Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

World War III and China

M0nK3Y
Posts: 62
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2016 12:18:49 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
World War III may or may not happen, the thought that it won't is not a sensible thought. Humans are volatile and I ask you to provide me a non emotional and non opinionated reason why a Government may not react negatively, emotionally, and start World War III.

My hypothesis is that Russia and whatever allies it has in the West, and the rest of the West, will critically injure each other, and China will pounce on these weaknesses. China will victor in World War III but their victory will be short lived due to nuclear fallout.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 12:24:18 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/19/2016 12:18:49 PM, M0nK3Y wrote:
World War III may or may not happen, the thought that it won't is not a sensible thought. Humans are volatile and I ask you to provide me a non emotional and non opinionated reason why a Government may not react negatively, emotionally, and start World War III.

World wars generally aren't started by a single government, but rather by forces linking national interests -- forces that are triggered and escalate into a domino effect faster than the nations can prevent through diplomatic and political means. These in turn are enabled by technological changes accelerating globalisation and the interdependency of national interests.

For example, World War I arose from a fracture line in colonial tensions that through the 19th century had become overstrained and unsustainable. What made it a world war rather than a continental war was the advent of steamships and steam trains able to recruit and deploy imperial forces from all around the globe, and what made it so bloody was the continued industrialisation of death-engines, that had first been seen in the US Civil War.

World War II arose from the pressures of industrial competition. It was in essence a war to control the resources and infrastructure needed for manufacturing, which was at that stage, key to national wealth. Germany and Japan were both cut out of manufacturing development (Germany due to crippling war debts, and Japan due to European control of Asia), and both adopted militant, expansionist postures in response.

Following the industrialised slaughter of WWI, and the advent of nuclear weapons in WWII, the prospect of a third world war has been terrifying now for over a century. However, it's important to consider what it might be fought over. Colonialism and manufacturing are arguably, no longer the right triggers. You need something that pulls in widespread national interests too fast for governments to react wisely, politically and diplomatically. Water security, food security, fuel security, rare earth metals or global communications are all possible triggers.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 12:25:21 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 12:24:18 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
Water security, food security, fuel security, rare earth metals or global communications are all possible triggers.

Oh, biosecurity too, since populations migrate en masse more easily now than ever before.
KthulhuHimself
Posts: 993
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 4:38:48 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/19/2016 12:18:49 PM, M0nK3Y wrote:
World War III may or may not happen, the thought that it won't is not a sensible thought. Humans are volatile and I ask you to provide me a non emotional and non opinionated reason why a Government may not react negatively, emotionally, and start World War III.

My hypothesis is that Russia and whatever allies it has in the West, and the rest of the West, will critically injure each other, and China will pounce on these weaknesses. China will victor in World War III but their victory will be short lived due to nuclear fallout.

Just one question...

WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH SCIENCE??!!!!!!!!