With the constant speculation about places like North Korea, Israel and Iran, where do you think the next major world conflict will take place, and why?
South Africa, obviously. And I'll be rooting for the Netherlands.
Quote from: Derk G on 17 May 2010, 08:50:19 PM
South Africa, obviously. And I'll be rooting for the Netherlands.
:D
You've got as much chance as England I suppose!
Quote from: Leon on 17 May 2010, 08:51:47 PM
:D
You've got as much chance as England I suppose!
:D :D :D Class!
Don't forget we've just won one in convincing style against our Antipodean cousins 8)
Redcar High St on a saturday night ?
Quote from: Leon on 17 May 2010, 08:00:02 PM
With the constant speculation about places like North Korea, Israel and Iran, where do you think the next major world conflict will take place, and why?
near the moon, when England win the World cup, fans will be over the moon, and scuffles will surely break out with our german friends...............
oh hold on ........i've just woke up, another bad dream :)
Who knows- when I was in the mob rumours were rife about N Korea, thank f### that one didnt come off!! - but then again did we know that the Regiment would have sharpened sabres to Bosnia - Kosovo, iraq and now Afganistan?? so hey - who knows- lets build another empire (now that Ive retired from all that malarky - hey Im 43 and a pensioner- ha ha)
Falklands again? all that blackgold
:D ;D
Quote from: Leon on 17 May 2010, 08:00:02 PM
With the constant speculation about places like North Korea, Israel and Iran, where do you think the next major world conflict will take place, and why?
Without wishing to be awkward, what do you mean by 'majr world conflict'?
Quote from: Luddite on 19 May 2010, 11:45:19 PM
Without wishing to be awkward, what do you mean by 'majr world conflict'?
Hopefully not anything World War scale, but anything similar to or bigger than Iraq/Afghanistan.
This is going up a notch: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia_pacific/10129703.stm
Well if bush was still in power I would say: Israel cause they seem to be getting close to kicking there neighbor's butt's again.:) Hell maybe the US will let them off the chain this time and go full out.
I wouldn't actually say N.Korea, I think it's just posturing and not actually looking for a fight. This i believe cause they do not have a backer with a beef.
I agree with Nick on this one. North Korea/South Korea is a possibility. North Korea have announced that any further sanctions will result in war?!? I would be surprised if level heads prevail in this one but you never know. The US has given it's support to South Korea but Hurley makes a good point, has North Korea got anyone backing them this time? History rolls on regardless.......
North vs South Korea is a smoke screen.Israel wants to nuke Iran and has wanted a war ever since it was given nukes.As we all know,what Israel wants it gets.
I think that a war with North Korea would be stage managed.Thats right,a smoke and mirrors war like the Falklands conflict,total political spin and a waste of lives.
When will this country get tired of being a slave state and when will its military wake up and stop acting as US/Israeli cannon fodder ?
North v Soth Korea, there have been constant naval clashes between these too for years but torpedoing a warship must up the ante quiet a bit. But i guess a lot depends on what China tells N Korea to do.
Israel V Iran, lets face it if Israel gets a sniff that Iran is close to building or obtaining a nuclear weapon they are going to strike first and no one will stop them.
Russia V Chechens, after the recent attacks on there underground you just no there will be a military response from the Russians.
And last but not least the Falkland Islands with all that potential black gold. And lets face it thanks to years of cuts to the Costal Defense Force, sorry i meant whats left of the Royal Navy there is no way we could go down there and take the islands back. It will be deja vue if the new government decides not to carry on building the new carriers just like the early 80s.
I think Kim Jong-Il must realise that his life of luxury is at risk if he decides to go to war. Is he willing to risk that? I doubt it. He'll just keep making noises.
Iran/Israel is where my money would be.
Quote from: Leon on 20 May 2010, 03:00:16 AM
Hopefully not anything World War scale, but anything similar to or bigger than Iraq/Afghanistan.
Right, OK, so essentially where will the next 'western' intervention be?
OK, so i'm going to discount 'escalations' of current engagements;
Afghanistan - which, with Iraq is actually part of the strategic encirclement of Iran to control the Middle Eastern oil insterests of the west by (a simplistic view, but still), and will probably spread either to Turkmenistan or simply go straight to invasion of Iran in the next 5 years or so.
Israel - which is actually a key part of the above - but is most likely to reignite a war with Egypt in the fairly near future...
Korea - which is actually still at war, just on a ceasefire
I'll therefore go for where will 'pop up', say in the next 15 years, that we don't already anticipate.
Venezuela.
With the BP oil pipeline currently losing 70,000 barrels a day, this US invasion may well come sooner than expected. Venezuela is a major oil importer to the US and a direct grab for control of the oil fields is likely, after a CIA attempt to destablise Chavez's govt there.
The Falklands
1982 was a war over pride and territory. Oil's been discovered there in quantity now, so i could see a renewed claim by Argentina that would illicit a response.
Africa
Keep an eye on Uganda, Ghana, Sierra Leone, and Libya in particular - all known to sit on oil reserves.
And finally, perhaps the most implausable...Antartica...probably a sea war for control of oilfields there.
Oil's running out people, and the wars to control what's left are going to get more overt and far nastier...
The next resource that will spak wars will be water. Who know's where that will start...probably Southern Europe...
The most likely ideological / political war is going to be the breakup of the EU. Whether your are for or against this institution, the simple fact is that it will not last. Such organisations never have. When it breaks up there will be wars, especially in the poorer south and east. We MAY be seeing the first cracks in Greece at the moment....
Good point about Venezuela and Antartica. Russia and Canada have both been staking claims to the area (Antartic) due to the prospects of oil there. And you are right about the fight for water but you forgot about the other major thing Food. Whenever i read articles about the future of our armed forces these are the three main prospective courses of future conflict in the world.
It will be intresting to see what the future Strategic Defense Review comes up with, will we still be aiming to be Great Britain again or wil it be Little Britain?
Quote from: Luddite on 20 May 2010, 06:46:37 PM
Venezuela.
With the BP oil pipeline currently losing 70,000 barrels a day, this US invasion may well come sooner than expected. Venezuela is a major oil importer to the US and a direct grab for control of the oil fields is likely, after a CIA attempt to destablise Chavez's govt there.
The Falklands
1982 was a war over pride and territory. Oil's been discovered there in quantity now, so i could see a renewed claim by Argentina that would illicit a response.
Africa
Keep an eye on Uganda, Ghana, Sierra Leone, and Libya in particular - all known to sit on oil reserves.
And finally, perhaps the most implausable...Antartica...probably a sea war for control of oilfields there.
Interesting stuff there.
With the Falklands, I was talking to a guy who does work for oil companies, and he was saying that the oil is actually of a low grade, so in the current market, wouldn't be worth much. But once the good stuff runs out, this lot will then become a lot more valuable.
In today's news:
North Korea's armed forces have reportedly been ordered to prepare for combat as tensions mount with the South over the deadly sinking of a warship.
The North's leader Kim Jong-Il is thought to have told his military to be braced for war, as Seoul blares out its own propaganda into the neighbouring rival country.
As part of psychological warfare operations, South Korea is placing loudspeakers at the border and is also using radio to broadcast messages into the North.
South Korea is slashing trade and denying permission for the North's cargo ships to pass through the South's waters.
The tensions also spooked global markets, with the FTSE 100 index of leading British companies falling by more than 2%.
Seoul has blamed Pyongyang for a torpedo strike that sank the warship Cheonan and killed 46 sailors on March 26.
A team of international investigators concluded last week that a torpedo from a North Korean submarine tore the Cheonan apart.
The sinking was the South's worst military disaster since the 1950-53 Korean War, which ended with an armistice, not a peace treaty.
The North denies any involvement and has warned retaliation would mean war. It has threatened to destroy any propaganda facilities installed at the heavily militarised border.
The claim that Kim had told his million-strong armed forces to prepare for combat was made by the South's state-run Yonhap news agency, citing North Korean observers.
"We do not hope for war but, if South Korea, with the US and Japan on its back, tries to attack us, Kim Jong-Il has ordered us to finish the task of unification left undone during the... (Korean) war," Yonhap quoted a May 20 broadcast as saying.
Pyongyang is already subject to a number of UN-backed sanctions in response to its nuclear weapons and missile programmes.
The US, which has 28,500 troops in South Korea, has thrown its full support behind its ally's moves.
Washington is planning two major military exercises off the Korean peninsula in a display of force intended "to deter future aggression" by the North.
Also, US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is stepping up pressure on China to back international action against North Korea over the sinking of the warship.
She said peace and security on the Korean peninsula is a shared responsibility between Washington and Beijing.
Mrs Clinton said the Obama administration expects to work closely with China to "fashion an effective response" to the sinking.
China, the communist country's main ally, has remained neutral, but the US wants Beijing to support UN Security Council action against North Korea.
Given that North & South Korea are actually still at war since the last time (just on a ceasefire if i recall), i'm really not getting too excited about this one.
China and the US won't allow the conflict to reignite so i'll be very surprised if it does - and if it does the two sides will likely be left to get on with it, reducing it to a 'local action'.
No two nuclear powers will directly engage as would be the likely outcome of either the US or China pitching into Korea again.
Still, who really knows where the next big thing will kick off...i guess the depressing thing is that its certain their WILL be a 'next time'... :(