World War III ?

[Eternu]

Not all so sad. Really if you start a third world war using nuclear weapons it really is in danger of Apocalypse. But the war can be without the use of nuclear weapons. Such a war already underway in Syria and yet the world did not end.

Yes, but it is just matter of time when would some country use nuclear weapon that they have. You see, someone would need to lose war, and none country want that. So when they understand they are near defeat, they would use there nuclear weapon and other side would use too... so there you go . Nuclear war how ever you turn it.

I think that now manifests a characteristic feature of the new strategy wars. They occur on the territory of third countries. Even if one of the parties is defeated, it won't be her due to the territorial losses and therefore no reason for the use of nuclear weapons.

Ok when you see it that way, it is truth... unless that other, that third countrie possess nuclear weapon. In that case your theory doesnt apply. Or maybe that third country is in alliance with some other country that have nuclear weapon, and in that case that other country could use it...

[1714122806]

1714122806

[1714122806]

1714122806

[1714122806]

1714122806

[1714122806]

1714122806

[sergeyzol]

Not all so sad. Really if you start a third world war using nuclear weapons it really is in danger of Apocalypse. But the war can be without the use of nuclear weapons. Such a war already underway in Syria and yet the world did not end.

Yes, but it is just matter of time when would some country use nuclear weapon that they have. You see, someone would need to lose war, and none country want that. So when they understand they are near defeat, they would use there nuclear weapon and other side would use too... so there you go . Nuclear war how ever you turn it.

I think that now manifests a characteristic feature of the new strategy wars. They occur on the territory of third countries. Even if one of the parties is defeated, it won't be her due to the territorial losses and therefore no reason for the use of nuclear weapons.

Ok when you see it that way, it is truth... unless that other, that third countrie possess nuclear weapon. In that case your theory doesnt apply. Or maybe that third country is in alliance with some other country that have nuclear weapon, and in that case that other country could use it...

If a country has nuclear weapons it openly on her one will not attack. Against such countries is economic war, and sooner or later it will destroy the country from within. Not be targets for nuclear bombing. For example Iran and North Korea.

[TrumpD]

The council on foreign relations report indicates that a mass casualty terrorist attack on U.S. soil, as well as the intensifying violence between Turkey and Kurdish forces and other potential major conflicts could cause lasting impacts throughout this year. Anything Is possible.

[btvlGainer]

The council on foreign relations report indicates that a mass casualty terrorist attack on U.S. soil, as well as the intensifying violence between Turkey and Kurdish forces and other potential major conflicts could cause lasting impacts throughout this year. Anything Is possible.

I'm sure that until Syria does not leave Russia, the conflict in this country will not stop. Syria is the new Afghanistan for Russia and several other countries. I think that he will last more than one year. If anything happens with Assad, he may flare up with new force.

[Eternu]

Not all so sad. Really if you start a third world war using nuclear weapons it really is in danger of Apocalypse. But the war can be without the use of nuclear weapons. Such a war already underway in Syria and yet the world did not end.

Yes, but it is just matter of time when would some country use nuclear weapon that they have. You see, someone would need to lose war, and none country want that. So when they understand they are near defeat, they would use there nuclear weapon and other side would use too... so there you go . Nuclear war how ever you turn it.

I think that now manifests a characteristic feature of the new strategy wars. They occur on the territory of third countries. Even if one of the parties is defeated, it won't be her due to the territorial losses and therefore no reason for the use of nuclear weapons.

Ok when you see it that way, it is truth... unless that other, that third countrie possess nuclear weapon. In that case your theory doesnt apply. Or maybe that third country is in alliance with some other country that have nuclear weapon, and in that case that other country could use it...

If a country has nuclear weapons it openly on her one will not attack. Against such countries is economic war, and sooner or later it will destroy the country from within. Not be targets for nuclear bombing. For example Iran and North Korea.

I think that most of countries in the world could withstand economic war. If done right, country doesnt need to sell there products to other countries. Thay could make there own food and day to day things that is basic for human survival. And if done right that could last forever. And i dont need to say that there will always be countries that will deal with that country so there will never be full economic war, so that all countries wont trade with that country.

[igorokavg13]

Not all so sad. Really if you start a third world war using nuclear weapons it really is in danger of Apocalypse. But the war can be without the use of nuclear weapons. Such a war already underway in Syria and yet the world did not end.

Yes, but it is just matter of time when would some country use nuclear weapon that they have. You see, someone would need to lose war, and none country want that. So when they understand they are near defeat, they would use there nuclear weapon and other side would use too... so there you go . Nuclear war how ever you turn it.

