How would WW111 manifest itself?

[ignoramus]

I was going to ask who here thinks a third world war is imminent, then I realised I don't even know what the definition of a world war is.

So basically, what are the minimum prerequisites of WW111?

Do there need to be nukes involved? If not, why not? Why dilly dally about?

Must it include an attempted takeover of foreign land?
Is there a minimum amount of countries needed to be involved.

please enlighten me.

[Gawdzilla]

World War One Hundred and Eleven?

Really hard to tell.

[ignoramus]

hehe ...something tells me earth won't survive 111 world wars! 3 if we're lucky!

[Gawdzilla]

Oh, I think that as long as humans remain humans we'll be killing each other in large numbers.

[Aoi Magi]

Requirement 1: Humans
Requirement 2: any bs reason

[abaris]

So basically, what are the minimum prerequisites of WW111?

Nukes got nothing to do with it. Major powers on all continents having at each other is the standard definition of a world war. That's why both world wars only started to be World wars, when the USA were joining the fun.

[robvalue]

It seems to me the war against ISIS is already underway and involves most powers.

I'm rather confused as to how so many countries can be bombing the shit out of them without being able to wipe them out, or at least thin them right down.

I agree with Harris though, what we really have is a war of ideas. Killing every last ISIS member isn't going to stop people with the same mindset doing exactly the same shit randomly, at any time.

[I_am_not_mafia]

It seems to me the war against ISIS is already underway and involves most powers.

I'm rather confused as to how so many countries can be bombing the shit out of them without being able to wipe them out, or at least thin them right down.

The world's determination to defeat Isil is a myth

•The Americans - and the British at least among their allies - want Isil to go but think it will take a properly trained ground force to get rid of it and are not prepared to commit troops, for domestic political reasons. President Obama, additionally, believes that there is no point defeating Isil while the conditions that led to its rise are in place, such as localised sectarian conflict, though he has no real notion of how to get rid of those conditions.

•Some elements in the Iraqi government may genuinely want to see the country reunited at all costs but others realise that if the Sunnis in Iraq return to the national fold the Shia majority will have to share power with them. Currently, Shia supremacist parties hold sway. These Shia parties are linked to the Shia militias that are fighting Isil on the ground - but signally failing to attack them in Sunni Arab strongholds like Fallujah and Mosul.

•The Assad regime's strategy presumably sees it eventually taking on Isil, but over most of the civil war its main enemy has been non-Isil rebels, who pose a more direct threat to regime heartlands. Having Isil fight them simultaneously has not been a bad thing.

•The Iranians don’t want Isil to gain ground but having a Sunni bogeyman, for whose existence they can blame their Sunni foes in the Gulf, has a certain use. The existence of Isil also prevents Sunni Arab states presenting a united face against their own ambitions.

•The Gulf states want to keep Isil down but they also see Isil as a lesser enemy than Iran, and certainly aren’t going to waste forces attacking fellow Sunnis that they could be using to fight Shia proxies in Yemen.

•Russia has ruled out sending ground troops, and has mostly targeted non-Isil rebels with its bombing campaign, since it believes the priority is to preserve the Assad regime. As these rebels are also fighting Isil, this has had the unfortunate effect of actually helping Isil advance in some areas, even as it cedes ground to Russian-backed regime forces in others.

•Turkey has made clear its main enemy is the Kurdish PKK, rather than Isil.

•The Kurds have a track record of success against Isil in both Iraq and Syria - thanks in part to their alliance with the US and other western air forces. But they have little interest in pushing beyond Kurdish territory. In Iraq, the Peshmerga took Sinjar last week, not Mosul.

[houseofcantor]

Lawyers and SJWs 

WWIII however is likely to be a conventional resource grab.

[dyresand]

You might as well call this current state we are in WW3 since most super powers are fighting a bunch of backwards people
called isis.