Wouldn't you?Googol wrote:There's a reason why people tend to be skeptical about cooperation between Israelis and Sunni Muslims, in case of major war conflict, they would probably cooperate but behind the scenes sunni Muslims would do everything they can to remove Israel from the map, they even tried it in the past immediately after Israel was created.
where are we now, in case of ww3
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Yes I would remove myself
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Mah wigga!Googol wrote:Yes I would remove myself
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Googol wrote:There's a reason why people tend to be skeptical about cooperation between Israelis and Sunni Muslims, in case of major war conflict, they would probably cooperate but behind the scenes sunni Muslims would do everything they can to remove Israel from the map, they even tried it in the past immediately after Israel was created.
If you ask the average Sunni what he thinks about Israeli then he most likely won't have anything positive to say. But the people who call the shots aren't all that interested in the Palestinians. It's just something that they have to give symbolic attention to for PR reasons.
https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-new ... -1.6036624
https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-new ... -1.5974278
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opini ... 32104.html
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
If "well" means it gave Kim everything he wanted then maybe. Kim can now increase his nuclear arsenal unopposed because whenever he does, and the media reports it, Trump will declare it fake news. After all, it is now in his best interest to pretend Korea is not a threat anymore. So they can become a huge threat without Trump ever acknowledging it. It's all very ironic and stupid, but sadly true.Amsel_ wrote:The North Korea summit went surprisingly well.
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Goodspeed wrote:If "well" means it gave Kim everything he wanted then maybe. Kim can now increase his nuclear arsenal unopposed because whenever he does, and the media reports it, Trump will declare it fake news. After all, it is now in his best interest to pretend Korea is not a threat anymore. So they can become a huge threat without Trump ever acknowledging it. It's all very ironic and stupid, but sadly true.Amsel_ wrote:The North Korea summit went surprisingly well.
The President and his cabinet have said multiple times that they're not cutting sanctions until North Korea makes tangible steps towards denuclearization. I have no idea where you've gotten all of this from.
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
It seems like there are no possible factors at this point that could lead to a 'world war', overt imperialism is a thing of the past. The electorates in their respective countries are succesfully sold the illusion that we don't rely on natural resources to fuel our lifestyles and greed, and the governments are all to aware that the cheap labour provided by the workhorse that is china, and other asian countries, is far too fundamental to risk through any sort of military conflict. Until the availability of resources runs so low that the mask comes off, or otherwise automation allows us to become non reliant on cheap labour, we are stuck with the entirely interdependant global family that we've got.
I would agree that states like iran and north korea, as well as non state dependant entities like 'al qaeda', are treated as 'monsters', this is to give us a suitable degree of fear to fecilitate our governments will to implement ever increasing levels of surveillance, if these entities were to ever actually reach the point of becoming a threat they would be swatted like flies.
I would agree that states like iran and north korea, as well as non state dependant entities like 'al qaeda', are treated as 'monsters', this is to give us a suitable degree of fear to fecilitate our governments will to implement ever increasing levels of surveillance, if these entities were to ever actually reach the point of becoming a threat they would be swatted like flies.
- spanky4ever
- Gendarme
- Posts: 8389
- Joined: Apr 13, 2015
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Many politician in the west fear that the Nato summit could be another catastope, having the G7 meeting freshly in mind.
Here is what the Guardian has to say about the matter:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... -g7-summit
I mean, I sertantly want USA and Russia to stop their harsh rhetorical word-war, and take it down a few steps, but even so, with this particular lunetic in the White house, there is just no way of knowing how this could turn out. After all Trumps trademark is being unpredictable, to say the least.
Could even Nato as we know it know, be at risk? Where will EU (and little Norway who is just loosely connected to EU) be when it comes to defence? Would we be at greater risk for blackmailing by the other 2 super powers (China and Russia?)
I for one, are pretty worried about what could be the result after the Nato summit, and the Russia talks.
Trump is also threatening to pull USA out of the WTO agreement. And EU has opened a case at the World Trade Organisation after the US imposed a 25% duty on European steel and a 10% duty on European aluminium.
https://www.vox.com/world/2018/7/2/1752 ... -wto-trade
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/01/politics ... index.html
Here is what the Guardian has to say about the matter:
Donald Trump trashed Nato, saying it was âas bad as Naftaâ, the North American free trade agreement the US president openly despises, European officials have confirmed.
