1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

world war III

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by LabR@t, Jul 25, 2006.

  1. Zip

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jun 26, 2005

    Posts: 20,224

    Location: Australia


    Here is his map

    [​IMG]


    :mad: :mad: :mad:

    Why does he not Acknowledge one of his Strongest allies? :mad:
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2006
  2. Visage

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Jan 13, 2005

    Posts: 10,708

    The US will drag everyone else into a war, until all our base are belong to them.
     
  3. ballistic

    PermaBanned

    Joined: May 15, 2006

    Posts: 2,278

    so would he look more concerned to you then if he doesn't talk about it at all?
     
  4. Raikiri

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 5, 2005

    Posts: 17,072

    Location: Brighton


    And they spelt Sweden wrong.
     
  5. Zefan

    Don

    Joined: Jan 15, 2006

    Posts: 29,367

    Location: Tosche Station

    Just because Gavrilo Princip shot Ferdinand doesn't mean that Europe has to.... oh wait.
     
  6. Zip

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jun 26, 2005

    Posts: 20,224

    Location: Australia


    That was a different day and age :)
     
  7. Zefan

    Don

    Joined: Jan 15, 2006

    Posts: 29,367

    Location: Tosche Station

    So?
     
  8. miracleboy

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Oct 31, 2002

    Posts: 2,312

    I think you miss my point.
     
  9. Rosbif

    Wise Guy

    Joined: May 29, 2006

    Posts: 2,278

    Location:

    anyone capable of fighting a meaningful war are all on our side anyway... iraq/afghanistan are not wars... theyre more like squirrel hunting trips...
     
  10. Zip

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jun 26, 2005

    Posts: 20,224

    Location: Australia

    Theres is Different ways of dealing with things now.

    Might not be extremely Different but its a little bit different.
    The UN would step in aswell if it got too much to handle
    I dont think the UN existed back then but i could be wrong
     
  11. dafloppyone

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jun 15, 2006

    Posts: 2,183

    Location: Amsterdam

    doesnt appear to be anyone wanting any more empires ....apart from the usa:p
     
  12. ballistic

    PermaBanned

    Joined: May 15, 2006

    Posts: 2,278

    League of nations did jack **** to prevent naziism, similarly the United Nations are useless with regards to almost anything
     
  13. LabR@t

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Nov 30, 2005

    Posts: 9,450



    Congress of Vienna pre 1919 then
    league of nations 1919-1945
    UN 1945-
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2006
  14. _PD_

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Dec 30, 2005

    Posts: 1,904

    Location: 16,000ft

    No, we aren't.

    If it was WWIII, you would know about it. The poo would really have hit the fan.

    World Wars are fought between large countries, not between countries (or international bodies) and terrorist groups.
     
  15. Zip

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jun 26, 2005

    Posts: 20,224

    Location: Australia

    :o
    Well i did say i might be wrong :p

    Did they have as much say as the UN do?
     
  16. Glaucus

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Mar 11, 2004

    Posts: 76,645

    nope can't see word war 3..

    Possibly in decades to come if things get worse a withdrawing into your own borders. shutting of immagration and global trade. But I dont even think tahts likley.

    if you lived in a city you wouldn't know about it you would be vaporized... Or if you where unlucky dieing slowley from radiation poisoning. Then you would know about it.
     
  17. LabR@t

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Nov 30, 2005

    Posts: 9,450

    UN powerful what have they prevented lately? TOOTHLESS organisation imo
     
  18. Glaucus

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Mar 11, 2004

    Posts: 76,645

    the second they didn't do anything with iraq, they signed there own death papers. Whats the point if they wont take actions.
     
  19. _PD_

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Dec 30, 2005

    Posts: 1,904

    Location: 16,000ft

    Er.... I don't think vapourisation of civilians is usually the first step in international conflict.

    I'm just waiting for one pants country to nuke another pants country.
    That'll be interesting.
     
  20. LabR@t

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Nov 30, 2005

    Posts: 9,450


    I class WWIII to be a little more sublte than being vaporised, yes it could in global Nuclear war but who says WWIII has to be about nukes?