Leave a comment

abomvubuso September 22 2016, 05:56:13 UTC
The use of a chemical weapon does not make WW3. A number of powerful militaries getting involved in the same conflict, each with its own interests and fighting on different sides, is.

Reply

underlankers September 22 2016, 14:40:17 UTC
Using WMDs to retaliate to a WMD strike in proximity to a hostile nuclear-armed force might well do it. Given Russia's definition of "ISIS" it might well declare whatever the USA decides to hit, if it hits anything 'innocent civilians', with plenty of gullible buffoons believing anything Moscow puts out while rightly applying to Washington skepticism never applied equally to anyone else deciding they're right and shit spirals downhill from there.

Likewise ignoring a mustard gas attack is not exactly a good idea, nor is giving people infinite license to do it. Iran didn't enjoy that experience very much in the 1980s.

Reply

htpcl September 22 2016, 16:39:46 UTC
And yet, even with all that extensive use of WMD, Iran and Iraq still didn't cause a WW3.

Reply

underlankers September 22 2016, 17:40:05 UTC
Kind of a challenge to start WWIII in the midst of the Cold War when both superpowers are simultaneously backing one side and enabling it to use WMDs on the other. ;)

Reply

policraticus September 22 2016, 17:53:35 UTC
That is because they were using them against each other.

When chemical weapons start becoming effective around Russian and American forces, well...


... )

Reply

htpcl September 22 2016, 20:22:07 UTC
Exactly. Russia uses its crony Assad against America's crony, the "rebels". And vice versa. What's this scenario leading to US and Russian forces fighting each other that I'm unaware of?

Reply

underlankers September 22 2016, 21:30:42 UTC
Way back when Obama said that if Russians kept shooting at American proxies the USA would start shooting at the Russians, which stopped them until it didn't.

Reply

underlankers September 22 2016, 21:37:29 UTC
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/661837/Russian-het-threatens-US-military-days-after-America-warns-shoot-down-Putin-planes

^Yeah, at the point the USA made *that* threat it drastically ratcheted up the threat of WWIII until Putin decided he just didn't care and went back to bombing US allies. It is interesting that after the USA point blank said "Do it and we shoot your planes down" Putin discovered a virtue he seldom displays: momentary restraint.

Almost indicates that if you want him to pay attention to shit, threaten him the way he threatens others and he caves.

Reply

policraticus September 22 2016, 22:05:57 UTC
Which is a tactic that works.

Until it doesn't.

Reply

htpcl September 23 2016, 06:18:15 UTC
Look, Russia has always bombed US allies, and the US has always bombed Russian allies. And it still hasn't caused a World War 3. I've been hearing all these "WW3 is coming" tales for decades. It still hasn't happened.

Reply

airiefairie September 28 2016, 07:52:18 UTC
It needs to happen just once.

Reply

policraticus September 22 2016, 22:04:36 UTC
Bad luck. Stupidity. Miscalculation. Hubris.

All the usual suspects.

Reply

htpcl September 23 2016, 06:16:59 UTC
You seem concerned.

Reply

abomvubuso September 22 2016, 20:20:27 UTC
I reiterate: for a war to be "world" war, the major world powers will have to directly fight each other.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up