I think that now manifests a characteristic feature of the new strategy wars. They occur on the territory of third countries. Even if one of the parties is defeated, it won't be her due to the territorial losses and therefore no reason for the use of nuclear weapons.

Ok when you see it that way, it is truth... unless that other, that third countrie possess nuclear weapon. In that case your theory doesnt apply. Or maybe that third country is in alliance with some other country that have nuclear weapon, and in that case that other country could use it...

If a country has nuclear weapons it openly on her one will not attack. Against such countries is economic war, and sooner or later it will destroy the country from within. Not be targets for nuclear bombing. For example Iran and North Korea.

I think that most of countries in the world could withstand economic war. If done right, country doesnt need to sell there products to other countries. Thay could make there own food and day to day things that is basic for human survival. And if done right that could last forever. And i dont need to say that there will always be countries that will deal with that country so there will never be full economic war, so that all countries wont trade with that country.

No it is a utopia. In the modern world it is impossible to live offline. Try to make a stock and try to live in a sealed bunker. How much you have enough? The country is even harder and some products of vital activity of the country is not limited. Very greatly influenced by technology.

[yescopyleftsounds]

World War III will happen for petroleum products sure it will start with israel.

[Klima]

World War III will happen for petroleum products sure it will start with israel.

It is already underway and it started with Syria. There really is a war for the ability to deliver oil and gas to Europe. Russia is not profitable so they unleashed a war there. Unfortunately Syria is doomed to destruction in favor of Russian.

[wizmo]

Maybe World War III is near because countries are grouped in two parts not good for people though. It'll start with America, China or Russia who knows?

[Klima]

Maybe World War III is near because countries are grouped in two parts not good for people though. It'll start with America, China or Russia who knows?

Countries always grouped together. It does not mean preparation for war. That says more about the economic wars, but they are always. Politics is certainly there but the fighting is not conducted. In Syria there is a war for the monopoly of Russia in the European market.

[wizmo]

Maybe World War III is near because countries are grouped in two parts not good for people though. It'll start with America, China or Russia who knows?

Countries always grouped together. It does not mean preparation for war. That says more about the economic wars, but they are always. Politics is certainly there but the fighting is not conducted. In Syria there is a war for the monopoly of Russia in the European market.

Recently India and Pakistan threaten each other to declare war both are nuclear powered nation some countries supported Pakistan and some favored India. 

[Perle]

Maybe World War III is near because countries are grouped in two parts not good for people though. It'll start with America, China or Russia who knows?

Countries always grouped together. It does not mean preparation for war. That says more about the economic wars, but they are always. Politics is certainly there but the fighting is not conducted. In Syria there is a war for the monopoly of Russia in the European market.

Recently India and Pakistan threaten each other to declare war both are nuclear powered nation some countries supported Pakistan and some favored India. 

India is constantly at war with Pakistan. It is the presence on both sides of nuclear weapons does not allow them to use it. I do not believe that anyone ever dare to use nuclear weapons. It is a horror that can only frighten.

[wizmo]

Maybe World War III is near because countries are grouped in two parts not good for people though. It'll start with America, China or Russia who knows?

Countries always grouped together. It does not mean preparation for war. That says more about the economic wars, but they are always. Politics is certainly there but the fighting is not conducted. In Syria there is a war for the monopoly of Russia in the European market.

Recently India and Pakistan threaten each other to declare war both are nuclear powered nation some countries supported Pakistan and some favored India. 

India is constantly at war with Pakistan. It is the presence on both sides of nuclear weapons does not allow them to use it. I do not believe that anyone ever dare to use nuclear weapons. It is a horror that can only frighten.

I've read somewhere that Pakistan get funds from China and other countries to train terrorists and kill people in India it could be wrong though but looking at Pakistan it looks true. Even Pakistan neighboring countries wants to depart from Pakistan. 

[Perle]

Maybe World War III is near because countries are grouped in two parts not good for people though. It'll start with America, China or Russia who knows?

Countries always grouped together. It does not mean preparation for war. That says more about the economic wars, but they are always. Politics is certainly there but the fighting is not conducted. In Syria there is a war for the monopoly of Russia in the European market.

Recently India and Pakistan threaten each other to declare war both are nuclear powered nation some countries supported Pakistan and some favored India. 

India is constantly at war with Pakistan. It is the presence on both sides of nuclear weapons does not allow them to use it. I do not believe that anyone ever dare to use nuclear weapons. It is a horror that can only frighten.

