Could already be going. We didn't name them World War 1 and World War 2 until after they were over
Asklemmy
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
Please seek therapy or counseling. If your concern that a war is on the horizon is affecting you this much then we aren't qualified to help.
I think that the true world war 3 will not be nations against nations, but citizens against their own nations. The stage is set for an actual paradigm shift or system annihilation. We will not support civilization if it doesn't change, either the people destroy the pyramid or the pyramid will destroy the world.
I kinda doubt that will happen. For instance, look at Venezuela: Venezuelans are beyond fed up with Maduro's dictatorship, but there's nothing they can do against the government forces.
Governments will do anything they can to prevent a paradigm change.
What revolution really takes is soldier's that are protecting the system being unwilling to kill when the "rebels" are their family and friends.
If soldiers have love for the people and see common cause more than they fear their leaders then the leader can fall.
The world as we know it
Nah, there won't be WW3. Instead we get countries sabotaging each other via hacking critical infrastructure, proxy wars, propaganda, trade wars.
I doubt there will ever be a direct "hot war" between the top five nuclear powers ever again.
WW3 is not what's gonna kill people, climate change is more likely gonna be humanity's downfall.
please tell me that Iβm overexagurating
You're overexaggerating.
Mach mal nicht so'n Fass auf.
Einfach locker durch die Hose atmen.
Man kann jetzt noch schneller ekk'n
In 2001 there was that 9/11 thing and it sounded like WW3 had just started. Turns out, it didn't. Well, lots of things did happen as a result of it, but WW3 wasn't one of them. Soon after that, USA was involved in a number if wars in the middle east and it felt like WW3 had just started. Again, it didn't. Some time around 2010s the tension between North Korea and South Korea was getting pretty intense, and a friend of mine started talking WW3... As usual, WW3 didn't start.
At the moment, the situation in Ukraine feels just like all the other major incidents, but we'll see how it works out. If you expose your mind to tabloid journalism, it begins to feel like the entire world is about to explode. History has a tendency of repeating itself, so I suggest reading about the things that lead to WW1 and WW2. Once, you've done that, you'll begin to pay attention to certain signs and start ignoring most of the nonsense tabloids keep writing about.
That's just survivorship bias, you didn't live through the worlds where all those things escalated into flat out war, you dimension skipping hippie.
Iβm a very picky hippie when it comes to dimensions.
I highly doubt that WWIII will happen (within the next few years), however I forsee the next several years to not be peacful. There will be several (regional/civil) despites that will most likley occur and the chances of any of them escalating is highly unlikley. Here are the conflicts I forsee:
- Continued Syrian Civil War: wont be pretty but escalation is unlikely
- Palestinian occupation: Will absolutely continue to be horrific but none of the neighboring Arab counties care enough to escalate (or risk US aid)
- Russia/Ukraine war: Russia will get some territory and thats about it, probrally just the Russian majority areas. After that the EU will intimidate Russia to back off.
- India/China border dispute: They'll make a lot of noise, actural fighting is unlikely
- US/Canada/Mexico/Greenland conflict: Who knows tbh, most likley Trump is running off his mouth as always
- China/Taiwan: I severly doubt it, in addition the US is moving microchip manufacturing to the US so strategic value may loosen
Worst case scenario here is a full blown war between the EU and Russia, the US likley wont get involved (Trump doesnt care about Europe) and neither will China (both counties might send aid respectively). It would probrally end with Russia surrendering followed by them loosing no land and maybe a regime change plus some political reforms.
Russia/Ukraine war: Russia will get some territory and thats about it, probrally just the Russian majority areas. After that the EU will intimidate Russia to back off.
How do you imagine the EU will do that exactly? The EU has no military industrial capacity to speak of, it doesn't have access to cheap energy, and it's becoming politically unstable. A far more likely scenario here is that the EU starts breaking up, and nationalist parties start realigning their countries towards Russia because the US will leave EU to hang.
I would imagine that if Russian agression continues than nationalist parties would loose steam
The situation today is nowhere near as bad as the Cold War.
Think of it this way. All of the 0.01%ers in china, USA and Russia share the same tastes and values. Think any of them are really hot to blow up their nice places on the Rivera?
No. Itβs bad for the economy.
You could not be more wrong
It's bad for certain parts of the economy and it is dangerous for current rulers.
Economy is cyclical, always either heading into a recession or coming out of a recession. A capitalist society requires constant money flow for expansion which is why interest rates are lowered during recessive times to stimulate expenditure and raised during peak to control expansion. World wars put spending into overdrive.
The number one thing I've learned through the last several decades is that if it's bad for the economy, no one will do it. Greed is the number one driver of everything right now. Maybe that will change, but I doubt it. Look at all the positive progress we try to make, it's stopped the second anyone rich would lose any money.
Anything could happen of course, but I don't see this as a likely scenario myself. What's more likely is that we return to bloc competition similar to what we saw during the Cold War. Except this time it's going to be G7 against the BRICS.
I've been expecting WW3 since 1983.
Only Wiseman in the thread.
Star Trek says that we shouldn't expect World War 3 until 2026, so we've got 1 more year to live to the fullest before then.
No.
Russia (the current primary aggressor) is on the brink of a banking system collapse. It doesn't have the money to wage war on a bigger scale than it already is.
China is far more interested in trade than hostilities.
The middle east has been a tinder box for over a hundred years. I don't see it dragging outsiders into it and hopefully we have a respite coming.
Central Asia has tension between India and Pakistan, but that's nothing new. India could piss off China or the reverse, and if that kicked off the loss of life could be on a scale that would be unprecedented but still I think it wouldn't drag the west in.
The US has joined the party
No
No but there will be wars.
It's reminiscent of the cold war.
I donβt expect it, but I donβt rule it out either.
Just a warning for everyone who isnβt worried: you expect that the leaders of the world act logically and like adults. That might be a mistake.
Actually I don't expect them to act logically or "adult", whatever you mean by that. Adulthood doesn't mean anything.
But that they don't act like that is exactly why I think there won't be any world scale wars.
Many will say that World War Three cannot happen, that nuclear weapons will prevent it. However, this assumes that World War Three has to be global thermonuclear war, rather than some repeat of the previous world wars.
Cities don't have to be leveled for nations to fight a world war. The US fought two world wars, and we never had our cities and infrastructure decimated. What I can imagine is a future world war where all the major players fight the war in the same way the US fought the two previous wars. Both sides contribute massive resources, adopt wartime economies, throw their whole populations behind the effort etc, but at no point do the various combatants directly attack the main territory and population centers of the other side. You could have a conflict where both sides lost millions of troops fighting it out in some third party territory, but the nukes never fly as all sides realize that invading the home territory of the others is suicide.
My vibes based analysis says atleast in the next ten years
Hope so, it's long past time for a reboot.
the rich will survive, the poor will die
I'm disabled and well below the poverty line, I'm fully aware where I would end up in a class war.
You are already living in a class war. You are below the poverty line because of it.
According to the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, we are closer to nuclear war now than ever in history. Closer than when boomers were doing school duck and cover drills.
2024 Doomsday Clock Statement: A moment of historic danger: It is still 90 seconds to midnight
No.
I think it has already started. It just hasn't consolidated yet.
Current circumstances do seem worrisome. But, we've been threatened with that for all my life, and even decades before I was born. So who knows. MAD is a certain thing and I don't think entire countries are unstable enough to let that happen. I'm not really sure what Putin is getting at threatening all of Europe. The situation with China and Taiwan doesn't look good, with the US pledge of taking Taiwan's side for independence.