Realistic chances of a WW3 & repercussions? - GoFuckYourself.com

pr0 · 10-18-2007, 11:44 AM

I give it a 100% chance of happening, at some point.

But lets give our thoughts on lets say the next "2" years.

I'm leaning toward a 50% shot.

Lets talk precursors....& indicators

Russia has been promoting "teen sex camps" & an overall population increase agenda for the past year. In other words...have babies. Why? Why would a country promote such a thing? Well the obvious notion is that Russia could actually be our ally in a WW3 situation. We'll get into why thats important under "repercussions"

The Chinese govt has been hacking into & testing the security of (so far that we know of) both the U.S. & Germany.

North Korea & Iran are both becoming Nuclear threats.

The chinese are becoming economic threats, & by becoming an economic threat, are also becoming a "communist revival" threat.

Now lets talk repercussions, or "chain of events".

Israel attacks Syria (which may have already happened). Syria attacks Israel, Iran supports Syria, to which we respond by launching air strikes on Iran & Syria. Israeli ground troops/tanks move into Syria.

Russia & China now have an issue. They have Iran, a major supplier of oil for china, & a country russian arms have been going to for years.

This is where it gets interesting. If we send one foot soldier into Iran, Russia will have to send troops in to "protect their interest" as well.

Once this happens, WW3 has been mobilized. Without a shot fired between russia & the U.S.

China is then free to take back Taiwan because all of our forces are now tied up with Iraq, Syria, Iran (countering each Russian installment with one of our own), & protecting Israel.

China now seeing weakness/opportunity attacks Taiwan (if Taiwan does not give up immediately or we honor our protection treaty) & the world spins into ww3.

Is this the beginning of a east v.s. west war for the oil? What are your thoughts? And which if any strategy/possible moves do you think i have right/wrong in the actual event of war?

And my biggest question is, which side will the Russians take? Even as a broken nation...they still have the only population base large enough to take on the Chinese in the world. Their "baby making" campaign, has me in the hopes they take our side to take on the Chinese billion.

pr0 · 10-18-2007, 05:23 PM

i see no one here has any background in battle strategy, or interest in it?

minusonebit · 10-18-2007, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0

i see no one here has any background in battle strategy, or interest in it?

Nah, they are too busy whoring their sigs to worry about the consequences of something as unimportant as nuclear war.

StuartD · 10-18-2007, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0

Lets talk precursors....& indicators

Indeed....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'%C3%A9tat

"In the 1953 Iranian coup d'état, the administration of U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower orchestrated the overthrow of the democratically-elected administration of Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddeq and his cabinet from power."

Jai · 10-18-2007, 06:00 PM

its all wrong it will come down to non muslim nations vs muslim nations

SilentKnight · 10-18-2007, 06:03 PM

As with the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Bay of Pigs, our only hope is that cooler heads prevail. People must remember the utterly devastating effects of nuclear war and look back in history to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Unfortunately, none of the superpowers currently have very clear-thinking leaders in terms of diplomacy and averting war at all cost.

It goes without saying there are no winners in a global nuclear war.

We all lose.

Time to stock up the bomb shelter with more Molsons.

L-Pink · 10-18-2007, 06:06 PM

What scares me is when some towel-head dictator finds out he has advanced cancer and wants to take the infidels with him on his way out.

minusonebit · 10-18-2007, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L-Pink

What scares me is when some towel-head dictator finds out he has advanced cancer and wants to take the infidels with him on his way out.

They want to take the infidels out with them anyway. One of the biggest threats the country is making right now is that we are not taking the threat of them seriously. 3/4 of of the US still thinks its all a big game, some big joke and they are waiting for the punchline. These people want very much to kill everyone here and they have the means to do it and when the moment is right, they are going to do it. While the rest of us sit around and worry about their rights, or whether or not too many civilians will die in the armed conflicts, or worry about if some spic trying to enter the border has been given every possible handout the stupid fucking government wants to give him. That punchline everyone is waiting for will come one day. Its gonna come in the form of a mushroom cloud rising over some major city. And right before it arrives, the government will tell us to evacuate and that everything will be fine... and then the next thing we know the world will be awash in a brilliant white light, and we will be relived of our duties in this life.

V_RocKs · 10-18-2007, 06:50 PM

We are not the only nation telling China to stay our of Taiwan.

Barefootsies · 10-18-2007, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by minusonebit

They want to take the infidels out with them anyway. One of the biggest threats the country is making right now is that we are not taking the threat of them seriously. 3/4 of of the US still thinks its all a big game, some big joke and they are waiting for the punchline. These people want very much to kill everyone here and they have the means to do it and when the moment is right, they are going to do it. While the rest of us sit around and worry about their rights, or whether or not too many civilians will die in the armed conflicts, or worry about if some spic trying to enter the border has been given every possible handout the stupid fucking government wants to give him. That punchline everyone is waiting for will come one day. Its gonna come in the form of a mushroom cloud rising over some major city. And right before it arrives, the government will tell us to evacuate and that everything will be fine... and then the next thing we know the world will be awash in a brilliant white light, and we will be relived of our duties in this life.

Just make sure when that happens it drops straight on my house.

I'll pass on the nuclear winter.

Cheers

tony286 · 10-18-2007, 07:44 PM

I doubt it,there would be too much money to be lost.

picaso · 10-18-2007, 07:51 PM

maybe, its hard to tell

After Shock Media · 10-18-2007, 07:51 PM

WWIII would not neccessarly mean going nuclear.

Russia is also wanting people to have kids because they were having a negative population growth. Sort of like china has a very big issue of almost an entire generation of no females and still trying to get over a social stigma of having or keeping female children.

I also see Iran as the great boogyman, specially since N Korea did not pan out to well.

yota71 · 10-18-2007, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After Shock Media

WWIII would not neccessarly mean going nuclear.

True, there is always Bio and Agriculture based warfare.

Profits of Doom · 10-18-2007, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0

Now lets talk repercussions, or "chain of events".

Israel attacks Syria (which may have already happened). Syria attacks Israel, Iran supports Syria, to which we respond by launching air strikes on Iran & Syria. Israeli ground troops/tanks move into Syria.

What makes you think the US needs to get involved? Just because Iran likes to beat it's chest and run it's mouth don't think for a second that Israel couldn't handle both Iran and Syria. Don't take Israel's recent problems in the fight against Hezbollah in Lebanon as any type of an indicator. That was more of a guerrilla type war and Israel was being extremely sensitive to civilian casualties due to world opinion. In a true war don't expect the same results...

After Shock Media · 10-18-2007, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yota71

True, there is always Bio and Agriculture based warfare.

Information, bio, argicultural, terrorist, ground, air, naval, chemical, and so forth.

Nobody really wants mutually assured destruction. Sure the low level unable to read jihadist might, the real powers that be are just as greedy and egotistical as the rest of mankind. They want to rule it all and convert the rest of us.

Barefootsies · 10-18-2007, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Profits of Doom

What makes you think the US needs to get involved? Just because Iran likes to beat it's chest and run it's mouth don't think for a second that Israel couldn't handle both Iran and Syria. Don't take Israel's recent problems in the fight against Hezbollah in Lebanon as any type of an indicator. That was more of a guerrilla type war and Israel was being extremely sensitive to civilian casualties due to world opinion. In a true war don't expect the same results...

They can take on all their neighbors and repeat the "6 day war" all over again ;)

Not to mention they already took our Iran's nuclear program once with their raid on the reactor.

Pick up some history books gents.

TheJimmy · 10-18-2007, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

They can take on all their neighbors and repeat the "6 day war" all over again ;)

Not to mention they already took our Iran's nuclear program once with their raid on the reactor.

Pick up some history books gents.

beat me to it...thanks

Profits of Doom · 10-18-2007, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

They can take on all their neighbors and repeat the "6 day war" all over again ;)

Not to mention they already took our Iran's nuclear program once with their raid on the reactor.

