I am obcessed with this question. I used to think it'd be the cliche US and EU vs Russia and China (plus others) but more and more I buy into the Friedman scenario with it being Turkey, Japan, and Mexico vs US, capitalist china, unified korea, India, etc.
What do you guys think?
Alliance?
States?
Cause?
Post war?
And most importantly, site historical trends as reasons for why.
Thanks!
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
...
China isn't capable of fighting the 'west' at the moment because its economy is too tightly tied to the west. They will likely be neutral in a case of NATO vs Russia, and not escalate conflicts in SEA or India for the moment.
Russia could engage NATO, but would kill itself doing so, significant parts of their civil and military infastructure is still from the soviet era and is having maintenance problems. Against China, they would most likely fare better, but they don't really have anything to gain there.
The USA/NATO could fight against anybody except for China (econ tie) easily, but doesn't really have any reasons to start any world wide conflicts. Its more likely it will be involved in minor conflicts, apart from North Korea. War with North Korea would cause some shifts, but unless they launch nukes major changes would be from political shifts after the war.
India and Pakistan could try to whack each other, and that could result in a lot of death that wasn't actually relevant to what the West cares about.
WW3 as it would have happened, in 1984
Many keks to you my friends.
>india with russia
>china with usa
Nice, but wouldnt china back the DPRK?
India with russia is a stretch, but in the early 80s India was indeed very close to the USSR. Tensions with Pakistan were high over Afghanistan so it's conceivable that in the event of world war, India would fall into the USSR camp by association of Pakistani-Soviet hostilities over Afghanistan
China siding with the west against the USSR 100% would have happened, read up on sino-soviet-western relations in the 1980s. It was an unofficial treaty that in the event of total war with the USSR the US would have aided China and vice-versa
China would probably ignore the DPRK, they hated the USSR much more than they supported the value of North Korea
>Guinea-Bissau and Benin are not by my side
How much I'm fucked?
So what will be our ww3?
>2017
>Great powers still going to war.
They'll just make their proxy developing world countries fight it.
china/india would be neutral and most countries would be having nationalist/anticommunist or communist revolutions
>he doesn't know that WW3 is cyber war
Most likely a China - US confrontation over the South China Sea, with the US seeking to maintain its dominance of the Pacific Rim and China seeking to break up the American economic/military ties to the Asia-Pacific. For it to become a world war it would also pull in African proxy wars, the Middle East (Iran vs. Saudis), and possibly Eastern Europe (Russia vs. NATO). India, Brazil, Indonesia as the major neutrals.
...
ionosophere desu
Seems a bit anti climatic... and for it to be a WW, does it have to take place on several continents?
Ah, you produced a map. I like you friend
: )
Why people keep putting the EU against Russia
>NZ
>going to war
not fucking likely lol.
I'm so glad this thread could be a melting Pot of friendship!
Find one flaw
Finland is gone.
>Being a Finland shill
Europe is irrelevant really, they're economically stable but mostly just do what we say. Russia has the economy of Italy and is hyped up by the media but in reality won't do shit. China & India will eventually overtake USA given the current trends but it won't be soon, maybe 2040-2050ish. Plenty of stuff can happen between then.
For some reason I think US will go to war against Turkey in the next 10 years.
Cuba siding against the US would be a shortlived mistake.
Ok im gonna be annoying, but why is Sweeden aligned with Russia and China, and Finnland in the ocean?
Is it because Sweden falls to islamists?
George Friedman intensifies*
Yeah, the island would fall before their allies could get there.
Ok then could you produce a map of said proxy war? I'm curious...
Why isnt romania or the soviet side?
>post-war
user... I don't know how to tell you this
According to the zionist masterminds behind all world wars, the final war WWIII is meant to destroy any threat to Israel meaning every superpower will collapse at the end of the way and only Israel will remain standing with any military power.
