WORLD WAR 3

[OrrLives]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Klomp,

There are billions of able bodies in China, Russia, and India whose governments would love to use as bullet-catchers for the Fatherland.

[/ QUOTE ]

can these people sprout wings and fly? man power in this day and age means very little.

[/ QUOTE ]

They only need to attack regions with a lot of natural resources to greatly hurt U.S. society... take over the middle east for example.

With regards to nukes, the enemy (whomever this is) only has to threaten to nuke these strategic areas to ensure the U.S. doesn't use nukes. If the M.E. is nuked, our whole way of life is destroyed. Of course, if the enemy is about to launch at us or has already launched at us, all bets are off.

[Daddys_Visa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
our navy = #1 in the world.

our air force = #1 in the world by far.

our military technology = #1 in the world without question.

[/ QUOTE ]

These things mean nothing if your enemy decides to spread some kind of smallpox superbug in NY, LA, etc....

[/ QUOTE ]

Biological agents are extremely hard to weaponize, disperse, and have it sustain, as far as I know. Seriously, comments like this are borderline retarded. "Yea, America may have the strongest (by far) Navy, and the (by far) strongest Air Force, but Russia and China can....well they can...use smallpox! Yea,that's it!" And what's to stop the US from using biological warfare in conjunction with superior military might? You guys watch too many movies.


But I may recall having heard something about Russian scientists pursuing the creation of a super strain of virus.

[/ QUOTE ]

Russia has, by far, the most advanced biological weapons program in the world. They are decades ahead of anyone else as far as weaponizing biological agents.

And while defected Russian scientists have reported a lot of research on developing superbugs, they really only need to release agents already available in nature. Smallpox for one would wreak havoc on a population that has less immunity to it than perhaps any other time in human history. The problem is controlling such an outbreak. It would be very hard to prevent it from eventually spreading to your own troops or population.

[Daddys_Visa]

[ QUOTE ]
I doubt if the world all grouped up together( minus the British since they've always got our backs [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ) that we could lose a war. Obviously this would be including any and all weapons. Any one want to estimate the worlds ratio vs ours when it comes to nuclear weapons? I have no idea but im sure we are close to THE WHOLE REST OF THE WORLD if not more. We americans our badasses so no one ever [censored] with us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think it is possible for ANY winners to emerge from this scenario? Aside from cockroaches and ants?

[MuresanForMVP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In my mind, World War 3 is between super powers and nations with standing armies, not suicide bombers and VBIEDs. In Vietnam, and virtually all the examples you suggested, the U.S. was still concerned with winning hearts and minds. The Vietnam War was a military victory, but a massive political defeat. If you're suggesting that what's going on now in Iraq and Afghanistan, and what happened on 9/11 are examples of how to take down a super power I'd have to say that you are out of your mind. My qualification for this scenario was that we toss all that feel-good [censored] out the window and get down to the business of winning the war. When that happens it's game over, and if we did that in Vietnam that place would have been a crater in SE Asia. Christ look at the major cities all over Europe and Japan after WW2. That's a total-war right there, not this occupation BS we have over in the Middle-East right now.

Considering we were discussing warring superpowers (ie Russia or China) how would you suggest they get us to fight on their own terms?

[/ QUOTE ]

Read the OPs post.... it was "what is the most likely total war to come up?" You and others may think it's Russia or China versus US, I don't. I was just giving my 2 cents worth on the question, and wondering why all the responses dealt with conventional warfare.

[/ QUOTE ]


I did. Total war isn't Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan. Do you know what Total War is?

[MuresanForMVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Assuming no nukes will be used in WWIII is a dumb assumption to begin with. Invading each others countries is pretty much out of question too. Its not just about who is the strongest its also about who is the smartest. Reading your guys responses, you must literally be picturing a bunch of little green army men fighting against each other. Here's just a couple scenarios that could easily become the future.

1. A half dozen nuclear bombs ALREADY in the US could be detonated and take out everything (everything worth taking out) on the whole eastern seaboard of course including Washington and New York. These bombs could have been smuggled in piece by piece and assembled over the last 50 years. This could happen at anytime even without the hint of war. This is a situation where there is no defense against and one that could easily be true. You wipe out the whole eastern seaboard with no warning and then tell me what the US chances are?

2. Anytype of conventional non-nuclear war with China that stopped complete trade with China, would grind the US economy to a halt in a matter of months, perhaps as short as a few weeks. This in turn will have a ripple effect in all forms of industry. We depend on China for ALOT.