Trumpâs inflammatory remarks â made in private at the G7 summit in Quebec earlier this month â were first reported by Axios and confirmed on Thursday by two European officials. They have added to jitters among US allies about what will happen at a Nato summit in Brussels starting on 11 July, followed by Trumpâs meeting with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki five days later.
At the tense G7 meeting in Quebec, Trump berated his six fellow leaders of major industrialised democracies for taking advantage of the US, in trade relations and in defence spending. Of the looming Nato summit, he said: âIt will be an interesting summit. Nato is as bad as Nafta. Itâs much too costly for the US.â
Europeans were ready to be criticised for low defence spending, a favourite Trump theme, but following the disastrous Quebec summit they are afraid it could be worse, with the US president calling Natoâs purpose into question.
There is added anxiety that Trump would go on, after a UK visit in between, to a chummy tĂȘte-Ă -tĂȘte with Putin in Finland, in the same way he flew from the fractious G7 summit in Quebec â tweeting insults at the host, Justin Trudeau, from Air Force One along the way â to a meeting with Kim Jong-un in Singapore, where he unilaterally offered to suspend joint military exercises with South Korea, to the surprise of US and South Korean militaries alike.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... -g7-summit
I mean, I sertantly want USA and Russia to stop their harsh rhetorical word-war, and take it down a few steps, but even so, with this particular lunetic in the White house, there is just no way of knowing how this could turn out. After all Trumps trademark is being unpredictable, to say the least.
Could even Nato as we know it know, be at risk? Where will EU (and little Norway who is just loosely connected to EU) be when it comes to defence? Would we be at greater risk for blackmailing by the other 2 super powers (China and Russia?)
I for one, are pretty worried about what could be the result after the Nato summit, and the Russia talks.
Trump is also threatening to pull USA out of the WTO agreement. And EU has opened a case at the World Trade Organisation after the US imposed a 25% duty on European steel and a 10% duty on European aluminium.
https://www.vox.com/world/2018/7/2/1752 ... -wto-trade
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/01/politics ... index.html
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
- vardar
- Lancer
- Posts: 787
- Joined: Jul 3, 2015
- ESO: VardarB98/DemonDeacs
- Location: us of a
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
WW3 will have aliens vs giant ants. The ants will eventually win because they are each a foot long and the queens are like tank size and have flying capabilities. Without the recruitment of humans on the aliens side (the aliens are too prideful to accept human help), they will fall apart and ants will rule the world and eventually kick humans off and force them into exile on the moon where we will eventually cause "moon warming" and the moon will turn into a giant fireball and crash into the earth where everyone will die accept Putin and his loyal KGB agents because they will have a secret base on Pluto.
Dont @ me
Dont @ me
c0ns!
- spanky4ever
- Gendarme
- Posts: 8389
- Joined: Apr 13, 2015
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
For the record, I do agree with USA on one thing, that the defense spendings should be more equally devided between the nato partners. But the USA spendings are stupidly high, imo, and there is just no way that EU would participate in spendings this much. USA spends about 10 times as much as no 2 who is Russia btw.
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Common sense and the fact that the agreement has little to say about the meaning of denuclearization and actual concrete steps NK will be taking towards that end. My point is that it's now important to Trump to have people think NK is denuclearizing even when it's not. Why? Because the summit was a "huge success" in his words and Trump needs it to be to justify concessions he made. Even if NK doesn't denuclearize, and they probably won't, Trump, with his tendency towards conjuring up truths as he goes, as well as his propaganda machine, will still pretend that they are. Therefore NK can do whatever they want without facing consequences.Amsel_ wrote:Goodspeed wrote:If "well" means it gave Kim everything he wanted then maybe. Kim can now increase his nuclear arsenal unopposed because whenever he does, and the media reports it, Trump will declare it fake news. After all, it is now in his best interest to pretend Korea is not a threat anymore. So they can become a huge threat without Trump ever acknowledging it. It's all very ironic and stupid, but sadly true.Amsel_ wrote:The North Korea summit went surprisingly well.
The President and his cabinet have said multiple times that they're not cutting sanctions until North Korea makes tangible steps towards denuclearization. I have no idea where you've gotten all of this from.
The sanctions have been in place for over a decade and cutting them now would be madness. The statement that they are not cutting sanctions until NK denuclearizes is not progress, that's where we were 10 years ago.
