1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

The Next Major War...

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by CurtSibling, Nov 7, 2019.

  1. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Virago

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,994
    Location:
    Gingerbread Cottage
    Most likely next major conflict is between India and Pakistan IMO.
    With Modi suspending Jammu and Kashmir's special status under the Indian constitution and opening up these primarily Muslim areas for Hindu settlement Pakistan will be under a lot of pressure to act to protect the Muslim population.
     
    El_Machinae likes this.
  2. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,181
    EU would probably flounder for quite a while against Russia, if China/USA/everyone else just did nothing (unlikely). I think Russia would ultimately lose but it would take a long time to retake those territories. Still a scary prospect, as with any military conflict between nations that both have nukes.
     
  3. Commodore

    Commodore Technology of Peace

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Messages:
    10,781
    Location:
    The Tiberium Future
    It doesn't have to be specifically water they are raiding us for, that's just the reason given in the movie. And if I remember right, some of the extended lore for the movie said the aliens picked us because they were something of a minor power and couldn't afford to attack other major powers for resources, so they decided to pick on us instead.

    Anyway, aliens could be raiding Earth for anything. From water, to other resources, to us.
     
    caketastydelish likes this.
  4. rah

    rah Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    8,957
    Location:
    Chicago
    As with any war, it's all about supply lines and I think Earth is pretty far off the beaten path to be considered a good supply depot.
    I think colonization would have to be the goal for Earth to make sense as a target by Aliens.
     
    caketastydelish and hobbsyoyo like this.
  5. Kaitzilla

    Kaitzilla Lord Croissant

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2008
    Messages:
    8,406
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    America!
    Yup, this one has my vote too.
     
  6. Thorgalaeg

    Thorgalaeg Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Messages:
    4,950
    Location:
    Spain
    Nah, the most realistic is Mars Attack. Probably we would see it as something absolutely
    incomprehensible, absurd and unstoppable, and if we somehow survive it would be due to totally unexpected and equally incomprehensible reasons
     
    hobbsyoyo likes this.
  7. Socrates99

    Socrates99 Bottoms up!

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,349
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Michigan
    Like WWIII scale? Not going to happen. MAD assures this. If it was going to happen it would have been back when Russia annexed territory in Georgia and Ukraine. It didn't. The three big kids in the schoolyard, US, Russia, and China all have second strike capability. Doesn't matter how many tanks you have. If enough nukes hit your homeland you lose whether you "win" or not. If China, US and Russia get mixed up in WWIII Europe, Africa, South America, basically anyone with industrial infrastructure will win. Look at how the US and USSR became the global leaders after WWII absolutely wrecked Britain, France and Germany. Once you become the one best equipped to supply the world with manufactured goods you win.

    The people counting GDP as a measure of ability to wage war aren't looking at the real picture. It's your resources, labor and ability to industrialize that determines your power in modern war. The USSR should have been crushed in WWII if we went by standing army, technology, weapons and wealth. Instead they became the world's most powerful land army and contributed far more to German defeat in the European theater than Britain and the US combined. It's the controlled resources, population and industrial capability that determines long term viability in war. Not GDP.
     
    El_Machinae and MaryKB like this.
  8. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,181
    Most resources are implausible. Earth has more gravity = energy requirement than even other bodies in solar system to take resources, and if that's not an object they can get far more of nearly anything elsewhere. Doesn't seem like our star is particularly unique either.

    If they're interested in us, we can only hope it's the good kind of interest, because there's not a lot we could do to oppose species wipe attempts.
     
    Hygro and El_Machinae like this.
  9. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,741
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    I think that major wars like WW2 are a thing of the past. Even Russia's invasion of Ukraine is not much of a war when compared to Korea or Vietnam. Full scale armed conflict for a prolonged time is just too difficult to maintain for economic, political, and social reasons. So much damage can be done so quickly that nobody wants to risk the consequences. A crazy person might blow up someplace significant, but retaliation would be quick and brutal.

    • A Mideast war involving Israel would be short.
    • India and Pakistan may skirmish and dance around the edges of war, but serious conflict would probably break Pakistan before India.
    • Putin's megalomania is a problem, but I think he prefers low key take overs to prolonged open warfare. He is very dangerous. If he were to die, Russia would cease to mean much on the world political stage.
    • China is not interested in war. It is winning its economic battle in Asia already.
     
    Truthy and MaryKB like this.
  10. CurtSibling

    CurtSibling ENEMY ACE™ SLeague Staff

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2001
    Messages:
    28,771
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Innsmouth
    @Socrates99

    This is to assume rational minds are always in command. The Axis nations in WW2 fought without any regard for economic sanity beyond plunder.
    In our era, there may be some in high places who think losing 30 million people is a fair cost for eradicating their foes for all time...It's terrifying.

