2024 & Prediction of World War III - Effect on Cryptocurrencies

[Argoo]

but who in this world also has once dropped a nuke? because it could mean history can repeat itself.
if everyone will already be showing their nuke capability in the media. these leaders will know they may never be stopping anymore and pressing that red button will be done shortly.

they don't need consensus before dropping the nuke. there is no transaction fee to send a nuke. in fact we are now programmed there will be blackout in different places. during blackout, our crypto is useless.

On August 6 and 9, 1945, the United States used nuclear weapons for the first time in human history to force Japan to surrender in World War II. The attack killed 70-100 thousand people in Hiroshima and 70 thousand in Nagasaki. The death toll, including those who died from radiation sickness, exceeds 500 thousand.
As we see, there have already been cases of the combat use of nuclear weapons, and the paradox is that humanity never learns from its mistakes.

In recent years, we have seen how Putin’s Russia, carrying out a military invasion of Ukraine and trying to seize this state, also periodically blackmails the world with nuclear weapons. At the same time, the Kremlin is gaining the audacity to tell other states that they should not dare to help Ukraine defend itself, otherwise, under certain circumstances, Russia will be ready to use nuclear weapons. Blackmail is also directed towards the Ukrainians in the sense that if you effectively resist killing you, then we can still drop a nuclear bomb on you. For Ukraine, such blackmail makes no sense at all. This state will, under any circumstances, defend itself to the extent possible, even if nuclear weapons are used against it.

In this situation, international organizations, and primarily the UN, should have taken tough preventive measures, but the UN is practically inactive, and therefore there are virtually no deterrents for Putin. The Fuhrer of Russia, dying of old age and illness, may well decide to launch a nuclear attack, if only in order to deprive him of a trace in human history, even if in such a terrible way. The people of Russia and Putin’s entourage themselves could have prevented Putin from this madness, but they are afraid to even write against him, and hundreds of thousands of people are being driven to the front in Ukraine to be slaughtered. Russians are dying like silent cattle and don’t even moo.

The third world war, if it has not yet begun, could break out at any minute. But those who are dead or dying from radiation sickness do not need cryptocurrency.

[serveria.com]

On August 6 and 9, 1945, the United States used nuclear weapons for the first time in human history to force Japan to surrender in World War II. The attack killed 70-100 thousand people in Hiroshima and 70 thousand in Nagasaki. The death toll, including those who died from radiation sickness, exceeds 500 thousand.
As we see, there have already been cases of the combat use of nuclear weapons, and the paradox is that humanity never learns from its mistakes.

Ok, thanks god you admit the Americans did it. I thought you were going to say Putin is to blame.  

In recent years, we have seen how Putin’s Russia, carrying out a military invasion of Ukraine and trying to seize this state, also periodically blackmails the world with nuclear weapons.

Where have you been for the last two years or so? At least, try to read the headlines: Macron: I can't rule out sending of NATO ground troops to Ukraine. President of Latvia Rinkevics: Russia should be destroyed. And many more similar headlines threatening to destroy Russia as a country. So in this situation Russia doesn't blackmail anyone, merely trying to defend itself from aggressive US sockpuppets.

This state will, under any circumstances, defend itself to the extent possible, even if nuclear weapons are used against it.

I think you underestimate the power of the nukes. Ukraine will turn into a uninhabitable desert. There will ne noone left to defend it and nothing to defend.

In this situation, international organizations, and primarily the UN, should have taken tough preventive measures, but the UN is practically inactive, and therefore there are virtually no deterrents for Putin. The Fuhrer of Russia, dying of old age and illness, may well decide to launch a nuclear attack, if only in order to deprive him of a trace in human history, even if in such a terrible way. The people of Russia and Putin’s entourage themselves could have prevented Putin from this madness, but they are afraid to even write against him, and hundreds of thousands of people are being driven to the front in Ukraine to be slaughtered. Russians are dying like silent cattle and don’t even moo.