- spanky4ever
- Gendarme
- Posts: 8389
- Joined: Apr 13, 2015
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
The North Korea situation are very dangerous. I wonder how close Trump was at raining "fire and firy, like nobody have ever seen before"??. And what would have happened then?? China would prolly not have stood passively by and watch it. Neither would Russia, I guess.
This mad POTUS are just very trigger happy - It looks like.
In the latest few days we also where informed on how close USA was to invade Venezuela. Btw, it was Trump who time after time, raised the question of invation.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... ela-report
I am surprised that there are almost no mentioning of this in the mail stream media
This mad POTUS are just very trigger happy - It looks like.
In the latest few days we also where informed on how close USA was to invade Venezuela. Btw, it was Trump who time after time, raised the question of invation.
Donald Trump repeatedly raised the possibility of invading Venezuela in talks with his top aides at the White House, according to a new report.
Trump brought up the subject of an invasion in public in August last year, saying: âWe have many options for Venezuela, including a possible military option, if necessary.â But the presidentâs musings about the possibility of a US invasion were more extensive and persistent than that public declaration, according to the Associated Press.
The previous day Trump reportedly took his top officials by surprise in an Oval Office meeting, asking why the US could not intervene to remove the government of NicolĂĄs Maduro on the grounds that Venezuelaâs political and economic unraveling represented a threat to the region.
Quoting an unnamed senior administration official, the AP report said the suggestion stunned those present at the meeting, which included the then national security adviser, HR McMaster, and secretary of state, Rex Tillerson. Both have since left the administration.
The administration officials are said to have taken turns in trying to talk him out of the idea, pointing out that any such military action would alienate Latin American allies who had supported the US policy of punitive sanctions on the Maduro regime.
âMy staff told me not to say this,â Trump said and then asked the other leaders at the table in turn, if they were sure they didnât want a military solution.
McMaster finally succeeding in persuading Trump of the dangers of an invasion, the report said, and the presidentâs interest in the notion subsided.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... ela-report
I am surprised that there are almost no mentioning of this in the mail stream media
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Goodspeed wrote:Common sense and the fact that the agreement has little to say about the meaning of denuclearization and actual concrete steps NK will be taking towards that end. My point is that it's now important to Trump to have people think NK is denuclearizing even when it's not. Why? Because the summit was a "huge success" in his words and Trump needs it to be to justify concessions he made. Even if NK doesn't denuclearize, and they probably won't, Trump, with his tendency towards conjuring up truths as he goes, as well as his propaganda machine, will still pretend that they are. Therefore NK can do whatever they want without facing consequences.Amsel_ wrote:Show hidden quotes
The President and his cabinet have said multiple times that they're not cutting sanctions until North Korea makes tangible steps towards denuclearization. I have no idea where you've gotten all of this from.
The sanctions have been in place for over a decade and cutting them now would be madness. The statement that they are not cutting sanctions until NK denuclearizes is not progress, that's where we were 10 years ago.
This seems like one of those things where you dislike Trump, and use that to automatically assume that anything he's involved in will fail. He was really on China's butt about enforcing sanctions against North Korea. Then he was able to switch from creating every sanction possible and mulling Kim's assassination to being a peaceful little dove. If he's already proven that he can change his tone from aggressive to kind then there's no reason he wouldn't do the inverse. In fact he could probably spin it to be a good thing. He could say "I tried being nice and offered peace, but they've decided that they won't have peace. I'm not going to repeat the mistakes of previous etc etc. Tough on our enemies etc etc." But I'm not talking about the future of North Korean denuclearization or the President. I'm just saying that the summit marks a major deescalation that significantly reduces the likelihood of war in the near future.
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Amsel_ wrote:There is absolutely no way there's going to be a war between the USA and EU, if that's what you're insinuating. The UK is just half-way between America 2 and another EU country. This is important because it allows the UK to be summoned to war, like how they helped during the second gulf war, and take other forms of unilateral action. But it also keeps them "EU enough" to stop any harmful ideas from spreading into the rest of the continent. Simple trade disputes aren't going to undermine the intense ideological similarity between Western countries.
We kind of know where every country would align during WW3. America, UK, EU, Australia, Israel, and Sunni Muslims vs Russia, China, and Shia Muslims. But there aren't any indicators of a major war starting soon. The North Korea summit went surprisingly well. If Trump wanted war in the middle-east, he had his chance in Syria. No one seems to want to fight, and that has helped maintain the peace. But there are past examples where no one wanted to fight, but everyone still went to war. We were kind of close to this in late 2017, with all the incidents in the middle-east, but things have cooled down a lot.
