What's new

Are we heading towards a third world war?

FearlessRoar

FearlessRoar

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 11, 2023
Runs
16,672
The past few years have indeed seen heightened tensions across various global regions. Since 2022, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine has persisted, leading to ongoing instability in the Eastern Europe. Additionally, tensions escalated between China and Taiwan, and subsequently between China and America due to disputes over a spy balloon. These conflicts have added to the geopolitical strain.

Last year, a devastating conflict erupted between Israel and Gaza, in which Israel registered new examples of war crimes and genocide.

Moreover, the middle east also witnessed escalating tensions between Iran and Israel, mainly manifested through support for Houthi rebels and incidents such as the explosions at the shrine of General Qasem Soleimani in Iran. These events intensified concerns about the broader implications of the conflict and its potential to escalate further.

Recently, there have been reports indicating tensions between South Korea and North Korea. This adds to the already volatile situation in East Asia, potentially exacerbating geopolitical tensions.

Are we on the brink of a third world war in practical terms?
 
Last edited:
FearlessRoar said:
The past few years have indeed seen heightened tensions across various global regions. Since 2022, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine has persisted, leading to ongoing instability in the area. Additionally, tensions escalated between China and Taiwan, and subsequently between China and America due to disputes over a spy balloon. These conflicts have added to the geopolitical strain.

Last year, a devastating conflict erupted between Israel and Gaza, in which Israel registered new examples of war crimes and genocide.

Moreover, the middle east also witnessed escalating tensions between Iran and Israel, mainly manifested through support for Houthi rebels and incidents such as the explosions at the shrine of General Qasem Soleimani in Iran. These events intensified concerns about the broader implications of the conflict and its potential to escalate further.

Recently, there have been reports indicating tensions between South Korea and North Korea. This adds to the already volatile situation in East Asia, potentially exacerbating geopolitical tensions.

Are we on the brink of a third world war in practical terms?
Click to expand...
Ottowan Bismarck once said that something stupid in Balkan will cause a great war and it did happen in shape of World War 1. The same way I believe some stupidity on part of US or Israel would cause the third world war and the poor global community would have to pay the price of their wretchedness
 
We are actually in War zone

these days biological and economic wars are causing even more devastating damage compared to conventional wars
 
There's no world war happening because the US is simply too powerful militarily and economically. Plus it has aligned itself with a host of credible allies. All in all there's simply no competition to oppose this. Who exactly will pick a fight with the west? Putin has his hands full with Ukraine let alone a world war. The arabs are a joke. Iran at best can defend itself but not take the battle to the west. China is too smart to waste time and resources on a conflict. Plus it knows it doesn't have a single credible ally that will join it on the battlefield. Also the recent purge within the Chinese security establishment shows there are problems within. The only ones stupid enough to try and nuke the US is North Korea.

To beat the US the most important strategic move is to disempower the dollar, do that and the mighty shall fall. For that China needs to build credible alliances with at least 2-3 of the world's top 10 economies. Remember the top 10 economies control more than 70% of the world's wealth.
 
A third world war only depends upon China and USA

With all the issues existing, the goal of USA and China isn't to fight a war. USA is trying to find ways to slow down the growth of China while they themselves recover their own economy. Covid already slowed down China and had a direct effect on BRI. USA doesnt want to destroy China or get involved in a war with them, they just want to slow them down by 15-20 years.

As for Israel-Palestine, whether people like this or not, its not going to create a World War.

World Wars were fought so that countries can gain power and become a super power, while the other countries that sided looked to benefit in some way aswell.

The Israel-Palestine war is a lost cause, and countries know they gain nothing by siding with Palestine in an actual war. No one makes alliances on theology but on geopolitical benefit. The only way Israel-Palestine war will end for now if peace is brokered, now that could happen before or after Israel decides to capture whole of Gaza.

There are some that may think Pakistan should get involved if such a war takes place (with Israel-Palestine), but our nuclear policy is we keep it for attacking India and not other countries. Plus, we have warhead ranges that only covers India's distance and no other country.

