NationStates Jolt Archive

I seem to remember a while ago there was a thread on here where people discussed hypothetical scenarios for global conflict, namely WW III. Lately I've been thinking a lot about war, politics etc in the future and, I thought it would be interesting to have another thread on this.

One pretty obvious one is a war over oil, and the control of remaining oil reserves after the Mid-East has peaked. I could see Russia becoming a potential battleground, in a Russia/China War. Maybe the Europeans will stop being a bunch of wusses and start going to war again :p, leading to an EU/Russia war. The USA would most likely protect it's oil interests in Canada and Mexico (yay! protection!), or possibly invade Venezuela. I could also see multiple countries having a large military presence in the Mid-East, primarily Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. The US, China, Europe and India could look to take what is left of Middle Eastern oil reserves. So, that would put the US military, The People's Liberation Army, the Indian Armed forces, possibly an EU armed force all in the same place, and for kicks let's add some Islamic Fundamentalist terrorism and...Russia, every thing's funner when you add Russians.

Another idea I had was the above scenario, except people fighting over water instead of oil which seems like a much scarier concept.

Anyone else?

I say a war over cheese. *nod*

I say a war over cheese. *nod*

well that would obviously just end in MAD. Nations take their cheese very seriously.

*nods*

well that would obviously just end in MAD. Nations take their cheese very seriously.

*nods*

Agreed. No nation will ever give-up on their national cheese reserves easily.

*nods*

I seem to remember a while ago there was a thread on here where people discussed hypothetical scenarios for global conflict, namely WW III. Lately I've been thinking a lot about war, politics etc in the future and, I thought it would be interesting to have another thread on this.

Anyone else?

The biggest potential right now is Israel/Iran. (http://www.carolmoore.net/nuclearwar/alternatescenarios.html#scenario3)
The Four Day War (http://www.amconmag.com/2004_09_13/article.html) is one example of how bad that could be.

A conflict over water could be a biggie, but not in any countries anyone really cares about. Eurasia, the States, the Canucks and Chinese are all doing alright for that.

Anyway, the Russians don't really need to fight over oil. They've got plenty. Same with gas. Other people also won't start anything with Russia, because if they know anything about Russian military history, they'd know that Russia on the defence is basically impregnible. Still, didn't stop us going into Afghanistan, a warzone famous for its tedious and expensive conflicts with no material gain to be had, eh?

Imagine if you will, a global shortage of water during a 100 year drought. Half of the population has died off and warlords have enslaved much of the rest into warring camps who have to use physical labor to desalinate ocean water, which is the new currency.

Still, didn't stop us going into Afghanistan, a warzone famous for its tedious and expensive conflicts with no material gain to be had, eh?
Material gain wasn't the only thing that mattered in the Cold War. A really major issue, the reason why the Korean War started, was the Westren damming policy; to dam in communism. Country's like Afghanistan acted like buffer states between the Westren coalitions (just look at all the different westren coalistions surrounding the communistic country's) and the communists.
Anyway, if a future war like that would start (and I hold that option very likely) it would be the Americans to start, because of a very simple reason; they are the one's who can't supply themselfs with gas and oil, most of it needs to be imported. Americans would occupy certain gas and oil supplies on the fringe of, for example, Chinese territory's (the one's who would be the least one's clear to be from a certain nation). China claims that they own them, small local conflicts could arise wich could result in a really really big war ala Frontlines Fuel of War.
Another option is that instead of the US capturing those doubtable oil supplies, China tightens it's grips on those doubting oil supplies, to eliminate chances like that for the US. The US would lack a proper oppertunity to gain oil. I don't know what would happen then, a possible option is that the US is forced to make a bargain with China to get some oil. Something like that would completly elliminate any power from the US, they would change into China's bitch. And thát could really be the start of a whole lot of trouble.

The Middle East will soon be steeped in a water crisis. Israel and plenty of the booming Arab countries are rapidly using up the non-renewable water supplies of the region.

*doobie doo Cold War*
Was as much about resources as anything else, South Asia is fairly unique in its production of high-quality latex and rubber, in addition to being a good source of expensive woods like Mahogany, and metals aplenty.
*doobie doo US*
Naw, it could supply itself if it started investing properly in shale oil production and refining, also made people buy less extremely pish cars with terrible fuel consumption.
*dooie doo Afghanistan*
It's a hive of ne'er do-wells is the real reason people invade it. To try and keep the Afghanis from pilfering yer convoys as they go down the Khaiber Pass etc.

The British have been there a couple of times, the Russians have been involved a lot there, the Indians and Chinese periodically care, too.

Hey, its the total opposite of the movie Waterworld
in that one, they lived on water and used dirt as money

war in the middle east would be those who live on dirt and use water as money:):p:D

<someone likes wars>

Anyone else?

