World War 3? (1 Viewer)

[cerebrum]

For what reason would a mass war come into existance (World War 3)??

 

[tomorrows_angel]

any stupid heads of countries bombing other stupid heads of countries?

george bush getting his way?

assassinations of prominent people? (wouldn't be the first time a war has been started)

dictators trying to take over the world?

there could be any number of different reasons. It all starts with one action, and then it depends on the reactions... hmmm that was ambiguous.

 

[Rafy]

Usually begins when somebody crazy rises to power.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

www.dragonsfuryseries.com

 

[withoutaface]

Someone invading North Korea, resulting in them nuking the US, resulting in the whole of NATO nuking North Korea, resulting in fallout floating over China and China nuking the US and half of Europe.

Of course this is stupid and will never happen because noone's planning on forcibly disarming NK any time soon, and afaik nuclear weapons these days have relatively little fallout.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Someone invading North Korea, resulting in them nuking the US, resulting in the whole of NATO nuking North Korea, resulting in fallout floating over China and China nuking the US and half of Europe.

Of course this is stupid and will never happen because noone's planning on forcibly disarming NK any time soon, and afaik nuclear weapons these days have relatively little fallout.

By most accounts china has very few ICBM's that could reach mainland america....

 

[tomorrows_angel]

By most accounts china has very few ICBM's that could reach mainland america....

very few? it only really takes one to contact...

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Yes of course but it would be very foolish for china to hit america without severely damaging their chances to counter strike...

 

[withoutaface]

Yes of course but it would be very foolish for china to hit america without severely damaging their chances to counter strike...

It'd be very foolish for them to hit America without severly stuffing up British and French silos as well.

 

[tomorrows_angel]

does anyone have enough ICBMs to take out america and all it's supporting countries?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Russia during the cold war would of been able to probably destroy most of their capability to fight back... I guess?

 

[withoutaface]

Russia still have substantial numbers of warheads, although the number which are operational would be significantly lower than the total.

 

[samuelblayden]

Usually begins when somebody crazy rises to power.

like George W bush

 

[withoutaface]

Number of warheads currently under the control of the world's nuclear powers:

United States 10,240
Russia (formerly the Soviet Union) 8,400
People's Republic of China 390
France 350
United Kingdom 200-300
India 60-90
Pakistan 30-52
North Korea 0-18

 

[Generator]

If North Korea is on that list, then surely Israel should be listed, too.

 

[withoutaface]

If North Korea is on that list, then surely Israel should be listed, too.

Those are the declared nuclear states, I don't think Israel has explicitly claimed to have nukes.

 

[Generator]

Ok. However, even though I'm not disputing the list as it stands (declared nuclear states), my point was that Israel's capabilities are actually 'known' whereas we can only speculate as to North Korea's level of development.

 

[Iron]

Other CIS countries would be plenty stocked too.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

I think it's almost inevitable that someone is going to decide to disarm North Korea. They would almost definately use nukes to defend themselves and if that happened then mainly America but also the other allies would nuke them until there was nothing left.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I think it's almost inevitable that someone is going to decide to disarm North Korea. They would almost definately use nukes to defend themselves and if that happened then mainly America but also the other allies would nuke them until there was nothing left.

No, I think that's entirely insane