You forgot Japan on the U.S side as well, but I wonder what India would do. Pakistan too I think has nuclear weapons.
last time i cryed was because i stood on Legoï»ż
- Mr_Bramboy
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 8219
- Joined: Feb 26, 2015
- ESO: [VOC] Bram
- Location: Amsterdam
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
The Netherlands needs to develop its own nuclear weapons. We cannot rely on our old European allies anymore and countries like North-Korea and Iran have shown that nuclear weapons are the ultimate deterrent against any aggression. Along with that, it would grant us an easy alliance with the United States and its tumor-like military. I advise Canada to follow the same strategy.
- Bramboy, leader of the ESOC geopolitics department /s
- Bramboy, leader of the ESOC geopolitics department /s
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Dutch is clutch!
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
@Bramboy, leader of the ESOC geopolitics department
facepalm
facepalm
- princeofcarthage
- Retired Contributor
- Posts: 8861
- Joined: Aug 28, 2015
- Location: Milky Way!
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
India would try to remain as neutral as possible, unless provoked of course. In case of US China war, I don't think Pakistan or China would ire India which could result in India siding up with USA. India and Russia have been traditionally allies and defense partners, but war against United states is different than against Pakistan or traditional Asian countries. That being said with correct events WW3 could do what WW1 and WW2 did to US, i.e. turn India into major manufacturing hub and a global power.ovi12 wrote:Amsel_ wrote:There is absolutely no way there's going to be a war between the USA and EU, if that's what you're insinuating. The UK is just half-way between America 2 and another EU country. This is important because it allows the UK to be summoned to war, like how they helped during the second gulf war, and take other forms of unilateral action. But it also keeps them "EU enough" to stop any harmful ideas from spreading into the rest of the continent. Simple trade disputes aren't going to undermine the intense ideological similarity between Western countries.
We kind of know where every country would align during WW3. America, UK, EU, Australia, Israel, and Sunni Muslims vs Russia, China, and Shia Muslims. But there aren't any indicators of a major war starting soon. The North Korea summit went surprisingly well. If Trump wanted war in the middle-east, he had his chance in Syria. No one seems to want to fight, and that has helped maintain the peace. But there are past examples where no one wanted to fight, but everyone still went to war. We were kind of close to this in late 2017, with all the incidents in the middle-east, but things have cooled down a lot.
You forgot Japan on the U.S side as well, but I wonder what India would do. Pakistan too I think has nuclear weapons.
Also you have to realize that while Russia and United states have nuclear weapons which are actively deployed, India, Pakistan and China doesn't which also acts as passive deterrent imo. US can theoretically eliminate china with a push of button, while China has nuclear weapons but they are not deployed meaning, in case of war they are still days from being operational.
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
-
- Ninja
- Posts: 14364
- Joined: Mar 26, 2015
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
This thread reminds me of the Eschaton scenes.
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
Mr_Bramboy wrote:The Netherlands needs to develop its own nuclear weapons. We cannot rely on our old European allies anymore and countries like North-Korea and Iran have shown that nuclear weapons are the ultimate deterrent against any aggression. Along with that, it would grant us an easy alliance with the United States and its tumor-like military. I advise Canada to follow the same strategy.
- Bramboy, leader of the ESOC geopolitics department /s
I think ESOC should develop it's own nuclear weapons.
last time i cryed was because i stood on Legoï»ż
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
I'm just saying that the summit marks a major deescalation that significantly reduces the likelihood of war in the near future
And where did the likelihood of war come from? Itâs like threatening to kill you, then going for a beer and saying letâs be friends. Then going to brag I am awesome bc I deesclated the situation.
mad cuz bad
Re: where are we now, in case of ww3
n0el wrote:I'm just saying that the summit marks a major deescalation that significantly reduces the likelihood of war in the near future
And where did the likelihood of war come from? Itâs like threatening to kill you, then going for a beer and saying letâs be friends. Then going to brag I am awesome bc I deesclated the situation.
NK was getting pretty angry back in '16, which continued into '17, and a lot of people thought war was inevitable. Trump did escalate the situation before deescalating, so I can see why someone might say that, but it's a fairly normal diplomatic move. The likelihood of war is currently at one of its lowest points in history; the means of getting there do not change that.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests