HamaticBabylon
Deity
What would life be like after World War 3? Will we have a global government to rule us all? Will Money play any part after world War 3?
-
We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days. For more updates please see here.
After WWIII?
- Thread starter HamaticBabylon
- Start date
thetrooper
Misanthrope
- Joined
- May 24, 2004
- Messages
- 9,059
"I don't know how WWIII will be fought but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones." -Einstein.
CruddyLeper
Unworshipped Deity
Well, let's put it this way. Stockbrokers, lawyers, and insurance salesman will be out of a job.
It's not ALL bad then.
It's not ALL bad then.
HamaticBabylon
Deity
Great quote form the man himself, 
now about an opinion form you?
now about an opinion form you?
Gelion
Retired Captain
WW3 already ended.
thetrooper
Misanthrope
- Joined
- May 24, 2004
- Messages
- 9,059
Opinion from me?
Noone will be able to tell after WW3. So money doesn't matter, neither do government issues.
Noone will be able to tell after WW3. So money doesn't matter, neither do government issues.
Gelion
Retired Captain
Cold War...stormbind said:
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
If by WW3 you mean an all out nuclear war, then no, there wont be governments of any kind. It'll be a struggle for survival among families and individuals. The closest thing to governments will be brief, petty, localized dictatorships comprised of whoever has the most guns and ammo. When the ammo runs out...
Scuffer
Scuffer says...
War never changed human nature before, so after WWIII there'll still be money and national goverance. And stockbrokers, insurance salesmen, and lawyers trying to sue over ineffective radiation suits.
Reno
The Studio Ghibli Fanatic
If there ever is another major world war, (I hope not) then almost nobody will be left to tell who won. In a nuclear fallout nobody wins.
RoddyVR
Veteran Board NESer
i dont think WW3 will be all out nuking.
a few nukes maybe. but not the whole mother load. i dont think it'll be nuclear winter for the earth after wards.
wont be many winners though either. bunch of killed off people a few destroyed cities, but other then that i dont think too much will change.
government wise, a few countries will probably consolidate into single nations (maybe europe will take the final step during the war). a couple countries might fall apart (all 3 north american ones are good canditates, they're too big for their own good. russia should split in half atleast).
making all the nations of the world the same size and smaller then the current US/russia types, would make it much easier to make fair and balanced board games.
that is my reasoning for thinking what i think about ww3. and i dare anyone to try to prove that their reasoning is any better then mine.
a few nukes maybe. but not the whole mother load. i dont think it'll be nuclear winter for the earth after wards.
wont be many winners though either. bunch of killed off people a few destroyed cities, but other then that i dont think too much will change.
government wise, a few countries will probably consolidate into single nations (maybe europe will take the final step during the war). a couple countries might fall apart (all 3 north american ones are good canditates, they're too big for their own good. russia should split in half atleast).
making all the nations of the world the same size and smaller then the current US/russia types, would make it much easier to make fair and balanced board games.
that is my reasoning for thinking what i think about ww3. and i dare anyone to try to prove that their reasoning is any better then mine.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
HamaticBabylon said:
After WW3, there will be a world of the dead - Nothing else will have meaning.
And we will have fundies and fanatics to thank for it.
.
Tank_Guy#3
Lion of Lehistan
I forget who it was, but his signature was like this.
World War One was fought with lots of troops.
World War Two was fought with lots of tanks and planes.
World War Three will be fought with lots of nukes.
World War Four will be fought with lots of rocks.
World War One was fought with lots of troops.
World War Two was fought with lots of tanks and planes.
World War Three will be fought with lots of nukes.
World War Four will be fought with lots of rocks.
RoddyVR
Veteran Board NESer
maybe WW3 will be fought against god.
he'll come down and say "well, i warned you, now its time for the apocolipse, every one gonna die and then we'll have the whole big judgement thing. ready?"
and we'll nuke him, cause we'll see that as a declaration of war.
he'll send meteors and the 4 horsemen at us, and we'll nuke those too.
lets see pestilence survive a nuke blast in his face.
ofcourse, after a while of nuking and shooting down the appocoliptic "weapons" of god, we'll screw the planet up enough that we'll have to leave it.
then we'll find some alience on another planet, and be their "bringers of the appocolipse".
wouldnt that be cool.
he'll come down and say "well, i warned you, now its time for the apocolipse, every one gonna die and then we'll have the whole big judgement thing. ready?"
and we'll nuke him, cause we'll see that as a declaration of war.
he'll send meteors and the 4 horsemen at us, and we'll nuke those too.
lets see pestilence survive a nuke blast in his face.
ofcourse, after a while of nuking and shooting down the appocoliptic "weapons" of god, we'll screw the planet up enough that we'll have to leave it.
then we'll find some alience on another planet, and be their "bringers of the appocolipse".
wouldnt that be cool.