Like what kind of measures? What kind of measures can be taken against a global nuclear superpower?  

The third world war, if it has not yet begun, could break out at any minute. But those who are dead or dying from radiation sickness do not need cryptocurrency.

WW3 is not going to happen. Because it would mean our civilization will cease to exist. Is it too hard to understand, colonel?  

[o48o]

-cut-
Was recently discussing with a friend who is of the opinion that since Crypto/Bitcoin is a digital kind of money it should not be affected by any natural disaster or war but for me I believe it will be affected since crypto/Bitcoin is striving because people are making use of it and if these people are affected by war, which will disrupt flow of doing things the normal way, then crypto will die a natural death at least for that period.
-cut-

Your friend is wrong. Bitcoin isn't an island, it's a part of economy and definitely affected by it (as you can tell looking at the volatility spikes in it versus world events). Bitcoin gets a boost when there are news of government acceptance, and price of it has been affected negatively by stock market dips in the past, so why wouldn't it be affected by WW3? Natural disaster wouldn't be any diffrent from that, depending how big and where, it could cause panic sale in all markets. And i am not talking about some tornado or floods, but catastrophic event.

Also if there's going to be big enough war that you can call world war 3, or catastrophic world event, i am sure that price of bitcoin will be least of our problems. At least if all of our wealth isn't tied to it at the moment. I can't really be afraid of any sudden natural disaster, but slower natural disasters could definitely cause WW3.

I hoped and thought that i could live rest of my days without seeing a war in my lifetime, but i am not certain anymore.

[pooya87]

On August 6 and 9, 1945, the United States used nuclear weapons for the first time in human history to force Japan to surrender in World War II.

European War 2 had already ended in early 1945 and it was official in May when Germany surrendered. Japan was also already defeated and had lost the war and had given up. Then the US regime dropped the nukes on them to make a statement for the future in the New World Order at the time showing its devastating capability and the will to commit mass murder.

To put simply, usage of nuclear weapons by the US regime had nothing to do with WW2.

[Argoo]

On August 6 and 9, 1945, the United States used nuclear weapons for the first time in human history to force Japan to surrender in World War II.

European War 2 had already ended in early 1945 and it was official in May when Germany surrendered. Japan was also already defeated and had lost the war and had given up. Then the US regime dropped the nukes on them to make a statement for the future in the New World Order at the time showing its devastating capability and the will to commit mass murder.

To put simply, usage of nuclear weapons by the US regime had nothing to do with WW2.

You have a slightly wrong idea about the chronology of the final stage of World War II.

World War II took place from September 1, 1939 to September 2, 1945.
Here's what Wikipedia says about it:
“The beginning of World War II is considered to be September 1, 1939, when Nazi Germany launched its invasion of Poland...
The invasion of Anglo-American troops into Germany and the Battle of Berlin brought only Germany out of the war, which signed the act of surrender on May 8 (May 9 Moscow time), 1945. In July 1945, the United States sent Japan the Potsdam Declaration, which it rejected. This was followed by the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the entry of the USSR into the war. On September 2, 1945, Japan signed the instrument of surrender. This ended the Second World War."
https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80 %D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D0%B0

In the period following the atomic bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945, and until Japan's surrender on September 2, large-scale military operations still took place. Thus, given Japan’s refusal of the unconditional surrender offered to it, the USSR made a statement to the Japanese government on August 8 that since August 9, 1945, it considers itself to be at war with Japan. On August 10, the Mongolian People's Revolutionary Army (PRA) entered the war against Japan. The fighting took place on fronts stretching over 5 thousand km. Only on September 2, at 9:04 a.m. (Tokyo time), the Act of Surrender of Japan was signed on board the American battleship Missouri, which was in Tokyo Bay.
https://www.noo-journal.ru/sovetsko-yaponskaya-voyna-1945/

[DrBeer]

On August 6 and 9, 1945, the United States used nuclear weapons for the first time in human history to force Japan to surrender in World War II.

