Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 173 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#131

Post by cynusx »

It's mostly self-preservation of the regimes in that country, Fidel Castro taught the worlds' dictators that they can stay in charge for life as long as there is a big external enemy so people naturally rally around a strong leader. It triggers a deeply instinctive group behavior where it's not the right time for "change".

If the world becomes more unsafe it's because autocratic leaders are feeling the pressure of their citizens, mainly due to the internet and free access to information.

You can see this in the Arab world where the enemy is always "israel and the zionist world order", the US in Cuba and Venezuela, NATO in Russia, the "western humiliation" in China, Colonization in Zimbabwe, ...

It somehow always winds up that organizations that promote democracy are agents of the west and should be suppressed. Formenting domestic problems in democracies only serves to make their regime look better in comparison.

Will this lead to a world war? I don't think so, but there will definitely be a lot of manufactured conflict designed for their own internal consumption.

In Russia's case, the Belarus and Kazakhstan revolutions apparently triggered the regime sufficiently to into an unprovoked invasion with a "kill list" of Russian speakers that were critical of the kremlin and the resolve to drag the only russian-speaking area under democratic rule into poverty.

China doesn't have a pressing need to invade anybody at the moment but I do believe that they will blockade Taiwan in the next decade.

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#132

Post by s1artibartfast »

actionfromafar wrote: post #124
s1artibartfast wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That's a naive view of war, which ignores individual a-holes. There's no self-preservation in Russia invading Ukraine... Russia was massively clear during the pre-invasion buildup that it was about Ukrainian NATO aspirations. They offered to deescalate and remove troops from the boarder if US declared opposition to Ukrainian admission. They publicly stated they saw it as an existential threat and were willing to inv…

I agree to it being an existential threat - to Moscow and the Kremlin. (Which is what matters.) A prospering, west-oriented, large and largely Russophone country on their borders would be a terrible reminder for both populations what a massive failure the Russian state is.

I was mainly thinking of the geopolitical ramifications, but that's a very good point as well with interesting similarities to China. The mere existence of Prosperous Chinese "Rogue States" like Hong Kong and Taiwan undermine the legitimacy of the CCP

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#133

Post by s1artibartfast »

mrtksn wrote: post #102
csomar wrote: post #76

I have a quite different (and most likely biased) opinion than most people (here or in Western countries). WWIII is already happening. The US is closing up on Russia now for more than a decade. China is growing economically but they are still far away militarily and except for Russia there isn't really another contender for the US militarily speaking. Before 2010 the world was quite multi-polar with the US being the…

This take is based on alternative realities. The western conspiracy over Russia is the Russian narrative and doesn't make any sense whatsoever because if you look closely won't be able to explain why Europe opted to depend on energy from Russia when conspiring to start a conflict with Russia. In reality, the west was simply naive to believe that what worked for EU would work with Russia too and that is the peace mode…

I think they have a really interesting point that is contrary to many scholars about relative power. The decline of Russia and strength of the US was a prerequisite to the Ukrainian situation. If there were more power parody like the US and USSR, I think the US would have been much more cautious about building relationship and influence in Ukraine. Knowing that the US would be free from reprisal enables it to take the route it did before and during the conflict

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#134

Post by hash07e »

I will be downvoted to hell.

But Yes it has started.

The *actual* stage where you can see bombs, soldiers etc is the last stage of war.

Ukraine is right now the new "vietnam"

EU and US providing money and training for ukranian forces and Russia fighting with their allies (china,etc).

Sanctions are war.

I am not discussing if the war is "legit" or not. What People is starting to realize is:

"you only own what you can defend".

This will trigger a lot of people because in their mind there is a Govt, council or "laws" that will prevent it.

But then, what about Iraq? Did we found Weapons of Mass Destruction? Are they better now? What the "laws" did to prevent one country from the other side of world to destruct Iraq?

What about Libya?

What will happen when 30% (Ukraine) wheat production will not reach countries that are not friend to Russia?

Before WW2 there was several actions/happennings as today.

But if everyone realize it what would they do?

Sell all stocks? Stock up food? Would be chaos...

...