Nice to see im not the only guy from pol here... kek
I think the world is angling at some sort of confrontation involving Iran. I remember during the start of the Iraq war the media and some politicians were talking about a move into both Syria and Iran to take care of the whole place in one hit.
I'm not sure how it will start (Yemen, Hormuz, oil, nukes), but will kick off when foreign boots hit Iranian soil and get caught in a shitstorm. Taking Iran would not be like taking Iraq, but more like taking Afghanistan if the Taliban were a modernised military backed. The terrain is difficult for offensive operations and Iran is well placed to receive logistical support from its allies. Knowing the sort of people in the US state department, they'd likely expand the war, as Churchill and others done before them, to impede this logistical support and that's when the thing can go global.
Obviously Iran has allies in Russia, China, Syria, and I believe Iraq atm is Iran friendly and getting more so each day. Saudi Arabia, Israel + friends will agitate on the opposition.
Prepare for the largest war Western Asia has ever seen. And yeah, Turkey could go either way.
This. Keep in mind that Cuba planned to remain neutral in the event of a NATO - Warsaw Pact conflict, Castro got more pragmatic after the Cuban Missile Crisis.
...
Definately, Persia's mountains make it a fortress. An invasion is fool hardy.
there will be no WW3 (if there was going to be one it would've happened long ago) until the current world order breaks down. I'd imagine when crucial resource shortages begin is when we will see conventional wars involving large countries once again. so there's really no telling who would be involved or why.
Have any best guesses?
The big confrontation will be between China and the West. Which side Russia goes in for will be the real kicker.
it would probably be the US attacking Cuba tbf
This image is the only proof needed that America isn't a western country
Its only cuz of blacks...
Big booty!
Boobs are superior!
With Antarctica on our side, we can't lose!
>They will likely be neutral in a case of NATO vs Russia
China has been funneling people over the border to settle russian land for years. If russia was tied up in a fight with NATO they'd take the opportunity to annex what they could
Thousands upon thousands of Irish fled to the US in search of an ass that wasn't pancake.
Why would china help russia, wouldnt it benefit them more to gobble up russian land afterwards?
I think it will look more like ww1 but sort of "inflated" in terms of scope.
by which I mean, there will be areas of "no man's land" where any aircraft will get shot down by guided missiles, and any surface target (troops moving on foot, or Armored Combat Vehicles) will be destroyed with rocket artillery or cluster-bombs.
That is if it doesn't end in a nuclear war first.
>China siding with Russia against America
>Sweden not falling in line with europe/Sweden siding with Russia
>Vietnam not siding with America
>Argentina retardedly going against America(the entirety of the Americas would all be on the same side, except maybe Venezuela and Cuba, who would be neutral if anything)
This is obviously shitposting but retards actually think Vietnam would side with China which shows the extent of liberal education.
>Taiwan is still in the fight
JAI YO!
ROC>PRC
...
The political landscape has changed since the Obama days my friend
Argentina is pro USA now
The US, a couple Central American puppet staets (including Honduras where the right just rigged an election with US help), some fucking Pacific Island countries, Israel, and Togo. Truly a great coalition.
>it's because of a tiny portion of the total population
Guess Iceland isn't western either.
I'd bet Turkey betrays the NATO
> Iraq red
> Iran blue
Not seeing it. Iran wouldn't have been picked by either side, and Iraq was an ally against Iran used by both
The 56%ers strike again
Nobody but a few Muslim countries actually gives a shit about Israel. Syria, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, turkey, that's about it. Everyone else is just virtue signaling
Russia is actually already moving its embassy to Jerusalem' just a it more quietly and without any official declaration
Iran was anti-Soviet in the 80s and close to China, Iraq was very much in the Soviet camp even if the US aided them in a limited way for a time
This is exactly how anti-Israel (and anti-south African) votes went in the 80s
India was still a member of the Non Aligned movement and the relationship with the USSR was about buying their weaponry.
>implying US wouldn't btfo every single other country.
>USA loses 3 planes and an infantry company
>"Bring our boys back home"
delete this
I view this as the most realistic scenario.