European War 2 had already ended in early 1945 and it was official in May when Germany surrendered. Japan was also already defeated and had lost the war and had given up. Then the US regime dropped the nukes on them to make a statement for the future in the New World Order at the time showing its devastating capability and the will to commit mass murder.

To put simply, usage of nuclear weapons by the US regime had nothing to do with WW2.

You have a slightly wrong idea about the chronology of the final stage of World War II.

World War II took place from September 1, 1939 to September 2, 1945.
Here's what Wikipedia says about it:
“The beginning of World War II is considered to be September 1, 1939, when Nazi Germany launched its invasion of Poland...
The invasion of Anglo-American troops into Germany and the Battle of Berlin brought only Germany out of the war, which signed the act of surrender on May 8 (May 9 Moscow time), 1945. In July 1945, the United States sent Japan the Potsdam Declaration, which it rejected. This was followed by the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the entry of the USSR into the war. On September 2, 1945, Japan signed the instrument of surrender. This ended the Second World War."
https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80 %D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D0%B0

In the period following the atomic bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945, and until Japan's surrender on September 2, large-scale military operations still took place. Thus, given Japan’s refusal of the unconditional surrender offered to it, the USSR made a statement to the Japanese government on August 8 that since August 9, 1945, it considers itself to be at war with Japan. On August 10, the Mongolian People's Revolutionary Army (PRA) entered the war against Japan. The fighting took place on fronts stretching over 5 thousand km. Only on September 2, at 9:04 a.m. (Tokyo time), the Act of Surrender of Japan was signed on board the American battleship Missouri, which was in Tokyo Bay.
https://www.noo-journal.ru/sovetsko-yaponskaya-voyna-1945/

Well, also a "short version", where a big period fell out, and a very important moment: on September 17, 1939, the USSR invaded Poland and soon seized the entire east of the country. By the end of September any resistance was crushed and Poland was divided between the Soviet Union and the Third Reich - to the horror of the entire world community.

After that, Germany and the USSR organized several more attacks on other European countries. This "brotherhood of Nazis" existed up to June 22, 1941, when Germany and the USSR had a small disagreement. On Germany's side, Hitler wanted to settle things peacefully. But the Soviets did not want to solve peacefully, played games and forced Hitler to launch a preemptive strike against the USSR! It was essentially self-defense of Germany.
And about peaceful initiatives of Germany in relation to the USSR, speaks the fact that on May 1, 1941, Germany together with the USSR held a parade of fraternal peoples, the Labor Communist Party of the USSR, and the National Socialist German Workers' Party of Germany.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52z6NV3bijI

[pooya87]

You have a slightly wrong idea about the chronology of the final stage of World War II.

Here's what Wikipedia says about it:

I'm not sure how to respond when your source is Wikipedia!!!

If you got the time, study the history of this period from a military standpoint (in books and other "reliable" sources, not Wikipedia) you can clearly see that there is enough evidence (even in the history written by the "victor") that Japan had already been defeated. For example Japan (which is an island in case you don't know) had its entire navy destroyed by the end of 1944 and 1945 started with the Allies having almost full control of all the seas around Japan.
Same with Japanese air-force that had been almost entirely destroyed.

To put simply, they didn't even have the capability to exit their own soil let alone continue fighting.

There are a lot of other evidence that clearly shows their total defeat way before the US regime committed mass murder in Japan by using not one but two Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Are you ready for the last nail in the coffin?
In the book Atomic Diplomacy by Gar Alperovitz (an American historian and writer in a book that is listed on the Office of the Historian which is a US government official department under the department of state) Alperovitz explains how Japan had already accepted defeat and had started peace envoy missions back in September 1944.
He doesn't stop there. There's more. He explains how the US regime knew the Japanese were defeated, wanted to surrender and negotiate peace so there was no need for any kind of invasion let alone dropping two nukes murdering over two hundred thousand civilians.

[Argoo]

You have a slightly wrong idea about the chronology of the final stage of World War II.