I've read somewhere that Pakistan get funds from China and other countries to train terrorists and kill people in India it could be wrong though but looking at Pakistan it looks true. Even Pakistan neighboring countries wants to depart from Pakistan. 

Pakistan is a country with a weak economy and policy of the state is earning money on the war and the training of terrorists. Golden time for them were active hostilities in Afghanistan. Now the conflict has subsided and they switched to India.

[Sithara007]

I've read somewhere that Pakistan get funds from China and other countries to train terrorists and kill people in India it could be wrong though but looking at Pakistan it looks true. Even Pakistan neighboring countries wants to depart from Pakistan. 

Pakistan is the main sponsor of terrorism in India and Afghanistan. China is their major ally, and Chinese investment has helped Pakistan to come up with several major infrastructural projects. But it came at a cost. Pakistan gave away the Trans-Karakoram tract (Shaksgam Valley) to China in exchange for the funds and technological help.

[bitcoinvestor]

I've read somewhere that Pakistan get funds from China and other countries to train terrorists and kill people in India it could be wrong though but looking at Pakistan it looks true. Even Pakistan neighboring countries wants to depart from Pakistan. 

Pakistan is the main sponsor of terrorism in India and Afghanistan. China is their major ally, and Chinese investment has helped Pakistan to come up with several major infrastructural projects. But it came at a cost. Pakistan gave away the Trans-Karakoram tract (Shaksgam Valley) to China in exchange for the funds and technological help.

nothing is free. Infrastructural projects funds exchange with Shaksgam Valley. Indonesia is now funded by China for some Infrastructures projects in return China political influence is stronger in Indonesia.;

[jeremy grol]

C'mon guys. not more wars.

[GameunitsSEO]

I think World War-III has already begun.

Millions of refugees moving why ?

[Eternu]

Not all so sad. Really if you start a third world war using nuclear weapons it really is in danger of Apocalypse. But the war can be without the use of nuclear weapons. Such a war already underway in Syria and yet the world did not end.

Yes, but it is just matter of time when would some country use nuclear weapon that they have. You see, someone would need to lose war, and none country want that. So when they understand they are near defeat, they would use there nuclear weapon and other side would use too... so there you go . Nuclear war how ever you turn it.

I think that now manifests a characteristic feature of the new strategy wars. They occur on the territory of third countries. Even if one of the parties is defeated, it won't be her due to the territorial losses and therefore no reason for the use of nuclear weapons.

Ok when you see it that way, it is truth... unless that other, that third countrie possess nuclear weapon. In that case your theory doesnt apply. Or maybe that third country is in alliance with some other country that have nuclear weapon, and in that case that other country could use it...

If a country has nuclear weapons it openly on her one will not attack. Against such countries is economic war, and sooner or later it will destroy the country from within. Not be targets for nuclear bombing. For example Iran and North Korea.

I think that most of countries in the world could withstand economic war. If done right, country doesnt need to sell there products to other countries. Thay could make there own food and day to day things that is basic for human survival. And if done right that could last forever. And i dont need to say that there will always be countries that will deal with that country so there will never be full economic war, so that all countries wont trade with that country.

No it is a utopia. In the modern world it is impossible to live offline. Try to make a stock and try to live in a sealed bunker. How much you have enough? The country is even harder and some products of vital activity of the country is not limited. Very greatly influenced by technology.

It is something like utopia, as you said. But it could come true one day, it is not impossible. Country doesn't necessarily need to sell stock, so that people of that country would have good life. If country have fertile soil and water for farming you can have anything. It wouldn't be life like we know it, but it would be life. And as i said, there would always be some country that would trade with you country.

[nitram411]

World War I and II Had passed. All the countries tied in United Nation. However recently there seem grouping countries. They join in the military coalition. Islamic countries have allied. Some comunists countries also take position with the winning Russia in Syria helped by Iran.

US , China and other super power countries may prepare all the possibilities. Will World War III Problably happen? Where will it start from?

Fearing a new World War, the former leader of the Soviet Union called on the great powers to stop their arms race.
 
In an alarmist column published in the American weekly "Time", Mikhail Gorbachev, now 85 years old, expresses his concern at "a current situation" which he considers "too dangerous". Former Soviet leader Donald Trump and Russian and US presidents Vladimir Putin to ban nuclear power for military purposes via the United Nations Security Council (UN), while the two heads of state Were scheduled to talk on the phone on Saturday for the first time since the Republican's inauguration at the White House.