copercel123
Instrumentalism.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2024
- Posts
- 8,671
- Reputation
- 18,106
For yall paranoid ass, I will make it clear why there won’t be a WW3.
It’s fucking 7am here so no good formatting today. I will keep that as simple as possible:
1. Nuclear Deterrence and Mutually Assured Destruction:
Countries with nuclear weapons understand that using them wouldn’t just destroy the enemy , it would destroy themselves too. This concept is called Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). If one side launches nukes, the other side will respond, and both end up in ruins. We’re talking about millions of lives lost, cities completely wiped out, and decades of radioactive fallout. That’s why even the most aggressive governments treat nuclear weapons as a last resort. In a weird way, nukes actually help prevent WW3, because once they’re used, everyone loses. That’s why nuclear weapons are like a giant red “stop” button on global war.
en.wikipedia.org
2. Economic Interdependence
The global economy today is like a giant spider web, every country is connected. Countries depend on each other for food, energy, technology, and trade. If a major war broke out between global powers, those connections would snap. Supply chains would collapse, economies would tank, and markets would spiral into chaos. No one, not the US, not China, not Europe, not Russia, wants to see their economy destroyed. That’s why the risk of mutual economic ruin is a huge reason countries hold back. They might compete fiercely, but full scale war? It would hurt everyone too much to be worth it.
gnb.org.in
3. Diplomatic Mechanisms and International Institutions
It might sound like political theater, but diplomacy and international groups like the United Nations, NATO, and the EU actually do reduce the chances of war. These organizations give countries a way to talk things out, issue warnings, impose sanctions, or coordinate peacekeeping, before things explode into war. Sure, these systems aren’t perfect, and some say they’re weak, but history shows they often prevent smaller conflicts from turning into something much bigger. A lot of modern wars are stopped or slowed down behind the scenes through diplomacy.
en.wikipedia.org
4. Public Resistance and Political Accountability:
Most people in the world don’t want another world war. After seeing the horrors of the 20th century, not to mention modern wars like Iraq, Syria, and Ukraine, public opinion plays a big role in keeping governments cautious. In democratic countries, leaders who rush into major wars risk losing elections, being thrown out of office, or facing massive protests. Even in more authoritarian regimes, large wars can trigger unrest and opposition. Politicians know war is risky, not just for the country, but for their own survival.
5. Shift Toward Proxy Conflicts and Asymmetric Warfare:
Instead of major countries going head-to-head, we now mostly see proxy wars, where big powers support smaller groups or allies in regional conflicts. You see this in Ukraine, Syria, Yemen, and even cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns. It’s war by proxy, and it lets countries push their agendas without going into direct combat. It’s safer, cheaper, and less risky than full-blown war. That’s why modern warfare looks more like sabotage, hacking, and proxy fighting, rather than tanks rolling across Europe like in the 1940s.
6. Russia, China, Iran, and Their Allies Probably Won’t Start WW3:
Yes, tensions are high , Russia is fighting in Ukraine, China is flexing over Taiwan, and Iran is active in the Middle East. But these countries are still careful. Russia avoids direct war with NATO because it knows that would escalate fast. China wants economic growth more than war. Iran uses proxy groups instead of going head-on with the US These countries talk tough and act aggressive in their regions, but they usually avoid going too far.
Nuclear weapons are a major reason for that restraint, none of these powers want to spark a nuclear exchange. Sanctions, internal problems, and economic risks also keep them from pushing things too far. And despite the public drama, they all keep backchannel communication open to avoid mistakes. So while they stir up trouble, they’re not actually trying to start World War III, because they know they’d suffer too.
www.bbc.com
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-military-power
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/proxy-wars
@BonesmashFinalBoss
@2023cel
@hopecel
@Gaygymmaxx
@zemult
sleep maxing rn. Gn.
