Is the World War 3 likely anytime soon?

1. 51

   Advaitaposted 8 years ago

   Is the World War 3 likely anytime soon?

   replyreport
2. 66

   Perspycaciousposted 8 years ago

   If we can even imagine it, we should be able to prevent it.  Let's hope so for the sake of the world's children.  They can only live here.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      threekeysposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Syria...China...Russia....
      Perspycacious a hopeful response. Can we really do anything about those in power and the arms race??

      replyreport
3. 51

   bradmasterOCcalposted 8 years ago

   
   
   Define World War?
   We call a lot of things wars, but to me unless congress declares a war, it is not a war. Maybe a police action like Korea, and who knows what the disturbances in the last 50 plus years should be called. Many have had UN involvement, and others have had several countries in the mix.
   
   But what is your WW III?

   replyreport
   1. 66

      Perspycaciousposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Our Constitution's definition of "war" is out-of-date.  It is hard to visualize a WWIII w/o involvement of Russia/China/USA as participants and nukes falling. Heaven forbid.

      replyreport
   2. 51

      bradmasterOCcalposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Demas
      So lets amend the constitution, and stop letting more countries develop nuclear weapons

      replyreport
4. 83

   tamarawilhiteposted 8 years ago

   There are Muslim fundamentalist groups with terrorist cells in control of areas and seeking to spread their influence in:
   * Iraq and Syria (ISIS)
   * Indonesia
   * The Philippines
   * Chechnya
   * Western China
   * Nigeria (Boko Haram)
   * East Africa (Al Shabab)
   * Muslim controlled neighborhoods in Europe where they attack women who aren't veiled, tell locals not to walk dogs, desecrate churches without penalty, attack homosexuals and Jews with little consequence
   
   We are already in a world war of fundamentalist Islam versus everyone else, though that is a faith that spread entirely by the sword except for Indonesia for its entire history from the day Mohammed was rejected as Messiah in Medina and said no more peace, raid the caravans for loot and it is moral as long as Mohamed got a cut.
   Islam even justifies terrorism - the greatest good in the faith is spreading Islam, not life. So killing 1 to scare 10 into converting to Islam is moral.
   Committing one or two atrocities well publicized to scare people who see it into submitting to dhimmi status (extra taxes, fewer legal rights, live under laws that privilege Islam so you want to convert) is thus moral, because spreading a legal system that pushes Islam is almost as good in the Koran as outright conversion. You see this in the mass sexual assaults across the EU New Years Eve 2016 and at other events - to scare women into submitting to Islam's dress code and behavioral rules, while rewarding Muslim men who are told they have the right to rape any woman not covered up. It is, in essence, showing who is "boss" while scaring the rest into behaving like Muslim women (in burkas if out at all).

   replyreport