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
The age of the World Wars is long over.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
rmsharpe said:
And the age of the war on terror has just began!
The name has changed, but the old enemies remain the same.
.
Hotpoint
Rome Treaty Legions
rmsharpe said:
Norman Angell wrote a book called The Great Illusion making a convincing case that the interconnected economies of the Great Powers made war between them impossible...
... of course he published it in 1910
Gladi
The ignored thread killer
Bright day
I do know very little about warfare, but I do have some beliefs.
Well IF there is world-scale conventional conflict, I doubt somebody would be the one side to start using missiles with nuclear payload (of course you cannout tell if it is nuclear or conventional warhead), plus in not-so-distant future we could improve energy effectivness of lasers and/or finally get knack for rail-guns, both of which ,with advanced computing technology and orbital surveilllence systems, could lead to missiles (and airplanes) being destroyed shortly after takeoff. Further strategic bombarding goes after strategic targets (), civilian population nowadays is not one of these nowadays (though often targets are located in or near population centers), more alive but desolate civilians may hinder your enemy ahe needs to cater to them. Though civilians may be used for draft, your first strike already destroyed large numbers of industry, material stokpiles and eliminated enemy's energy grid, communications and leadership. And if not what the hell are you doing starting this war? My two cents on subject of WWIII.
After it, well in case of one's side victory, well that is up to them. In case of mutual and global-wide collapse (even you Solomon Islanders!), we can expect socio-economic changes to come rapidly, as far as I can understand, our society caneven devolve. I doubt we would lose much in terms of already widely known technology, one would have to eliminate each and every one of tens thousands learning institutions around the globe for that. We will probably see less aplied technology as we would be short on energy and materials- which very well should lead to famine and outbreaks of epidemic diseases. Oh and after that we will have a even greater lack of labour. But what thatt could leat to most of us cannot even speculate.
Addendum: If somebody feels like I am cutting meter high letters into rock, please understand that this very subjective non-profesional view, based only on the few bits of wits () I so far managed to, somehow, acquire.
EDIT#1: changed "opininons" in the second sentence second row to "beliefs".
I do know very little about warfare, but I do have some beliefs.
Well IF there is world-scale conventional conflict, I doubt somebody would be the one side to start using missiles with nuclear payload (of course you cannout tell if it is nuclear or conventional warhead), plus in not-so-distant future we could improve energy effectivness of lasers and/or finally get knack for rail-guns, both of which ,with advanced computing technology and orbital surveilllence systems, could lead to missiles (and airplanes) being destroyed shortly after takeoff. Further strategic bombarding goes after strategic targets (
), civilian population nowadays is not one of these nowadays (though often targets are located in or near population centers), more alive but desolate civilians may hinder your enemy ahe needs to cater to them. Though civilians may be used for draft, your first strike already destroyed large numbers of industry, material stokpiles and eliminated enemy's energy grid, communications and leadership. And if not what the hell are you doing starting this war? My two cents on subject of WWIII.After it, well in case of one's side victory, well that is up to them. In case of mutual and global-wide collapse (even you Solomon Islanders!), we can expect socio-economic changes to come rapidly, as far as I can understand, our society caneven devolve. I doubt we would lose much in terms of already widely known technology, one would have to eliminate each and every one of tens thousands learning institutions around the globe for that. We will probably see less aplied technology as we would be short on energy and materials- which very well should lead to famine and outbreaks of epidemic diseases. Oh and after that we will have a even greater lack of labour. But what thatt could leat to most of us cannot even speculate.
Addendum: If somebody feels like I am cutting meter high letters into rock, please understand that this very subjective non-profesional view, based only on the few bits of wits (
) I so far managed to, somehow, acquire.EDIT#1: changed "opininons" in the second sentence second row to "beliefs".
Similar threads
