WWIII...............what do you think?

Great Debates
1

Ok here is the deal…I am talking to my co worker Panzerfaust and talking about WWIII.

This is going to be scenario for this discussion:

WWIII will be the world vs U.S.

Given these parameters would the U.S. be able to defend ourselves against the world???

My co worker thinks that the majority of people in the U.S. would not defend themselves against a U.S. invasion by our enemies and we would greet our conquerers with open arms.

I think we’d have a nuke fest before we let America be taken over. And keep in mind I am not a very patriotic person.

Let’s get the ball rolling and see what you think…

2

oops

that should read “against an invasion by our enemies”

sorry :smack:

3

Given the apathetic nature of most Americans, I feel the common man is more likely to huddle down somewhere and wait for it to blow over, one way or the other, before rushing out with daddy’s shotgun to fight the heathen.

I also disagree with DdDHellspawn’s idea that the next major global war will be the sum of humanity vs. the United States of America.

4

Well for one, I don’t think WWIII will have anything to do with invasion of the US mainland. The US is too large.

If any war does break out, it would most likely be the removal of US forces from another country. As soon as the US responds with force from international waters, the carrier fleets get struck via massive conventional or a few low yield nukes. After that, it moves into the nuke arena and we all lose.

5

I can go with that MrTuffPaws

but that brings the whole end of humanity concept that Panzer doesn’t think is possible.

If all the nukes were launched at all the cities wouldn’t that pretty much make things unihabitable???

But back to my original question…couldn’t the world assemble an army and surround the U.S.

*this of course would have to happen after our forces are thrown out of course

6

WWIII… You’re looking at it. The war against terrorism and extemism mixed with weapons of mass destruction. So far, dozens of countries are combatants. Iraq was just one battle.

7

I doubt VERY much if any hostile nation(s) would attempt a direct assault on the mainland of the USA.

  1. It would be suicide for the invader(s).
  2. I think enough citizenry would rise up against the enemy. Heck I am a Yankee liberal yet own enough firearms to give an invasion force a “bloody nose”. Think of the kind of firepower right wing conservatives must have at their disposal.
  3. Other nations lack the resources, technology and general know-how for serious weapon design. The USA developed the A-Bomb sixty years ago and still many aspects of it are still top secret and some parts VERY difficult to obtain and/or manufacture.

Think about the attack on the World Trade Center 12 years ago. The terrorists couldn’t even make a decent bomb. SO, they had to come up with the “brilliant” plan of flying big planes into the buildings. Basically, I am saying terrorists are NOT about to start their own MENSA chapter.

8

Well, MENSA has nothing to do with this. And by the way, do you know who Oppenheimer was?
What I find interesting in this starting conversation, is that although some of you doubt the US’ers will actually move to defend themselves, you have no doubt they have the right to defend themselves.

How come you claim that you have such right, while the USA actually invaded a sovereign nation, murdered thousands of people there, destroyed everything possible, didn’t move a finger to prevent groups of bandits taking advantage of the situation to loote and create the greatest chaos possible, keeps that nation occupied and goes on murdering people there … And claims that those people, defending themselves and their country against those foreign invaders are criminals, while they are the criminal invadors, murderers, occupyers and looters?

?

?

Any logical explanation for this?

Aldebaran.

9

Now wait just a gosh darned minute. Why on Earth do you think that the majority of the American people would greet our conquerers with open arms?:dubious:

10

As for the WWIII scenario:

There were a few occasions where the US troops in Iraq came close to launch that.

For example when they wanted to march through the shrine of 'Ali as if that is a fictionary place in Disneyworld.
Lucky that the person in lead (who probalby was the responsible for this in the first place) got frightenend enough by the furious reaction of the whole town to be so wise to order the soldiers to retrieve.

What do you think would have happened if they would have started a bloodbath under Shi’a Muslims defending the most sacred place of the Shi’a? And next entered that place with their dusty soldiers boots? Infidel invaders of Iraq entering the buriel place of the son in law of Muhammed after they killed a few hundreds of people?

Do you realize what kind of snowball effect that would have caused, not only in Iraq and Iran, but among Muslims worldwide?
Do you picture the scenario of enraged Iranis flowing into iraq and enraged people from all the neighbouring countries joining them, which would have only been the beginning.
It would have caused involvement of other nations, willingly or not.

And you were only one bullet and one step of a soldier into that shrine away from the danger of starting it.

11

Yes I am familiar with J Robert Oppenheimer - very brilliant scientist who was the head of the Manhattan Project that eventually produced the atomic bomb. Why did you ask me that question?

Not to seem callous about the USA’s actions in Iraq, but it sure seems that might does make right. Then again, how about what we did to the Native Americans? How about USSR’s actions in Eastern Europe after WW2? How about the Khmer Rouge’s treatment of Cambodians? What about the massacre of Armenians by the Turks? The Holocaust? Humans are a very brutal species.

12

You guys, this is getting very close to something that belongs in the pit or, at least, its own seperate thread.

13

I don’t think other nations will bother to attack and invade the USA.
The other scenario painted here, US bases around the globe being targetted, is a possibility and in fact they were targetted more then once in the past.

