If the third WW were to break out...

[tiaf]

Today my very uneducated coworker (I very much hate them) threw out the statement that the 3rd World War (Russia against the whole world lmao, as if) is about to break out and that we all should evacuate from Germany to Vietnam. (because he is viet, so he as some very thick filter for no apparent reason )

Now I came to think about what the alliances and warzones would be like if there was a WW III. Which country would fall first? Who would be friends and who would become enemies? Which country would be relatively safe? (Me looking at Australia)

Come and crush coworker's unfounded statements.

Spoiler: As for me

As for me...I first called what my coworker said utter bullshit and find it more realistic to have a tiny country as Vietnam that is considered poor fall before Germany, a country in the heart of Europe.

For one, Russia won't confront Europe directly except it's aiming for mutual destruction. Germany has too many allies. North America is practically part of the NATO, so for once Germany is not alone in a WW.

Second, China won't look away if one of their biggest Cashcows get destroyed. Their exports would crash if Europe or the rest of the Westeners would perish. Can't rule out that they won't have dealings with both sides, but I highly doubt they will directly involve themselves in Russia-Europe conflict. If anything, I think that China would annex the surrounding countries for their resources which includes Vietnam.

 

[KoyukiMegumi]

If WWIII were to break out. Fallout world here, we come! Nowhere is safe when all the world powers have nukes.

 

[Deleted member 146224]

If there was WW3 there would be no alliances, because before any would have a chance to be created, the whole world would be nuked out of existence and the only thing left would be cockroaches.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

I know you probably can't do it, since you will incur the ire of that person... But a man can dream, right? On the odd chance it is possible, please, mention where I live, and I have a little message for that person. "Fuck off, retard."

 

[owotrucked]

Just dont talk to him lol

ww3 cant happen because of nuclear bomb
only wars that happen nowadays are proxy wars in god knows where
Russia only invaded a country without nuke because they thought they could crush in a matter of days

Since Vietnam doesnt have nuclear weapon, they're the most likely to get into a random war than germany

 

[greyblob]

nato and brics. if ww3 does not turn nuclear and we all die, then it'd be big countries playing war in smaller ones. like how us is doing in ukraine right now. the poor get poorer and the rich get richer and a lot of people die. win win win for the 1%

 

[SirDogeTheFirst]

I mean if countries somehow decided not to use nuclear weapons and go old fashioned, like the good old days of ww1 and ww2, and the entire world, for some reason, chooses to be divided into factions and join the fun, I can see the first country to fall probably be one of the baltic states or Syria, or I don't know, maybe Swiss will attack Lichestein or something.

 

[Woolen_Monkey]

?

 

[J_Chemist]

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Today my very uneducated coworker (I very much hate them) threw out the statement that the 3rd World War (Russia against the whole world lmao, as if) is about to break out and that we all should evacuate from Germany to Vietnam. (because he is viet, so he as some very thick filter for no apparent reason )

Now I came to think about what the alliances and warzones would be like if there was a WW III. Which country would fall first? Who would be friends and who would become enemies? Which country would be relatively safe? (Me looking at Australia)

Come and crush coworker's unfounded statements.

Spoiler: As for me

As for me...I first called what my coworker said utter bullshit and find it more realistic to have a tiny country as Vietnam that is considered poor fall before Germany, a country in the heart of Europe.

For one, Russia won't confront Europe directly except it's aiming for mutual destruction. Germany has too many allies. North America is practically part of the NATO, so for once Germany is not alone in a WW.

Second, China won't look away if one of their biggest Cashcows get destroyed. Their exports would crash if Europe or the rest of the Westeners would perish. Can't rule out that they won't have dealings with both sides, but I highly doubt they will directly involve themselves in Russia-Europe conflict. If anything, I think that China would annex the surrounding countries for their resources which includes Vietnam.

It seems far more likely that China attacks Vietnam than Russia Germany.

nato and brics. if ww3 does not turn nuclear and we all die, then it'd be big countries playing war in smaller ones. like how us is doing in ukraine right now. the poor get poorer and the rich get richer and a lot of people die. win win win for the 1%

BRICS? They can't even spell each other properly, and then they should be an alliance.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

 

[quagma]

If this one doesn't die of zombies or radioactive spiders first, they'd like to live in new zealand. it's warm and it's pretty, and we could live there well within our means.