The most extreme case would be where China owning USA's Debt decides to dump the dollar causing the dollar to lose its value and spiral out of control. In which case USA might enter into war and get allies involved, especially those who would be directly affected by the dumping of the Dollar
 
no, more likely to have a second cold war between USA its western allies and China with its eastern allies, neither country either have the desire for, or ability to sustain an all out war.
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Ottowan Bismarck once said that something stupid in Balkan will cause a great war and it did happen in shape of World War 1. The same way I believe some stupidity on part of US or Israel would cause the third world war and the poor global community would have to pay the price of their wretchedness
Click to expand...
WW1 happened due to many countries that were doing well economically and had decided to compete to become a super power. Alliances had been built before hand. WW1 had a built up to it and it made sense that one small incident was waiting to happen to let the whole world spiral out of control
 
We aren't getting a 3rd world war in the sense of the 1st and 2nd. That's because of changes in technology, nature of war and very importantly the economic interdependence of all the big powers. Any major war could economically destroy all the powers and send the World back by decades. The 3rd World war would also lead to Nuclear weapons being used on a smaller and bigger scale. This obviously has massive implications for humanity and the planet and no one wants to go down in History as the guy that destroyed the a viable planet.
It could be argued that we are in the middle of small scale conflicts which in cumulation are the 3rd World War. This theory has lots of milage and I am of the belief that these smaller conflicts are the most likely outcomes over the next few decades.
 
With the Israel war with Hamas is expanding, you never know what might happen? Also, the Russia, Ukraine war doesn't seem to be ending any time soon so anything can happen.
 
FearlessRoar said:
@Major @Rana @Cpt. Rishwat @Bewal Express share your reviews
Click to expand...
I appreciate that you are seeking my views on this but I don’t think I know enough to predict where the world is heading in terms of War.

The Isreal/Palestine situation is the closest I have seen when it comes to something that could spiral out of control into a full blown war between the West and Islamic countries. Besides that, I feel War is something that won’t ever come to us due to the vast business, money at stake between the developed nations.

Some poor countries will be battle grounds, whilst we will always just sit at home and comment about what’s going on in these places and actually never do anything about it physically.
 
The West isn't going to initiate a war. That means China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia will have to be the instigators.

China is calculating, Iran uses proxies (see Israel-Palestine), and North Korea is a proxy. Unless something drastically changes in China's calculations vis-a-vis Taiwan, they won't attack for the foreseeable future.

That leaves the Russia-Ukraine war as the likeliest point of escalation. This is why I suspect Western governments are slowing down aid to Ukraine. They want to hurt Russia, but not to the point where Putin does something stupid.

I expect more conflicts, but not a full-blown global scale war.
 
Not impossible the way things are going.

I feel like there are lots of pent up angers on all sides currently. These angers may cause a trigger which may cause WW3.
 
FearlessRoar said:
They are indirectly inviting Iran and Russia in this war.
Click to expand...
Iran can't fight the direct war with any country and certainly not against UK/ US .they always fight behind the scenes through proxy force.
Russia is already in the war .
 
Monday Morning said:
The West isn't going to initiate a war. That means China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia will have to be the instigators.

China is calculating, Iran uses proxies (see Israel-Palestine), and North Korea is a proxy. Unless something drastically changes in China's calculations vis-a-vis Taiwan, they won't attack for the foreseeable future.

That leaves the Russia-Ukraine war as the likeliest point of escalation. This is why I suspect Western governments are slowing down aid to Ukraine. They want to hurt Russia, but not to the point where Putin does something stupid.

I expect more conflicts, but not a full-blown global scale war.
Click to expand...
I think this is a very fair analysis. I believe the cost of full scale wars between major powers has become so high that we'll see a lot of significant conflicts rather than a full scale world war unless initiated by a charismatic madman in which case God ( or the flying spaghetti monster) bless us all!
 
Devadwal said:
Iran can't fight the direct war with any country and certainly not against UK/ US .they always fight behind the scenes through proxy force.
Russia is already in the war .
Click to expand...