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#135

Post by csomar »

mrtksn wrote: post #102
csomar wrote: post #76

I have a quite different (and most likely biased) opinion than most people (here or in Western countries). WWIII is already happening. The US is closing up on Russia now for more than a decade. China is growing economically but they are still far away militarily and except for Russia there isn't really another contender for the US militarily speaking. Before 2010 the world was quite multi-polar with the US being the…

This take is based on alternative realities. The western conspiracy over Russia is the Russian narrative and doesn't make any sense whatsoever because if you look closely won't be able to explain why Europe opted to depend on energy from Russia when conspiring to start a conflict with Russia. In reality, the west was simply naive to believe that what worked for EU would work with Russia too and that is the peace mode…

Friendly reminder: This is my own biased opinion.

> Why would you start a conflict with your neighbours when you depend on their wellbeing?

The way I look at it: Where is the war happening? It's happening at Putin's border. This is a defense war that Putin is leading. Whether he is wrong in his assessment of Western plotting or not, is a different story.

> EU has a well educated and healthy society that is going through demographics crisis

You just contradicted yourself in a single statement. A healthy society that's going through a crisis?

> The main problem with China is that now they are actually very close to the west to catch up on science, technology and culture and design too which would mean complete Chinese dominence.

They are not. China is good in planned execution and they do have some innovative companies. The last saga of clamping down on the tech elites at this specific period of time just shows that the country is being run by a circus. Chinese elite are running to the US (and Canada/Australia which is kinda like saying the US but different flags).

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#136

Post by csomar »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #133
mrtksn wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This take is based on alternative realities. The western conspiracy over Russia is the Russian narrative and doesn't make any sense whatsoever because if you look closely won't be able to explain why Europe opted to depend on energy from Russia when conspiring to start a conflict with Russia. In reality, the west was simply naive to believe that what worked for EU would work with Russia too and that is the peace mode…

I think they have a really interesting point that is contrary to many scholars about relative power. The decline of Russia and strength of the US was a prerequisite to the Ukrainian situation. If there were more power parody like the US and USSR, I think the US would have been much more cautious about building relationship and influence in Ukraine. Knowing that the US would be free from reprisal enables it to take th…

Exactly. A hypothetical of Russia sending weapons to Cuba. How would you think the US will react? I wonder what the mass population opinion will be. American people will be freaking out and asking for immediate military intervention. Wait, we did see that scenario didn't we?

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#137

Post by stared »

rich_sasha wrote: post #38
kypro wrote: post #5

I doubt it simply because there's still a massive power imbalance between western and non-western countries. A war with China and Russia would obviously be awful for the human race, but there's almost no way China and Russia would win such a war, nor would it make sense to fight it. I mean what does the "winner" of WWIII gain? You might win the war, but now the planet is a nuclear waste land. I think China and Russia…

I would like that to be true. Did Germany stand a chance to win WWII? Probably not, or at best a slim chance; it made huge, surprising victories against most of continental Europe, but it just picked on too many opponents. By the time the US was in, it was (slow and deadly) game over. They believed their own BS and went ahead with it regardless. I guess the risk here is that Russia or China could also believe their o…

Why not?

They "incorporated" what they could (Austra, Czechoslovakia), then quickly conquered Poland and France. Capturing Moskow seemed not off limits had they started earlier. I don't want to place bets if it was possible to hold the Soviet Union. Alternatively, if they hadn't attacked the Soviet Union at all.

It is plausible that they would have kept most of Continental Europe, ending with a stalemate with the UK (and no war with the US). Alternatively, not attacking the Soviet Union, and conquering the UK (still, I am not sure if it would work without getting the US to the war). I am happy it didn't work that way - especially as a Pole.

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#138

Post by csomar »

sph wrote: post #129
csomar wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. After the end of WW2, the US was the "obvious" leader but not the actual leader. European countries were still the leader of the colonized countries, China/Japan/SouthAmerica were figuring things on their own, the EU united, some arab countries wanted to influence/control oil, Russia was planting communism around the world, etc... In fact, the US was not much at that time. It had power but little influence. Think…

Sorry, I still don't get it. Forget WW2, you said the US became the leader in 2010. I argue it has been the only superpower with worldwide economic and military reach before that date, if not since the end of WW2. Also, why 2010? If you're referring to the economic crisis, I can't see the US position in the world stage being affected post-2008. You also say EU was another leader, but Europe is a superpower that has a…

Okay, I'll try to explain. Let's say you have 10 armadas with nuclear weapons and shit. Cool stuff and you do have power, at least on paper.

