World War III coming in 25 years

[preemptingyou03]

Oh and by the way, I have a Phd in political science and served 12 years in the DoD.

Research is a hobby.

 

[NewGuy]

DMP, you MAY want to review Gog-Magog and see if any of it makes sense.

Then again, the timeline could be way off too.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03
Oh and by the way, I have a Phd in political science and served 12 years in the DoD.

Research is a hobby.

That's it? You throw out your opinion on what you think you know about the training activities of China and Russia's military and call that proof? Evidence? data?

I have two PhD's...and have worked for the DoD for 23.5 years.

see how easy that is?

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by NewGuy
DMP, you MAY want to review Gog-Magog and see if any of it makes sense.

Then again, the timeline could be way off too.

I've read it.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by dmp
That's it? You throw out your opinion on what you think you know about the training activities of China and Russia's military and call that proof? Evidence? data?

I have two PhD's...and have worked for the DoD for 23.5 years.

see how easy that is?

That's it huh? I have issued sixteen PhD's, written six books, and appeared live in concert at a fair that draws a million people a year! And I've worked in the DoD for 68 years, 10 months.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
That's it huh? I have issued sixteen PhD's, written six books, and appeared live in concert at a fair that draws a million people a year! And I've worked in the DoD for 68 years, 10 months.

Yea so. Ive gone to a couple years of community college, lol. So bite me.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03
I don't want to sound fatalistic.

But I firmly believe the fight against terrorism, while very important, may be the beginning phases of something huge two decades or so from now.

The Soviet Union collapsed 15 years ago, and the threat of WWIII was thought to be gone. For the time being, that is true. But as we fight terrorism, the Middle East will transform.

Capitalism will take over the Middle East and will defeat the ideology of terrorism. When terrorism dies down, Russia and China will suffer politically, economically, and will feel they must respond militarily.

We're the world's lone superpower, and the Chinese don't want it to remain that way. China and Russia have signed treaties together.

Capitalism in the Middle East will raise the GDP there, and it will hurt the oil contracts Russia had with that region. It will also hurt the military contracts China had with that region.

The North Korean government will reform by that time, whether we take Kim Jong Il out, or his regime collapses. China and Russia will see an expanding American empire by virtue of American ideals.

Now while Russia is a democracy, it is a half-assed democracy. There are many Russian politicians and Russian generals that have the mindset of communists and hate the fact that the very ideals that had the Soviet Union fall apart are the same ideals that are defeating terrorism, as the cost of the Russian economy.

In two decades or so, what you will see is something beyond our imagination. All of this stuff about al-Qaeda and Iraq will seem like nothing.

There will be a coup in Russia, and it will become a communist dictatorship once again. One by one, the New Soviet Union will start to take over Arab states that just recently reformed to capitalist countries, and one by one Russia will inch closer and closer to Germany, France, and Italy. The EU's socialist agenda will not satisfy the diehard communists and the fact that the UK and Italy will try to break away from the EU, will piss off the Russians.

As for China, China will take over Taiwan. China will go after Korea, as well... and it will end up confronting Japan.

World War III will be fought on three fronts... it will start with a Russian attack on the main European countries, like Germany and Italy. (France may sign a non-aggression treaty, which the Soviets will break). The other front with be against the Russians in the Middle East. As for China, China will attack Japan and India and that will spark the third front.

WWIII will actually bring peace between Pakistan and India as they will fight side-by-side against the Chinese and it will bring peace between the Israelis and Palestinians as they fight side-by-side against the Russians.

Some former Soviet states and some people within Korea may rise up and fight us.

It will probably last 7-8 years and there will be many wars within the war. It will be a war of liberation. The liberation of Italy, Germany, Korea, India, Taiwan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc. It would go nuclear, considering China has over a billion people.

We will develop SDI by then and nuclear ICBMs won't damage us that much. We may lose two or three cities at the beginning of the war. And our SDI will allow us to USE nukes without the fear of retaliation, so we will use them wisely.

WWIII will not be an all-out nuclear war for years at end. But maybe once or twice a year, throughout the war, another city will get nuked. China has three cities with over 12 million people.

Sighs, WWIII is over. We won Thanks to President Reagan. And we did it without firing a shot.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
That's it huh? I have issued sixteen PhD's, written six books, and appeared live in concert at a fair that draws a million people a year! And I've worked in the DoD for 68 years, 10 months. And in that time, I have seen 71L's and 0301 series Murder and eat babies...rape horses, and ride off on the women.

JOHN KERRY IS ON THE FORUMS USING gop_jeff's SCREEN NAME!! Nobody else could tell such stories!

 

[preemptingyou03]

For you to simply neglect all the facts I have put forth is exactly the kind of mentality our enemies want in power.

 

[preemptingyou03]

After disregarding all the military preparations by the Chinese, one must look no further than quotes. Beijing has begun to fine-tune its domestic and security policies to counter the perceived threat of U.S. "neo-imperialism."

As more emphasis is being put on boosting national strength and cohesiveness, a big blow could be dealt to both economic and political reform.

That the new leadership has concluded China is coming up against formidable challenges in the short to medium term is evident from recent statements by President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao.

Hu indicated earlier this year Beijing must pay more attention to global developments so that "China make good preparations before the rainstorm ... and be in a position to seize the initiative."

The threat now is radical Islamic terrorism. And it is a very serious threat which must be confronted and defeated. But it may directly lead to something bigger than we could ever imagine.

You worked in the DoD for 23.5 years? Under whom? Was there direct contact to the DIA?

 

[preemptingyou03]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Sighs, WWIII is over. We won Thanks to President Reagan. And we did it without firing a shot.

The Cold War was not World War III. There was the threat of WWIII but... Ronald Reagan, our best leader ever, prevented WWIII. He didn't win it. Because there was none.

