What war(s) would you like to see?

[Narz]

Monsanto vs. McDonalds. A war where both parties are completely annihilated ideally.

 

[nc-1701]

I think an all out Indo-Pakistani nuclear conflict would be very interesting to watch unfold. I certainly wouldn't wish for it to happen, but in terms of something I'de be interested in watching the consequences of it would be cool. Big enough to see a full scale nuclear war unfold, but not so large as to devastate the world etc.

 

[BananaLee]

A war between Zheng He's mighty fleet of superships with 78 trillion pounder cannon versus the rubbish European ships with bows, arrows and hairy uncivilised men.

 

[Tani Coyote]

War between Israel and Iran would be interesting.

As birdjaguar said, quite short as well. Though I wonder who would "win" ... since neither can really touch the other outside of air power.

Germany v. Poland

Can't say no to Greater Germany. Maybe this time around, the epicly-failed cultural assimilation programs will be done away with in favor of some sort of peaceful coexistence... think Canadians-Quebecois or Americans-Hispanics, where one dominating group has a significant minority. Besides, if the Poles here are any indication of the actual majority, it sounds like they prefer being German to Russian anyways.

Class war, proletarian victory. Any other war would involve the wholesale slaughter of conscious beings. Being a conscious form of life myself, I cannot, in all good conscience, "desire" any action which would cause suffering on such a massive scale.

I'll play the role of reactionary, as I am against true communism and socialism. (Social democracy is okay, though)

Poland v. Czech Republic

Russia will not be happy Poland is taking it's role as the protector of all Slavic peoples...

Seriously though, Italy vs. all of Rome's former territories.

I get the strangest feeling the EU will beat Italy to any New Roman Empire.

The thread OP vs the moderators.

Why?

Except this is about war, not genocide.

Precisely. Anybody who knows my principles of war knows that I'm against widespread killing of civilians, anyways. Therefore, unless a whole group happens to be evil(pretty much not possible if we're talking genetics), I'm anti-genocide as well. Therefore, in conclusion, I am not an advocate of genocide. Equating the removal of a government to the outright extermination of all people beneath it is... kind of...

..Well, insane.

Anyhoo... a war between America and Canada could prove to be interesting.

Very true. Who's side would NATO take? Or would NATO just outright dissolve, and reform into a Europe-only defense organisation? I get the strangest feeling the Europeans would be happy to leave Canada to get eaten alive, reforming NATO to a EU organ.

Not to say American occupation of Canada would be cake, however. Canada's first world status would mean it's military would be quite a hassle, even if it would be defeated eventually. On top of that, the USA would have HUGE fiscal strains in trying to occupy all of Canada's territory. The cities would be firmly under American occupation, but chances are the more rural areas would become guerilla fortresses... it would be necessary for the USA to win the hearts and minds of the Canadian people, which is usually easier if you don't invade them in the first place.

Liechtenstein, Vatican, Monaco, Andorra, San Marino, and Luxembourg vs Switzerland

I like Gaddafi's idea better myself, but go for it. Neutral countries scare me.

Russia v. North Korea

It's obvious how one-sided this would be! Seems to fit my idea of North Korea being split into Russian, Chinese, and South Korean-occupied zones, however.

 

[BananaLee]

It's obvious how one-sided this would be! Seems to fit my idea of North Korea being split into Russian, Chinese, and South Korean-occupied zones, however.

It was also obvious how one-sided Vietnam was going to be.
And Afghanistan.

 

[Joecoolyo]

It was also obvious how one-sided Vietnam was going to be.
And Afghanistan.

And Zheng He's invasion of the world

 

[SeleucusNicator]

It would be interesting to see Russia attempt to conquer some of the former Soviet republics. Both from a military perspective and to see how a certain CFC poster would react...

 

[vogtmurr]

Not to say American occupation of Canada would be cake, however. Canada's first world status would mean it's military would be quite a hassle, even if it would be defeated eventually. On top of that, the USA would have HUGE fiscal strains in trying to occupy all of Canada's territory. The cities would be firmly under American occupation, but chances are the more rural areas would become guerilla fortresses... it would be necessary for the USA to win the hearts and minds of the Canadian people, which is usually easier if you don't invade them in the first place.

Thanks for the good post, wish all of it were true, but for sure it would be seen as hugely unpopular even within the scope of this bizarre thread. If their hearts and minds are in synch, there would be no need for an invasion. After who knows, maybe Greater America would sort of polarize and split up along different lines.

 

[Lord Baal]

Horrible thread idea for history. The OP's points are pretty bad, but, as suggested, I'm not going to debate those points.

I'd like to see India beat the crap out of Pakistan. It's the single biggest immediate problem facing the world today, so get rid of it. Also, I'd like to see two Pacific Islands fight one another. That would be entertaining as hell (well, maybe not now). Oh, and Switzerland versus anyone. Lousy neutrals.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Horrible thread idea for history.

Cute. Little do you know, I posted this in Off-Topic, but a mod decided it was better for World History. So be it.

I'd like to see India beat the crap out of Pakistan. It's the single biggest immediate problem facing the world today, so get rid of it.

What about Iran and North Korea?

All due support for the destruction of Pakistan(as a country, for some reason, nobody knows the difference between a country itself and it's people anymore...), anyway. Pakistan should be part of the New Raj.

Also, I'd like to see two Pacific Islands fight one another. That would be entertaining as hell (well, maybe not now). Oh, and Switzerland versus anyone. Lousy neutrals.

Entertaining indeed.

Yes. Switzerland should've been partitioned during the age of Nation-States... the map of Europe would certainly look interesting without it... but where would people horde their loot?

 

[Lord Baal]

Cute. Little do you know, I posted this in Off-Topic, but a mod decided it was better for World History. So be it.