    Also, people after WW1 swore another huge, trench-based war would never happen.
    It didn't. The next war was totally different and much greater in scale and horror.

    We cannot forsee what the next decades will bring as old orders start to crumble.
     
    Narz and El_Machinae like this.
  11. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam Top Logic

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    25,181
    I'm guessing information control, information denial, and destruction of computer software/hacking/damaging equipment people come to rely on for survival. Very different from previous wars, won't have immediate nuclear response as a viable threat, and can still wind up causing the deaths of more than WW2 (at least in part because global population is larger).

    Most western countries have already attempted or executed some form of legal power grab in this regard. China even more so. Who ultimately gets to decide and impose "social credit scores" to most of the world?
     
  12. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,741
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    Nobody foresaw the horror of WW1.
    Nobody foresaw the horror of WW2.
    We know what awaits a nuclear exchange, bio warfare, or expanded terror. Nuking Israel will also wipe out others perhaps with greater devastation. There will be no surprises beyond the event itself.
     
  13. CurtSibling

    CurtSibling ENEMY ACE™ SLeague Staff

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2001
    Messages:
    28,771
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Innsmouth
    Don't forget nulcear terrorism as a prelude to sudden nation state nuke slug outs.
     
    El_Machinae likes this.
  14. Patine

    Patine Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,431
    Mid-Galaxy, apparently. Not the far-flung edges or arms, or the heavily clustered centre. I don't know what information you drew upon to get "pretty far off the beaten path," especially having no idea at all where other hypothetical alien civilization clusters and travel routes would be. It sounds more like a nonchalant wishful thinking comment trying to convince yourself.
     
  15. Zkribbler

    Zkribbler Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    6,424
    Location:
    Philippines
    :shake: Ice asteroids are there just for the taking.
     
    tjs282 and hobbsyoyo like this.
  16. Socrates99

    Socrates99 Bottoms up!

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,349
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Michigan
    I'm not a big fan of belittling the rationale of past figures. Hitler was a racist bigot but he wasn't dumb. He weighed the risks and rewards. He made terrible blunders, partially based on his racism and bigotry but he had confidence that if he came out on top he'd be the winner. WWI was supposed to end wars but the victors maintained their place at the top, primarily Britain.

    WWII had different results. Europe fell behind the US and USSR. Mostly because the US was mostly untouched and the USSRs rapid industrialization that was forced on them by the war itself. We know now that it isn't the winner that "wins" its who stays most intact.

    Now that MAD is an issue the only wars we'll see are the long drawn out proxy wars we see in Yemen and Syria or the low key struggles for territory we see in Ukraine and Pakistan/India. If WWIII were going to happen it would've been during the Cuban Missile Crisis or Putin's land grabs.

    Trump's a dumb and irrational president. Has he started WWIII? Nope. Even a dope can look at nuclear war and say nobody wins here.
     
    El_Machinae and MaryKB like this.
  17. rah

    rah Deity Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    8,957
    Location:
    Chicago
    More like, if we were on the beaten path we would have already met them. But then why use logic?
     
  18. innonimatu

    innonimatu Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    11,197
    I think that Europe is mostly settled regarding international borders. There are still some messy situations to the east but no one wants to annex territory with a hostile population. Diplomatic issues is one thing, but why bring into the country political problems? That is a bigger problem, and the reason why several "empires" (including the USSR) dissolved on their own accord. That lessons seems to have been learned.

    The places where instability still exists are those where populations got stuck inside countries they do not wish to be part of. Just a few bits in the Baklans and eastern Europe, some in India and in China, many in Africa. Many in the Middle East. Apparently none in America.

    By far the continent suffering greatest danger of wars is Africa, followed closely by the middle east.
     
  19. red_elk

    red_elk Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    11,617
    MAD only ensures that nobody would want to start a nuclear war, but it doesn't guarantee that the war won't happen regardless, after some accident or chain reaction of escalations, etc.
    There were several situations during Cold War, where USSR and USA were very close to starting nuclear war, despite MAD was already applicable back then. AFAIK during Cuban Crisis a Soviet submarine was cornered by American fleet and was about to launch a nuclear torpedo against US carrier. Didn't do that only because one of three officers who were supposed to make decision disagreed with it. There were also a few cases of false alarm from early warning systems, in both USA and USSR.
     
    hobbsyoyo and Phrossack like this.
  20. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    35,741
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    That was then; this is now. I think that nuclear or bio terrorism is more likely than war. There are too many ways to stop such a war before it happens.
     
    El_Machinae likes this.

Share This Page