The soon to come World War 3 will be about GLOBAL DOMINANCE! The most aggressive factions will win. (A READ)

[enchanted_elixir]

From: http://faculty.webster.edu/corbetre/personal/reading/spengler-decline.html

Oswald Spengler is a renowned German polymath that specializes in understanding history in a scientific, and systems-thinking way, seeing the fundamental megatrends that drive cultures through their birth, rise, peak, decay, and death.

Spengler predicts the future of the 20th-21st centuries:

Ever since Napoleon, hundreds of thousands, and latterly millions, of men have stood ready to march, and mighty fleets renewed every ten years have filled the harbours. It is a war without war, a war of overbidding in equipment and preparedness, a war of figures and tempo and technics, and the diplomatic dealings have been not of court with court, but of headquarters with headquarters. The longer the discharge was delayed, the more huge became the means and the more intolerable the tension. This is the Faustian, the dynamic, form of ‘the Contenting States’ during the first century of that period, but it ended with the explosion of the World War [1914]. For the demand of these four years has been altogether too much for the principle of universal service – child of the French Revolution, revolutionary through and through, as it is in this form – and all tactical methods evolved from it. The place of the permanent armies as we know them will gradually be taken by professional forces of volunteer war-keen soldiers; and from millions we shall revert to hundreds of thousands. But ipso facto this second century will be one of actually Contending States. These armies are not substitutes for war – they are for war, and they want war.

Within two generations it will be their will that prevails over that of all the comfortables put together. In these wars of theirs for the heritage of the whole world, continents will be at stake, India, China, South Africa, Russia, Islam, called out, new technics and tactics played and counter played. The great cosmopolitan foci of power will dispose at their pleasure of smaller states – their territory, their economy and their men alike – all that is now merely province, passive object, means to end, and its destinies are without importance to the great march of things. We ourselves, in a very few years, have learned to take little or no notice of events that before the War would have horrified the world; who today [1922] seriously thinks about the millions that perish in Russia?”

Shortly after that quote he follows with:

“From the rigour of these facts there is no refuge. The Hague Conference of 1907 was the prelude of the World War; the Washington Conference of 1921 will have been that of other wars. The history of these times is no longer an intellectual march of wits in elegant forms for pluses and minuses, from which either side can withdraw when it pleases. The alternatives now are to stand fast or to go under – there is no middle course. The only moral that the logic of things permits to us now is that of the climber on the face of the crag – a moment’s weakness and all is over.”

In short:

The passage discusses the evolution of military strategy and international relations from the Napoleonic era to the aftermath of World War I. Initially, since Napoleon's time, nations engaged in a continuous arms race, focusing on building vast military forces and fleets. This "war without war" involved intense preparation and diplomatic negotiations conducted by military headquarters rather than traditional court diplomacy. The tension and scale of military readiness grew until it culminated in World War I.

Post-WWI, the nature of warfare and military organization shifted. The extensive conscription armies that had characterized the previous century would give way to smaller, professional, volunteer forces eager for conflict. These new forces would be more active and aggressive, seeking actual wars rather than merely preparing for them.

The text predicts that within two generations, the will of these militarized states will overshadow that of more passive, comfortable nations. Conflicts will involve large-scale battles for global dominance, with significant territories like India, China, South Africa, and Russia at stake. The focus will be on major powers manipulating smaller states and their resources, reducing the importance of smaller nations' fates.

Finally, the passage emphasizes that the international order has shifted from intellectual debate to a more precarious state of affairs where nations must either decisively maintain their stance or face collapse. The moral lesson is that nations must remain resolute, firm and vigilant or die.

So [ChatGPT], WW3 will be about global dominance?

Yes, based on the passage, World War III—or future conflicts—are projected to be about global dominance. The text suggests that such wars will involve major powers battling over significant territories and resources on a grand scale. The conflicts will revolve around the control and influence over continents and key global regions like India, China, South Africa, and Russia.

The passage anticipates that these wars will not be about merely preparing for potential conflicts but will involve actively seeking and engaging in war. It foresees a shift from the extensive conscription armies of the past to smaller, highly professional, and aggressive forces that are eager for conflict. This dynamic will make global dominance the central issue in these future wars.

As I can see it, there will be factions that want to take over the world and fix the degeneracy, literally.

