I heard this topic discuss the other day. I’m curious of your thoughts.
I voted the nuclear age because we can only have one more great world war. Tis war will inevitably use nukes, which means all will die. Assuming the world leaders are rational, this won’t happen
The world was very globalized prior to WWI, by some measures there was more international trade then than today. But that did not prevent WWI.
So, no. I don’t think globalization would by itself prevent another world war.
I’m sorry, but another World War is coming. mainly due to the uselessness of nuclear warfare and Globalization.
First off, nuclear warfare only works to end a war. Its not the useful first strike. The obvious thing is to knock out the nuclear weapons of the defenders and his allies with a preemptive strike, mainly of low-flying or even strategic bombers. To defeat farther inland missile silos/airbases, you uses a fast moving bunker busting missile, like the Tomahawk missile, to destroy them. SSBN submarines are only moderately effective due to them having to close the distance.
Second, Globalization, while it is a neat idea of preventing a massive war by withdrawing on the economic support of a nation, only works if the nation doesn’t decided to goes balls to the wall and goes full out on its enemy. For instance, if Russia decided it was ripe for a 3rd world War, who the heck is going to stop their economy? They are self-sustaining themselves.
And for the finale, the only reason there hasn’t been a 3rd world war is that fuel cost are so high. Once the World finds another massive oil well, like the Arctic oil fields, the Alaskan oil fields, and the Siberian oil fields, the cost of fuel will lower and more fuel will be ready to fuel the World’s massive war machines.
We already had WWIII. Russia collapsed and we won. Subsequently we helped minimize the consequences of the Russian collapse.
I fear we are headed for a WWIV. I am not sure if we will expereince it due to a pending economic collapse or some other cause, but I see things as having fallen out-of-balance. I doubt it will be put aright and we may descend into a second Dark Age.
@221B:
The world was very globalized prior to WWI, by some measures there was more international trade then than today. But that did not prevent WWI.
So, no. I don’t think globalization would by itself prevent another world war.
By Globalized prior to WWI, do you mean an European World? Europe ruled the world before WWI.
Your poll is a little light on choices and even a bit snarky but IMO.
Up until the fall of communism the threat of nuclear war was the largest deterrent to large scale conflicts like WWII.
Globalization now assures that WWII scale conflicts will not occur as they are largely not in all of the corporate oligarchy’s best interest. The ‘money men’ have assets and holdings all over and a global conflict is a threat to those holdings. However smaller scale conflicts such as Iraq and Afghanistan are likely to be perpetual (not necessarily those conflicts but those sort of conflicts.) No snark intended but remember the 34th and 35th Rules of Acquisition, War is good for business;Peace is good for business.
The greatest threat to this present scenario is climate change.
I suppose though that one might argue that the nuclear age (i.e. threat of nuclear annihilation) and globalization occurred concurrently.
i had to say huh? since none of the given responces answered the question.
WTF!
The effects of the Atomic Bombs on Japan have done much greater deterrent to any full scale war from developing. It may even have saved the human race from WW3 because of how horrible the loss of life was.
Globalization has no effect on whether a war or not will be fought. The causes of war cannot be mitigated by it either. Warfare is a human condition and will always be with us, and only the form of warfare may be played out in different manner than all out nuclear warfare.
Nearly all life shows forms of warfare by different means.
@ABWorsham:
@221B:
The world was very globalized prior to WWI, by some measures there was more international trade then than today. But that did not prevent WWI.
So, no. I don’t think globalization would by itself prevent another world war.
By Globalized prior to WWI, do you mean an European World? Europe ruled the world before WWI.
I’ll try to find some links when I get more time, but international trade, as a percentage of GDP, was greater pre WWI for the “Western world” than it is today. As far as distant parts of the world such as S. America the trade may have been less, I’m not sure. As such, economically necessary British imports of German machinery, for example, did not prevent the war.
I agree with Emperor_Taiki. If you are going to ask a question, one of the options should be answer for the question asked. How do you vote in favour of the idea the global integration is the number one reason preventing another world war.
One of the main reasons holding S. Korea back from acting too aggresively in response to an act of war by the North in the recent ship sinking is economic. A few wrong words could tank their stock market and damage their economy greatly. And that is just some poorly choosen words……
Of course nukes, biological/chemical nasties and tens of thousands of artillary pieces dug into mountains sides over 50 years all aiming at Soeul is also something to think about.
China is going to be an interesting case in point. Their economy has averaged at least 10% growth per year on average. Has since the late 70s probably. GDP doubles every 7 years based on compounding. Now they have the #2 GDP albietly, spread over a whole whack of people but still… Doubling every 7 years could see their GDP become the world’s largest in 2 decades or so. Let’s hope their citizens worry about their version of the 401K and not urge their leaders to get all hoped up on the drug called nationalism.
globalization leads to World War III.
It’s the easiest way to achieve your Goal as the striker …
Please no long winded political posts. Nobody reads them and they are not allowed. Leave out US political policies as it can lead to forbidden political talk.
It was not my intention to make an political sounding post…However ,I just answerd from my prospective the topic question…I dearly apologize…
It was not your post that had this. The post in question was removed and totally off topic.
