Who will win WW3?

[BADecker]

The above (previous post) is unclear BS. The point to focus on is simple. Slavery vs. freedom. Islam is the worst kind of slavery, because people can live with it. And that is what the whole thing is about.

Probably there isn't any form of slavery that is as capable in every way as is Islam.

[1715002976]

1715002976

[1715002976]

1715002976

[BombayChicken]

I think both parties have just as much destructive weapons as the other

I think they will destroy each other while they're going at it

[galdur]

The above (previous post) is unclear BS. The point to focus on is simple. Slavery vs. freedom. Islam is the worst kind of slavery, because people can live with it. And that is what the whole thing is about.

Probably there isn't any form of slavery that is as capable in every way as is Islam.

Why don´t we make it even simpler. Black and white, no grey. Good vs. evil. Those who aren´t with us are against us and will be blown to smithereens. The big guy in the sky says so.

“We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace.“/George W.Bush’s Address to the United Nations General Assembly, September 21, 2004.

[galdur]

free nations strive to resolve differences in peace.

Yeah ####### right. All the war scams and ruined countries and millions of killed, maimed and displaced people are certainly solid evidence of that.

[BADecker]

The above (previous post) is unclear BS. The point to focus on is simple. Slavery vs. freedom. Islam is the worst kind of slavery, because people can live with it. And that is what the whole thing is about.

Probably there isn't any form of slavery that is as capable in every way as is Islam.

Why don´t we make it even simpler. Black and white, no grey. Good vs. evil. Those who aren´t with us are against us and will be blown to smithereens. The big guy in the sky says so.

“We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace.“/George W.Bush’s Address to the United Nations General Assembly, September 21, 2004.

We can't do that. Why not? Because then we have to bow down to some religion. Or else we have to suggest that people can make up their own ideals of what is good and what is evil.

If you want to get right down to it, freedom is to allow others to do anything as long as they don't harm you or damage your property. Harming you or damaging your property is the beginnings of slavery.

[galdur]

The above (previous post) is unclear BS. The point to focus on is simple. Slavery vs. freedom. Islam is the worst kind of slavery, because people can live with it. And that is what the whole thing is about.

Probably there isn't any form of slavery that is as capable in every way as is Islam.

Why don´t we make it even simpler. Black and white, no grey. Good vs. evil. Those who aren´t with us are against us and will be blown to smithereens. The big guy in the sky says so.

“We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace.“/George W.Bush’s Address to the United Nations General Assembly, September 21, 2004.

We can't do that. Why not? Because then we have to bow down to some religion. Or else we have to suggest that people can make up their own ideals of what is good and what is evil.

If you want to get right down to it, freedom is to allow others to do anything as long as they don't harm you or damage your property. Harming you or damaging your property is the beginnings of slavery.

But idiots vote for nutcases that among other insane things bow down to religion. And do so even in the freakin White House. This Bush screwball stated numerous times that the big guy in the sky told him to attack Iraq. It´s a matter of historical record. Of course as usual with criminals and psychopaths the story changed. First it was weapons of mass destruction, then that and terrorists. He also was avenging for his daddy and so on. But after the scam had been pulled off and everything was heading straight to hell there in Iraq he was following orders from up above. And the weapons of mass destruction weren´t mentioned anymore. Now another batch of idiots are dying to vote for the crazy brother of this nutball who plans to use the nutball as foreign policy adviser!
Un freakin believable.

[BADecker]

The above (previous post) is unclear BS. The point to focus on is simple. Slavery vs. freedom. Islam is the worst kind of slavery, because people can live with it. And that is what the whole thing is about.

Probably there isn't any form of slavery that is as capable in every way as is Islam.

Why don´t we make it even simpler. Black and white, no grey. Good vs. evil. Those who aren´t with us are against us and will be blown to smithereens. The big guy in the sky says so.

“We know that dictators are quick to choose aggression, while free nations strive to resolve differences in peace.“/George W.Bush’s Address to the United Nations General Assembly, September 21, 2004.

We can't do that. Why not? Because then we have to bow down to some religion. Or else we have to suggest that people can make up their own ideals of what is good and what is evil.

If you want to get right down to it, freedom is to allow others to do anything as long as they don't harm you or damage your property. Harming you or damaging your property is the beginnings of slavery.