 

[NotaNuffian]

At this point, I just need WW3 to complete my bingo card.

Also, Vietnam as a safe haven? Dude left his country for so long that he had forgotten the general rule; every country is its own munted shitshow. Good that he is still loyal, but still.

 

[AnonUnlimited]

No one wants a nuclear war.

most of the war these days are proxy and economic wars between countries.

 

[NotaNuffian]

No one wants a nuclear war.

most of the war these days are proxy and economic wars between countries.

Nobody wants it.

Brexit happened. So shit may still fly.

But seriously, news outlets are edging me with threats of fallout and I do hope for a swift, probably horrifying death.

 

[AnonUnlimited]

Nobody wants it.

Brexit happened. So shit may still fly.

But seriously, news outlets are edging me with threats of fallout and I do hope for a swift, probably horrifying death.

Personally I thought brexit was a good thing. A lot of people I know who live in the Uk wanted it, it’s the media and those in power who didn’t want it. And college age kids.

EU is trying to punish Britain now though.

 

[Pixytokisaki14]

Today my very uneducated coworker (I very much hate them) threw out the statement that the 3rd World War (Russia against the whole world lmao, as if) is about to break out and that we all should evacuate from Germany to Vietnam. (because he is viet, so he as some very thick filter for no apparent reason )

Now I came to think about what the alliances and warzones would be like if there was a WW III. Which country would fall first? Who would be friends and who would become enemies? Which country would be relatively safe? (Me looking at Australia)

Come and crush coworker's unfounded statements.

Spoiler: As for me

As for me...I first called what my coworker said utter bullshit and find it more realistic to have a tiny country as Vietnam that is considered poor fall before Germany, a country in the heart of Europe.

For one, Russia won't confront Europe directly except it's aiming for mutual destruction. Germany has too many allies. North America is practically part of the NATO, so for once Germany is not alone in a WW.

Second, China won't look away if one of their biggest Cashcows get destroyed. Their exports would crash if Europe or the rest of the Westeners would perish. Can't rule out that they won't have dealings with both sides, but I highly doubt they will directly involve themselves in Russia-Europe conflict. If anything, I think that China would annex the surrounding countries for their resources which includes Vietnam.

Einstein always said, if there would be a 4th world war, it would be fought with sticks and stones.

In terms of the conflict itself it would be largely between Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea against basically everybody, do note that all 4 of them are nuclear capable and will push that big red button, which will happen, if they're desperate (just like what happened in Ace Combat: Zero with Belka)

Back in the 90s nuclear war itself is the deterrent because of mutually assured destruction, but now with the advent of hypersonic ballistic missiles and advanced missile defense systems counties are racing to get that technology out because a nation with hypersonic capability has a high probability of winning a first strike scenario, because these missiles get detected just as they're about to hit their target going up to speeds past mach 5 (mach 5 is the bare minimum to be counted as hypersonic by the way).

With the war currently in Ukraine becoming more and more of a test field for future weaponry, future wars would be fought with who was the most missiles, artillery shells, ECM units (Electronic Counter Measures) and drones, not the conventional tanks, aircraft and ships. With stealth technology becoming more and more expensive, the former is A LOT more viable in a modern conflict.

One things assured though, If ww3 does start, we're all fucked. It does not matter if you're from the US, China, or Russia. Mutually Assured Destruction WAS AND STILL IS Mutually Assured Destruction

 

[Hans.Trondheim]

As of now, BRICS is more of an economic alliance than a military one. If ever the push comes to the shove, you might want to consider the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the CSTO to possibly oppose NATO.

However, that's a big 'if'. CSTO is not that belligerent compared to NATO (as seen in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh). And SCO has no 'unified' command unlike NATO.

Also about the nuclear war, it's only a 'weapon of extremely last resort', as the 'evil countries' themselves don't want it. By practicality, they want to take over natural resources, so why would they destroy/poison these resources? It is still highly-possible, though, especially when one major power involved finds itself pressed into a corner; it's also why 'proxy wars' happen...they don't want war to reach deep inside their borders, if possible.

In the battlefield, it's highly-likely it'll be dominated by drones and robotics, as seen in the Russo-Ukrainian Conflict and the Israeli-Hamas War. The 'flood' of automated killing systems in the future of warfare, and with the current attitudes of the West and the East, it's bound to get worse.