If you think Iran can't fight direct wars, then what's stopping America from invading Iran?
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Ottowan Bismarck once said that something stupid in Balkan will cause a great war and it did happen in shape of World War 1. The same way I believe some stupidity on part of US or Israel would cause the third world war and the poor global community would have to pay the price of their wretchedness
Click to expand...
US is contributing to unrest worldwide. To be very specific, the US funds Israel, expands NATO ,which fueled the conflict in Russia-Ukraine and the US-Iran rivalry is causing turmoil in the Middle East. In all these conflicts, the common factor is the US.
 
Cricket Warrior said:
We are actually in War zone

these days biological and economic wars are causing even more devastating damage compared to conventional wars
Click to expand...
A valid Point. In the economic war, i think China appears to be a master. It is evident in its growing influence over South Asia and Africa.
 
shortbread said:
There's no world war happening because the US is simply too powerful militarily and economically. Plus it has aligned itself with a host of credible allies. All in all there's simply no competition to oppose this. Who exactly will pick a fight with the west? Putin has his hands full with Ukraine let alone a world war. The arabs are a joke. Iran at best can defend itself but not take the battle to the west. China is too smart to waste time and resources on a conflict. Plus it knows it doesn't have a single credible ally that will join it on the battlefield. Also the recent purge within the Chinese security establishment shows there are problems within. The only ones stupid enough to try and nuke the US is North Korea.

To beat the US the most important strategic move is to disempower the dollar, do that and the mighty shall fall. For that China needs to build credible alliances with at least 2-3 of the world's top 10 economies. Remember the top 10 economies control more than 70% of the world's wealth.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, the US relies on the strength of its dollar. Disempower the US dollar is challenging due to its alliance with Europe.
 
Major said:
A third world war only depends upon China and USA

With all the issues existing, the goal of USA and China isn't to fight a war. USA is trying to find ways to slow down the growth of China while they themselves recover their own economy. Covid already slowed down China and had a direct effect on BRI. USA doesnt want to destroy China or get involved in a war with them, they just want to slow them down by 15-20 years.

As for Israel-Palestine, whether people like this or not, its not going to create a World War.

World Wars were fought so that countries can gain power and become a super power, while the other countries that sided looked to benefit in some way aswell.

The Israel-Palestine war is a lost cause, and countries know they gain nothing by siding with Palestine in an actual war. No one makes alliances on theology but on geopolitical benefit. The only way Israel-Palestine war will end for now if peace is brokered, now that could happen before or after Israel decides to capture whole of Gaza.

There are some that may think Pakistan should get involved if such a war takes place (with Israel-Palestine), but our nuclear policy is we keep it for attacking India and not other countries. Plus, we have warhead ranges that only covers India's distance and no other country.

The most extreme case would be where China owning USA's Debt decides to dump the dollar causing the dollar to lose its value and spiral out of control. In which case USA might enter into war and get allies involved, especially those who would be directly affected by the dumping of the Dollar
Click to expand...
China has indeed secured alliances with Saudi Arabia, with both Iran and Saudi Arabia aligning with China. Afghanistan has also come under China's influence, and there's a gradual expansion of Chinese control in Africa. The USA seems to be losing influence, yet it relies heavily on its technology and wealth.
 
Bewal Express said:
We aren't getting a 3rd world war in the sense of the 1st and 2nd. That's because of changes in technology, nature of war and very importantly the economic interdependence of all the big powers. Any major war could economically destroy all the powers and send the World back by decades. The 3rd World war would also lead to Nuclear weapons being used on a smaller and bigger scale. This obviously has massive implications for humanity and the planet and no one wants to go down in History as the guy that destroyed the a viable planet.
It could be argued that we are in the middle of small scale conflicts which in cumulation are the 3rd World War. This theory has lots of milage and I am of the belief that these smaller conflicts are the most likely outcomes over the next few decades.
Click to expand...
You made good points. Even though a big war like World War 1 and 2 might not happen soon, the fact is countries have weapons, and they're not just for peace. Those with nuclear weapons aren't keeping them for show or peace either. Because people can be unpredictable, we might see them being used, sooner or later.
 
Rana said:
I appreciate that you are seeking my views on this but I don’t think I know enough to predict where the world is heading in terms of War.