Here's what Wikipedia says about it:

I'm not sure how to respond when your source is Wikipedia!!!

If you got the time, study the history of this period from a military standpoint (in books and other "reliable" sources, not Wikipedia) you can clearly see that there is enough evidence (even in the history written by the "victor") that Japan had already been defeated. For example Japan (which is an island in case you don't know) had its entire navy destroyed by the end of 1944 and 1945 started with the Allies having almost full control of all the seas around Japan.
Same with Japanese air-force that had been almost entirely destroyed.

To put simply, they didn't even have the capability to exit their own soil let alone continue fighting.

There are a lot of other evidence that clearly shows their total defeat way before the US regime committed mass murder in Japan by using not one but two Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Are you ready for the last nail in the coffin?
In the book Atomic Diplomacy by Gar Alperovitz (an American historian and writer in a book that is listed on the Office of the Historian which is a US government official department under the department of state) Alperovitz explains how Japan had already accepted defeat and had started peace envoy missions back in September 1944.
He doesn't stop there. There's more. He explains how the US regime knew the Japanese were defeated, wanted to surrender and negotiate peace so there was no need for any kind of invasion let alone dropping two nukes murdering over two hundred thousand civilians.

Do you want to say that after the surrender of Germany in May 1945, the million-strong Kwantung Army of Japan, which was an ally of Germany and was armed with over 1.2 thousand tanks, more than 6.6 thousand guns, 1.9 thousand aircraft, over 30 combat ships and boats did not pose a threat to the eastern borders of the USSR at all? In fierce battles throughout August 1945, the irretrievable losses of Soviet troops amounted to 12 thousand people, medical losses - 24.4 thousand. Was this damage caused by those who were unable to resist? Why then didn’t Japan capitulate earlier than September 2 and fought stubborn battles with Soviet troops for almost a month? In a national radio address, Emperor Hirohito announced surrender to the Japanese people on August 15, but the Japanese army continued to offer serious resistance for a long time.

[yhiaali3]

In fierce battles throughout August 1945, the irretrievable losses of Soviet troops amounted to 12 thousand people, medical losses - 24.4 thousand. Was this damage caused by those who were unable to resist? Why then didn’t Japan capitulate earlier than September 2 and fought stubborn battles with Soviet troops for almost a month? In a national radio address, Emperor Hirohito announced surrender to the Japanese people on August 15, but the Japanese army continued to offer serious resistance for a long time.

Despite all of this, from a humanitarian perspective, is this a justification for dropping two nuclear bombs on two Japanese cities containing hundreds of thousands of civilians and killing about 200,000 people to stop the war?

Likewise, compared to the current situation, does Ukraine’s continued resistance against Russia represent a justification for dropping a Russian nuclear bomb on Ukrainian cities to stop the war?

This is unacceptable from a humanitarian perspective, even in the most horrific and longest wars. From my personal point of view, there is no justification for dropping a nuclear bomb on any enemy.

[Argoo]

In fierce battles throughout August 1945, the irretrievable losses of Soviet troops amounted to 12 thousand people, medical losses - 24.4 thousand. Was this damage caused by those who were unable to resist? Why then didn’t Japan capitulate earlier than September 2 and fought stubborn battles with Soviet troops for almost a month? In a national radio address, Emperor Hirohito announced surrender to the Japanese people on August 15, but the Japanese army continued to offer serious resistance for a long time.

Despite all of this, from a humanitarian perspective, is this a justification for dropping two nuclear bombs on two Japanese cities containing hundreds of thousands of civilians and killing about 200,000 people to stop the war?

Likewise, compared to the current situation, does Ukraine’s continued resistance against Russia represent a justification for dropping a Russian nuclear bomb on Ukrainian cities to stop the war?

This is unacceptable from a humanitarian perspective, even in the most horrific and longest wars. From my personal point of view, there is no justification for dropping a nuclear bomb on any enemy.