Pick up some history books gents.

Exactly, although that was Iraq's reactor. I actually read where during the original Gulf War General Norman Schwarzkopf sent Israel a picture of the old reactor site, that was since overgrown with vegetation, and wrote a note on it thanking them for bombing it, as Iraq most likely would have had nuclear weapons during the Gulf War if they hadn't...

Barefootsies · 10-18-2007, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Profits of Doom

Exactly, although that was Iraq's reactor. I actually read where during the original Gulf War General Norman Schwarzkopf sent Israel a picture of the old reactor site, that was since overgrown with vegetation, and wrote a note on it thanking them for bombing it, as Iraq most likely would have had nuclear weapons during the Gulf War if they hadn't...

I mistyped. Thank you fine gent.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/3014623.stm

pr0 · 10-18-2007, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Profits of Doom

What makes you think the US needs to get involved?

Last time i checked, theres no other route between Iran & Israel (other than through U.S. occupied Iraq), unless theres some sort of super secret canal I'm not privy to. Or perhaps an old goat trail, like in the movie 300?

Not to mention the state of Israel was almost on the verge of defeat during the beginning of the 7 day war v.s. a much smaller force.

pr0 · 10-18-2007, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

They can take on all their neighbors and repeat the "6 day war" all over again ;)

Not to mention they already took our Iran's nuclear program once with their raid on the reactor.

Pick up some history books gents.

you think the 6 day war was a cake walk?

at one point israel was on the verge of defeat

fighting countries that did not have russian technology

israel has one deterrent for iran.......a nuke in a gift basket

there for Israel will never fight Iran, (well maybe air support for us) if we should need it against syria, while we take on iran

and WW3 doesn't necessarily have to be nuclear.....we can goto war without nukes, even with the other major powers...its when one side starts losing badly that the nukes come out of the closet

Profits of Doom · 10-18-2007, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0

Last time i checked, theres no other route between Iran & Israel (other than through U.S. occupied Iraq), unless theres some sort of super secret canal I'm not privy to. Or perhaps an old goat trail, like in the movie 300?

Not to mention the state of Israel was almost on the verge of defeat during the beginning of the 7 day war v.s. a much smaller force.

Exactly how does that involve the US getting actively involved again? You don't think Israel's Air Force could do most of the damage without moving ground forces through Iraq?

By the way, it's the 6 Day War, and please explain at what point Israel was ever at the verge of defeat? The Egyptians had to put out false propaganda stating that to get Syria involved...did you fall for that, too, 40 years after the fact?

Barefootsies · 10-19-2007, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pr0

you think the 6 day war was a cake walk?

at one point israel was on the verge of defeat

fighting countries that did not have russian technology

israel has one deterrent for iran.......a nuke in a gift basket

there for Israel will never fight Iran, (well maybe air support for us) if we should need it against syria, while we take on iran

and WW3 doesn't necessarily have to be nuclear.....we can goto war without nukes, even with the other major powers...its when one side starts losing badly that the nukes come out of the closet

I never said it was easy sport. But the fact remains they took on all their neighbors at once, and won in 6 days. Period.

pr0 · 10-19-2007, 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Profits of Doom

Exactly how does that involve the US getting actively involved again? You don't think Israel's Air Force could do most of the damage without moving ground forces through Iraq?

By the way, it's the 6 Day War, and please explain at what point Israel was ever at the verge of defeat? The Egyptians had to put out false propaganda stating that to get Syria involved...did you fall for that, too, 40 years after the fact?

no that false propoganda of which you speak directly relates to U.S. & British Air involvement from carriers stationed nearby.

anyways this is not a thread about the 6 & 1/2 day war

View Poll Results: possible in the next 2-3 years?
absolutely, im more than 50% sure	5	17.24%
maybe, its hard to tell	8	27.59%
i sincerely doubt it	11	37.93%
theres no way	5	17.24%
Voters: 29. You may not vote on this poll

