• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

World War 3 map

Desert Storm

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 8, 2015
Messages
6,911
Reaction score
2,772
Location
Toronto & Amsterdam, Holland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
So this is not my map, but I think its right for the most part.
The countries who were neutral in WW2 will probably sit this one out too.
Some neutral countries might supply logistic support to other Western countries.

The US is marked a separate colour since under Trump they appear to have become isolationists.
The Islamic alliance is a serious threat to Europe because around 5% of the EU population is now muslim.
They have a sitting army in place that merely needs to be supplied with weapons.

Let me know what you think. Do you agree with the map??



 
Last edited:
The map doesn't show up in your post...

 
Desert Storm said:
The Islamic alliance is a serious threat to Europe because around 5% of the EU population is now muslim.
Click to expand...
That is the ONLY line we need to look at folks, it speaks volumes.

 
 
I think given recent events, we can remove Syria from the Sino-Russo block and move them probably into the Islamic "Alliance" (which is an alliance in name only).

Also, I think Argentina is moving more to the West or at least Neutral.
 
Mycroft said:
So...who's fighting who?
Click to expand...
Here's one way things could possibly unfold:

EU has said they are considering putting ground forces inside Ukraine.
If/when that happens Russia is then technically at war with EU.
This could broaden the theatre to Western Europe.

Ukraine Needs European Forces Immediately

The continent’s leaders must act decisively to prevent a bad peace that could undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty and embolden Russia.
cepa.org

The US has said they want to stay out of any EU/Russia war, and Trump has also said he's considering withdrawing from NATO.
So without the US the EU will have a hard time beating Russia.
I think that war will turn into a long, drawn out stalemate.

What Russia would do if they're smart, is ally themselves with the Islamic countries (similar to what they did with Syria).
They then might arm muslims who currently live peacefully inside the EU, and cause instability within EU countries.
This will weaken the EU greatly from within.

If the war goes on for a few years, the US will probably join in at some point after Trump's term is up, albeit late in the game.
If/when the US comes to help the EU fight Russia, I can see China taking the opportunity to quickly conquer Taiwan.

Once we're at this point its basically WW3, and who knows what happens from there.
All this is assuming the war is conventional of course, and not nuclear
 
Last edited:
Your prediction certainly looks possible.

Another possibility that could play a part in WW lll are nuclear weapons. Now that US support is no longer dependable as we have begun to back away from our mutual protection commitments to NATO and other allies Europe is more vulnerable to Russian aggression.

Recognizing the lack of support from the US NATO nations must consider their collective nuclear strength. France is already considering increasing its nuclear capabilities and even sharing with Germany. What other nations may consider the same?

Trump’s horrible mistakes in European diplomacy will likely cause nuclear proliferation not only in Europe but in Asia and even in South America. Only a fool would trust Trump’s commitments to protect South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and even Vietnam.

A few things we know. Trump is criminally impulsive. He acts and/or speaks before he thinks. Trump absolutely has no understanding of actions and resulting consequences. As a result of the above Trump is not likely to plan ahead, as we have seen in so many examples.

In essence, the United States is destroying its infrastructure, its intelligence resources, its military capabilities and its world leadership. Stability across the globe is in jeopardy more so than it has been in a very long time. We have dumbed down diplomacy. We are peeing on democracy in our own country as we turn our back on Ukraine.

The overall message the US is sending to the world is you are on your own. Don’t trust us. Don’t depend on our support. Get your own nukes and **** off.
 
If there's one thing I learned in international geopolitics, is the more allies a superpower has, the stronger they are.
But when you start alienating your allies, or start taking them for granted, you're headed in the wrong direction.
You also embolden your enemies, because a fractured coalition is a weak coalition
 
Contrary to the OPINION of CEPA, no EU leader has proposed putting troops in Ukraine BEFORE a peace deal is signed.

The EU doesn't want to declare war on Russia. They prefer to stand back and use Ukraine as their proxy while the fighting is still going on.
 
Mycroft said:
Contrary to the OPINION of CEPA, no EU leader has proposed putting troops in Ukraine BEFORE a peace deal is signed
Click to expand...
I watch Dutch and German news channels, and putting troops inside Ukraine has been discussed.
I'm not saying they will, and I hope they wont, but you never know
 
This is more of a 20th century Trumpian Risk board for the uninitiated.
NATO’s concern should be the world’s dictators in etc joining BRICS.
Anyone who thinks South America and India are neutral haven’t been paying attention.
 
Desert Storm said:
I watch Dutch and German news channels, and putting troops inside Ukraine has been discussed.
I'm not saying they will, and I hope they wont, but you never know
Click to expand...
Have they been talking about putting the troops there before or after a deal is signed?
 
Linc said:
This is more of a 20th century Trumpian Risk board for the uninitiated.
NATO’s concern should be the world’s dictators in etc joining BRICS.
Anyone who thinks South America and India are neutral haven’t been paying attention.
Click to expand...
Edit: that last line was supposed to be South Africa, not South America, though S. America also remains a dangerous hotbed, especially due to the interference of the GOP (especially 1953–1993) and the United Fruit Company in 1871.
 

Member states of BRICS - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
 
Linc said:
Edit: that last line was supposed to be South Africa, not South America, though S. America also remains a dangerous hotbed, especially due to the interference of the GOP (especially 1953–1993) and the United Fruit Company in 1871.
Click to expand...

BRICS is not an alliance - India for instance is distancing itself from Russia and moving closer to China.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…