World War 3 ?

Will this lead too world war 3 ? Are you scared or worried that eventually world war 3 could and will happen after a strike on Syria ?


22 reasons why starting World War III in Middle East is a really bad idea from PressTV.COM

While most of the country is obsessing over Miley Cyrus, the Obama administration is preparing a military attack against Syria which has the potential of starting World War 3. In fact, it is being reported that cruise missile strikes could begin “as early as Thursday“. The Obama administration is pledging that the strikes will be “limited”, but what happens when the Syrians fight back?


What happens if they sink a US naval vessel or they have agents start hitting targets inside the United States? Then we would have a full-blown war on our hands. And what happens if the Syrians decide to retaliate by hitting Israel? If Syrian missiles start raining down on Tel Aviv, Israel will be extremely tempted to absolutely flatten Damascus, and they are more than capable of doing precisely that. And of course Hezbollah and Iran are not likely to just sit idly by as their close ally Syria is battered into oblivion.

We are looking at a scenario where the entire Middle East could be set aflame, and that might only be just the beginning. Russia and China are sternly warning the U.S. government not to get involved in Syria, and by starting a war with Syria we will do an extraordinary amount of damage to our relationships with those two global superpowers. Could this be the beginning of a chain of events that could eventually lead to a massive global conflict with Russia and China on one side and the United States on the other? Of course it will not happen immediately, but I fear that what is happening now is setting the stage for some really bad things. The following are 22 reasons why starting World War 3 in the Middle East is a really bad idea…

#1 The American people are overwhelmingly against going to war with Syria…

Americans strongly oppose US intervention in Syria’s civil war and believe Washington should stay out of the conflict even if reports that Syria’s government used deadly chemicals to attack civilians are confirmed, a Reuters/Ipsos poll says.

About 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria’s civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Barack Obama should act.

#2 At this point, a war in Syria is even more unpopular with the American people than Congress is.

#3 The Obama administration has not gotten approval to go to war with Syria from Congress as the US Constitution requires.

#4 The United States does not have the approval of the United Nations to attack Syria and it is not going to be getting it.

#5 Syria has said that it will use ”all means available” to defend itself if the United States attacks. Would that include terror attacks in the United States itself?

#6 Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem made the following statement on Tuesday…

“We have two options: either to surrender, or to defend ourselves with the means at our disposal. The second choice is the best: we will defend ourselves”

#7 Russia has just sent their most advanced anti-ship missiles to Syria. What do you think would happen if images of sinking US naval vessels were to come flashing across our television screens?

#8 When the United States attacks Syria, there is a very good chance that Syria will attack Israel. Just check out what one Syrian official said recently…

A member of the Syrian Ba’ath national council Halef al-Muftah, until recently the Syrian propaganda minister’s aide, said on Monday that Damascus views Israel as “behind the aggression and therefore it will come under fire” should Syria be attacked by the United States.

In an interview for the American radio station Sawa in Arabic, President Bashar Assad’s fellow party member said: “We have strategic weapons and we can retaliate. Essentially, the strategic weapons are aimed at Israel.”

Al-Muftah stressed that the US’s threats will not influence the Syrain regime and added that “If the US or Israel err through aggression and exploit the chemical issue, the region will go up in endless flames, affecting not only the area’s security, but the world’s.”

#9 If Syria attacks Israel, the consequences could be absolutely catastrophic. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is promising that any attack will be responded to “forcefully“…

“We are not a party to this civil war in Syria but if we identify any attempt to attack us we will respond and we will respond forcefully”

#10 Hezbollah will likely do whatever it can to fight for the survival of the Assad regime. That could include striking targets inside both the United States and Israel.

#11 Iran’s closest ally is Syria. Will Iran sit idly by as their closest ally is removed from the chessboard?

#12 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with Russia. On Tuesday, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that the West is acting like a “monkey with a hand grenade.”

#13 Starting a war with Syria will cause significant damage to our relationship with China. And what will happen if the Chinese decide to start dumping the massive amount of US debt that it is holding? Interest rates would absolutely skyrocket and we would rapidly be facing a nightmare scenario.

#14 Dr. Jerome Corsi and Walid Shoebat have compiled some startling evidence that it was actually the Syrian rebels that the US is supporting that were responsible for the chemical weapons attack that is being used as justification to go to war with Syria…

With the assistance of former PLO member and native Arabic-speaker Walid Shoebat, WND has assembled evidence from various Middle Eastern sources that cast doubt on Obama administration claims the Assad government is responsible for last week’s attack.