The only factions I can see that qualify are:

• Afghans/ISIS types
• Radical Warrior White (maybe Aryan) Nationalists

But mostly the Afghans/ISIS types.
I can't see the Radical White Nationalists giving a damn outside of Europe (especially Europe), and the Non-White majority Anglo nations. But... their nations are passive and comfortable, and the USA hasn't been an ethnostate since the first major wave of immigration back in the late 1800s-early 1900s.

The Radical Warrior White Nationalists are MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more likely to gain serious steam in Europe compared to the USA.

Of course, my view is very limited, and there may be many more factions that are WILLING TO FIGHT for global dominance.

 

[Mando4]

high iq post will read

 

[enchanted_elixir]

high iq post will read

Refresh your page. I edited it.

 

[SubhumanForever]

>Banned from Offtopic

 

[BideltMaxer]

Can someone put this in a 5th grade reading level for me

 

[enchanted_elixir]

>Banned from Offtopic

I can't browse, only post in Offtopic.

 

[Mando4]

Agree that ww3 will be mainly about global dominance but its possibility of actually happening is still questionable due to the just magnitude of how large that would be and difficulty but as technology increases in warfare I do see this coming more possible. I think that the winner of ww3 will have huge control due to the chances that the main powers fighting, and then the winner will start slowly dominating the rest.

 

[SubhumanForever]

I can't browse, only post in Offtopic.

How does this even look like?

 

[enchanted_elixir]

Agree that ww3 will be mainly about global dominance but its possibility of actually happening is still questionable due to the just magnitude of how large that would be and difficulty but as technology increases in warfare I do see this coming more possible. I think that the winner of ww3 will have huge control due to the chances that the main powers fighting, and then the winner will start slowly dominating the rest.

Did you see the updates I made at the end of the thread?

 

[enchanted_elixir]

How does this even look like?

You can't access offtopic. You can only post on it. You can only access your own offtopic threads you've posted through notifications since you can't access Offtopic any other way.

 

[tombradylover]

This post is so high IQ that’s it’s actually Low IQ. Dnr

 

[enchanted_elixir]

Agree that ww3 will be mainly about global dominance but its possibility of actually happening is still questionable due to the just magnitude of how large that would be and difficulty but as technology increases in warfare I do see this coming more possible. I think that the winner of ww3 will have huge control due to the chances that the main powers fighting, and then the winner will start slowly dominating the rest.

I think it's likely.

 

[enchanted_elixir]

This post is so high IQ that’s it’s actually Low IQ. Dnr

You didn't even read.

 

[tombradylover]

You didn't even read.

I read but stopped reading because I couldn’t take the IQ mog from u. Bookmarked tho and will finish the read after I fap

 

[Mando4]

Did you see the updates I made at the end of the thread?

Didnt see just read yea its pretty much wraps for america just due to lack of unity but I think there is still a chance in europe with the white nationalists as we can see it growing in europe as more people get angered.

 

[enchanted_elixir]

Didnt see just read yea its pretty much wraps for america just due to lack of unity but I think there is still a chance in europe with the white nationalists as we can see it growing in europe as more people get angered.

Since the idea of America being an Anglo-Saxon ethnostate eroded about a century ago, the quickest and one of the best option to recovery would be a cultural rebirth that would include intense nationalism, very anti-immigration and American pride for everyone living there.

Basically hard conservatism.

White Nationalism doesn't work as well in the USA due to several inherent factors, like it still being a Christian nation, it was founded o justice and equality, and other factors.

Europe on the otherhand, is atheist, not founded on New World principles of justice, equality, etc. and the nations were always an ethnostate, so europeans will probably sweep the non-europeans out of their nations, as much as they can.

Those are my predictions and my reasoning regarding that topic.

 

[Imretarded?]

Stopped reading at 'chat gpt'

 

[enchanted_elixir]

@Mando4
Why I think WW3 is airing on the probable side?

There is a global decline in birth rates. The WORLD's birth rate is 2.4. You need 2.1 to keep your population running.
This is the starting point. The world has seen a cultural, spiritual, and soon economic and political, crisises.

And the major thing is that there are many hot points right now.

Taiwan and Ukraine (US/Nato v China), Israel v Muslims (already scaling into a major conflict), African nations and their conflicts, India v China, Europe vs Russia, Europe v Migrants, the list goes on.

I can't imagine a scenario where things die down, but I can easily see things escalating.
Just like there was no way that Israel v Palestine would die down, I see the world as the same.

 

[Mando4]

Since the idea of America being an Anglo-Saxon ethnostate eroded about a century ago, the quickest and one of the best option to recovery would be a cultural rebirth that would include intense nationalism, very anti-immigration and American pride for everyone living there.

