I want to hear you reasons, why do you think that.

During the first cold war conflicts happened outside of the super-powers:

  • Vietnam ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ณ and North-Korea ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ’ฅ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท

This time conflicts will happen in Siberia, Africa and Middle east. I also think Indonesia and Pakistan will be center of major conflicts between China, India and the USA. These conflicts will costs some millions of lives, but not touch the empires heartlands, so it will not get nuclear again imo.

permalink
report
reply

Demographics will play a major role in this: Younger median age countries will have more war and conflict, while the older countries can maintain some semblance of stability. South Sudan is a great example of this mechanism: This is why I also think this war will last 30 years, like the 30 years war in Germany 1618 that killed 50%+ of its populaiton.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

I think weโ€™re going through Cold War 2 before World War 3. China and Russia have been testing krill fishing limits recently while American private equity has entered the field, and the TikTok showdown is testing Internet authority.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

America will take Greenland, and then Canada is next being surrounded on three sides.

Can a NATO country invoke the defence pact if itโ€™s attacked by another NATO country?

NATO vs America wasnโ€™t on my bingo card.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

The class war never stopped.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

I think sort of, although it wonโ€™t be as cut-and-dry and the first two. I think itโ€™ll be somewhere between a traditional โ€˜hotโ€™ war and a cold war, where the larger players (ie: China, the US, Russia, the EU) will engage in propaganda wars, attempts to destabilize each other, cyber attacks, trade wars etc. while in areas outside of those groups (eg: Ukraine currently) there will be physical wars fought by proxy between the bigger groups.

I think weโ€™re seeing the start of it now, and IMO the US is probably doing the least well so far of the major groups. Russia is doing the destabilization thing, which is working quite well in Europe and spectacularly well in the US, China seems to be leading in trade and tech (both cyber attacking and just undermining the US tech sector with things like DeepSeek) and I think Europeโ€™s strategy seems to be to just bunker down and see what happens.

I think the main advantage the US traditionally has always had is its military - itโ€™s geared up very well for a big physical war, but I donโ€™t think this is that kind of conflict. And with the Trump administrationโ€™s obsession with tariffs and the general disregard for education and soft power, I think the country is really heading in the wrong direction for what may be coming.

permalink
report
reply

Asklemmy

!asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Create post

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, itโ€™s welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Icon by @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de

Community stats

  • 8.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.9K

    Posts

  • 322K

    Comments