To stop the war in Ukraine, Russia does not have to drop a nuclear bomb on its territory.  To do this, it is only necessary to withdraw Russian troops from the territory of Ukraine.  In addition, it must be taken into account that any use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine will have a negative impact on the environment and people both in Russia itself and in European countries.  And this will actually mean an attack on NATO countries.

No one here approves of the use of nuclear weapons against peaceful cities for any purpose and under any circumstances. The nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was most likely a political step for the United States to demonstrate the capabilities of new nuclear weapons and an experiment to study their consequences of use in war conditions.

In the current conditions, Russia itself attacked the neighboring state of Ukraine, and so that no one would stop it from destroying Ukraine and destroying its population, it is trying to threaten and blackmail the whole world with the use of nuclear weapons. This is blasphemous and has no justification from any point of view, and also carries a direct and obvious threat of starting World War III.

[pooya87]

Do you want to say that after the surrender of Germany in May 1945, the million-strong Kwantung Army of Japan, which was an ally of Germany and was armed with over 1.2 thousand tanks, more than 6.6 thousand guns, 1.9 thousand aircraft, over 30 combat ships and boats did not pose a threat to the eastern borders of the USSR at all? In fierce battles throughout August 1945, the irretrievable losses of Soviet troops amounted to 12 thousand people, medical losses - 24.4 thousand. Was this damage caused by those who were unable to resist? Why then didn’t Japan capitulate earlier than September 2 and fought stubborn battles with Soviet troops for almost a month? In a national radio address, Emperor Hirohito announced surrender to the Japanese people on August 15, but the Japanese army continued to offer serious resistance for a long time.

We are talking about war crime committed by the US regime and the lack of justification for it, not what could have happened between USSR and Japan. As for any battles that took place between the two timeframes, that's due to lack of negotiations which is the only reason why any wars stop. US regime wanted to test its nukes somewhere which is why they refused to negotiate peace with Japan so Japanese kept fighting a little longer than they wanted to.

[Argoo]

Do you want to say that after the surrender of Germany in May 1945, the million-strong Kwantung Army of Japan, which was an ally of Germany and was armed with over 1.2 thousand tanks, more than 6.6 thousand guns, 1.9 thousand aircraft, over 30 combat ships and boats did not pose a threat to the eastern borders of the USSR at all? In fierce battles throughout August 1945, the irretrievable losses of Soviet troops amounted to 12 thousand people, medical losses - 24.4 thousand. Was this damage caused by those who were unable to resist? Why then didn’t Japan capitulate earlier than September 2 and fought stubborn battles with Soviet troops for almost a month? In a national radio address, Emperor Hirohito announced surrender to the Japanese people on August 15, but the Japanese army continued to offer serious resistance for a long time.

We are talking about war crime committed by the US regime and the lack of justification for it, not what could have happened between USSR and Japan. As for any battles that took place between the two timeframes, that's due to lack of negotiations which is the only reason why any wars stop. US regime wanted to test its nukes somewhere which is why they refused to negotiate peace with Japan so Japanese kept fighting a little longer than they wanted to.

I agree that from a military point of view there was no need for the US to drop nuclear bombs on the peaceful Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 and that these were, in fact, US war crimes.

In the current situation, Putin’s Russia, although they declare that they are open to negotiations with Ukraine, however, the precondition for negotiations is the consent of Ukraine to the fact that the occupied territories of Ukraine remain with Russia, and this is unacceptable for Ukraine and for the entire civilized world. More and more states are being drawn into this bloody and brutal war, and therefore the threat of World War III is growing rapidly.

[serveria.com]

Do you want to say that after the surrender of Germany in May 1945, the million-strong Kwantung Army of Japan, which was an ally of Germany and was armed with over 1.2 thousand tanks, more than 6.6 thousand guns, 1.9 thousand aircraft, over 30 combat ships and boats did not pose a threat to the eastern borders of the USSR at all? In fierce battles throughout August 1945, the irretrievable losses of Soviet troops amounted to 12 thousand people, medical losses - 24.4 thousand. Was this damage caused by those who were unable to resist? Why then didn’t Japan capitulate earlier than September 2 and fought stubborn battles with Soviet troops for almost a month? In a national radio address, Emperor Hirohito announced surrender to the Japanese people on August 15, but the Japanese army continued to offer serious resistance for a long time.