It’s fucking 7am here so no good formatting today. I will keep that as simple as possible:
1. Nuclear Deterrence and Mutually Assured Destruction:
Countries with nuclear weapons understand that using them wouldn’t just destroy the enemy , it would destroy themselves too. This concept is called Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). If one side launches nukes, the other side will respond, and both end up in ruins. We’re talking about millions of lives lost, cities completely wiped out, and decades of radioactive fallout. That’s why even the most aggressive governments treat nuclear weapons as a last resort. In a weird way, nukes actually help prevent WW3, because once they’re used, everyone loses. That’s why nuclear weapons are like a giant red “stop” button on global war.
Stability–instability paradox - Wikipedia
2. Economic Interdependence
The global economy today is like a giant spider web, every country is connected. Countries depend on each other for food, energy, technology, and trade. If a major war broke out between global powers, those connections would snap. Supply chains would collapse, economies would tank, and markets would spiral into chaos. No one, not the US, not China, not Europe, not Russia, wants to see their economy destroyed. That’s why the risk of mutual economic ruin is a huge reason countries hold back. They might compete fiercely, but full scale war? It would hurt everyone too much to be worth it.
World War 3: An Analysis of Global Risks | GNB BLOG
Explore GNB.org.in for the latest insights on current events, technology, health, and lifestyle. Stay informed with in-depth articles and updates.
gnb.org.in
3. Diplomatic Mechanisms and International Institutions
It might sound like political theater, but diplomacy and international groups like the United Nations, NATO, and the EU actually do reduce the chances of war. These organizations give countries a way to talk things out, issue warnings, impose sanctions, or coordinate peacekeeping, before things explode into war. Sure, these systems aren’t perfect, and some say they’re weak, but history shows they often prevent smaller conflicts from turning into something much bigger. A lot of modern wars are stopped or slowed down behind the scenes through diplomacy.
Prevention of World War III - Wikipedia
4. Public Resistance and Political Accountability:
Most people in the world don’t want another world war. After seeing the horrors of the 20th century, not to mention modern wars like Iraq, Syria, and Ukraine, public opinion plays a big role in keeping governments cautious. In democratic countries, leaders who rush into major wars risk losing elections, being thrown out of office, or facing massive protests. Even in more authoritarian regimes, large wars can trigger unrest and opposition. Politicians know war is risky, not just for the country, but for their own survival.
5. Shift Toward Proxy Conflicts and Asymmetric Warfare:
Instead of major countries going head-to-head, we now mostly see proxy wars, where big powers support smaller groups or allies in regional conflicts. You see this in Ukraine, Syria, Yemen, and even cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns. It’s war by proxy, and it lets countries push their agendas without going into direct combat. It’s safer, cheaper, and less risky than full-blown war. That’s why modern warfare looks more like sabotage, hacking, and proxy fighting, rather than tanks rolling across Europe like in the 1940s.
6. Russia, China, Iran, and Their Allies Probably Won’t Start WW3:
Yes, tensions are high , Russia is fighting in Ukraine, China is flexing over Taiwan, and Iran is active in the Middle East. But these countries are still careful. Russia avoids direct war with NATO because it knows that would escalate fast. China wants economic growth more than war. Iran uses proxy groups instead of going head-on with the US These countries talk tough and act aggressive in their regions, but they usually avoid going too far.
Nuclear weapons are a major reason for that restraint, none of these powers want to spark a nuclear exchange. Sanctions, internal problems, and economic risks also keep them from pushing things too far. And despite the public drama, they all keep backchannel communication open to avoid mistakes. So while they stir up trouble, they’re not actually trying to start World War III, because they know they’d suffer too.
Ukraine in maps: Tracking the war with Russia
How Russia and Ukraine are placed after three years of fighting ahead of renewed peace talks.
www.bbc.com
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/proxy-wars
@BonesmashFinalBoss
@2023cel
@hopecel
@Gaygymmaxx
@zemult
sleep maxing rn. Gn.
Last edited:
