|
Author
|
Topic: World War Three?
|
craig c
Member
|
posted 09-13-2003 11:35 AM
  
I have heard on several news channels that the new "War on Terrorism" could be considered the Thrid World War?
My question is could this war be considered that, or should ws consider only conventional warfare (or diplomacy by other means) as what a World War should be.Regards, Craig Crofoot
IP: Logged |
Kjetil Aasland
Senior Member
|
posted 09-13-2003 03:38 PM
Frankly, I think the implications of the terrorism threat is being blown more than a little out of proportion by the media - this would simply appear to be the most recent and extreme example.Certainly, it is a threat that requires the full attention of the West and also other parts of the world, but it is not something that can fundamentally threaten our societies. Tragic though September 11 was, other countries have proven able to live with worse things than that for prolonged periods of time. To even mention it in the same breath as conflicts that required the full resources of all major industrial societies for several years and cost tens of millions of lives is so obviously absurd and meaningless that one is surprised that even Journalists could say it 
regards,
K.A.
IP: Logged |
acetone
Member
|
posted 10-17-2003 01:41 AM
Cold War can be considered as World War III. the period between 1945 and 1991 has been no less bloody than in previous wars. it is just that no massive carnage took place within rich Western countries. in contrast, wars in Algeria, Korea, Indochina, Middle East, Africa, and Latin America were bloody as hell.i suppose we are living in the era of World War IV, since the collapse of the Soviet Union. instead of any sort of 'peace dividend', we are witnessing yet more interventionism. now there is 'War on Terror' ... honestly, just a pretext for the US to wage war both at home and abroad w/ impunity. on the final thought, i would not be too obsessed w/ putting labels as it is highly biased to start with. furthermore, wars are more than mere weapons. the 12 years long economic sanction on Iraq is also a form of war. not to mention the actions of IMF and World Bank upon poor and developing countries.
IP: Logged |
Chris Lawrence
Moderator
|
posted 10-17-2003 04:04 PM
quote:
Originally posted by craig c:
I have heard on several news channels that the new "War on Terrorism" could be considered the Third World War?
I think that is a pretty absurb claim considering the scale and level of violence in the first two world wars.
IP: Logged |
Lucky
Member
|
posted 12-10-2004 12:47 PM
This current "War on Terrorism" is the way the future wars are going to be fought. As Nation States fight to stay in the mainstream of globalization, the "have nots" will continue to use war as the means to make a living.It's interesting to note that neither Arafat or Usama bin Laden blew themselves up with a chest full of bombs. No, because they were the top thugs who used war as a way to make a living...they used misery to become rich. Either rich in money, or fame or both. It is the way things will become in the future. The old days of a million tanks on the battlefield in the Fulda Gap are over. The new way of warfare will be between the rifts in the world, between the globalized world - connected by wires and money vs the have nots, who are too poor, or hard headed to change. K
IP: Logged | |
The Dupuy Institute Forum
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
