Wondering About WW3

[Rainbow Dash]

Last night, my friend and I were discussing the possibility of a WW3. I was looking at this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...mber_of_troops , and I wondered why Russia has so many people (20,000,000) in reserve. What does this even mean, though? Does it mean that those 20 million can be easily called upon without resorting to drafting? Or what?

We also wondered if N. Korea declared war on S. Korea right now, what would happen? Would Russia or China join with N. Korea? Would the US immediately join the South? Would they just nuke the North? And is there any possibility of a "Homefront"-like scenario (NK invading and occupying the entire US)? Yeah, in that upcoming video game, it was actually 2027 and NK had taken some of Indonesia and the Phillipines, and the US was economically collapsing, but still...

And if Russia did join in on NK's side, would parts of Europe declare war on Russia? Would any Europeans support Russia? And what about Iran?

Current politics aren't my specialty, so if I'm very wrong, I'm sorry. Can you guys just tell me what you think?

[Azog 150]

No one would join NK's side and certainly not Russia. If anything China would be itching to sort out NK itself.

[Manuel I Komnenos]

In case the USA nuked NK and killed thousands of innocent civilians just like they did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I'm pretty sure that Russia and China would have something to say.

[Vanoi]

In case the USA nuked NK and killed thousands of innocent civilians just like they did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I'm pretty sure that Russia and China would have something to say.

First off, the USA most likley wouldn't nuke North Korea, the other alternative to using atomic weapons was an invasion of Japan, which would have cost millions of Japanese lives, and hundreads of thousands of US, Australian, and British lives.

Also China and Russia would never go to war wiht the USA over North Korea.

[Manuel I Komnenos]

First off, the USA most likley wouldn't nuke North Korea, the other alternative to using atomic weapons was an invasion of Japan, which would have cost millions of Japanese lives, and hundreads of thousands of US, Australian, and British lives.

Also China and Russia would never go to war wiht the USA over North Korea.

There was also another alternative, sign a non-humiliating peace treaty with Japan.

[Imperial]

There was also another alternative, sign a non-humiliating peace treaty with Japan.

A chance to surrender? You mean the one that they rejected the first time?

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Why was hirohito forgiven so easily by the USA?

[empr guy]

A chance to surrender? You mean the one that they rejected the first time?

the japanese did eventually make an offer of total surrender except that they kept their emperor, the idea was rejected, but the same peace deal was made and accepted after the bombs were dropped.


Also, if anything war with north korea would be more like the Mercenarys video game scenario, where everyone just joins together and beats the out of NK.

[Vanoi]

There was also another alternative, sign a non-humiliating peace treaty with Japan.

Nope sorry if you sneak attack the US and kill 3000 people, its unconditional surrender, or no surrender.

[Manuel I Komnenos]

Nope sorry if you sneak attack the US and kill 3000 people, its unconditional surrender, or no surrender.

There was no way to force unconditional surrender to an intact island state with an intact army.
Unless of course you burn to the ground 2 of its biggest cities and kill some hundreds of thousand of civilians.

[Norwegian_viking]

There was also another alternative, sign a non-humiliating peace treaty with Japan.

they tried, but the japs back then were fanatics and it was more ''honourball'' to die for the emporor.

[Manuel I Komnenos]

they tried, but the japs back then were fanatics and it was more ''honourball'' to die for the emporor.

They didn't try. Unconditional surrender is not a honorable peace treaty.
It means that you offer your country to the Americans and they are free to do whatever they want with it.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

In case the USA nuked NK and killed thousands of innocent civilians just like they did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I'm pretty sure that Russia and China would have something to say.

They would say "great but don't you think that's overkill?". The USA would never nuke it though, even though they would send troops to support SK in the event of an invasion.

They have nothing to gain by supporting the crazy country that is NK and stability to gain by losing it.

I bet China would rather influence a united and sane Korea than a divided and insane Korea. Because if Korea was united they'd look to China not the USA.

also about korea china cant afford usa to have a base right outside its border if they take down north korea.they will interfere somehow.

A united South Korea won't want a huge garrison of US troops, and won't need them either.

[Armenum]

The reason that the reserve number is so high is because there's a draft, and after you serve the required years you are still on a "reserve". So that number probably accounts for all able-bodied males who have formal military training.

I feel like we won't have wars on such a large scale any-more, they will be quick, and on the point. Done by a slick combination of machine power and a much less amount of humans. There will be a lot of computer warfare involved as well like viruses, hacking, and so on.

[Border Patrol]

The reason that the reserve number is so high is because there's a draft, and after you serve the required years you are still on a "reserve". So that number probably accounts for all able-bodied males who have formal military training.

I feel like we won't have wars on such a large scale any-more, they will be quick, and on the point. Done by a slick combination of machine power and a much less amount of humans. There will be a lot of computer warfare involved as well like viruses, hacking, and so on.

Not to be pedantic, but this is exactly the line of thought before WW1.

[Armenum]

Not to be pedantic, but this is exactly the line of thought before WW1.

Let's hope people have learned from the horrors of the World Wars.

[Border Patrol]

Let's hope people have learned from the horrors of the World Wars.

The Entente learned to never back down, and the Central Powers learned to keep to themselves. The shattered remnants of the Central Powers are arguably the only nations to have learned anything.

Aside from East Asia of course, where most of the nations learned to do what the US says, and do it quickly.

How could this possibly blow up in our faces?

[Holger Danske]

Let's hope people have learned from the horrors of the World Wars.

You are most naive if you truely believe this... War, war never changes!

[bushranger]

You are most naive if you truely believe this... War, war never changes!

I think we have.I cant ever see a world war 3 starting,why start a war you can not win.

[Imperial]

Anything close to convectional warfare in this modern age was the first and second Gulf wars against Saddam's big bad army, and even those didn't last long.