JCC World War 3 Countdown Thread

So, how will it happen?
My money is on the following scenario:

The Russia investigation comes to a head. Trump wants out of the deal. Putin threatens him: if you quit the deal, I'm going to release the hooker tapes. Trump then decides that nuking the world is preferable to having the world see the tapes.

Trump nukes Russia. Russia nukes the US.
Rest of world dies from nuclear fallout.
Over some hookers.

 

Why would Putin want Trump to stay in the deal? In 15 years when warming has opened northern sea lanes for shipping, Russia will be one of the happeningest places on the globe.

 

More: Russian Lawmaker: We Would Use Nukes if US or NATO Enters Crimea - Defense One

God, Nikonov is an ass...

He happens to be the grandson of another Vyacheslav, Molotov, Stalin's Foreign Minister, you know?

So proud of it, even wrote a book about the guy

I read Molotov's own memoirs, and even he himself didn't brag and exaggerate and embellish so much about himself... lol

Well, I mean, I get being proud of one's heritage. That's cool.

But, Nikonov seems to think being Molotov's grandkid gives him the qualifications and authority to comment on foreign policy now, today, even babble about nukes! And, worse, Putin seems to be content to ALLOW him to continue to think that, and to run his mouth, like this...

Does he not realize this is bloody dangerous???

Like, honestly, yes, if the US attempted a military intervention in Crimea, Russia will go nuclear. Period.

Over Syria, no. Even Donbass, I'm not sure.

But Crimea they consider own soil now. And Putin's current military doctrine calls for preemptive nuke strikes against any enemy government who attacks Russian soil. I'm perfectly frigging serious about that, that's just not something one should joke around about.

Which is exactly why that moron, Nikonov, should not be flapping his damn gums about it like that...

 

Well damn, I was too optimistic.

 

lol, Trump is in the White House and wrecking NATO, and they're still wailing on about a "third invasion" from the west.

 

Yeah probably trying to escape from the West into Russia once Trump wrecks NATO and the Western integrated economies.

 

full implementation of the U.S. anti-ICBM missile system could always start a new arms race. Overwhelming an anti-ICBM system is easy - just throw so many warheads at a given target that the anti-missile missiles can't keep up.

 

That's DPRK's strategy for their own rocket and short range HE non ICBMs at Seoul. Overwhelming numbers until some get through.

 

It will be pretty cool though that we can tell our grandkids about how the villains of the third world war, the United States of America and her allies (lol), were defeated by virtuous freedom loving peoples the world over.

"As we vanquished the last evangelical on the battlefield, and burned the Constitution, we knew we had saved the world from a fate worse than death. The End."

 

Oh, yeah...why the hell did South Korea decide to build up its political and economic center right on the border with North Korea, and then allow incentives for all its citizens to go live there? I mean what a surprise, the North is now holding the South hostage.

lol, Europe is tearing itself apart, you guys in the Western Pacific can't even come together to stop China, and none of the developing world democracies are willing to even speak up over Syria...how do you expect to conjure up a united military force to fight back against Donald Trump?

 

Aaaaand the from-birth indoctrination kicks in. That took less time than I expected.

 

What indoctrination? I'm saying if you want to preserve the international order, you're probably going to have to do it without America, and you have a hell of a lot of work ahead of you.

 

Why Seoul? Well, historical and symbolic reasons as well as economic ones. Seoul is a very old city, stretching back to the beginnings of the Korean kingdoms. It was also symbolic of Korean unity through various dynasties. So people have lived there forever.

 

Will Trump shoot himself in his bunker, after poisoning Melania?

 

Yeah I know Seoul is the traditional capital of Korea, but so is Berlin for Germany...and we didn't see the West German government setting up shop there.

 

They didn't??? Why did NATO/the West insist so much on hanging on to their Western Berlin, to the point it almost caused a military confrontation with Stalin?

 

Because the de jure capital of Germany was divided between powers so they needed a de facto seat of power in the actual west?

I mean it's pretty obvious.

 

Not to me... I need to read up on the whole history there. Embarrassing myself here...

 

My point is that Berlin was smack in middle of East Germany and therefore utterly indefensible...a similar situation that Seoul finds itself in today. The West Germans had the good sense to do the obvious and set up a capital elsewhere, but in South Korea it looks like political inertia won the day.

 

I'm no fan of Trump generally but I think its pretty ironic that someone who actually seems less focused on taking an aggressive line with Russia is talked up as more dangerous. I'd say the main danger with Trump is that the CIA/NSA/etc threaten him enough that we get reactions like bombing that Syiran airbase more inline with what they'd have expected from Hilary.

 

Yes, Trump and others, BFF

 

I don't know where people get this idea that Hillary Clinton would intervene in Syria and that this would lead to World War III. First, she probably wouldn't intervene. Second, even if she did, Putin's retaliation would be limited to the likes of escalating in Ukraine, Georgia, and supplying more arms to Iran and China. That's not good, but it's not nuclear armageddon.

With Trump, the man is completely erratic, and there does not seem to be a sane thought in his head. Moreover, he's destroying America's moral credibility, which is important. We tell the world that we're a benevolent superpower, that we should have nuclear weapons and that other countries shouldn't. Okay so maybe some people will point out that we don't live up to the "benevolent superpower" thing (Ender Sai), but if America starts to decide that it's going to outright maliciously **** over weaker countries for no good reason, that's going to prompt everyone else to get nukes and you can kiss goodbye to any semblance of world peace.

Even in a better case scenario, erosion of America's moral credibility would lead to increased terrorism as more people in the Muslim world hear the things Trump says. Moderate pro-American people in the Middle East would lose credibility in the eyes of their communities, anti-American individuals will become more anti-American, and terrorist sympathizers will start to join up with al-Qaeda and ISIS when they might have stayed home otherwise. This is what happens when you piss people off for no good reason.

 

Probably because she publicly and repeatedly criticized Obama's policy of non-intervention and advocated for a "no-fly zone" that would require thousands of troops on the ground in Syria in order to maintain.

 

Clinton would have had to been incredibly hell-bent on getting that no-fly zone if she really wanted to do it. There was zero public support for doing this, not to mention no support from Pentagon. It would take a hell of a lot of political effort to overcome that kind of opposition, and at the end of the day I don't think she would have done it.

Look, if we all get sucked into a wormhole and emerge into an alternate dimension where the world's been turned into radioactive ash because Hillary Clinton became president...you get to say "I told you so", okay?

 

Exactly. According to data (not emotion or 'indoctrination') the US has the most powerful military in the world.

This is a pretty interesting article re: Hillary Clinton.