But most likely if the current president and administration gets re-elected, the USA, already reduced to nothing when it comes to credibility and respect of the world, will be ruined by itself.

By the way: do you know that Russia sold recently their secret of the most powerful and fast underwater missile ever developped to the USA? I don’t know if there is something to be found on that somewhere on the internet since it so called didn’t happen that Mr. Putin gave it away to the Americans. Yet it happened.
Business is business… As usual.

14

I brought Oppenheimer up because you claim that A bomb was a us-only invention. Oppenheimer studied also in Germany.

And all in all Germany was far advanced in the developping of missiles. Later was this technology used by the USA.

People always tend to forget that in science nothing and nobody pops up just like that on its own. Every scientist (and every researcher in no matter which field) contributes his share to previous work done by other people. This interaction knows no borders. Without the work already done by others, no new developments and discoveries can be done.

15

Aldebaran, do you think you could, if you tried very, very hard, muster just a little more vehemence into your completely off-topic tirades?

Next up from [bAldebaran** - You can’t talk about WWIII because your deplete the ozone!

16

panzer…

I’ll do my best…

And since the thread is about WWIII… US infidel military shooting Shi’s who defend the mosque of 'Ali, because they want to stampede through the place, was a very real occasion to start it.

About ozone: high concentration of that stuff is very unhealthy.
So… I think… I help you to keep breathing…

No one ever is grateful for what I do these days.

Salaam. A

17

Well Aldebaran you seem to put words in other people’s postings. When I mentioned the A-Bomb, I did NOT say it is a USA only invention. Otherwise how did other countries figure it out? (Russia, China, India, Pakistan, England, France and probably Israel).
And I agree with panzer that your “debating” style goes way off into acerbic rants.
Basically, my point being - like it or not - might makes right.
Do you think the Roman Empire was concerned about global credibility or world opinion when it destroted Carthage? NO !!
They saw Carthage as a threat to their existence and totally annihilated the entire country, its people, land … EVERYTHING.
And the world hasn’t heard much from Carthage since then.

18

[quote]
The USA developed the A-Bomb sixty years ago and still many aspects of it are still top secret and some parts VERY difficult to obtain and/or manufacture

[quote]

That is where I commented on. That is where you claimed the USA invented it “on its own” and “keeps the secret”.

And it can be your opinion that “might makes right” but that isn’t the opinion of millions and millions of other people on this globe, including myself.

So if I come tomorrow with some weapons to kill your family and they all die… You can’t do me anything because I can claim that “might makes right”?

OK, if you say so…

So those people flying planes in the WTC and the Pentagon were at that moment “the mightier” because they had those planes and all the people inside planes and buildings weren’t able to shoot them out of the air before they crashed, burning them alive? Might makes right, no?
Right.
My dead friend shall surely applaud your reasoning and so will his wife and baby, his parents and the rest of his family and friends, including myself.
I’m one big waving flag and applaud right now.

I’ll ignore your "Roman Empire remarks because it doesn’t make any sense.

But basically you are defending here the fact that the US has murdered thousands of people in Iraq because they don’t care a bit about them, no?

Well surprise: That is now exactly how it is seen in by the man in the street in the Muslim world.

And from that “Roman Empire” remark one can also deduce that you seem also to be someone who buys the lies of the US/UK government and especially the lies of the US government that Iraq was involved in any form of terrorism.
Great.
That is also something very needed these days, as if there aren’t already enough of such people around.
Next thing is that you are going to say it were Iraqis who flew those planes into buildings. Or what comes next, I wonder.
Besides, like I said: how can anyone have something against those hijacking murderers if Might Makes Right?

Mmmm…

Thinking hard about this…

difficult…

Still trying to figure it out…

Got it: It must be that in your view only the "might makes right with US colours counts.

Before I forget to ask : Any signs of that “immediate threat” and all those WMD toys in Iraq yet?
And eummm: any sign of Hussein yet… And his “links” to OBL??? Oh, now that we mention that: any signs of OBL yet?
Does any one even talks about Afghanistan these days?Think not.

Might makes right bombed an already devastated country completely back into the stone age and see now what great result that had… And what great efforts the US makes to repare at least the damage they caused…Whit no budget at all for it.
Of course the “collateral dammage” still increasing day by day thanks to the friendly “might makes right” cluster bombs is not worth to be mentioned, let be remembered.

Well, Mr. or Mrs. Might Makes Right, you are of course as free as a bird to glide day by day in unconsciouness from sheer admiration of that really brilliant principle. It is your own free choice.
But let’s hope that one day some “might makes right” recruit from the opposite site doesn’t pop up where you unforunately happens to be, no?

Salaam. A

19

Speaking of not making anyt sense…Mssr. Pot, may I introduce Mssr. Kettle?

20

I expect the major cause of WW3 to be China or India or both. Both have vast populations and limited area. I can easily see China spreading NW into Mongolia and Russia, simply because it needs more room. The area between China and India is already becoming touchy - China has conquered Tibet, occupies part of Kashmir, and there are ‘Maoist’ guerillas active in Nepal. That war could easily go nuclear - with populations of 1 Bn apiece, both sides can shrug off vast population losses and neither side is thought to have many nukes