The Isreal/Palestine situation is the closest I have seen when it comes to something that could spiral out of control into a full blown war between the West and Islamic countries. Besides that, I feel War is something that won’t ever come to us due to the vast business, money at stake between the developed nations.

Some poor countries will be battle grounds, whilst we will always just sit at home and comment about what’s going on in these places and actually never do anything about it physically.
Click to expand...
You are right. It's often the poor countries bearing the brunt of wars.
 
Monday Morning said:
The West isn't going to initiate a war. That means China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia will have to be the instigators.

China is calculating, Iran uses proxies (see Israel-Palestine), and North Korea is a proxy. Unless something drastically changes in China's calculations vis-a-vis Taiwan, they won't attack for the foreseeable future.

That leaves the Russia-Ukraine war as the likeliest point of escalation. This is why I suspect Western governments are slowing down aid to Ukraine. They want to hurt Russia, but not to the point where Putin does something stupid.

I expect more conflicts, but not a full-blown global scale war.
Click to expand...
Western countries are slowing down in sending aid to Ukraine due to their own economic problems. People are expressing concerns that their governments are spending money on Ukraine while they face domestic issues. Despite sanctions, Russia's economy hasn't crashed, indicating Putin's strategic planning in starting the war.
 
FearlessRoar said:
US is contributing to unrest worldwide. To be very specific, the US funds Israel, expands NATO ,which fueled the conflict in Russia-Ukraine and the US-Iran rivalry is causing turmoil in the Middle East. In all these conflicts, the common factor is the US.
Click to expand...
Well ppl may dislike Osama bin laden but he was right on one thing that USA is the biggest terrorist in the world. They are the biggest exporters of arms in the world but make hypocratic claims of being the world's peacemaker.
 
sweep_shot said:
Not impossible the way things are going.

I feel like there are lots of pent up angers on all sides currently. These angers may cause a trigger which may cause WW3.
Click to expand...
The anger of nations that have endured irreversible harm will never let the war end. If we witness a temporary peace, it's likely another conflict will arise as a form of revenge from them.
 
This week was an eventful one for the ever-escalating crisis in the Middle East, with a few critical developments on both the Gaza and Red Sea fronts. The International Court of Justice took up a case brought forth by BRICS member South Africa to prevent the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza at the hands of Israel.

The first two days of proceedings, which saw the legal representatives of South Africa and Israel present their opening arguments, drew contrasting reactions from the ‘West and the rest’. While much of the Global South and sympathetic voices in Western nations hailed South Africa, some key governments from the Global North rejected outright the main premise of the case.

Germany declared its intention to intervene on Israel's behalf as a third party in the ICJ and dismissed the accusation of genocide while affirming its support for Israel's right to self-defense. The United States and Canada, similarly, announced that they believed the case was ‘baseless’, even as Israel’s brutal offensive in Gaza has claimed more than 23,000 lives, over 10,000 of them children.

Meanwhile, in response to months of attacks by Houthi forces on Red Sea shipping, the United States and the United Kingdom launched dozens of air strikes across Yemen in what marked a serious escalation in the conflict. US President Joe Biden held up the strikes as a “clear message that the United States and our partners will not tolerate attacks on our personnel or allow hostile actors to imperil freedom of navigation."

The leaders of Yemen’s Houthi forces vowed to continue their attacks on shipping for as long as Israel’s war on Gaza continues while threatening that “all American-British interests have become legitimate targets for the Yemeni armed forces.”

As with the proceedings in ICJ, the reactions to the strikes by the US and the UK highlighted the sharp split between the West and the region. While the nations seen as part of the US-led world order framed the development as ‘defensive’ and tried to isolate it from Israel’s war in Gaza, Middle Eastern nations, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran voiced grave apprehension and called for avoiding escalation.

This month, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran, along with the United Arab Emirates and Ethiopia, formally became part of the BRICS bloc, accepting the invitation extended to them by the five titular members at last year’s summit in Johannesburg. Together, the 10 nations now represent 45 per cent of the world’s population and, with a combined economy worth over $28.5 trillion, account for roughly 28 per cent of the global economy. With the inclusion of the new members, they will also be producing about 44 per cent of the world's crude oil.