Now country A is speaking French, they are trading with country B; and they are importing their shit from France. They use the Swiss banking System. And they rely on German for cars. Most importantly, if you ask them for passage they say "No". They don't seem keen to please you despite your military superiority. Worse, Country "C" just straight out hate you and will undermine your companies and efforts. They also don't seem to be afraid and willing to go on a losing war with you.

See?

The US had military power coming from WW2. But they didn't have the equivalent financial or political power. Other countries did. They have been working on establishing puppets all over the place with varying success. But it's not as easy as having the military; and some military interventions went really badly.

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#139

Post by mrtksn »

csomar wrote: post #135
mrtksn wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This take is based on alternative realities. The western conspiracy over Russia is the Russian narrative and doesn't make any sense whatsoever because if you look closely won't be able to explain why Europe opted to depend on energy from Russia when conspiring to start a conflict with Russia. In reality, the west was simply naive to believe that what worked for EU would work with Russia too and that is the peace mode…

Friendly reminder: This is my own biased opinion. > Why would you start a conflict with your neighbours when you depend on their wellbeing? The way I look at it: Where is the war happening? It's happening at Putin's border. This is a defense war that Putin is leading. Whether he is wrong in his assessment of Western plotting or not, is a different story. > EU has a well educated and healthy society that is going thro…

> Where is the war happening? It's happening at Putin's border. This is a defense war that Putin is leading.

So if Turkey attacks Greece it would be Erdogan's defence war because it would happen at Turkey's borders?

Hard to follow that logic. Do you say that the invasions are actually defensive moves when they happen at the invaders borders(which is always the case when you invade a neighbour).

EU has a healthy society with ageing population. That's the crisis, it's not like middle east or Africa but like early stages of Japan. The USA doesn't have that problem, China has it much more severely.

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#140

Post by dirtyid »

War unlikely short term, too much mutual exposure (until 2028)

- Still lots of interdependancy in critical supply chains - USNavy decade of concern

- US reshoring semi

- PRC building out nuke deterence

- PRC catching up on semi, shifting energy mix, improving food security

- PRC improving other critical defense/deterrence capabilities

- ergo US not doing much but poking TW with diplomatic moves

- meanwhile PRC reciprocates by building up military, continuing defense modernization

War likely medium term (2028-2036)

- There maybe be a period of elevated concern when either sides retrenched enough, thinks they have upper hand and miscalculates.

- Both PRC and US domestic politics have made responding to TW likely.

- PRC's the only country to have fought/threaten to fight with every NPT nuclear state while she had no/marginal nuclear capability. US (and all of UN in Korea), USSR border wars, India Border skirmishes, threaten UK wanting to renege over HK handover, technically France in Vietnam war, all over sovereignty/security issues much less important than TW.

- US spend too much on defense to not use shiny toys, but so far has been smart enough to only fight opponents they can stomp, but still get dragged into decades of excess commitment.

- Ideally Sino-US war (likely sparked TW blockade) will likely be low casualty maritime event for US and PRC, but TW and maybe JP, SKR or other island nations in region willing to support US efforts will turn into a developing country with all their critical infra glassed. Worst case scenario is mainland/CONUS strikes that trigger nuclear response.

- PRC will be alright, it produces plenty domestically to hobble along.

- Only scenario where US maintains hegemony or PRC unseats US global primacy, overall just temping big stake gambles.

(World) War unlikely long term (2040+)

- there are some paradigm shift capabilities long term that will create credible mutual deterrence, specifically conventional prompt global strike that both US and PRC are pursuing.

- Ultimately works in PRC favor, as it opens CONUS to existential vunerability.

- Which will US deter from substantive intervention, PRC options to tackle TW opens up, including blockading it into Yemen until island capitulates.

Last scenario/timeline is tech dependent and might also occur short/medium term, but IMO long term inevitable. Many hints that PRC is pursuing meter level CEP conventional global strike capabiltiies, while official doctorine states rapid strikes are coming. This means every USN capital ship from CVNs to SSBNs, critical piece of infra like oil refineries, data centres, power generation are all vunerable, (or any US allies, or anyone for that matter). Personally what I'm keep eye out for to predict how things will play out. Note it doesn't mean no war, but it will dramatically circumbscribe how much war will escalate. Both US and PRC will direct confrontation away from home front will be mostly alright in this scenario. Though this might mean proxies/vassals gets wrecked.

Post reply on HN