Basically hard conservatism.

White Nationalism doesn't work as well in the USA due to several inherent factors, like it still being a Christian nation, it was founded o justice and equality, and other factors.

Europe on the otherhand, is atheist, not founded on New World principles of justice, equality, etc. and the nations were always an ethnostate, so europeans will probably sweep the non-europeans out of their nations, as much as they can.

Those are my predictions and my reasoning regarding that topic.

Yea agreed we went to far and now we have to let the pendulum swing back(this being a rise in nationalism ect.). Id like to ask do you why you think that religon plays a role atleast for why its harder to become a nationalist country if its a christian country and why its easier for a atheist country. I kind of have a idea but id like to hear your reasoning. On the other hand I agree that the equality and other factors do make it quite hard for america aswell of the just amount of diversity there.

 

[Mando4]

agree things are just to

@Mando4
Why I think WW3 is airing on the probable side?

There is a global decline in birth rates. The WORLD's birth rate is 2.4. You need 2.1 to keep your population running.
This is the starting point. The world has seen a cultural, spiritual, and soon economic and political, crisises.

And the major thing is that there are many hot points right now.

Taiwan and Ukraine (US/Nato v China), Israel v Muslims (already scaling into a major conflict), African nations and their conflicts, India v China, Europe vs Russia, Europe v Migrants, the list goes on.

I can't imagine a scenario where things die down, but I can easily see things escalating.
Just like there was no way that Israel v Palestine would die down, I see the world as the same.

Agreed things arent going to die down its just unrealistic without a major war.

 

[LancasteR]

@BigJimsWornOutTires Tell em' what‘s coming

 

[Imretarded?]

are you kidding me?

A hypothetical ww3 isn't going to be fought with highly professional armies.

In ukraine, Russia's war planning has devolved into a large scale attrition heavy doctrine.

They've had to downgrade their tools to more easily produced versions.

America and rest of Nato has better supply networks but they're also struggling to meet the needed production, they'll realistically resort to easily produced weaponry and large armies in a war with China.

In the world wars, the UK for example quickly adapted their pre war highly advanced machine guns with inexpensive versions.

Professional armies are only good for destroying inferior populations who aren't capable of any real level of logistics or planning.

America's current war gear is very pricy and the costs in Afghanistan which was very low intensity shows just how unrealistic such a strategy is against any near pear foe. It costed them around 2 trillion to fight in afghanistan

 

[enchanted_elixir]

Yea agreed we went to far and now we have to let the pendulum swing back(this being a rise in nationalism ect.). Id like to ask do you why you think that religon plays a role atleast for why its harder to become a nationalist country if its a christian country and why its easier for a atheist country. I kind of have a idea but id like to hear your reasoning. On the other hand I agree that the equality and other factors do make it quite hard for america aswell of the just amount of diversity there.

Well, nationalism is merely pride and prioritization of your nation and its principles. You can be a Christian nation and still be American nationalist. You can be a (Insert religion here) Nationalist, (Insert race/group here) nationalist, etc.

When I mention that Christianity makes it tougher, I'm talking about White nationalists in the USA finding a reason to kick out or genocide non-Whites or even having that train of thought to begin with. The Christian moral code makes it nearly impossible. It also goes against too many established and very widely adopted and deeply embedded American ideals, and America has long lost its Anglo-Saxon ethnostate status (I consider an ethnostate when one ethnicity is at least 85% of the population), hell the US was technically multiracial to begin with (African American slaves, Native Americans) until the Anglo-Saxons outbred and killed/diseased the Natives. Even then, slave importations were so large that they were 20% of the population.


Europe (especially Western Europe) on the otherhand, don't really have Christianity to tell them to not to be ruthless to migrants, they only have the woke moral code (which they're quickly coming to hate). Christianity isn't that embedded into European culture (particularly Western Europe). So, the Chrisitian moral code has much more weakness there. Therefore, there's a very, very significant reduction in barriers to actually going full "GTFO OF OUR NATION, YOU ARE NOT SWEDISH/FRENCH/ENGLISH, etc."

We also have to consider that European nations were pure ethnostates until very recently, not like the US where it was never a pure ethnostate to begin with, so that's an additional fire.

 

[enchanted_elixir]

are you kidding me?

A hypothetical ww3 isn't going to be fought with highly professional armies.

In ukraine, Russia's war planning has devolved into a large scale attrition heavy doctrine.

They've had to downgrade their tools to more easily produced versions.

America and rest of Nato has better supply networks but they're also struggling to meet the needed production, they'll realistically resort to easily produced weaponry and large armies in a war with China.

In the world wars, the UK for example quickly adapted their pre war highly advanced machine guns with inexpensive versions.

Professional armies are only good for destroying inferior populations who aren't capable of any real level of logistics or planning.

America's current war gear is very pricy and the costs in Afghanistan which was very low intensity shows just how unrealistic such a strategy is against any near pear foe. It costed them around 2 trillion to fight in afghanistan

And they still lost to the Afghans.
I have to give them props though for not being degenerates, and having the skill and the terrain advantage to make the USA surrender.

 

[enchanted_elixir]

are you kidding me?

A hypothetical ww3 isn't going to be fought with highly professional armies.

In ukraine, Russia's war planning has devolved into a large scale attrition heavy doctrine.

They've had to downgrade their tools to more easily produced versions.

America and rest of Nato has better supply networks but they're also struggling to meet the needed production, they'll realistically resort to easily produced weaponry and large armies in a war with China.

In the world wars, the UK for example quickly adapted their pre war highly advanced machine guns with inexpensive versions.

Professional armies are only good for destroying inferior populations who aren't capable of any real level of logistics or planning.

America's current war gear is very pricy and the costs in Afghanistan which was very low intensity shows just how unrealistic such a strategy is against any near pear foe. It costed them around 2 trillion to fight in afghanistan

"A hypothetical ww3 isn't going to be fought with highly professional armies."

We'll see.
One of the first things about real war is that people need to WANT TO FIGHT, or else you'll just lose.
Plus, I think the author is discussing when the world goes to shit due to the crisises and law and order doesn't really work

I mean, look at Hamas and the Taliban. They aren't professional armies, but well-organized militias WILLING TO FIGHT AND DIE.

 

[Mando4]

Well, nationalism is merely pride and prioritization of your nation and its principles. You can be a Christian nation and still be American nationalist. You can be a (Insert religion here) Nationalist, (Insert race/group here) nationalist, etc.

When I mention that Christianity makes it tougher, I'm talking about White nationalists in the USA finding a reason to kick out non-Whites or even having that train of thought to begin with. The Christian moral code makes it nearly impossible. It also goes against too many established and very widely adopted and deeply embedded American ideals, and America has long lost its Anglo-Saxon ethnostate status (I consider an ethnostate when one ethnicity is at least 85% of the population), hell the US was technically multiracial to begin with (African American slaves, Native Americans) until the Anglo-Saxons outbred and killed/diseased the Natives. Even then, slave importations were so large that they were 20% of the population.


Europe (especially Western Europe) on the otherhand, don't really have Christianity to tell them to not to be ruthless to migrant. Christianity isn't that embedded into European culture (particularly Western Europe). So, the Chrisitian moral code has much more weakness there. Therefore, there's a very, very significant reduction in barriers to actually going full "GTFO OF OUR NATION, YOU ARE NOT SWEDISH/FRENCH/ENGLISH, etc."

We also have to consider that European nations were pure ethnostates until very recently, not like the US where it was never a pure ethnostate to begin with, so that's an additional fire.

Yea true but I think that if you have a reason for nationalism, or the move of immagrints let that be statistics, the crime they produce and other factors I think that christianity(giving them moral reason to kick them out)can also be a backing point for nationalism in europe but thats just my opinion.

 

[enchanted_elixir]

Yea true but I think that if you have a reason for nationalism, or the move of immagrints let that be statistics, the crime they produce and other factors I think that christianity(giving them moral reason to kick them out)can also be a backing point for nationalism in europe but thats just my opinion.

Europe will go in that direction, 100%.

I mean, there has already been a George Floyd level situation in Germany where those migrants raped the German girls in the street I think that went ballistic. Europe will become Hard European Nationalists that will most certainly deport migrants in the future.



It's over for migrants over there, particularly if you aren't substantial or not half European.

The United States will be more moderate though. They'll probably be very anti-immigration, halt a lot of immigration, and destroy wokeness entirely (and its subsequent social consequences), and focus on nationalism, assimilation, cultural revival, being tough on crime and Making America Great Again.

There has been no George Floyd level incident in the USA against immigrants. And you can't deport African Americans They've been in the states longer than the Non-Anglo White immigrants on average.

 

[Mando4]

Europe will go in that direction, 100%.

I mean, there has already been a George Floyd level situation in Germany where those migrants raped the German girls in the street I think that went ballistic. Europe will become Hard European Nationalists that will most certainly deport migrants in the future.

It's over for migrants over there, particularly if you aren't substantial or not mixed-race.

The United States will be more moderate though. They'll probably be very anti-immigration, and destroy wokeness entirely (and its subsequent social consequences), and focus on nationalism, assimilation, cultural revival, being tough on crime and Making America Great Again.

Yea well have to see I see europe making the first leap then based on that I see the U.S following after but not in as such a radical way.

 

[enchanted_elixir]

Yea well have to see I see europe making the first leap then based on that I see the U.S following after but not in as such a radical way.

Here's the video

 

[enchanted_elixir]

Yea well have to see I see europe making the first leap then based on that I see the U.S following after but not in as such a radical way.

It's impossible for the USA to be nearly as radical as Europe.
And besides, Europe's #1 issue is immigration, this isn't true of the USA. In the USA, it's massive general division and disunity.
When they speak of immigration issues here in the USA, they're discussing illegal immigrants and deporting them.

In Europe, it's merely migrants/refugees in general.

 

[cromagnon]

Love your posts

 

[enchanted_elixir]

Love your posts

Thanks!

 

[LevantinePsycho]

There won't be a world war three inshallah

 

[Ultimate Subhuman™]

Dnrd

 

[Rea]

Self-Banned from browsing Offtopic.​

i might ask for that tbh

 

[enchanted_elixir]

i might ask for that tbh

You can do that right now.
Go to offtopic, and on the top-right, press ignore.

 

[enchanted_elixir]

i might ask for that tbh

I don't know of anything going on on Offtopic right now besides my own threads.

 

[enchanted_elixir]

If you want to read.

Why I think Arabian civilization (MENA) will dominate post-WW3, compared to the West, Latin America, South Asia, East Asia, EE, Sub-Saharan Africa...

I'm not going to write an essay on this. I'll keep it somewhat brief The West: Sadly, it is too decadent, too fucked, spiritually empty, on a verge of a crisis, and possibly nearing the end of its civilizational cycle. Also degenerate. Would need a reinvigoration and new worldview to compete...

looksmax.org

 

[BigJimsWornOutTires]

Stopped reading at 'chat gpt'

Me too. When I read that, I felt, "Oh, fuck... another one bites the dust."

@BigJimsWornOutTires Tell em' what‘s coming

You can't reason with anyone who gets advice from a Q&A search engine algorithm from Iceland (not far from the Doomsday Vault in Spitsbergen.)

 

[Imretarded?]

Me too. When I read that, I felt, "Oh, fuck... another one bites the dust."


You can't reason with anyone who gets advice from a Q&A search engine algorithm from Iceland (not far from the Doomsday Vault in Spitsbergen.)

OP has not read the dune books

 

[LOOKISM-LOGIC]

Enough said

 

[BigJimsWornOutTires]

View attachment 3074151View attachment 3074152

Enough said

Trump unites Russia and Ukraine. China becomes enraged and breaks friendly ties with Russia. Do the math.

 

[LOOKISM-LOGIC]

Trump unites Russia and Ukraine. China becomes enraged and breaks friendly ties with Russia. Do the math.

I agree that is a very likely scenario that could lead to ww3.

 

[<6PSLcel]

if they try to conscript me by force, when they give me a gun im holding down the trigger and pointing it towards anyone in charge

 

[BigJimsWornOutTires]

I agree that is a very likely scenario that could lead to ww3.


View attachment 3074189

China has the military numbers to invade Russia, surround Taiwan, the Philippines, and Japan, and fortify their border with Thailand, India, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, and the smaller irrelevant ones.

 

[LOOKISM-LOGIC]

if they try to conscript me by force, when they give me a gun im holding down the trigger and pointing it towards anyone in charge

You wont get the chance to do that very likely

 

[<6PSLcel]

You wont get the chance to do that very likely

guess we will see, im not fighting, you cucks can go do that.

 

[LOOKISM-LOGIC]

guess we will see, im not fighting, you cucks can go do that.

I will try dodge the draft if it were to come my way.

Or I will avoid being cannon fodder, just score high on the cognitive test they administer and gets some other duty

 

[LancasteR]

China has the military numbers to invade Russia, surround Taiwan, the Philippines, and Japan, and fortify their border with Thailand, India, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, and the smaller irrelevant ones.

So it‘s essentially NATO, Russia and America (until a certain point) vs B(R)ICS nations?