I assume, like James Woolsey, you think the War on Terror is World War IV? So if we broke out in a war with China, would we call it World War V?

The titles of conflicts don't matter. There has never been a war titled World War III and I expect it will only be titled that if it were against another superpower.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03
Had we prolonged WWII by 6 months, invaded Russia, and listened to Patton, none of those events would have happened.

That's a pretty optimistic appraisal of the situation in 1945. Similar to Hitler's appraisal of the Soviet Union in 1941.




Understand, there will be no land war with China, so it is of no consequence how many soldiers they have. If they attacked us, we would hit them with nuclear weapons. If we felt the Russians would have a serious problem with that, we'd nuke them too. That's what our stealth bombers and cruise missiles were designed for. Not for dropping 2,000 lb bombs on Baghdad, but for evading the Soviet radar net and obliterating their cities, industrial centers, and missile sites with nuclear weapons.

This would be followed quickly by the full release of those nine ballistic missile submarines, some carrying over 200 warheads.

The least that would happen would be the utter annhilation of Russia and China. The most would be the destruction of the world.

In many ways, the War on Terror may have provided for the perfect excuse to strengthen the best defense against what would be China's or Russia's best hope for a succesfull attack against us with little or no response on our part: increased alertness to the possibility of suitcase-shaped nuclear weapons.

Finally, you can't know what preparations we are making, and if you did, I doubt you'd be posting them on this forum.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by Zhukov
That's a pretty optimistic appraisal of the situation in 1945. Similar to Hitler's appraisal of the Soviet Union in 1941.

Deja Vu

 

[preemptingyou03]

I, on the other hand, think the complete and utter destruction of Russia or China or America wouldn't happen. Don't get me wrong. I do believe, in the event of war with China and/or Russia, nuclear weapons would be used many times... but not on some end of the world Biblical level. Russian, Chinese, and American leaders would have a nuclear exchange and would form some kind of mutual halt of nuclear exchanges for a certain period of time.

The MAD agreement would turn into the Eye-for-an-Eye agreement.

These leaders don't want to their their country laid to waste.

As for us using nuclear weapons on China and not using ground forces, I too, agree it would look like that. But if we were to develop something like Reagan's SDI, we would have total defense control on nuclear ICBMs. China couldn't hit us. We'd shoot their missiles down over the Pacific.

This would allow us to use nuclear weapons in strategic terms. I do believe we'd need ground forces to liberate the nations that China already invaded. Why nuke an ally country.... because an enemy is in that country? It wouldn't work like that.

As for prolonging WWII and listening to Patton... I feel it would have bettered the world from 1945 until now had we dealt with the Soviet Union at the end of WWII.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03
For you to simply neglect all the facts I have put forth is exactly the kind of mentality our enemies want in power.

You have neglected to put forth any facts. No credible sources to back up your claims.

 

[preemptingyou03]

Madone.

I have put laid out my case. I have shown you what the Russian and Chinese military are doing. I have compared this era to historical events. And I have explained why I think a coup in Russia is realistic and an imperialist drive in China will happen.

If you don't want to accept my opinion, fine.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03
Madone.

I have put laid out my case. I have shown you what the Russian and Chinese military are doing. I have compared this era to historical events. And I have explained why I think a coup in Russia is realistic and an imperialist drive in China will happen.

If you don't want to accept my opinion, fine.

oh! Are the things you said 'facts' or, your 'opinion'? You have written a bunch of things, taking leaps and bounds in logic to arrive at what you WANT to believe in. Fine.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03
I do believe, in the event of war with China and/or Russia, nuclear weapons would be used many times... but not on some end of the world Biblical level. Russian, Chinese, and American leaders would have a nuclear exchange and would form some kind of mutual halt of nuclear exchanges for a certain period of time.

One does not 'halt' a nuclear exchange. One either plays for it all or is consumed by the nuclear furnance. We wouldn't launch one weapon and wait for a response, we would launch thousands.

These leaders don't want to their their country laid to waste.

That is why it is imperative to always make sure the line we draw is clear and non-negotioable.

As for us using nuclear weapons on China and not using ground forces, I too, agree it would look like that. But if we were to develop something like Reagan's SDI, we would have total defense control on nuclear ICBMs. China couldn't hit us. We'd shoot their missiles down over the Pacific.

This would allow us to use nuclear weapons in strategic terms.

If we had an SDI, and that is why we are trying to build one. Even so, no SDI could be constructed that could guarantee complete invicibility to enemy attack.

As for prolonging WWII and listening to Patton... I feel it would have bettered the world from 1945 until now had we dealt with the Soviet Union at the end of WWII.

We didn't have anymore nuclear weapons in 1945. Our last one was dropped on Nagasaki. It took until the proceeding summer to construct several more. Stalin calculated that the Soviet Union, with its newly acquired properties and protectorates in eastern Europe and Asia could withstand a nuclear attack by us against them of between 3 and 6 nuclear bombs, and still maintain enough strength to conquer all of Europe.

Starting a war with the Soviet Union at any point in time after the war would have been a bad idea. The situation did get progressively more perilous as time went on, but that does not mean that the situation was ever good.

 

[Zhukov]

Incidentally, I don't think Putin needs to worry about a coup d'etat any time soon.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by dmp

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by gop_jeff
That's it huh? I have issued sixteen PhD's, written six books, and appeared live in concert at a fair that draws a million people a year! And I've worked in the DoD for 68 years, 10 months. And in that time, I have seen 71L's and 0301 series Murder and eat babies...rape horses, and ride off on the women.

JOHN KERRY IS ON THE FORUMS USING gop_jeff's SCREEN NAME!! Nobody else could tell such stories!

Quote doctor!!! Is there a quote doctor in the house?!?