Global economic overhaul

One tool the United States has frequently used to keep global governments in line with its geopolitical and geoeconomic aims has been its currency. The US dollar, the Sri Lankan analyst wrote, has allowed Washington to perpetuate its hegemony. The sanctions and trade restrictions the US placed on nearly 40 countries that run counter to American objectives have resulted in immense hardships for nearly half of the world’s population.

BRICS discussions to bring about an alternative currency for global trade transactions could result in a potent counter to what Majueran termed the ‘weaponization of the US dollar’. “If BRICS' plan to adopt a common currency to conduct global trade is successful, it could break the dollar's global hegemony and make it easy for emerging economies to conduct free trade in currencies other than the dollar,” he suggested.

In an interview with Sputnik a few days after Iran formally joined BRICS, the country’s deputy foreign minister voiced interest in an alternative to the dollar. “We are interested in creating a unified currency in the BRICS group, and this could be very effective,” Mahdi Safari said. “By using national currencies, the process of eliminating the use of the dollar in commercial exchanges begins, and we are interested in continuing this process,” he added.

BRICS members Russia and Iran have already officially abandoned the SWIFT payment system for cross-border transactions. Instead, the two countries will initiate payments to settle international trade using direct transfers between the banks of both countries.

An article carried by the UAE state-owned English-language daily The National anticipated more bilateral trade in local currencies following the inclusion of new members into BRICS. “The implication we are watching closely from the addition of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt to BRICS is the potential for more bilateral trade in local currencies, particularly following the UAE and India's agreement reached in July, and Egypt being in similar discussions with India already,” the article quoted Carla Slim, an economist at Standard Chartered Bank, as saying. India has already started purchasing UAE oil in Indian rupees.

The article also expected that calls for overhauling the international monetary system and developing a US dollar alternative would grow with BRICS expansion – “…even if less relevant today, the emergence of BRICS common currency can act as a major harbinger in diversifying risks away from the stronghold of the dollar,” it quoted Dubai-based professor of finance Ullas Rao as saying.

Infusion of finance

Up until last year, analysts, especially in Western publications, consistently downplayed the potential of BRICS and emphasized how its five titular member nations, collectively, had failed to live up to economic expectations. The formal inclusion of oil- and finance-rich Saudi Arabia and the UAE could allow the grouping to challenge that perception and enable it to empower new economic initiatives, such as the New Development Bank.

“The image of Brics in the past was of a financially vulnerable group, beholden to the global political superpowers. The financial power of Saudi and the UAE as net exporters of capital to the rest of the world will substantially change that perception,” the National quoted Gary Dugan, chief investment officer at Dalma Capital, as saying. “Also as a collective, we expect Saudi Arabia and the UAE to be afforded easier access to the growth markets of the BRICS countries on favorable terms,” he added.

An analysis by the Stimson Center last year explored in particular the impact the UAE could have as a member of the BRICS, particularly on the NDB initiative, which has faced difficulties particularly due to Western sanctions against Russia.

“The UAE could inject much-needed liquidity into the NDB,” the analysis noted, adding that the Gulf nation’s substantial financial resources, including its sovereign wealth fund, could be leveraged to provide direct capital contributions. “Moreover, the UAE’s expertise in finance and infrastructure development could be valuable in structuring and managing NDB projects efficiently, attracting more funding from both within and outside the BRICS alliance,” the analysis added.

Energy factor

With the inclusion of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the UAE, the BRICS grouping can now boast of being a major player in the world’s energy market. China and India are already the second and third biggest consumers of oil in the world with strong ties to Gulf countries. The two other new entrants, Egypt and Ethiopia, also provide BRICS a firm foothold in one of the world’s major shipping corridors, from the Horn of Africa to the Suez Canal.

Iran’s deputy foreign minister Safari, in his interview with Sputnik, highlighted the positive role the expanded BRICS could play in terms of energy in particular. “The most important problem is represented by three issues: the first is energy production, the second is energy transfer, and the third is energy consumption. I can say that these three issues are being solved by BRICS.”

Experts quoted by the UAE-state-owned The National underscored the influence the expanded BRICS now had on the world’s oil and energy markets. “The addition of two major oil exporters … will reinforcet heir bargaining power and influence in OPEC+ while also offering the space for them to align theirs trategies with other BRICS members,” it quoted commodities and emerging markets expert Ehsan Khoman as saying. By virtue of its influence on OPEC+, the BRICS grouping is poised to become a powerful voice for the Global South, Khoman added.

“The prospect of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Iran and Egypt joining BRICS creates new mechanisms that forces a degree of political co-operation by all the countries,” said Ayham Kamel, another expert quoted in the article. “The Arab countries are looking for improving their global geopolitical influence and appear committed to avoiding detachment from the West,” he stressed, however. As the BRICS contain many members that overlap with the G20, they may work in tandem in the future,a BBC article quoted Dr Irene Mia from the International Institute for Strategic Studies as saying.
"Together, they might push for more money for developing nations to tackle climate change, or to reduce the power of the US dollar as the world's currency," she said.

Experts quoted by the UAE-state-owned The National underscored the influence the expanded BRICS now had on the world’s oil and energy markets. “The addition of two major oil exporters … will reinforce their bargaining power and influence in OPEC+ while also offering the space for them to align their strategies with other BRICS members,” it quoted commodities and emerging markets expert Ehsan Khoman as saying. By virtue of its influence on OPEC+, the BRICS grouping is poised to become a powerful voice for the Global South, Khoman added.

“The prospect of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Iran and Egypt joining BRICS creates new mechanisms that forces a degree of political co-operation by all the countries,” said Ayham Kamel, another expert quoted in the article. “The Arab countries are looking for improving their global geopolitical influence and appear committed to avoiding detachment from the West,” he stressed, however.As the BRICS contain many members that overlap with the G20, they may work in tandem in the future, a BBC article quoted Dr Irene Mia from the International Institute for Strategic Studies as saying.

"Together, they might push for more money for developing nations to tackle climate change, or to reduce the power of the US dollar as the world's currency," she said.In the case of UAE in particular, the Stimson Center analysis noted that membership in the BRICS did in no way mean a detachment from the West. “The UAE wants to maintain its strong ties with the US while simultaneously exploring new avenues for collaboration and engagement with BRICS nations,” it stated.“The UAE remains a vital US security partner in the Middle East.

However, the Emirates appears to be recalibrating its economic diplomacy to expand its political and economic leverage in the Global South.” In a statement issued by the UAE following its formal inclusion into BRICS, the Gulf nations Minister of State for International Cooperation, Her Excellency Reem Al Hashimy, said: “We are pleased to join the BRICS group, which the UAE recognizes as a mechanism to promote global peace, stability, and prosperity.”

“The UAE believes in championing multilateralism and actively contributing to important international arenas. This includes engaging with BRICS, participating regularly in the G20 process, and hosting the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP28) climate conference in November,” she concluded.“The UAE stresses that the future of global security and prosperity relies on strong multilateral partnerships and cooperation on the international level, and a shared commitment to achieving stability and development.”

Express Tribune

tribune.com.pk

New BRICS, new voice for Global South | The Express Tribune

Clear divisions over the Middle East crisis underscore the pressing need for an alternative to the US-led world order
tribune.com.pk tribune.com.pk
 
Who is going to take on US and NATO?

Russia could not even beat Ukraine and the war is going on for more than 1 year.

China's military is weak and untested. They could not take Taiwan after all these years. They can only bully countries like Philippines and Vietnam. Their economy is also struggling post Covid. They are in no position to fight any war.

Rest of the countries like Iran or Yemen are irrelevant. They are more like tiny bugs that will pester US and NATO from time to time, but nothing of any significance.
 
Champ_Pal said:
Who is going to take on US and NATO?

Russia could not even beat Ukraine and the war is going on for more than 1 year.

China's military is weak and untested. They could not take Taiwan after all these years. They can only bully countries like Philippines and Vietnam. Their economy is also struggling post Covid. They are in no position to fight any war.

Rest of the countries like Iran or Yemen are irrelevant. They are more like tiny bugs that will pester US and NATO from time to time, but nothing of any significance.
Click to expand...
India can take them all on
 
Iran's recent attack on Pakistan, causing the tragic death of innocent children, is a serious breach of international law and disrespect for a country's sovereignty. This unprovoked aggression escalates tensions and poses a threat to regional stability. It should be strongly condemned, and prompt action is needed for accountability and justice to protect borders and civilian safety.
 
Now, Pakistan is also part of the global war. However, I think Pakistan will avoid military escalation because of internal terrorism, economic crisis, and the upcoming general elections with no stable government.
 
FearlessRoar said:
Now, Pakistan is also part of the global war. However, I think Pakistan will avoid military escalation because of internal terrorism, economic crisis, and the upcoming general elections with no stable government.
Click to expand...

Iran dragged Pakistan in. Very irresponsible from Iran.

Things will be deescalated hopefully.
 
sweep_shot said:
Iran dragged Pakistan in. Very irresponsible from Iran.

Things will be deescalated hopefully.
Click to expand...
Bro Iran may have started this but Pakistan has escalated the situation further. First by downgrading diplomatic ties and now retaliating through attack. Some irresponsible stuff from Pak too.
 
If a country is violating your border and your sovereignty then this kind of reply was the last thing they could have done and they did so. Every country is taking Pakistan lightly and this is not good.
 
sweep_shot said:
Iran dragged Pakistan in. Very irresponsible from Iran.

Things will be deescalated hopefully.
Click to expand...

What if Iran attacks again?

Iran is out of its mind right now going after everyone. Deescalation (if that's what a nation wants) should never be left in another country's hands. You just never know what they want or how far they're willing to go.

Pakistan's response is understandable (both for protecting its sovereignty and avoiding India getting new ideas) but incredibly dangerous too.
 
It will be more like a cold war. Not like the "all gunz blazing and all weapons used" type war.
 
The EU says it is deeply worried about the “spiral of violence in the Middle East and beyond” after Pakistan and Iran targeted each other’s territory over the last two days.

“These attacks, including in Pakistan, in Iraq and Iran now are of utmost concern for the European Union because they violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of countries, and they have also a destabilising effect on the region,” EU spokesman Peter Stano said.

Source: Al Jazeera

Screenshot_20240118_182211_Gallery.jpg
 

Russia’s Lavrov rejects US proposal to resume nuclear arms talks​

Speaking at a news conference on Thursday, Sergey Lavrov accused the West of fuelling global security risks by encouraging Ukraine to ramp up strikes on Russian territory and warned that Moscow will achieve its goals in the conflict regardless of Western support for Kyiv.

Commenting on a US proposal to resume contacts in the sphere of nuclear arms control, Lavrov said that Moscow has rejected the offer. He said that for such talks to be held, Washington first needs to revise its current policy towards Russia.

Lavrov charged that Washington’s push for the revival of nuclear talks has been driven by a desire to resume inspections of Russia’s nuclear weapons sites. He described such US demands as “indecent” in view of Ukraine’s attacks on Russian nuclear-capable bomber bases during the conflict.

“Amid a ‘hybrid war’ waged by Washington against Russia, we aren’t seeing any basis, not only for any additional joint measures in the sphere of arms control and reduction of strategic risks, but for any discussion of strategic stability issues with the US,” he said. “We firmly link such possibility to the West fully renouncing its malicious course aimed at undermining Russia’s security and interests.”

The minister said Washington’s push for restarting nuclear arms talks is rooted in a desire to “try to establish control over our nuclear arsenal and minimise nuclear risks for itself” but added that “those risks are emerging as a result of forceful pressure on our country.”

He accused the West of blocking any talks on ending the conflict and inciting the ramping up of attacks on Russia.

“Such encouragement and the transfer of relevant weapons shows that the West doesn’t want any constructive solution,” Lavrov said. “The West is pushing toward the escalation of the Ukrainian crisis, and that raises new strategic risk

He reaffirmed that Russia will pursue what it calls the “special military operation” regardless of Western pressure.