IMO, WWWIII will involve Israel eventually. Any of these or other scenarios could easily touch off WWIII and end with Israel.

Most of you guys are underestimating China let alone Russia, but combined to say its US (AA) vs Russia/China (23o) have seriously been successfully brainfed your entire life.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is a literally horrible post. For the most part,we were using the qualifier of "non-nuclear, 1 on 1 Total War. "It's not about who's the strongest it's about who's the smartest!" That statement means what exactly? The US is leaps and bounds ahead of China in terms of bottom line military strength, and military intelligence. It's really not even close.

2). World wars create economies. Saying the "US economy would grind to a halt" is foolish. You wipe out the whole eastern seaboard with no warning and then tell me what the US chances are? Man. that's a huge assumption to make. Tell me, have you seen The Sum of All Fears? Sounds like it. And kindly show me how one could just wipe the eastern seaboard off the map without warning. LOL


I'm not even trying to be a complete homer, but really there is no other country in the world, today, that's anywhere close to the US in military strength.

[corsakh]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not even trying to be a complete homer, but really there is no other country in the world, today, that's anywhere close to the US in military strength.

[/ QUOTE ]

- Emptied reserves.
- Billions budget deficit.
- Everdropping US dollar.
- Virtually no oil 'cept for in frozen Alaska.
- "Globalized" heavy industries infrastructure.
- Goofiest school education system of the entire civilized world.
- Tens of millions of obese people unable to walk 500 meters let alone hold a gun.
- The nation of people that can not find their own country on world map, let alone know where the rest of the world is.

This has a lot of potential [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Certainly a ruthless power to reckon with.

God.. Dont even need an army. Japan sells 10%-20% of their reserves, buys some dollar bills, drops them from the air in big American cities - "The End". They would not want to loose their biggest market of course, but you see how "hard" this is? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Matt Flynn]

i'd vote private faction internet chaos > accidental release of a biologic as the trigger.

the biologics are scariest.

[MuresanForMVP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not even trying to be a complete homer, but really there is no other country in the world, today, that's anywhere close to the US in military strength.

[/ QUOTE ]

- Emptied reserves.
- Billions budget deficit.
- Everdropping US dollar.
- Virtually no oil 'cept for in frozen Alaska.
- "Globalized" heavy industries infrastructure.
- Goofiest school education system of the entire civilized world.
- Tens of millions of obese people unable to walk 500 meters let alone hold a gun.
- The nation of people that can not find their own country on world map, let alone know where the rest of the world is.

This has a lot of potential [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Certainly a ruthless power to reckon with.

God.. Dont even need an army. Japan sells 10%-20% of their reserves, buys some dollar bills, drops them from the air in big American cities - "The End". They would not want to loose their biggest market of course, but you see how "hard" this is? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


Youre a huge anti-american politics troll, and nothing you just listed has anything to do with the US having an insanely powerful military.

[Farfenugen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not even trying to be a complete homer, but really there is no other country in the world, today, that's anywhere close to the US in military strength.

[/ QUOTE ]

- Emptied reserves.
- Billions budget deficit.
- Everdropping US dollar.
- Virtually no oil 'cept for in frozen Alaska.
- "Globalized" heavy industries infrastructure.
- Goofiest school education system of the entire civilized world.
- Tens of millions of obese people unable to walk 500 meters let alone hold a gun.
- The nation of people that can not find their own country on world map, let alone know where the rest of the world is.

This has a lot of potential [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Certainly a ruthless power to reckon with.

God.. Dont even need an army. Japan sells 10%-20% of their reserves, buys some dollar bills, drops them from the air in big American cities - "The End". They would not want to loose their biggest market of course, but you see how "hard" this is? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

There is not a single nation in the world that doesnt have similar problems or problems of a severity to match the ones on this list.

Also,

[ QUOTE ]
Youre a huge anti-american politics troll, and nothing you just listed has anything to do with the US having an insanely powerful military.

[/ QUOTE ]

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
I doubt if the world all grouped up together( minus the British since they've always got our backs [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ) that we could lose a war. Obviously this would be including any and all weapons. Any one want to estimate the worlds ratio vs ours when it comes to nuclear weapons? I have no idea but im sure we are close to THE WHOLE REST OF THE WORLD if not more. We americans our badasses so no one ever [censored] with us.

[/ QUOTE ] The US against the rest of the world? You would have some trouble getting your hands on the oil you'd need to win that war.