WWIII Sides

[niftydrifty]

Ah - I thought that your particular comment was a general one

I think it's a little or a lot premature (as well as overly simplistic) to divide the current global players into only "good" and "bad." WWIII could easily be avoided at this point. one way to do that, is to resist labeling exercises which paint others as bad, and to look more closely at the things that don't exactly make us good.

 

[moe]

I think america may have created a situation where any nation may convince itself of the possibility of a pre-emptive strike from us, and therefore may want to beat us to the draw...just a scenario...?

China has no natural enemies in the region that can do her any real harm and yet she is building and modernizing her military at a very fast pace. Not even Russia. Russia is afraid of the Chinese. They always have been. China wants Taiwan, This is still a sticking point in US China relations.

China has been concentrating on a nuclear sub fleet and several years ago she purchased an air craft carrier from Russia. So she has at least one carrier today.

In fact in today's paper the US is shifting ships from the East Coast to the West Coast because of Chinese naval expansion

China's military rebirth prompts U.S. response
The problem with China today is nobody knows what they are really thinking or planning. Their recent economic expansion has given them the taste of money and they like it. So will they continue towards a progressive capitalist society or change their minds and return to a hard core militaristic model.

Moe

 

[Cold Highway]

Ok, so should I remove al-qaeda from the list?? They are friends of eTA.

ETA and Al-Qaeda could never get along. ETA fashions itself as a Marxist terrorist group which is very incompatible with a Theocratic Religious Organization.

 

[obvious Child]

Put China on bad side, at least for now. China and USA will never get along.

And no, China could never overpower the US. They are WAAAAY behind in tech.

Technology alone cannot win wars. And they aren't that behind.

Besides, China engaging in a war with the US is a surefire way to bring democracy to China. Losing huge export markets will result in massive civil unrest. Not going to happen.

China would likely stay neutral and export to everyone.

 

[obvious Child]

That list is funny.

The vast majority of those countries would stay neutral. Especially the alleged bad list. There isn't any real motivation for any of the Latin American countries to actual commit to open warfare as a cohesive group. The notion that Argentina would commit to war on the side of Venezuela is laughable. Not to mention that Cuba would hardly ally with Islamic terrorists. And who would buy Iranian and Russian oil during a world war?

 

[rathi]

This list is a joke. You just put the countries that U.S. has bad foreign relations with as the "bad guys". Furthermore, you ignored pretty much every single strategic and geo-political factor possible. This wouldn't even cut it as the plot for a made-for TV movie.

 

[BmanMcfly]

I made a list of the WWIII sides:

Side 1: The Good People

USA
Colombia
Israel
European Union
India
China
Japan
South Africa
Australia
Canada
Mexico
Chile
Peru
Brazil
Uruguay
Georgia
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates
South Korea
Guatemala
Many ex-Sovietic Countries.

Side 2: The Bad People:
Russia
Iran
North Korea
Venezuela
Hamas (Don't confuse with Palestine)
Al-Qaeda
Other Islamic Groups
Myanmar
Vietnam
Cuba
Bolivia
Belarus
Ecuador
Argentina
Nicaragua
El Salvador
FARC
ETA


Contribute modyfing, adding or removing.

Start with which countries might constitute a 'faction'

A) North American Union
B) European Union
C) Russia
D) China

Then determine who are the strategic / ideological allies to each 'faction' and you're getting closer to a proper scenario...

I would hardly put any of these 'factions' on the side of good... as all governments ultimately just want control over their populations.