#15 As Pat Buchanan recently noted, it would have made absolutely no sense for the Assad regime to use chemical weapons on defenseless women and children. The only people who would benefit from such an attack would be the rebels…

The basic question that needs to be asked about this horrific attack on civilians, which appears to be gas related, is: Cui bono?

To whose benefit would the use of nerve gas on Syrian women and children redound? Certainly not Assad’s, as we can see from the furor and threats against him that the use of gas has produced.

The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war.

#16 If the Saudis really want to topple the Assad regime, they should do it themselves. They should not expect the United States to do their dirty work for them.

#17 A former commander of US Central Command has said that a US attack on Syria would result in “a full-throated, very, very serious war“.

#18 A war in the Middle East will be bad for the financial markets. The Dow was down about 170 points today and concern about war with Syria was the primary reason.

#19 A war in the Middle East will cause the price of oil to go up. On Tuesday, the price of US oil rose to about $109 a barrel.

#20 There is no way in the world that the US government should be backing the Syrian rebels. As I discussed a few days ago, the rebels have pledged loyalty to al-Qaeda, they have beheaded numerous Christians and they have massacred entire Christian villages. If the US government helps these lunatics take power in Syria it will be a complete and utter disaster.

#21 A lot of innocent civilians inside Syria will end up getting killed. Already, a lot of Syrians are expressing concern about what “foreign intervention” will mean for them and their families…

“I’ve always been a supporter of foreign intervention, but now that it seems like a reality, I’ve been worrying that my family could be hurt or killed,” said one woman, Zaina, who opposes Assad. “I’m afraid of a military strike now.”

“The big fear is that they’ll make the same mistakes they made in Libya and Iraq,” said Ziyad, a man in his 50s. “They’ll hit civilian targets, and then they’ll cry that it was by mistake, but we’ll get killed in the thousands.”

#22 If the US government insists on going to war with Syria without the approval of the American people, the US Congress or the United Nations, we are going to lose a lot of friends and a lot of credibility around the globe. It truly is a sad day when Russia looks like “the good guys” and we look like “the bad guys”.

What good could possibly come out of getting involved in Syria? As I wrote about the other day, the “rebels” that Obama is backing are rabidly anti-Christian, rabidly anti-Israel and rabidly anti-western. If they take control of Syria, that nation will be far more unstable and far more of a hotbed for terrorism than it is now.

And the downside of getting involved in Syria is absolutely enormous. By attacking Syria, the United States could cause a major regional war to erupt in the Middle East which could eventually lead to World War 3.

I don’t know about you, but I think that starting World War 3 in the Middle East is a really bad idea.

Let us hope that cooler heads prevail before things spin totally out of control.

#13

False. You cannot collect a debt earlier than what is stipulated in the contract.

So, let's say in the contract it says that the debt is payable in 5 years.

The Creditor cannot demand payment of said debt until 5 years, as according to the stipulation.

Also, what makes you so sure not intervening would not lead to WWIII?

While I'm completely sure that some world leaders are the most greedy and petty individuals alive, I still hope that they're not stupid enough to want another global war - not after over sixty million people died in WW2 (but then again, for some people in very high positions, those are numbers, not tragedies).

So no, I can't say I'm scared about an upcoming WW3, because that would mean nuking each other to extinction, and even the most raving lunatics would see that THAT kind of scenario is against their best interest - wether it be money, prestige, influence, or MAYBE the well-being of their fellow countrymen.

The worst I could see develop from the Syrian conflict is another proxy war, but I hope I'm wrong, the Cold War's ended 24 years ago.

There's a world war 3? Doesnt feel like it.

World War 3 at the moment seems extremely unlikely. Its in everyone's best interest to not begin any major-scale wars due to the fact how much damage can be caused by modern weaponry. Although if a WW3 were to happen, it would cause unimaginable damage to any country involved.

I don't think youtube videos are allowed in SD.

Eh, first wait for the debate regarding syria even though presidents in the past have ignored congress and gone to war. It would make sense for the US to go war since post second world war allied nations promised to stop another germany or the atrocities the second world war brought, but now some nations don't have the balls to do anything since syria and russia play a role as their ally and economic interest.

I doubt it will be a world war, but it will be a conflict and I doubt either side(Russia or US) wants to fight.
Edit: then again it's not in their best interest to get involved.

Yea not only for the soldiers that put their life on the line but for the women and children who would get involved.
But it would have a upside to it to. People would stop being fat ass and start getting together to support the cause.