Hotspots? Prolly Eastern Europe, East and Southeast Asia, and in a smaller scale, Africa and the Middle East. Vietnam, though it might be neutral (playing between US and China), would certainly be in the middle of the shitstorm as it also has interests in South China Sea (the Spratlys). So your co-worker's statements is only half-true.

Countries involved? NATO versus Russia-China along with smaller states allied/sympathetic with the two. India, while a traditional Russian ally, would prolly stay put, unless Pakistan (a US ally) enters the other side. But then again, Pakistan is also an ally to China, so it's 50-50. South America might stay off, as they are also trying to wean US influence from their borders (with a few exceptions like Ecuador and Colombia, but that's also a big 'if) and by now, many have realized the hypocrisy of western brand of 'democracy'.

Personally, I don't like that to happen, as the Philippines is being turned into 'another Ukraine' by the US in attempt to 'rein in' China. I don't want to get drafted and fight for a dictator's son and a people whose historical memories are worth of 15 seconds of Tiktok. We also got lots of potential fifth columns here, so any 'struggle' by our army trained to deal with terrorists, communist rebels and Moro independence fighters, plus our rusting air force and naval ships of mostly WW2 US hand-me-downs (we only got two modern frigates), would be in vain.

 

[ElijahRyne]

Today my very uneducated coworker (I very much hate them) threw out the statement that the 3rd World War (Russia against the whole world lmao, as if) is about to break out and that we all should evacuate from Germany to Vietnam. (because he is viet, so he as some very thick filter for no apparent reason )

Now I came to think about what the alliances and warzones would be like if there was a WW III. Which country would fall first? Who would be friends and who would become enemies? Which country would be relatively safe? (Me looking at Australia)

Come and crush coworker's unfounded statements.

Spoiler: As for me

As for me...I first called what my coworker said utter bullshit and find it more realistic to have a tiny country as Vietnam that is considered poor fall before Germany, a country in the heart of Europe.

For one, Russia won't confront Europe directly except it's aiming for mutual destruction. Germany has too many allies. North America is practically part of the NATO, so for once Germany is not alone in a WW.

Second, China won't look away if one of their biggest Cashcows get destroyed. Their exports would crash if Europe or the rest of the Westeners would perish. Can't rule out that they won't have dealings with both sides, but I highly doubt they will directly involve themselves in Russia-Europe conflict. If anything, I think that China would annex the surrounding countries for their resources which includes Vietnam.

If a WW were to break out, and no nukes are going to be used, I doubt it would start between Russia and NATO. Russia is economically not that great, at least since the collapse of the USSR. At the same point I highly doubt that China would invade any country at the moment. I, personally imo, don’t think the threats with Taiwan are actually going to happen baring a drastic change. I think it is unlikely for any EU nation to start the conflict, with the possible exception of France trying to keep control of its colonies. I doubt it would be the US that would start it, but it is more reasonable with its history of warmongering. In that case it would probably have to start out as a conflict between 2 smaller nations, like in WW1.

At the moment there is little reason for a larger/richer nation to start a war(s) of conquest. At least to the extent of Ww2.. The leaders of Japan & Germany at that time were motivated by a bad economy, a ideology of racial superiority, and to a lesser extent a fear of the Soviet Union & internal revolution, so they decided to invade and enslave neighboring countries to extract as much recourses as fast as possible. I don’t think the world is currently in a similar position atm. With the possible exception of the Israel/Palestine conflict, which I personally don’t think will be more than a local war, such as WW1, minus the colonial fights around the world since those countries don’t have any. At most we will have isolated conflict over economic control/liberation, such as the Majority of the Wars the U.S. has been in since Vietnam.
P.S. I don’t really consider WW1 that much of a world war, as it was more of a European war with various opportunistic skirmishes across the world. Of course this is opinion as well.

 

[NotaNuffian]

Personally I thought brexit was a good thing. A lot of people I know who live in the Uk wanted it, it’s the media and those in power who didn’t want it. And college age kids.

EU is trying to punish Britain now though.

I feel like every action for a positive movement will ultimately sour and turn bad and every inaction is rewarded with the inevitable rot.

Yay~