I want to hear you reasons, why do you think that.

  • ReadMoreBooks@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    No, we are not headed for WW3.

    The military-industrial complex must be fed, our weapons sold or used. But, a large magnitude hot war has far more social and economic risk and not enough return on investment relative the alternative of multiple proxy wars. We’ve currently proxy wars in Israel and Ukraine. Economic growth is optimized by beginning a proxy war with China.

    If Trump was smart then he might internally convince others in his administration to diplomatically and operationally over-commit. Then we could have WW3. But, he’s a puppet ruling by fear. We’ve been fighting our proxy wars since Reagan. Trump isn’t capable of overcoming capitalism’s mandate for optimized growth.

    • TheYang@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Economic growth is optimized by beginning a proxy war with China.

      But where? Taiwan seems the obvious candidate. Not sure if that would really lead to (quaterly) economic growth though.

      • ReadMoreBooks@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Not sure if that would really lead to (quaterly) economic growth though.

        Regarding war and money, the question often isn’t who’s positioned to gain the most, instead who’s positioned to lose the least. We often don’t measure self against history and reason, instead relative our competitors.

        Taiwan seems the obvious candidate.

        The US has already manufactured consent to have a proxy war with China. I assume we’ve not done it in Taiwan because we’d lose more on trade than we’d gain consuming weapons, perhaps also because China could absorb the loss of Taiwan as a trade partner better than the US.

        But where?

        To be determined. We’re ready and waiting for an opportunity to present itself.

        • scratsearcher 🔍🔮📊🎲@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Myanmar borders China in to its north and India to its west and is currently in a civil war. This would be the perfect battlespace for a proxy war between India, US vs China.

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    6 days ago

    Perhaps. Depends, ultimately, on if the US Empire goes down with a bang, or a whimper. Its grip on the world is spilling through its fingers like sand, so either it will watch it fall out helplessly, or will attempt to strike and retake what it’s losing.

  • EtnaAtsume@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    6 days ago

    I mean, unless there is no major global war from now until the heat death of the universe or some other extinction level event, aren’t we just perpetually going towards WW3?

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    6 days ago

    In the long term, yes. The bourgeoisie are rich and comfortable with no desire for a war that could jeopardize their position. However, they have lots of financial incentives for military spending because it’s rife with corruption. As such, they do a lot of saber-rattling to make WWIII seem like a genuine possibility, while also fighting in proxy wars around the globe.

    But the problem is, they’re playing with forces beyond their control. If you have a generation raised on constant propaganda to genuinely hate other countries, then all it takes is a couple people in the wrong positions at the wrong time who aren’t in on the game. Right now, the rabid dog is on the leash of the bourgeoisie, but the gamble they’ve been making is that they can keep pumping steroids into it forever and never lose control.

    Furthermore, wasting all this money on war and militarism has allowed China to emerge as a credible threat to their global hegemony. China is sitting back and focusing on domestic economic development, and they are winning the peace while the US burns itself out. What happens when the only area in which the US has an advantage is the military? Are people really going to accept becoming #2, or are they going to force a confrontation? Given that we’re talking about Americans, who are 1) Riled up on propaganda, 2) Preoccupied with being “#1,” and 3) Unused to experiencing the effects of fucking around firsthand, it seems almost inevitable. Ofc, it’s true that we somehow maintained a Cold War with the USSR for decades, but it’s different today because conditions are declining and the far-right is growing stronger every day.

  • Random Dent@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 days ago

    I think sort of, although it won’t be as cut-and-dry and the first two. I think it’ll be somewhere between a traditional ‘hot’ war and a cold war, where the larger players (ie: China, the US, Russia, the EU) will engage in propaganda wars, attempts to destabilize each other, cyber attacks, trade wars etc. while in areas outside of those groups (eg: Ukraine currently) there will be physical wars fought by proxy between the bigger groups.

    I think we’re seeing the start of it now, and IMO the US is probably doing the least well so far of the major groups. Russia is doing the destabilization thing, which is working quite well in Europe and spectacularly well in the US, China seems to be leading in trade and tech (both cyber attacking and just undermining the US tech sector with things like DeepSeek) and I think Europe’s strategy seems to be to just bunker down and see what happens.

    I think the main advantage the US traditionally has always had is its military - it’s geared up very well for a big physical war, but I don’t think this is that kind of conflict. And with the Trump administration’s obsession with tariffs and the general disregard for education and soft power, I think the country is really heading in the wrong direction for what may be coming.

  • pappabosley@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Most arguments against a potential WW3 happening seemed to base the assumption that we were dealing with mentally competent world leaders, who were ultimately worried more about their money and comfortable life, so would not let it happen. Trump and Elon have grown up in such wealth, they are completely disconnected from reality and I believe are insane enough to think they are untouchable by anyone and anything, even Putin knows he is not invincible. This swing to the right in Western countries seems to be filled with similar people, with the common belief that they will never truly have to deal with the consequences of their actions. People with this level of insanity, do not care if the poors get ground up in their wars and thus, i think it is now just a matter of time.

  • NicolaHaskell@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I think we’re going through Cold War 2 before World War 3. China and Russia have been testing krill fishing limits recently while American private equity has entered the field, and the TikTok showdown is testing Internet authority.

  • scratsearcher 🔍🔮📊🎲@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    During the first cold war conflicts happened outside of the super-powers:

    • Vietnam 🇻🇳 and North-Korea 🇰🇵💥🇰🇷

    This time conflicts will happen in Siberia, Africa and Middle east. I also think Indonesia and Pakistan will be center of major conflicts between China, India and the USA. These conflicts will costs some millions of lives, but not touch the empires heartlands, so it will not get nuclear again imo.

  • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    On average it takes ~21 years between world wars, so it’s about the time since we’re 60 years late on schedule

  • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    America will take Greenland, and then Canada is next being surrounded on three sides.

    Can a NATO country invoke the defence pact if it’s attacked by another NATO country?

    NATO vs America wasn’t on my bingo card.