This video assumes a lot and is out of context. But it is still a very real possibility that we need to be aware of when we go to cast our votes for the next election

World war 3 will happen because of either food shortage or because of a global economic collapse.
Attacking Syria can only speed up the process. The question is not will there be a world war 3, the question is when will this war happen. The only certainty is that the entire world right now is in a big mess. That will continue to get worse because of the stupid overpopulation. If the world population keeps on rising, war will happen and very soon. Maybe within the first decade.

The world leaders are oblivious for this problem (except for china).

Yeah I think that syria and the Tomahawk missiles will be the begging of the end if not that then the start. I mean there is a theme here guys.

World war started because of economic collapse from world war 2,country's and bankers screwing whole nations over etc. Now the shit will same shit is happening again. 2008 bush brought us into this shit hole and Obammmma is continuing it. After his term some no name will show up and completely fuck everything up. Damn I hope there is a True God so I don't just end up in nothingness etc.


P.S Anyone else scared shitless silly ?

Will we can all agree that war and history will repeat itself if not soon. Hope you guys make some plans just incase shit hit's the fan.

Syria also signed the Geniva convention in 1968, witch means they violated it. I'm suprized the U.N. hasn't stepped in over the gas attacks. More people are gonna have to die before the rest of the world is going to take any action. Only tip I have for the civilians over there is to pack up your shit and RUN!

WORLD WAR 3 FOR THIS I HAVE SOME WORLD WAR

1.WORLD WAR ALIEN

2.WORLD WAR ANGEL

3.WORLD WAR ROBOT

4.WORLD WAR DEMON

5.WORLD WAR VAMPER

6.WORLD WAR ZOMBIES

7.WORLD WAR WEREWOLF

8.WORLD WAR BIO-HUMANOID

9.WORLD WAR NUCLEAR-WEAPON

10.WORLD WAR SUPER GENIUS BRAIN WAVES

I'M NOT SAYING THAT BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE A SOME KIND OF JOKE THE REAL WORLD WAR IS THAT WE ARE KILLING ARE

OWN BROTHERS WE ARE ALL HUMANS AND WE'RE KILLING BECAUSE SOMEONE MAKING FUN OUT OF SOMEONE RELIGION AND

SOMEONE MAKING FUN OUT OF ARE RELIGION THAT IS WHY THIS IS THE REAL WORLD WAR 3 IF YOU REILLY WANT TO STOP THIS

WAR THINK AGAIN BEFORE YOU MAKING FUN OUT OF SOMEONE RELIGIONS STOP NOW WAR WILL BE OVER

I will begin by taking a short look at the history between the two nations, and of Egypt and Palestine for that matter. Ever since the religion of Islam emerged from the flames of tribal warfare and the conquest of Mecca in the deserts of Saudi Arabia, there has been a general movement sustained and repeatedly taken-up to either expel or exterminate the Jewish populations from the region. Beginning right after the second world war from 1948 only, we have found the Syrians, Palestinians, and Egyptians attacking the modern state of Israel time and time again through the raids of 1954-1955 through breach of ceasefire, reallocation of the Jordan river's waters for the express purpose of hindering Israel's national water carrier (designed for transporting water for further Israeli colonization of once-desert land) and its following "War of Attrition", Palestinian and Neo-Nazi terrorists capturing a plane of 100 Jewish people and holding them hostage, the assassination of Sadat (the only friendly Egyptian president to Israel in many, many years) by Egyptian army renegades, missile attacks from Syria and many, many other grievances that have been committed.

I will also go the distance to say that Israel is not completely innocent of its crimes either, as with the duping by Britain and France to go to war with Egypt over its canals early in the modern state's history. However, all of this history goes to prove the main point of this argument: that incidents such as these shown in the video have been going-on for a long time now, and although this certainly does add to this list of bad history between the two nations, it in no way shows that a peak has been reached or a political breaking point between entangling world alliances is close.

I will take this response one step further, however, and say that if world war III were to begin, its most imminent threat could certainly stem from the Zionism vs Islamic fervour we see in the middle east that you have pointed-out. The only two real players for this kind of war, however, would be the more or less obvious U.S. of A pitted against the Russian Federation. Without returning to some of the more reminiscent cold war era arms play and dress rehearsals, Vladimir Putin has been competing for the return of Russia's superpower status since he first took office in 1999, became Prime Minister from 2008-2012, and then continued a third Presidential term that continues to this day. Already Putin has taken the Russian income tax down to only 13%, encouraged small business heavily, reduced corporate tax from 35% to 24%, and continued to industrialize Russia to the point where its GDP has increased 6 fold from when he was first elected. The grain of salt here, of course, is that the national economy before his first Presidency was already at an incredibly low point. Nobody can deny that. However, the economic potential for such a nation under a man who is introducing capitalism (Using the older USSR's history as a convincing incentive I might add) will make the new Russia a real threat to the balance of power on the world stage.