I wasn't blaming you, I was just stating that this was a horrible place for it.

What about Iran and North Korea?

No threat to anyone. Iran is intent on building nukes for its own defence, as a deterrant. Anyone who thinks; "OMG, but they'll nuke Israel!!!" simply doesn't understand how nation-states work. That's simply rhetoric to increase their popularity in the region. Iran is notoriously disliked by other Muslim states, so this gets them some respect among their neighbours. A nuclear attack on Israel would be political and literal suicide for the regime, so they won't do it. People tend not to give up power when they have a choice in the matter.

As for NK, it's an interesting case. NK is approximately half a step away from collapsing. As an oligarchy it requires consensus among the leadership. That leadership is primarily interested in retaining power. In order to do this they need to stave off the collapse of their state. As the military is the true power in NK, it is necessary to keep them onside, while at the same time not giving them too much of a say in matters, or allowing one of the oligarchs to get them on his particular side over the others. A good way of doing this is to develop nuclear weapons, as it increases the nation's prestige, while channelling funds away from the military itself.

In short, NK's nuclear development actually has very little to do with international relations - its nukes are very little danger; it's actually their conventional artillery that is a much larger problem, especially in Seoul - but is designed to give a prestige-boost to a regime that is desperate for survival. You'll note the cyclical nature in NK's foreign policy - play nice, agree to many things in exchange for aid, break promises, threaten war, go to the brink, back down in exchange for aid, play nice, wash, rinse, repeat - which is also designed for this purpose. Foreign aid props them up, but getting rid of it periodically and rattling the sabres ensures that the military is too concerned about the outside threats to think about effecting regime-change of their own.

All due support for the destruction of Pakistan(as a country, for some reason, nobody knows the difference between a country itself and it's people anymore...), anyway. Pakistan should be part of the New Raj.

I propose that Sean Connery and Michael Caine take their rightful places as kings.

Entertaining indeed.

Yes. Switzerland should've been partitioned during the age of Nation-States... the map of Europe would certainly look interesting without it... but where would people horde their loot?

There's a thread in OT about Gadaffi proposing that very thing, actually.

As for loot, that's why God invented the Caribbean.

 

[aronnax]

I want to see the UK and France rip each other again into shreds like the good ole days of the 1400s.

Then after that, I want to see Turkey go head to head with a Greeco-Bulgarian Alliance.

Then after that I want to see to see Austria against Czechia!

 

[RedRalph]

My idea is for this thread to be closed. You might as well say "What genocide would you like to see?"

Lighten up man, its hypothetical. No one is saying this would actually be a good thing. Bear in mind you are on a game forum that largely revolves around this sort of thing.

I'd like to see if Japan built up a serious army, how it would fare against Russia.

 

[holy king]

russia vs usa.

 

[Bast]

None. I don't like wars.

 

[Lord Baal]

None. I don't like wars.

*sigh* Try reading the OP, would you?

 

[bombshoo]

Can we say historical wars that never happened since this is in the history forum now?

I always have fun imaging what a WWII era Soviet-Japanese conflict or Soviet-American conflict might have been like.

Also what about Turkey, Spain and Portugal joining with Germany in WWII. Would it change anything?

Or maybe a South American front in WWII....Argentina vs Brazil.

Also, how would WWI Britain fare against WWI France? Or WWI Austria-Hungary against WWI Ottoman Empire?

 

[Lord Baal]

Can we say historical wars that never happened since this is in the history forum now?

Don't see why not.

I always have fun imaging what a WWII era Soviet-Japanese conflict or Soviet-American conflict might have been like.

The Soviet Union and Japan did fight during the WWII era. Several times, actually. The Battle of Lake Khasan was a hard-fought Soviet victory. The Battle of Khalkin Gol was an absolute Soviet arse-raping of Japan in 1939. Finally, the Soviet Union basically killed the Imperial Japanese Empire with it's surprise invasion of Manchuria.

Also what about Turkey, Spain and Portugal joining with Germany in WWII. Would it change anything?

Turkey, Spain and Portugal would undergo some rather radical regime change after the war. Spain wasn't even in a position to take Gibraltar, Turkey didn't declare war on Germany until 1945, and Portugal allowed the British to use their offshore islands as naval bases. They knew who was coming out on top, and none of them were in a position to assist either side anyway. Spain was pretty much bankrupt.

Or maybe a South American front in WWII....Argentina vs Brazil.

That would be interesting.

Also, how would WWI Britain fare against WWI France? Or WWI Austria-Hungary against WWI Ottoman Empire?

The Habsburgs would have little trouble against the Ottomans really, but only because of local independence movements assisting them. Those same movements were just as likely to stab the Austrians in the back immediately after the Turks were gone, however. Once the Young Turks were in charge, after the Balkan Wars, it's a different story. The Turks were no longer fighting for empire, they were fighting for survival as a nation-state. They were highly motivated, and fought quite well with modern German technology. Since neither nation had a border with the other, it's pretty much moot. They both had negligible naval capacity.

As for Britain and France, it would be a colonial war. Neither side really had the capacity to invade the other's mainland. From what I know of their imperial situation, France had larger armies in most of their territories - including much of the Foreign Legion - but Britain had a superior navy, and therefore could provide reinforcements and supply her troops better. I'd back a British victory in that one, but there'd be plenty of cross-channel bombing raids to sap their spirit and force an armistice.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

*sigh* Try reading the OP, would you?

What's wrong with her answer? its a legitimate answer to your question.

 

[Lord Baal]

What's wrong with her answer? its a legitimate answer to your question.

I didn't write the OP. The OP specifically mentioned people who didn't want to see any wars, and told them to either make a decision or not post.