“Third World War a risk”
- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 4 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
We had a discussion recently on Discord as to whether a Third World War was likely. The consensus seemed to be that it wasn’t but that the local and proxy wars would continue non-stop and that states would continue to arm themselves with the most effective weapons they could afford since, in negotiations over economic and geopolitical matters, “might” is a factor.
Here is the view of the Chief of Staff of the British armed forces, General Sir Nick Carter. He thinks there is a risk of a Third World War:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/general-sir-nick-carter-warns-of-third-world-war-danger-hb0k9fnsx
More detail here.
I think the consensus is in error and war escalating from trade wars and other factors is distinct possibility.
The consensus wasn’t that a Third World War wasn’t possible but that it wasn’t likely which, I suppose, means that it wasn’t a “distinct” possibility. Let’s hope you’re wrong.
I think it is a question of definition
A world war of many countries actually suffering the consequences
Or many countries from around the world participating in a war
The Kuwait war was an example had 34 nations involved in some degree or another
And 2003 Iraq Invasion had the so-called “Coalition of the Willing”
There are many alliances happening …NATO IN Afghanistan, OAU France, UK and US in the Sahel…Libya and Syria with foreign combatants …less national and now more international conflicts
Also, we have to consider war by mistake and error, accidental incidents and miscalculated gambles.
Capitalism lays down the conditions for a war to break out but in many cases actual events are not so well planned or premeditated.
What is often said is that war between two full democracies has ended…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.