However, certain countries are a toss-up.
Specifically countries in the Rio treaty, as they have historically shown little willingness to be called upon.
Afghanistan
Mexico, after the next election.
And African nations
shid
The communists(everyone except the US) vs Drumpf
Nauru is truly our greatest ally.
Any economic strength Turkey has will be choked when climate change reduces crop yields, and millions of starving Arabs descend upon it.
Likewise, the US - Mexican border will become a lawless Aztlan zone. Borders will become meaningless as the Southwest falls into the chaos of year round drought, fire, crop failure and starvation.
This world will end not with a bang, but with a whimper.
>that antarctica
he who controls the penguins controls the world
>Iceland is red
what are the implications of this image?
I could definitely see it ending up like this.
>youporn and pornhub statistics
>for north korea
NICE
1984 combat scenarios had us flying from bases in Iraq to attack a soviet allied Iran. Saddam was still considered "our guy", even if he was taking aid from both sides.
quints says China wins WW3
The only WW3 scenario I can imagine happening (and even this is incredibly unlikely), would involve Iran. Let's say Iran is desperate for a nuclear arsenal. They start building missiles, Israel throws a hissy fit, saying they'll bomb Iranian nuclear facilities with or without the US. The US, being israel's absolute best friend, will cave in and bomb Iran with Israeli and possibly Saudi help. In retaliation Iran blocks the straits of Hormuz which causes a fucking economic meltdown, perhaps enough to bring in the whole of NATO. The air strikes, however, don't finish the job because Iranian nuclear facilities are embedded deep in the mountains; they have to be rooted out by ground troops. The US and allies put boots on the ground and as a result, Iranian backed Shia militias across the Middle East go apeshit, resulting in the entire region descending into chaos. Syria (assuming the civil war is over at this point) and Lebanon may even take this chance to try and wipe Israel off the map. Russia also enters onto the stage as an Iranian ally, and although neither side wants it, Russian and American warplanes come into conflict while supporting their relative allies. This allows both sides to treat the other as the aggressor and full scale war erupts between the two. Russia might even go full retard and attempt more land grabs in Eastern Europe, which NATO would be forced to respond to. Which side China falls onto is anyone's guess. They might see the US Navy's preoccupation in the Persian gulf as an opportunity to exert its influence in the South China Sea, but why would they risk their economy for that? Hell, North Korea might even try something, but that would be a sideshow.
[Citations needed]
You are all fools. Off yourselves.
>le world war between nuclear powers meme
Didn’t happen when the two superpowers wanted to kill each other and launched numerous proxy wars against one another.
Didn’t happen in 1950.
Didn’t happen in 1962.
Didn’t happen in 1979.
Didn’t happen in 1983.
Not happening.
Thank god we have Antarctica on our side
Fuck off to . Futurism is neither history nor a humanity.
isis btfo
What did you hope to accomplish with a post like this?
"The conflicts in the South-China Sea and the Middle East only served as excuses for a war whose underlying cause was the growth of Chinese power and the fear this inspired in America."
From my History of the Third World War.
Total Chinese revolution.
World War III already happened between 1939 and 1945
if you consider WWI a 'world war', then the French Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars certainly qualify as such. thus, Napoleon fought in the First World War.
If we're going to count the French Revolution, then we're also going to be counting the Thirty Years War, the War of Spanish Succession, and the Seven Years War.
Good answer. Excellent analysis of the speciousness of categories.
30 years war was exclusively European though
nevertheless, looks like we are actually 5 world wars deep
American Revolution as well since the French, in support of the American effort, took war to the British navy wherever it went and even had a few land battles in Europe, that's a world war. Scroll down to "Other Theaters".
en.wikipedia.org
>Kim's an ass man
Not all bad
it's because black culture is mainstream now
Iran, China, and India should be neutral
The only correct answer is BRICS and friends x USA and friends.
and you all know it :^)