Quote:
Originally posted by John D Harris:
Will there be a WWII? You bet your sweet bippy there will be, ever since we got kicked out of the Garden, or crawled out of the slime (Depending on which camp you are in.) we humans have killed each other and will continue to do so.
But as is was pointed out in an earlier post, at the current time there is nobody that can stand up to the USA. WHEN, not if, a rival nation arises that can threaten the USA in military and economic power, there will be lots of folks killed. The USSR for all it's Military power couldn't stand up to the USA in economic power. Despite what many re-visionists want to say the USA ran the USSR economy into the ground. The USA spent 7-9% of GNP on defense, the USSR spent nearly 30% of GNP on defense. Both countries spent about the same amount of actual money, the USSR spent nearly 1/3 of it's capitability to keep up(some accounts slightly ahead). If the USA needed to spend we could have increased our spending to 1/3, then inorder to keep up the USSR would have had to increase to spending 100%.
Nukes are great weapons to DEFEND in a conflict or to End a conflict. But Nukes are a complete assine weapon to use if one wishes to gain territory or resources. Radioactive fallout kinda puts a damper the use of any territory where nukes have been used, and it kinda defeats the purpose of gaining resources *cough* Oil *cough* If one has to wait a couple of thousand years before radiation levels have droped enough to go drilling. [img]smile.gif[/img]
|
Hmmm, i think things are more difficult than that.
There has only been two world wars, so in fact they have not been a regular occurance to suggest they will occur again. There have been large scale wars yes, but they tended to be between the Great Powers, which now no longer exist. So, the chances of such a war are remote, especially with the lack of rival superpowers and ideological confrontation. There is also, given the systems of alliances little chance of a war between the lesser world powers that doesn;t involve the US. As John says, a new superpower would ne needed for such an event to occur, and in my view this superpower would have to have an ideology that would be seen to threaten the US. THe most likely candidate is China, but she is only communist in name, however we lack the crystal ball. And the US sees S.E. Asia as an important, an would not be happy to see a country extend a sphere of influence there. But even were this to happen, the nuclear detterant would mean that, like the USSR and the USA, war would be avoided due to MAD.
The point about the USSR, is in view flawed. However it is too early to draw conclusions, from my point of view, given what is known, I beleive that the econmic strain on the Soviet economy, although a strong contributing factor, wasnot the ulitmate cause of the collapse of the USSR, but the change in the ideological nature of the USSR, which removed the ideological basis of the conflict and split the soviet bloc, causing it to split due to not having its binding factor and the uncontrolable unleashing of populist forces that resulted.
On the nukes issue, tactical nukes offer new possibilities on this front. If the leader of a small country developed capabilities and was just power-crazed enough to use them, he could, possibly detroy the leadership of a country, while retaining her resources and allowing the country to be lived in. However, the country would need the military to exploit this so, it is very, very unlikely, even ignoring the problems of a delivery system.
My tip for future conflict is this:
With the fall of the USSR the USA tranfers it ideological confrontation to Islamic fundamentalists, who are seen as a threat to the democracy and the US way of life. THis in turn means there is no clear war, as they are stateless. States may support them openly or in secret, but they cannot truely be defeated. The USA involves herself in wars in small countries all over the Muslim world trying to prevent aid to terrorists. It is largely ineffective as although in the short term the issus in that area is resolved, instability in the region and the world is created and actions alienate others, who join the war against the US.
Well that's my silly theory to add to the pot [img]smile.gif[/img] . Can't forsee what the ending will be to this scenario, as unlike the Cold War, there is no state to fall, and the Fundamentalists shall not abandon there ideology as the USSR did. THe collapse of the USA would seem to be bring a possible end to this ideological conflict...