Vladimir Putin, putting country economics aside, has also been exercising exact control over the population he leads. By carefully taking opposing points of view with the current and previous popes, he is making the Eastern Orthodox Church that is highly unique to Russia very much more prone to a return of Tzarism. On top of this, the population has a very high opinion of him due to his help to raise the Russian Federation from the ashes of the old USSR. If you take his KGB background and string of censorships due to his creation of the "Federal List of Extremist Materials" in accordance with the "Fedearl Law on Combating The Terrorism" in 2006, the control he exacts over his people is nothing less than incredible. Journalists are even as far as encouraged not to write on information to the public that may not "please" the authorities.

One last point of interest lies in Vladimir Putin's recent interest in the Middle East. Siding almost exclusively with Syria in middle-eastern conflicts, he has undoubtedly taken an interest in keeping the U.S. on its toes in the middle-east, and seeing as he has good relations with most of the middle-east due to his support of an Islamic government, he may have nothing short of an alliance with the middle-east if a world war III were ever to emerge. The U.S. of A would be left without its most vital source of crude oil, and Putin would have both these resources to himself and China as the southern industrial gem in compliment to the Russian industrial heart of Eastern Europe. This would put America in a rather precarious position for more obvious reasons, and to make matters worse he has demanded from Japan, now America's largest protectorate state (and slipping away from that status), some of their offshore islands that they had acquired from Russia in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-1905. Japan, as I had just stated, is a slipping American protectorate at the moment. The reason I write this is because in 2007, it was allowed by the U.S. to have a standing army and in 2010 and 2012, there have been attempts by their government to revise the constitution itself (without amending it) from its 1947 state.

All-in-all, however, Vladimir Putin is a much more level-headed man when it comes to world diplomacy than one might think. He has been improving Russian relations with NATO since day one of his taking office, and there is no sign at the moment of any sudden eruption of war between the U.S. and the Russian Federation. Although it is very clear that he is in want of increasing the amount of power that he controls on the world stage, I do not think that he plans to use it in a thermo-nuclear war- and definitely not in a war of world proportions anytime soon. He is most likely flexing his Russian muscles, so to speak, in order to achieve superpower status for his country that the USSR enjoyed during the cold war. We must continue to remember that the days of Joseph Stalin, Leon Trotsky's biggest political mistake, are over, and that the country is no longer living in the shadow of such a man.

I just wanted to say , anyone who think a world war 3 could happen soon is absolutly delusional . There is one thing that motivated the leaders who started the previous great wars, they thought they could win .

When the nuclear bombs landed on Hiroshima and Nagasaki , things changed . The world knew at this exact moment that war would never be the same again. Some childish quarrel like what is happening right now will never start a new world war .

---

"What good could possibly come out of getting involved in Syria?"

My oppinion on that is that the USA like to engage in conflicts unrelated to them to remember the world that they should fear them. You could call that world terrorism i suppose .

True the U.S.A is committing world war 3

And I somewhat agree with you about world war 3 but you never know

Well at this point, I'm still not paranoid enough to assume military action in the middle east would be "the trigger" for starting a third world war. Sure there have been scandals here and there with sprinklings of some 21st century military action but it's nothing new. We've constantly had weapons on the middle east since way back in the 1970's. Besides, no matter how bad our diplomatic relations get, as long as we are all economically tied, there will be no war. That and the whole mutual destruction nuke agreement we made waaay back in kennedy's time. That eliminates all large powers from joining a world-wide war due to fear of a truly pyrrhic victory. Chances are, the only way to actually initiate one is to take a rogue nuke then fire it and hope it causes a chain reaction. Other than that, meh.

I always wondered what a nuclear winter would be like.

There are a whole lot of reasons why a third World War would be impractical for both the instigators and defenders as well as alternatives that are more efficient.

Almost all speculation of a third World War comes from the mouth of over-sensationalizing main stream 'news' broadcasters who'd rather see the masses ignorant of all but the latest trends than be properly informed.

That being said, the only people who'd want to instigate a third World War are those who just want to see the world burn and they do not have many friends who would help. You might as well call it an International Gang Bang.