We are talking about war crime committed by the US regime and the lack of justification for it, not what could have happened between USSR and Japan. As for any battles that took place between the two timeframes, that's due to lack of negotiations which is the only reason why any wars stop. US regime wanted to test its nukes somewhere which is why they refused to negotiate peace with Japan so Japanese kept fighting a little longer than they wanted to.

I agree that from a military point of view there was no need for the US to drop nuclear bombs on the peaceful Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 and that these were, in fact, US war crimes.

In the current situation, Putin’s Russia, although they declare that they are open to negotiations with Ukraine, however, the precondition for negotiations is the consent of Ukraine to the fact that the occupied territories of Ukraine remain with Russia, and this is unacceptable for Ukraine and for the entire civilized world. More and more states are being drawn into this bloody and brutal war, and therefore the threat of World War III is growing rapidly.

Oh, cool, now could you answer me: was any US official prosecuted for this act? Any international court orders issued to arrest president Truman? Were there any sanctions imposed on the US by the international community? Were US sportsmen banned from international competitions?

Check and mate, Bozo! Now I'll go get some popcorn and waiting for your answer which will be quite entertaining I suspect.... 

[Kakmakr]

Albert Einstein said it best, " I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

So, if WWIII  destroy the world with Nukes, Bitcoin will not be the focus of the people that has to survive such a hostile and damaged planet. 

[Argoo]

Oh, cool, now could you answer me: was any US official prosecuted for this act? Any international court orders issued to arrest president Truman? Were there any sanctions imposed on the US by the international community? Were US sportsmen banned from international competitions?

Check and mate, Bozo! Now I'll go get some popcorn and waiting for your answer which will be quite entertaining I suspect....  

According to the official version, the United States bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki because the Japanese were fanatics and would not capitulate, and the only way to end the war without the entry of American troops was an atomic bombing. The alternative could have been an American invasion. President Truman wrote in his memoirs that this would have cost half a million American lives, and then he noted that it would also have resulted in the deaths of millions of Japanese. Thus, according to the official explanation, the bombing was not only justified, it was actually also humane because it saved so many lives.

  Until now, the United States has not only not been punished, but has not even apologized for the murder of Japanese civilians.

Donald Trump, while still President of the United States, said that it was thanks to this program that World War II ended and an “unprecedented era of global stability” began.

US President Barack Obama and his administration, who visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial in 2016, said that there would be no apology for the nuclear strike in 1945. First of all, because Japan was the first to attack the United States when it attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on December 7, 1941, where the US Pacific Fleet was stationed and where 2.4 thousand Americans died.
The mayor of Hiroshima, Tomihisa Taue, when he conveyed an invitation to Obama to visit the Memorial, said: they say, the very fact that the American leader will visit a city that suffered from the American atomic bombing is important.
https://rg.ru/2016/05/24/pochemu-ssha-ne-izviniaiutsia-za-atomnye-bombardirovki-iaponii.html

Advice to an aggressor: Don't attack others and you won't have to mourn the death of your loved ones. No one knows what kind of weapon may appear in the hands of the one you have taken as your victim.
Before the attack on Ukraine, Russia threatened everything with its Black Sea Fleet, which was bulky and intimidating in sight. Now its remnants are hiding away from the shores of Ukraine, fearing the spread of Ukrainian-made drones.
I hope I have satisfied your curiosity. This will make the popcorn even tastier.

