Page 1 of 2 [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

28 Nov 2011, 12:12 am

WWIII won't happen.

Space war I, however, will.

It is the 21st century, people. Get updated!


_________________
.


phil777
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 May 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,825
Location: Montreal, Québec

28 Nov 2011, 12:19 am

Talking about a Star War? :p



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,398

28 Nov 2011, 12:27 am

The idea is that satellites will play a major role. And by it I mean they will have weapons and will also be destroyed. We could also get to the point to detonate nukes on space to cause devastation that is a lot more terrible than ground nukes and much harder to intercept, ok, maybe that's reserved for space war II.


_________________
.


ICY
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 17 May 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 192
Location: Hertfordshire England

28 Nov 2011, 11:07 am

donnie_darko wrote:
It all sounds so familiar. Global depression, countries rattling sabers, polarized politics, the revival of ethnic prejudice. Iran and Israel can exchange fire any second.


I think cold war 2 is more likely as today’s globalised economy makes open war between countries such as the USA and China unlikely. After all, if the aforementioned powers were at war, China would lose a major if the largest market and the USA would lose its source of cheap goods.

Iran is not so well connected or powerful on its own that war between it and Israel would mean world war 3

Abgal64 wrote:
If WWIII did occur, and if it used nuclear weapons, it would be a catastrophe rivaled only by the Bronze Age Collapse in all of history.

I think the Israel-Iran conflict is greatly overshadowed by the conflicts between India and Pakistan and China and the USA.

If the war stayed conventional, China and its allies, which could possibly include quite a few African and Latin American countries, would surely win. This would not necessarily be a bad thing IMHO, given Chinese Civilization's extreme stability, productivity and its usually choosing to assimilate the conquered in the long run, as led to China's expansion from the Yellow River Valley during the Bronze Age to its contemporary giant size, rather than to dominate the conquered, as happened with many Western states during the Ages of Exploration and Imperialism, which would eventually lead to a more or less homogeneous and fully unified humankind, something that I see as highly desirable.


Tibet.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

28 Nov 2011, 11:29 am

Abgal64 wrote:

If the war stayed conventional, China and its allies, which could possibly include quite a few African and Latin American countries, would surely win. This would not necessarily be a bad thing IMHO, given Chinese Civilization's extreme stability, productivity and its usually choosing to assimilate the conquered in the long run, as led to China's expansion from the Yellow River Valley during the Bronze Age to its contemporary giant size, rather than to dominate the conquered, as happened with many Western states during the Ages of Exploration and Imperialism, which would eventually lead to a more or less homogeneous and fully unified humankind, something that I see as highly desirable.


The Chinese can be a beastly lot. Ask any Tibetan. Also Mao Ze Dong oversaw the death of 60 million Chinese people. That is many more than the Japanese killed during their imperialistic phase. The Chinese do not have the least idea of what a right is. Not the fuzziest notion. And the few Chinese that do, do not give a fig for rights.

ruveyn



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,440
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

28 Nov 2011, 4:41 pm

Probably.


_________________
We won't go back.


Abgal64
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 408

28 Nov 2011, 5:11 pm

Abgal64 wrote:
If WWIII did occur, and if it used nuclear weapons, it would be a catastrophe rivaled only by the Bronze Age Collapse in all of history.

I think the Israel-Iran conflict is greatly overshadowed by the conflicts between India and Pakistan and China and the USA.

If the war stayed conventional, China and its allies, which could possibly include quite a few African and Latin American countries, would surely win. This would not necessarily be a bad thing IMHO, given Chinese Civilization's extreme stability, productivity and its usually choosing to assimilate the conquered in the long run, as led to China's expansion from the Yellow River Valley during the Bronze Age to its contemporary giant size, rather than to dominate the conquered, as happened with many Western states during the Ages of Exploration and Imperialism, which would eventually lead to a more or less homogeneous and fully unified humankind, something that I see as highly desirable.


Tibet.[/quote]Tibet is still essentially an example of assimilation, not exploitation: The Chinese government itself says that Tibet has always been part of China; thus they are Chinese. They are not being abused for the resources really so much as for their deviating from Chinese norms. Unlike the Italians in Somalia, for example, the Chinese do not think the Tibetans are inherently inferior; they think there culture is inferior. This type of ethnocentrism has an ancient history going back to the Warring States Period at least, if not before. The reason the Chinese government treats Tibetan dissenters the way it does is much more comparable to the reason that the Cuban government treats its dissenters the way it does than the way African slaves were treated in Brazil or the USA: They are a threat to Chinese civilization by deviating from its norms.

Eventually, as is seen repeatedly in Chinese history, the conquered people become assimilated as Chinese. Such was the case during the Ming Dynasty in Taiwan, for example, and such is most likely to happen now in Tibet.


_________________
Learn the patterns of the past; consider what is not now; help what is not the past; plan for the future.
-Myself


ICY
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 17 May 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 192
Location: Hertfordshire England

29 Nov 2011, 6:24 am

ICY wrote:
Tibet.
Abgal64 wrote:
The Chinese government itself says that Tibet has always been part of China; thus they are Chinese.


You believe something just because a government said it :lmao: .

Abgal64 wrote:
They are not being abused for the resources really so much as for their deviating from Chinese norms. Unlike the Italians in Somalia, for example, the Chinese do not think the Tibetans are inherently inferior; they think there culture is inferior. This type of ethnocentrism has an ancient history going back to the Warring States Period at least, if not before. The reason the Chinese government treats Tibetan dissenters the way it does is much more comparable to the reason that the Cuban government treats its dissenters the way it does than the way African slaves were treated in Brazil or the USA: They are a threat to Chinese civilization by deviating from its norms.

Eventually, as is seen repeatedly in Chinese history, the conquered people become assimilated as Chinese. Such was the case during the Ming Dynasty in Taiwan, for example, and such is most likely to happen now in Tibet.


Are you, someone diagnosed with Aspergers Syndrome according to your profile, seriously defending the idea that people should either conform or suffer on such a scale?