3 ms·

If I had to guess (and I'm really hoping that I'm wrong) I'd say that RUS will use small tactical nuclear weapons on UA which will trigger NATO response. Either

by _V_ 4y ago

If I had to guess (and I'm really hoping that I'm wrong) I'd say that RUS will use small tactical nuclear weapons on UA which will trigger NATO response. Either direct on indirect but with such impact that it will not matter so RUS will escalate the conflict with NATO. China is a question but I'd say that noone is benefiting from WW3 apart from perhaps military industry. So I don't really believe China will be too happy because they have a lot going on internally and they don't really need aditional problems that RUS will inevitably cause them. But as I said: I really hope that time will prove me wrong.

piva00 4y ago
> I'd say that noone is benefiting from WW3 apart from perhaps military industry. What do you mean? If nuclear escalation happens and WW3 is triggered there is absolutely no world for the military industry to benefit from. Weapons will be required, of course, so production will continue but there would be no semblance of economy or governments as we know them now. Nukes flying are world-ending, at least the human world and societies we currently experience. There's no profit to be made in total global mayhem.
- _V_ 4y ago
  World war by itself would benefit military industry directly. That's not saying that they wish for WW3 in any means as the destruction (or crippling) of society would be huge and it would take many years to recover. WW3 does not necessarily mean nukes at all. I personally think - based on how Russian generals used the military funding to enrich themselves - that most of the Russian nukes are not operational. They might have some low-yield "tactical" nukes (something like nuclear grenades). And I seriously doubt that US would use theirs since as soon as you use nukes, everyone will and after that there is no winner anymore.
- c1sc0 4y ago
  > There's no profit to be made in total global mayhem. Unless you calculate you can be the last man standing in a world with drastically reduced pressure on natural resources due to depopulation

by _V_ 4y ago

piva00 4y ago

> I'd say that noone is benefiting from WW3 apart from perhaps military industry. What do you mean? If nuclear escalation happens and WW3 is triggered there is absolutely no world for the military industry to benefit from. Weapons will be required, of course, so production will continue but there would be no semblance of economy or governments as we know them now. Nukes flying are world-ending, at least the human world and societies we currently experience. There's no profit to be made in total global mayhem.

_V_ 4y ago
World war by itself would benefit military industry directly. That's not saying that they wish for WW3 in any means as the destruction (or crippling) of society would be huge and it would take many years to recover. WW3 does not necessarily mean nukes at all. I personally think - based on how Russian generals used the military funding to enrich themselves - that most of the Russian nukes are not operational. They might have some low-yield "tactical" nukes (something like nuclear grenades). And I seriously doubt that US would use theirs since as soon as you use nukes, everyone will and after that there is no winner anymore.
c1sc0 4y ago
> There's no profit to be made in total global mayhem. Unless you calculate you can be the last man standing in a world with drastically reduced pressure on natural resources due to depopulation