[fuguebtc]

Do you want to say that after the surrender of Germany in May 1945, the million-strong Kwantung Army of Japan, which was an ally of Germany and was armed with over 1.2 thousand tanks, more than 6.6 thousand guns, 1.9 thousand aircraft, over 30 combat ships and boats did not pose a threat to the eastern borders of the USSR at all? In fierce battles throughout August 1945, the irretrievable losses of Soviet troops amounted to 12 thousand people, medical losses - 24.4 thousand. Was this damage caused by those who were unable to resist? Why then didn’t Japan capitulate earlier than September 2 and fought stubborn battles with Soviet troops for almost a month? In a national radio address, Emperor Hirohito announced surrender to the Japanese people on August 15, but the Japanese army continued to offer serious resistance for a long time.

We are talking about war crime committed by the US regime and the lack of justification for it, not what could have happened between USSR and Japan. As for any battles that took place between the two timeframes, that's due to lack of negotiations which is the only reason why any wars stop. US regime wanted to test its nukes somewhere which is why they refused to negotiate peace with Japan so Japanese kept fighting a little longer than they wanted to.

I agree that from a military point of view there was no need for the US to drop nuclear bombs on the peaceful Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 and that these were, in fact, US war crimes.

In the current situation, Putin’s Russia, although they declare that they are open to negotiations with Ukraine, however, the precondition for negotiations is the consent of Ukraine to the fact that the occupied territories of Ukraine remain with Russia, and this is unacceptable for Ukraine and for the entire civilized world. More and more states are being drawn into this bloody and brutal war, and therefore the threat of World War III is growing rapidly.

Oh, cool, now could you answer me: was any US official prosecuted for this act? Any international court orders issued to arrest president Truman? Were there any sanctions imposed on the US by the international community? Were US sportsmen banned from international competitions?

Check and mate, Bozo! Now I'll go get some popcorn and waiting for your answer which will be quite entertaining I suspect.... 

When the US military attacks a country , they will call it punishing criminals , punishing terrorists, bringing  peace to the world and being the world's only messenger of peace . But when a country that is not an ally of the United States has a conflict or war related to national interests, it will be called an invader, a terrorist , and must be destroyed. The conflicts and wars that killed millions of people in Japan, Vietnam, and Iraq caused by the US were all wars against evil  .

[Casdinyard]

As 2024 approaching many predictions has been made about economic crisis that will shake the world with many countries rising up to fight against one another

If these assumptions/predictions are to be true then what will be its effect on cryptocurrency most especially Bitcoin. As we know during war, economic activities are always grounded where many will be thinking only about their survival in terms of living than economic dealings and gains

Was recently discussing with a friend who is of the opinion that since Crypto/Bitcoin is a digital kind of money it should not be affected by any natural disaster or war but for me I believe it will be affected since crypto/Bitcoin is striving because people are making use of it and if these people are affected by war, which will disrupt flow of doing things the normal way, then crypto will die a natural death at least for that period.

Although we both agreed that even if there would be a World War III, participating countries will not be more than 6 going by previous wars but these countries will be economic powers that can/would ground economy of others countries depending on them. Hypothetically, say Russia, it might be difficult to pump oil to neighboring countries and other countries abroad that depend on them for their survival and might not be able to power countries including  Satellites and Base stations (BTS) to generate data. Without data, cryptocurrencies will be useless as there would be no trading of any sort for that period.

Will like to know your view on these as 2024  prediction for Bitcoin, Ethereum investment is encouraging and we don't want anything to truncate this flow. For me I believe there won't be any war significant enough to affect investment in Cryptocurrencies.

First of all, I'd like to set the record that nobody agreed on shit lol, if anything a lot of us here are in agreement that should a full-blown world war were to happen, it's going to be a full military-centered conflict with chances of these people sending nukes against each other cause let me just remind you that the only thing that's stopping these people from nuking each other is a big shiny red button, and a piece of paper saying they shouldn't and they can't send nukes against them.

Now going back, if a war were to happen, and if it were to be of global scale we might get cut off from internet access, and in turn, our access to cryptocurrencies are good as done. Demand for crypto would die down, and until the war is over, we might not have use for it whatsoever. Unless we invent a new way to transact with cryptocurrencies without having to use the internet. If this is made possible then this might become the de facto currency during the war, which would in turn, increase demand and love for crypto.

