China, Japan, WWIII?

after ww2 japan had to sign a treaty. They're not allowed to build up offensive weapons. They have one of the most safisticated defencsve capibilities tho. I would say india and pakistan are the greatest threats along with north korea. Israel they're fine. They proved they could mop the floor with all the surronding countries. it only took 6 days, ofcourse the u.s helped supply them with f-16's. Isreal also has the best spy network in the world the musad or w.e its called is eleet. China may have a billion soliders but they dont want to fuck anything up with the u.s they make way to much money off us

 

The prospect of war between Japan and China over islands is very scary, and very real. The war would be begun on a small scale as a display of territorial power, but the possibility of its evolving into WWIII scares the shit out of me.

Hopefully Japanese and Chinese leaders keep their heads and work out some type of diplomatic solution.

 

ww3 gonan be india vs china i saw a article in macleans a while back saying they were building up their armies both of them are super powers and tensiosn are rising between them sooner or later the 2 countries will enter conflict

 

Population doesn't matter when there's treaties, contracts etc. It more than about the number of pawns.

China is poor as well so they're at a disadvantage. Russia can be compared as they had numbers but were poor, only reason they were able to push back was thanks to the US.

Theres an imminent war that I know I will live to see. There's too many things in chaos without many knowing.

 

just about nothing in this thread is a geopolitically feasible action, the guy who mentioned Iran would be closest to the possibilities presented by our current world order. US/CN would like to avoid conflict as much as possible as both sides are held in financial equilibrium by the other. US aggresses CN, CN employs debt domination. CN provokes US, US switches creditors.

japan wage a war? with who? china? do they really love that little island that intensely? with a stagnating yen and tsuntsun approach to international relations, what sort of allied coalition would they be able to entice?

i get the read that no one here has done any formal study of geopolitical theory.

everyone in this thread needs to take the first step and read the geopolitical pivot of history and then afterwards geocentralism theory, the grand chessboard. from there, branch out sociology putting emphasis on pathological and domination paradigms.

in our world order, no super power would benefit from instigating military conflict with another. a war is expensive, and if there's no profit to be made, there's no reason to begin one. the most likely scenario resembling international civil war 3 would be initiated by western europe's and china's dissatisfaction with their energy dependency. which the scenario, all guns would turn to the former arab spring in an attempt to resource raid. china and europe would love to rid themselves of their energy dependency. russia would prefer to have the middle east off the map because the have no vested interest in undercutting themselves competing with a producing nation and the cooperative nature of the cold war is long over. the united states's only vested interest with the middle east is the hold of Israel which hates their neighbors. maybe throw in a little pretext that there's a new upcoming terrorist cell to entice public support.

who would actually take the defendant's side? no one because human nature is self gratifying and no one likes paying $3.99 for whopper combo inflated to $7.99 because of transportation costs. if the humanitarians want to cry out injustice, remind them of their human nature and the futile crop of futility and carry on carpet bombing the part of the world that should have dissapeared after the collapse of the ottoman empire.

i always laugh a little when i hear someone bring up deterrence theory as if it's any bit relevant today. we've had the capabilities for decades to deploy stealth nukes from satellite orbit, completely undetectable and could bypass nuclear impact defense systems like norad. in modern world order, weapons for deterrence are like the trophies in a display case. if someone breaks into your trophy case and crushes your trophies before you can react, your mantle piece nuclear warhead is already useless.


additionally, there are far more destructive technologies than nuclear warheads available today. even 20 years ago.

electromagnetic scaler deployment is a far greater threat than a nuclear explosion, additionally doesn't fuck up the land for decades onward.

thermobaric bombs are also far more feasible than personnel sized nuclear warheads, and we've had that technology even when nukes were relevant.

 

If nukes were ever used, every other country would get involved because if a country is willing to use a nuke, they are willing to use it against them as well.
So naturally all other countries would see them as a threat, then be against them.

 

I agree that if it ever came to the use of nukes it would literally be a world war and not just between Japan/China.

 

Just going to throw my opinion in the matter, with the vast expansion of social media, if any country used a nuke anywhere, it'll turn into a war. I think North Korea though will start it. They've made so many threats recently to the US and to South Korea. I would imagine if they did anything, US will get dragged into it. Then North Korea might call Russia/China for support, and they'll attack, and there's WWIII.

 

Realistically I doubt China would waste their resources on defending their noisy neighbours NK, this time around. They only defended them during the Korean war because of their ideologies back then were very similar. Nowadays, China is more capitalist and they've moved away from their traditional model of communism. Furthermore, China has been agreeing to all UN sanctions against NK.

 

I think korea is going to take action soon.