this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
414 points (99.5% liked)

World News

39211 readers
2017 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] not_that_guy05@lemmy.world 31 points 1 day ago (4 children)

We really are in WW3 we just haven't noticed it fully yet.

[–] dumbass@leminal.space 54 points 1 day ago (2 children)

We're nearly at the end of the" Lead up to World War Three" chapter.

"Rising economic and social tensions in the West" heading on wikipedia

[–] Invertedouroboros@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

I can't remember when I came to the realization, but for years now I thought that if (and I would love to hold on to the naive hope that it is an "if") WW3 breaks out then the battle lines would be drawn between the forces of autocracy and democracy. Those would be our sides.

Now, I'm not even sure democracy is gonna make it out the gate... America's elected a dictator who's aligned with Russia who is itself a major factor of this unholy autocratic alliance with China, North Korea, and Iran... Now this?

There were no "good guys" in world war 1. It was the result of squabbleing European powers not realizing the destructive potential modern military technology had and how much that changed the game. It needed to happen in the sense that countries couldn't continue to act the way they had prior to the great war, but that doesn't mean anyone was in the right.

It's hard to imagine "good guys" in world war 3 either. Increasingly, it kinda just seems like it's a choice between "what shit flavor of authoritarianism do you hate less?". Assuming that question even matters considered all the nuclear weapons that could fly in a third world war.

I dunno man, shit's just looking pretty fucking bleak.

[–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

We are still mostly in the stage where it might be diplomatically avoided, but if it does start, yes, this will have been a small part of the start of it. Like the last couple of decades to varying degrees at various points. It's still potentially avoidable, but honestly, in some places, it feels like it has already been going for a long time. Currently, they don't count as part of a world war, but if a world war breaks out, they will then retroactively count as part of it. If everything settles down before getting to that point, then these will have been individual events that were largely connected to a similar crisis.

It's not like anyone knew at the time what day world war 1 and 2 started on the days we now consider them to have officially started. For world war 1, there was really no precedent. So they certainly would have had no idea on the day we consider it to have started. Used to take months to even find out 2 other countries were at war, let alone the time it took to them react to that information and muster up support or further opposition. World wars only really became possible once world-wide near instantaneous communication was available. I'm not sure how long it even took to coin the phrase "world war", but they figured that would be the only time something like that would ever happen, considering not only the cost/rammifications, but how widespread word of how bad it was could be with such quick communication.

No one would soon forget the various costs... but then we had a source of motivation that outgrew those costs. So world war 2. At least we knew what to call it this time. People were probably a bit less fuzzy on the day it officially started, but a lot of that would have to do with what country they lived in. And it still eventually mostly had to be hammered out by historians to really figure out what all should be considered part of it.

So, it's still a bit schroedinger's WW3, all these events are in the box waiting to see what they will eventually be called once it's time to examine the contents of the box.

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The US was late to WW1 and WW2. Trump wants to go 3 for 3.

[–] wjrii@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Given Trump's tendencies, I'm not sure I want us jumping in right away. He'd probably pick the worse side.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

He'd probably pick the worse side.

No doubt about it. He obviously love Putin and Kim, and for all of his "Chayna" bullshit, he loves Xi too.

He takes the side of oppressive regimes 10/10 times. Because he loves power and dominating people who are superior to him in every way.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Oh the break up of America is scheduled for any WW3 under Trump. He absolutely could not keep this country together in such extremes.