I think Water wars would be less heated than oil ones, water is easier to get a hold of than oil.
I reckon if things went a certain way down shit world alley perhaps another arms race would start between various dictators in South America and Africa, have a few 'isolated incidents' between the US and China, weaken ties between the US and Europe and you could have a very unstable climate.
but seeing as i don't read very far into the future i'd say this isn't very likely, now there might be lots of little conflicts across the world, i doubt there would be another great war.

I think we should put Mad Hatters and Lunatic Goofballs into the middle east

when they see the levels of unparalleled insanity these 2 are capable of, their brains will not be able to cope, and burn out causing them to die, and then we can call MHIJ and LG war heroes for solving the middle east crisis

Was as much about resources as anything else, South Asia is fairly unique in its production of high-quality latex and rubber, in addition to being a good source of expensive woods like Mahogany, and metals aplenty.

Naw, it could supply itself if it started investing properly in shale oil production and refining, also made people buy less extremely pish cars with terrible fuel consumption.

It's a hive of ne'er do-wells is the real reason people invade it. To try and keep the Afghanis from pilfering yer convoys as they go down the Khaiber Pass etc.

The British have been there a couple of times, the Russians have been involved a lot there, the Indians and Chinese periodically care, too.
Well ofcourse they have certain resources, but to justify an invasion? I find it hard to beleive that pretty wood is a reason to invade a country. It still was the Cold War, the reason why Afghanistan was/is attacked so much, is because it's such a pretty central state. A perfect example from a buffer-state, like Tibet was in Eastren Asia before China invaded (ofcourse, that's not the only reason). It still was the Russians thus communists who invaded the country, and in the Cold War it's not really odd to think that we wouldn't counter-attack for that reason. And atm, it's not that likely as well we invaded Afghanistan for the resources as well.
And no, it's not very likely that US can support itself with that for several reasons. The US can only produce 25% of it's own oil needs, you think they can produce 75% from shale oils, when it's own production is already declining? That's not even the main problem, the problem is how much that would cost. The oil problems aren't really about literally running out of it, it's about running out of affordable, cheap oil. And we know that the US lives on loans from other country's, so even IF they would be able to produce the oild, would they be able to pay it? Maybe conflict is simply cheaper.

A conflict over water could be a biggie, but not in any countries anyone really cares about. Eurasia, the States, the Canucks and Chinese are all doing alright for that.

Anyway, the Russians don't really need to fight over oil. They've got plenty. Same with gas. Other people also won't start anything with Russia, because if they know anything about Russian military history, they'd know that Russia on the defence is basically impregnible. Still, didn't stop us going into Afghanistan, a warzone famous for its tedious and expensive conflicts with no material gain to be had, eh?

China has a lot of Water, but it also has a ton of people who drink it all. A war over water would most likely take place in the Mid-East and in Kashmir (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siachen_Glacier) and Tibet, which could turn really explosive with India, Pakistan and possibly China laying claim to it.

I think Water wars would be less heated than oil ones, water is easier to get a hold of than oil.
I reckon if things went a certain way down shit world alley perhaps another arms race would start between various dictators in South America and Africa, have a few 'isolated incidents' between the US and China, weaken ties between the US and Europe and you could have a very unstable climate.
but seeing as i don't read very far into the future i'd say this isn't very likely, now there might be lots of little conflicts across the world, i doubt there would be another great war.

I disagree. water is a basic necessity for all life, I think people would fight much harder if they needed it as opposed to oil.

Well ofcourse they have certain resources, but to justify an invasion? I find it hard to beleive that pretty wood is a reason to invade a country.
And rubber, and mineral deposits, amongst many other things.
It still was the Cold War
Resoooources.
the reason why Afghanistan was/is attacked so much, is because it's such a pretty central state.
It's full of ne'er do-wells too ;)
*Oil prices and pish*
War is not cheaper, especially since OPEC can make the world its collective bitch if the Saudis get cheesed off.

China has a lot of Water, but it also has a ton of people who drink it all. A war over water would most likely take place in the Mid-East and in Kashmir (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siachen_Glacier) and Tibet, which could turn really explosive with India, Pakistan and possibly China laying claim to it.
Nah, the only places there'll be wars about water is the middle east, which we can simply invade and control after they all die, and Africa, which nobody actually cares about, apart from as a way to waste a lazy Sunday going on a rally or whatever.

Alsace-Lorraine we be the starting point of the next world war. Of course, I blame the Franco-Prussian war, WWI/II on that tiny strip of land.

All that bloodshed over mediocre wine.

If there was an absolute oil disaster the US would shift to better cars, domestic/Canadian/ANWR/etc. that's left, our HUGE amounts of coal, etc... We wouldn't just die outright, although we'd still be pretty f'ed.