[sekalitas]

Was recently discussing with a friend who is of the opinion that since Crypto/Bitcoin is a digital kind of money it should not be affected by any natural disaster or war but for me I believe it will be affected since crypto/Bitcoin is striving because people are making use of it and if these people are affected by war, which will disrupt flow of doing things the normal way, then crypto will die a natural death at least for that period.

I agree with your opinion. While cryptocurrencies possess a degree of decentralization, they are still fundamentally connected to the real-world economy. The investors, traders, and infrastructure supporting crypto exist within the traditional economic landscape. Economic turmoil, job losses, and lack of basic necessities – all of which can result from war –  severely impact people's ability and willingness to engage with cryptocurrency, consequently affecting the overall market.

Large-scale wars, and especially a potential world war, would inflict immense economic distress. Physical infrastructure damage, trade route blockades, and supply chain interruptions lead to a cascade of economic woes. This would fundamentally alter how money flows, potentially reducing access to exchanges and impacting the value of currencies used to buy and sell crypto.

Therefore, the conclusion is that a major war, especially a large-scale or world war, will likely have severe negative consequences for cryptocurrencies. The value of these assets could drop significantly.

[pooya87]

According to the official version, the United States bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki because the Japanese were fanatics and would not capitulate, and the only way to end the war without the entry of American troops was an atomic bombing. The alternative could have been an American invasion. President Truman wrote in his memoirs that this would have cost half a million American lives, and then he noted that it would also have resulted in the deaths of millions of Japanese. Thus, according to the official explanation, the bombing was not only justified, it was actually also humane because it saved so many lives.

Mass murderers and psychopaths always justify their criminal acts one way or the other. If you ever asked Ted Bundy why he murdered all those people he would justify it somehow without accepting that he was a serial killer.

Donald Trump, while still President of the United States, said that it was thanks to this program that World War II ended and an “unprecedented era of global stability” began.

This is funny since his own Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff compared him with Hitler and the Nazi regime, expressing his concern by describing it as being worried Trump will pull a "Reichstag Moment". This is before he effectively stripped Trump of all his powers as the commander in chief.

[lepbagong]

Was recently discussing with a friend who is of the opinion that since Crypto/Bitcoin is a digital kind of money it should not be affected by any natural disaster or war but for me I believe it will be affected since crypto/Bitcoin is striving because people are making use of it and if these people are affected by war, which will disrupt flow of doing things the normal way, then crypto will die a natural death at least for that period.

I agree with your opinion. While cryptocurrencies possess a degree of decentralization, they are still fundamentally connected to the real-world economy. The investors, traders, and infrastructure supporting crypto exist within the traditional economic landscape. Economic turmoil, job losses, and lack of basic necessities – all of which can result from war –  severely impact people's ability and willingness to engage with cryptocurrency, consequently affecting the overall market.

Large-scale wars, and especially a potential world war, would inflict immense economic distress. Physical infrastructure damage, trade route blockades, and supply chain interruptions lead to a cascade of economic woes. This would fundamentally alter how money flows, potentially reducing access to exchanges and impacting the value of currencies used to buy and sell crypto.

Therefore, the conclusion is that a major war, especially a large-scale or world war, will likely have severe negative consequences for cryptocurrencies. The value of these assets could drop significantly.

Indeed, everyone also recognizes the advantages of crypto, which will not be disturbed or disturbed by whatever circumstances occur in any part of the world. As long as there are still people who can carry out their normal activities, then crypto can still run well.
But if it leads to a war on a large scale such as a world war, where all countries are involved and infrastructure is disrupted and activities can no longer be carried out calmly, then it is certain that there will be an indirect impact on crypto. If the infrastructure has collapsed, it is certain that the need that must be used is an internet network. If it is not available, then it is certain that the movement or circulation of crypto cannot run.
Therefore, avoid this so that there is no world war whose escalation will clearly affect everyone, crypto will no longer be of any use.