I don’t know if I’m going crazy but looking at the current situation in the world … please tell me that I’m overexagurating

  • guy@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    43 minutes ago

    You are probably overexaggerating.
    There are increased conflicts over the world but no signs of a world war.

    First there are no willing candidates for it. Not even Russia which is engaged in a war is willing to make the push to engage NATO, which is the closest to a world war we would get.
    Neither is Iran willing to go into war which was very obvious after their actions when Israel made ample opportunities for them to escalate conflict.
    And for China… well war is bad for business, and China really likes doing business.

    However the US with Trump at the helm. 🤷 Who the fuck knows. Maybe not world war but I am adding military occupation of Panama and Greenland to my bingo just in case.

  • ...m...@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    …i think the early stages will be fuzzy over the next four years but the `states will be fully engaged within six…

  • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    I am personally looking for a few things that will concern me about escalation:

    • Japan and Finland making active land claims to Russia (actively reoccupying disputed land with troops)

    • Europe putting peace keepers in Western Ukraine (which will create a casus belli for war with Russia), specifically France and the UK. I mean, Poland as well, but if Poland says they are putting peacekeeping troops in Ukraine, Russia should either back off or assume war.

    • South Korean troops in Ukraine. (Ridiculous given their current chaos, but stranger things have happened in the last year).

    Other than that, the russian frog has been very well boiled for 3 years. Even China has probably gone back to the drawing board on a taiwan invasion, and added a delay until 10 millions drones are available.

    I do have concerns trump will pull the us back in europe, making the second item above possible if not likely. The first trump presidency shook us primacy in europe, and the second may see it start to unravel. If europe has to take russia alone, the us should consider china a personal problem from now on (as well as any other concerns not near europe), as no one will see value in going to war with a fair-weather ally.

    • guy@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      23 minutes ago

      <i>Finland making active land claims to Russia (actively reoccupying disputed land with troops)</i>

      I can guarantee you that there is no territory the Finns would try to reclaim from Russia. The Continuation war pretty much sated any future thought to regain territory seized by the Soviet Union

  • Hexadecimalkink@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I think it il depend on the military industrial complex in the USA and whether they decide to off Trump or not. If Trump goes isolationist then they’ll probably merc him. If he invades Panama and starts a hot war with Iran then there probably won’t be a world war (ironically). If China invades Taiwan and the US blinks then there won’t be a world war. If the US attacks China for taking over Taiwan then we’ll be in a world war.

  • 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    You’re not overexagerating, the property crisis in the imperial core is becoming so severe that there are only 2 solutions, either the people rebel against its ruling class or they side with them and engage in yet another settler project. In my honest opinion, the latter seems like the most probably outcome, its already very advanced in Palestine and its starting in Syria.

  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I don’t think so.

    Primarily because there’s not economic benefit in it for the ruling class.

    Also, we’ve made the experience of the war in the middle east around 2000 where the USA couldn’t even occupy a farmer’s state for more than a couple years.

    I don’t think anybody realistically thinks they can take over another (big) country in this time.

    • dx1@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Primarily because there’s not economic benefit in it for the ruling class.

      Our history of perpetual war seems to disprove this

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Yeah, I’d tend to agree. The war is digital and economic. Countries are hacking each other’s infrastructure and commercial systems, mass propaganda and spying with troll farms, tiktok and even hardware. Plenty of fighting with sanctions, tariffs, bans of sales of technology.

      Fighting for land right now is really unnecessary, however depending on how well humanity survives climate change I’d expect to see some arguments going in to drilling and mining places like Greenland, the arctic and antarctic. China is already setting up shop in Antarctica.

      We are also all tied together economically in so many different ways that a war between major powers would be economically devastating for everyone before the first shot is fired, particularly for the countries that ceded most of their production to other countries that might be hostile in war.

  • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    So, WW3 won’t happen until the oligarchy says it’s time. Not sure why now would be the time, but I suppose it could be. There’s like a billion people in the world making a dollar a day, a few billion people only making a few dollars a day… That’s a few billion dollars per day the oligarchy almost certainly thinks belongs in their pocket instead. So I could see them continuing to squeeze the world for every last drop of wealth, which I think will cause unrest in a lot of places. Add climate change to that and I think things just get bad everywhere for most people. Obviously the oligarchy will just go to their islands, yachts, bunkers until a few billion are dead and they can pop back out with their private armies ready to “save” the world.

    A lot of people think they need us to buy their trinkets, but the entire consumer middle class is only like 100 years old, and I think was only designed to keep us distracted while they plundered the world. Now that a small handful of people own everything, and soon enough robots and AI will replace most human labor, it’s mission accomplished and we can go back to feudalism where they are gods and everyone else is slaves.

  • Hubi@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    please tell me that I’m overexagurating

    You’re overexaggerating.

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 day ago

    Nah, there won’t be WW3. Instead we get countries sabotaging each other via hacking critical infrastructure, proxy wars, propaganda, trade wars.

    I doubt there will ever be a direct “hot war” between the top five nuclear powers ever again.

    WW3 is not what’s gonna kill people, climate change is more likely gonna be humanity’s downfall.

  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    The situation today is nowhere near as bad as the Cold War.

    Think of it this way. All of the 0.01%ers in china, USA and Russia share the same tastes and values. Think any of them are really hot to blow up their nice places on the Rivera?