But idiots vote for nutcases that among other insane things bow down to religion. And do so even in the freakin White House. This Bush screwball stated numerous times that the big guy in the sky told him to attack Iraq. It´s a matter of historical record. Of course as usual with criminals and psychopaths the story changed. First it was weapons of mass destruction, then that and terrorists. He also was avenging for his daddy and so on. But after the scam had been pulled off and everything was heading straight to hell there in Iraq he was following orders from up above. And the weapons of mass destruction weren´t mentioned anymore. Now another batch of idiots are dying to vote for the crazy brother of this nutball who plans to use the nutball as foreign policy adviser!
Un freakin believable.

A lot of people understand the mess. More are coming to understand it. Many have been trying to change it for many years. The answer is not to change it. The answer is to let it die. Here's a peek at how to do it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twn96nj0jfw&list=PLHrkQxgz0mg6kUBciD-HIvTXByqjcIZ-D&index=10

[ridery99]

Look Inside Putin's Massive New Military Command And Control Center

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/look-inside-putins-massive-new-military-command-and-con-1743399678

[Christyfrazier]

Hi,

I think the US and EU will win. But in terms of survival i think the citizens of china and russia will survive as there are more of them living in rural areas so will be less affected by major violence

Thanks

[ridery99]

Is Japan going to stay in NATO side? Tell your opinion

[galdur]

Is Japan going to stay in NATO side? Tell your opinion

Well, Japan is occupied country (like Germany) and has as such limited independence, limited military and limited policy. It´s a vassal state. It doesn´t get to choose which side to be on. But I doubt that it has any military might to play a meaningful part in any war except as a forward base maybe. And as a result of that it´d be a punching bag obviously.

[PAKYU]

i see clearly in front of my eyes russia and china already won this ww3!
NATO & USA own too many debt to make them ready for war.

[Movement of Brothers]

You are saying that some faction will win the war, but I'm not so certain about that this time. Before parasite Israel will be defeated, they will bring the entire world with them.

[ridery99]

You are saying that some faction will win the war, but I'm not so certain about that this time. Before parasite Israel will be defeated, they will bring the entire world with them.

Adolf is that you?

[knightkon]

I am USA all the way, but I am sorry if there is a war where we are against china, I think that the sheer numbers will defeat us.  There is a small possibility that we may win, because we own china so much money, they may not have enough money to buy the supplies and all to beat us.  Whoever the winner is, there will be no winner, we will all be screwed.

[ridery99]

I am USA all the way, but I am sorry if there is a war where we are against china, I think that the sheer numbers will defeat us.  There is a small possibility that we may win, because we own china so much money, they may not have enough money to buy the supplies and all to beat us.  Whoever the winner is, there will be no winner, we will all be screwed.

"money" doesn't matter, China and Russia have huge gold reserves.

[dloghwak]

Who will win WW3? Well at least not us citizens.

[zeaderza]

If start,probably NATO.

[ridery99]

Keep Track of All the World's Territorial Disputes With This Amazing Interactive Map

http://gizmodo.com/keep-track-of-all-the-worlds-territorial-disputes-with-1744443886

[pungopete468]

World War 3 won't be won. Period...

World War 3 will end with only two possible outcomes. Either a stalemate with a resolution by treaty, or the complete destruction of humanity.

Think of it like this, while the organizations we've created have prevented the outbreak of global war for a time, they haven't even come close to solving the root causes of wars between member-states. The tension keeps building up like a rubber band, driven by fundamental disagreements between societies. The only reason it hasn't snapped already is because the outcome of any war is decided before it starts. Every party involved recognizes the fact that they'll likely be destroyed.

The problem comes when certain actors face destruction individually, when self-destruction is no longer a deterrent to war but becomes a certainty in the absence of war, then the scales are shifted towards reckless desperation. The problem faced here is that individual self-destruction becomes international leverage when the desperate acts become harmful to other national actors who aren't facing destruction. The desperate party can use this threat as a way to lean on other nations and hopefully prevent its own demise. Unfortunately, this can't work when the financial system is in chaos!

NATO is one example of an alliance forged in a different time when the world was completely different, it's incompatible with the economic system of the present day. In its current form, given an infinite timeline, it can only lead to absolute global destruction. There's literally no way to view it any other way. Weak actors must be allowed to fail, it's the only way to relieve the tensions in the world...

I'm not saying NATO should be dissolved, but it certainly needs to be reconstructed! There needs to be an understanding between ALL parties that NATO isn't going to save them from their own self-destruction! Recklessness and desperate acts should void any military protections offered by NATO. It seems like common sense to me! Maybe I'm wrong...