Will the 21st Century See a Major Global Military Conflict?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter vanesch
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Major
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the likelihood of a major global military conflict occurring in the 21st century, including the potential origins and nature of such a conflict. Participants explore various scenarios, including nuclear and conventional warfare, as well as socio-political tensions that could lead to conflict.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the likelihood of a major war between world powers, citing economic globalization as a deterrent to large-scale conflict.
  • Others argue that local conflicts could escalate, particularly highlighting tensions between India and Pakistan as a significant concern due to both nations possessing nuclear weapons.
  • A few participants suggest that socio-economic disparities could lead to conflict, although they note that such conflicts may not manifest as traditional wars.
  • There are discussions about the potential for civil unrest in Europe related to cultural integration issues, particularly concerning Muslim populations and the rise of nationalism.
  • Some contributions mention the role of corporations in modern conflicts, suggesting that private entities may engage in warfare rather than nation-states.
  • Participants also reference historical contexts and the potential for ideological movements to incite conflict, drawing parallels to past events.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the likelihood of a major global military conflict. There are multiple competing views regarding the nature of potential conflicts, their origins, and the role of economic and social factors.

Contextual Notes

Some arguments depend on assumptions about future geopolitical dynamics, economic conditions, and social integration processes, which remain unresolved and speculative.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying international relations, conflict resolution, socio-political dynamics, and historical patterns of warfare.

  • #61
Count Iblis said:
And the Soviets were involved in Afghanistan way before the invasion.
So what?
Count Iblis said:
The Soviets did not invade with the purpose of destroying Afghanistan. They saw a threat from radical Islamists. They also thought that the policies of the president were a threat. The Soviet invasion did not work for a many reasons.
Most of that is false, but even if all true so what? The topic at the moment is the historical fact that Afghanistan was in many ways a modernizing country prior to the Soviet invasion, and that the Soviets did great damage to the country upon invasion. You called that nonsense.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Most of that is false, but even if all true so what? The topic at the moment is the historical fact that Afghanistan was in many ways a modernizing country prior to the Soviet invasion, and that the Soviets did great damage to the country upon invasion. You called that nonsense.

It is not false at all, but to see that you may have to ditch some biased US sources. The Soviet invasion did end up doing a lot of damage, but the reason for that had a lot to do with the Western support for Islamic extremists in that country (the so-called "freedom fighters").

You quoted some examples of positive developments in Afghanistan, but you left out some crucial facts about Ismalic extremists gaining power. You cannot have a modern democratic society, if some (small) fraction of the population does not want it and is prepaired to use violence. These forces were present in Afghanistan and they were even seen to be a threat to the Soviet backed governments and to some republics of the Soviet Union.
 
  • #63
Count Iblis said:
It is not false at all, but to see that you may have to ditch some biased US sources. The Soviet invasion did end up doing a lot of damage, but the reason for that had a lot to do with the Western support for Islamic extremists in that country (the so-called "freedom fighters").

You quoted some examples of positive developments in Afghanistan, but you left out some crucial facts about Ismalic extremists gaining power. You cannot have a modern democratic society, if some (small) fraction of the population does not want it and is prepaired to use violence. These forces were present in Afghanistan and they were even seen to be a threat to the Soviet backed governments and to some republics of the Soviet Union.
Enough.
 
  • #64
Locked.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
9K
Replies
36
Views
14K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K