Mugabe can't do anything but invade some neighbouring African countries. He's no threat to the First World, an only a war involving the First World will ever be defined as WW3 in history.
Monroe wrote: My history teacher in college always said there were three nations that never bully well throughout history. The Dutch, the English, and the Americans. Look at the solidarity that formed after 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. Its like invading Russia. Russians fought like crap in the Winter War but the Germans found out that the Russians fighting on Russia was a whole different matter. Some countries just don't do too well to other countries trying to bash them into submission. Maybe its the culture. Maybe its a feeling of homeland or the motherland. But some countries just don't bend.
I think the US would be against the war if it happened over sees constantly but if the war was close at home I don't think any invader would have an easy time. Same with Russia, as I contend they aren't easy to bully either, though they have been in the past.
Quite right. It all depends on the context. Who fires the first shot? What type of shot do they fire? Do they declare war beforehand or make a Pearl Harbour style sneak attack?
If the US was the aggressor in the war, the public would quickly turn against it when the casualty rates start shooting up. If they're defending, there'll be more support. It's probably the same, to a lesser extent, in Russia. No idea on China.
That said, public opinion isn't the only factor. The governments of the "big three" have too much of an interest in maintaining peace to start a war.
China's economy is praticaly based on exporting stuff to the other two major powers, so attacking would fuck up their own economy to massive extents.
Russia isn't powerful enough to win a war against either of the others, and they know it.
The US can't attack China due to the massive amount of materials it imports from there, and can't attack Russia due to the fact Europe gets all their oil from there (the US attacks and the Russians cut off the oil, all of Europe will turn against the US).
There's also, quite simply, nothing to justify the costs of such a war. There's litteraly no reason for them to go to war with each other.
Aye Russia has its own oil concerns to look out for. China though may support the ME.
Unlikely. They make too much money from selling goods to the various First World powers. Thus they need to keep them happy. They may verbaly support it, but they won't be helping them out in any way.
Teaos wrote:You misunderstood the concept.
The ME alliance doesnt need to be powerful eough to take on the world. Just to take out Turkey and pose a moderate threat to Eastern Europe, both well with in there power.
I seriously doubt Turkey is going to fall to a mismatched alliance of sworn enemies with decades old military equipment. And Eastern Europe sure as hell isn't going to be threatened at all by them.
Firstly, they have no choice, If Turkey dams the rivers which they are likely to do from what I hear it is going to royally screw over a lot of people, not that Turkey cares.
It'll screw over the populace, not the leaders. Ergo, they won't care as it doesn't impact their lives. They can afford to import water for themselves. They're not going to start a futile war that they
know they'd lose. They'll bitch and rattle their sabres for all eternity over such an action, but they're not going to throw away everything they've worked so hard to achieve.
The threat of economic bitch slap is laughable.
The ME arabs will unit against a common enemy, when they do no one can f**k with them because they hold the oil. We can bitch and moan all we like and make some token efforts but the fact is they can f**k us over by stopping oila lot worse than we can them.
There are other sources of oil than the ME, you know. Russia has a fuckload of oil, the EU gets the majority of its oil from there, the US has enough stockpiles to last for a few years before they need to start looking elsewhere and Canada has quite a bit of oil, from what I've heard. There's also the fact that we have access to nuclear reactors to supply power.
The Arab Alliance cutting off oil would definitely cause chaos, but it wouldn't be a killing blow. We'd recover.
The AA, on the other hand, wouldn't. They quite litteraly make everything from selling oil. If they suddenly stop, they're fucked. No money coming into the country = total economic collapse. Again, they're not stupid enough to make such a move.
If there water gets cut off they will go to war, they have no choice.
If it gets cut off, they'll bitch about it and start rattling their sabres and try to get the UN to stop Turkey from doing it. They aren't going to start a futile war they know they'll lose horrificaly.
A ME alliance of the Arab nations would put up a damn good fight against Turkey. Them Vs Turkey by themselves, my money is on the Alliance, depending on how fast Europe and US can pour military aid in Turkey it could swing the other way.
My money's on Turkey.
First, how are forces going to get from one end of the ME all the way to Turkey? The various leaders aren't going to just let masses of enemy tanks roll through their cities, and they sure as hell won't want to send all their forces to the other side of the ME when their sworn enemies are sitting right next to them.
Secondly, how the hell are they going to win when Turkey would have air superiority? Any large formation of tanks or troops would be blasted before they get too far past Turkey's border.
Thirdly, the ME armies are, quite bluntly, shit. While Turkey is hardly great, their army is large enough and well equipped enough to hold off an invasion by such countries.
While it's hardly going to be a curbstomp, I think Turkey's superior tech could at least hold the AA off long enough to bring both parties to the negotiation table.
The big factor in the war will be how fast it happens and how fast everyone reacts. NATO is not fast to react and only time will tell in what position America will be to help.
It's hardly going to be some sort of unforseen blitzkrieg. You think the AA can move large quantities of troops from one end of the ME to Turkey's border without practicaly every country on the planet noticing? Hell no. The build up will be noticed
months before the attack actualy takes place, and the US, EU and NATO would all have ample time to react.
Russia and China will not help Turkey. This whole senario works in both their favors.
Exactly how does it work in their favour? Seeing the militaries of the ME crippled would work perfectly for them, as would the resulting collapse of the ME economies. Why? Because then they'd be pretty damn desperate to get more money by selling more oil.
Seeing Turkey invaded, the AA gain a foothold near Europe and Russia and a massive alliance of people that hate them continuing to exist would
not benefit them in any way.
And I never said Russia will help the ME allaince (not directly anyway, they may supply weapons ect) they will how ever try to throw around their poiltical muscle a bit and expand their zone of influence.
Of course they'll try to use the situation to their own advantage. And crippling the ME governments would be exactly what works in their favour. Having Turkey fall and giving the AA a sense of power would not help them. Jumping on the bandwagon to help slap down the AA would work perfectly in their favour, as it boosts relations with the various countries and puts Turkey somewhat in their debt, particularly if they sell them weapons.
Staplic wrote:I voted North Korea.
I did so, because while most other nations may be hostile, they atleast have reason...the leader of N. Korea however is at a stalemate with the US and UN. The US/UN won't help him unless he gets rid of his nucs, he's thretening to shoot off his nukes unless the US/UN secures his regieme, and it seems like neither side is willing to compromise.
I see it playing out that after we're done in the middle east, maybe a few presidents down the line when we get another incompetant one, the US decides that we don't need to ask him to get rid of the nukes, we'll undermine his regieme. The Korean leader will then launch nukes, initiating WWIII.
Never gonna happen. NK has no way of launching their nukes to hit anywhere further than SK, if they even have nukes. They know they'd be ruthlessly crushed in a war, and the leaders over there aren't going to throw away everything they've worked so hard to maintain in a suicidal action that would only end with their own destruction.
They may be insane, but they're not that far gone just yet.
Personaly, I see Israel as the most likely nation to start tossing nukes around. If Iran starts building them, I can easily see Israel lobbing a couple of nuclear warheads in their direction. They know the rest of the world isn't going to do anything but bitch at them. If you define a nuclear conflict as WW3, then that's it.