What does this mean for me? You will always be able to play your favorite games on Kongregate. However, certain site features may suddenly stop working and leave you with a severely degraded experience.
What should I do? We strongly urge all our users to upgrade to modern browsers for a better experience and improved security.
We suggest you install the latest version of one of these browsers:
Kongregate is a community-driven browser games portal with an open platform for all web games.
Get your games in front of thousands of users while monetizing through ads and virtual goods.
Learn more »
Sure, there are tensions, economic crisis, rebellion, civil unrest etc.
But are they enough to cause another catastrophic international war?
Well, not really immediately right now, but if you were to predict, judging by current situations and issues, will there be a chance of it happening?
Of course there’s the UN, but can they hold-off all kinds of uncertainty?
> *Originally posted by **[wargamer1000](/forums/9/topics/303940?page=1#posts-6442681):***
> Sure, there are tensions, economic crisis, rebellion, civil unrest etc.
> But are they enough to cause another catastrophic international war?
> Well, not really immediately right now, but if you were to predict, judging by current situations and issues, will there be a chance of it happening?
> Of course there’s the UN, but can they hold-off all kinds of uncertainty?
the next planetary war is zombie.. World War Z or Aliens Worlds at War. GG.
Suppose it’s possible. Someone’s bound to get annoyed enough with Muslims/Jews/Christians/westerners/human rights abusers to take a proper swipe at them sooner or later.
Not like the World Wars of the past, because technology has come so far… but if the extremely fortunate distaste for civilian/any casualties we’ve developed ever wears off, it could see as many deaths.
We may need to contain China. They are constantly playing a dangerous ‘nationalist’ card. Which changes them into a more fascist context to the socialism as market becomes more free. Thus, they have riots against foreign businesses related to the need to assert that they should control completely all the South China Sea (for instance there are also lots of other claims) and have the appearance of threatening Taiwan with eventual military actions in order to take it back. It is a sad thing that the military wastes excess funds rather than buying goods such as gold with it.
Possibly, tensions are heating up in the middle east between countries that are developed enough to have WMD, and those are backed by Russia and America. It’s plausible that the shit will hit the fan if it comes to that.
Everyone, you need to realise that in such an occurrence between countries, no warfare would occur nowadays. It would be a war of sending non-stop nuclear missiles to each other. There would be no warfare, just millions of civilian and soldier daily deaths.
yeah, it seems entirely plausible. Russia, China and their smaller allies, vs “the West” and their poorer allies.
i’d wonder about the tensions between the US and Europe though.
it’s gonna be about oil, that’s for sure. with interpretations of human rights as a side theme. (the other way around in the media, of course)
Omegadoom, I don’t think China and Russia are really as close as what you might think they are. They have their own tensions between themselves, I do not believe Russia and China would ever team up to go against “the West”.
I do not think there could be another World War, there would need to be more than a global political upheaval, economic turmoil for there to be even the chance of a World War.
I believe we (in the West) are living in some of the most peaceful times…there maybe be threats to this stability by individual countries, but these threats would not start a world war.
I’d like to add also that China wouldn’t want to start a war, they’re doing fine the way things are now.
Too much risk atm. If America, China and Russia wanted they could blow up the world with nukes. In fact, the main reason they haven’t done it to the terrorist already is because it will affect the countries hosting the terriosts for many years to come.
I recently saw a documentary and the history’s on computers (it was made in 2004) and it talked about that if a EMP was blasted 300 miles above Europe it would destroy all the silicon ships in Europe, thus sending the country into anarchy. Idk if the technology exists yet (EMP does, but Idk about the EMP of that power).
Keep in mind that the EMP would prevent nukes from being launched.
> *Originally posted by **[OmegaDoom](/forums/9/topics/303940?page=1#posts-6444857):***
> yeah, it seems entirely plausible. Russia, China and their smaller allies, vs “the West” and their poorer allies.
> i’d wonder about the tensions between the US and Europe though.
> it’s gonna be about oil, that’s for sure. with interpretations of human rights as a side theme. (the other way around in the media, of course)
[The Clash of Civilizations](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clash_of_Civilizations) …is bullshit.
then we better hope it doesn’t become nuclear eh?
and i didn’t suggest that Russia and China are such good friends. but they seem to have common insterests, common allies, and common enemies. and proximity, more-or-less, so they’re quite possibly gonna need a pragmatic allience.
and yes there are reasons for there not to be a war, but there are also reasons for there to be a war. China may doing quite well growing it’s economy, but they’re gonna see a fallback as well at some point. they’re gonna have to restrategise at some point.
and the USA is in serious shit. their debt is massive, and their only way to deal with it is filling the gaps with new, bigger gaps. this is a finite solution. their military power is massive, and being overemployed. they’re getting desperate.
and there’s a lot of stuff going on in the Middle East, and this has great significance for the major powers in the world. it’s not impossible for this to culminate into a conflict that could maybe start an all out war.
and as for nukes, whichever country uses them first, is gonna lose all it’s allies, hopefully, and definitely lose the support of it’s own population.
> In fact, the main reason they haven’t done it to the terrorist already is because it will affect the countries hosting the terriosts for many years to come.
uhm, what? you can’t nuke terrorists, that’s just not how it works. just like you can’t nuke murderers. that’s just… terrorists are parts of organisations. there’s no Terrorismia anywhere on the map.
and in fact the only state terrorism that we know about being employed is being employed by the USA. so if any country were to be nuked because of terrorism…