10-18-2007, 11:44 AM	#1
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	Realistic chances of a WW3 & repercussions? I give it a 100% chance of happening, at some point. But lets give our thoughts on lets say the next "2" years. I'm leaning toward a 50% shot. Lets talk precursors....& indicators Russia has been promoting "teen sex camps" & an overall population increase agenda for the past year. In other words...have babies. Why? Why would a country promote such a thing? Well the obvious notion is that Russia could actually be our ally in a WW3 situation. We'll get into why thats important under "repercussions" The Chinese govt has been hacking into & testing the security of (so far that we know of) both the U.S. & Germany. North Korea & Iran are both becoming Nuclear threats. The chinese are becoming economic threats, & by becoming an economic threat, are also becoming a "communist revival" threat. Now lets talk repercussions, or "chain of events". Israel attacks Syria (which may have already happened). Syria attacks Israel, Iran supports Syria, to which we respond by launching air strikes on Iran & Syria. Israeli ground troops/tanks move into Syria. Russia & China now have an issue. They have Iran, a major supplier of oil for china, & a country russian arms have been going to for years. This is where it gets interesting. If we send one foot soldier into Iran, Russia will have to send troops in to "protect their interest" as well. Once this happens, WW3 has been mobilized. Without a shot fired between russia & the U.S. China is then free to take back Taiwan because all of our forces are now tied up with Iraq, Syria, Iran (countering each Russian installment with one of our own), & protecting Israel. China now seeing weakness/opportunity attacks Taiwan (if Taiwan does not give up immediately or we honor our protection treaty) & the world spins into ww3. Is this the beginning of a east v.s. west war for the oil? What are your thoughts? And which if any strategy/possible moves do you think i have right/wrong in the actual event of war? And my biggest question is, which side will the Russians take? Even as a broken nation...they still have the only population base large enough to take on the Chinese in the world. Their "baby making" campaign, has me in the hopes they take our side to take on the Chinese billion. __________________ __________ Loadedca$h - get sum! - Revengebucks - mmm rebills! - webair (gotz sErVrz)

10-18-2007, 07:51 PM	#13
After Shock Media It's coming look busy Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn". Posts: 35,299	WWIII would not neccessarly mean going nuclear. Russia is also wanting people to have kids because they were having a negative population growth. Sort of like china has a very big issue of almost an entire generation of no females and still trying to get over a social stigma of having or keeping female children. I also see Iran as the great boogyman, specially since N Korea did not pan out to well. __________________ [email protected] ICQ:135982156 AIM: Aftershockmed1a MSN: [email protected]

10-18-2007, 05:23 PM	#2
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	i see no one here has any background in battle strategy, or interest in it?

10-18-2007, 06:00 PM	#5
Jai Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Location: http://www.fitnesspornbabes.com Posts: 6,915	its all wrong it will come down to non muslim nations vs muslim nations

10-18-2007, 06:03 PM	#6
SilentKnight Megan Fox's fluffer Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: shooting pool in Elysium Posts: 24,818	As with the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Bay of Pigs, our only hope is that cooler heads prevail. People must remember the utterly devastating effects of nuclear war and look back in history to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Unfortunately, none of the superpowers currently have very clear-thinking leaders in terms of diplomacy and averting war at all cost. It goes without saying there are no winners in a global nuclear war. We all lose. Time to stock up the bomb shelter with more Molsons.

10-18-2007, 06:06 PM	#7
L-Pink working on my tan Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Florida/Kentucky Posts: 39,151	What scares me is when some towel-head dictator finds out he has advanced cancer and wants to take the infidels with him on his way out.

10-18-2007, 06:50 PM	#9
V_RocKs Damn Right I Kiss Ass! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Cowtown, USA Posts: 32,422	We are not the only nation telling China to stay our of Taiwan.

10-18-2007, 07:44 PM	#11
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	I doubt it,there would be too much money to be lost.

10-18-2007, 07:51 PM	#12
picaso Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11,247	maybe, its hard to tell