“We will consistently and persistently press the goals of the special military operation and we will achieve them,” he said. “They should have no hope that Russia could be defeated in any way. Those in the West who fantasise about it have failed to learn history lessons.”

Source: Al Jazeera
 
The past week has seen new rounds of violence across the Middle East, deepening fears of conflict spreading in an already unstable region.

Here is a brief guide to what has happened - and where it might lead.

IRAN-PAKISTAN

On Tuesday, Iran unexpectedly carried out a missile and drone attack on Pakistani territory. Iran said it was targeting an Iranian Sunni Muslim militant group, Jaish al-Adl, that has staged attacks inside Iran. Pakistan said two children were killed and swiftly hit back, launching missiles at Pakistani "terrorist hideouts" on Iran's side of the border. Iran said three women, two men and four children were killed.

The flare-up has heightened tensions in a region already experiencing a multitude of crises. Although the area of the ***-for-tat strikes is far from the main theatres of fighting in the Middle East, the border is volatile and further incidents here could quickly escalate, for instance if Jaish al-Adl retaliates against Iran.

YEMEN AND THE RED SEA

This week saw multiple rounds of US Navy missile strikes against the Houthi Zaidi Shia movement in Yemen, following Houthi attacks on shipping in the Red Sea, a waterway crucial to world trade. The Houthis - backed by Iran - stepped up their attacks in November following the outbreak of the war in Gaza. They vowed to target "Israeli-linked" boats so long as Israel's offensive continued, to show solidarity with the Palestinians.

Consequently all merchant shipping in the international waters has been put under threat, something considered intolerable by Western powers. The US and UK, backed by allies, launched the first air strikes against the Houthis last week to try to deter them - but the group has remained defiant.

On Monday, the Houthis hit a US vessel in the Gulf of Aden in what appeared to be their first successful attack on an American ship since their campaign began. A second was hit in the Gulf of Aden on Wednesday and the Houthis have vowed to continue - raising the prospect of further US strikes and the question of whether Iran will feel forced to respond.

ISRAEL-HEZBOLLAH-IRAN

An increasingly intensifying years-long shadow war between arch-foes Israel and Iran ratcheted up on Monday when Iran fired missiles at what it described as headquarters of Israel's Mossad spy agency in Irbil in Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdistan region, killing four people. Iraq - an ally of Iran and hostile to Israel - denied Mossad was there and condemned the attack.

Iran said its attack was a response to the alleged Israeli killings recently of a senior Iranian commander in Syria and two top Iran-backed militants in Lebanon - one a commander of the Shia militant movement Hezbollah and the other the deputy leader of the Palestinian group Hamas.

The Israel-Lebanese border, where Israel and Hezbollah - heavily armed and funded by Iran - have frequently traded strikes since the Hamas attack on Israel and start of the Gaza war on 7 October, is one of the most dangerous fronts in the region.

On Wednesday Israel's military chief of staff said "the likelihood of [war in the north] happening in the coming months is much higher than it was in the past."

IRAN-ISLAMIC STATE GROUP

At the same time as it struck in Iraq, Iran fired missiles into a rebel-held province in north-west Syria, saying it had targeted bases of the Islamic State (IS) group in retaliation for IS suicide bombings in southern Iran on 3 January which killed 94 people. IS, a Sunni jihadist group, considers Shia Muslims heretical, and Iran is the dominant Shia power in the region.

While Iran is a key ally of the Syrian government, directly striking militants in the rebel-held region is a rare step and a signal to its adversaries that Iran is prepared to act far afield.

ISRAEL-SYRIA-IRAN

An air strike on the Syrian capital, Damascus, on Saturday killed 10 people, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Five of them were senior members of Iran's elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Syria and Iran blamed Israel, with Iran vowing revenge.

It follows similar strikes around Damascus earlier in the week. Israel has not commented, but has previously acknowledged carrying out hundreds of aerial operations in Syria involving attacks on targets it says are linked to Iran. An interception of a fighter aircraft by Syrian air defences - which has so far not happened - or deadly retaliation could ignite a new crisis in a region beset by wars.

ISRAEL-GAZA

Intense fighting between Israel and Hamas in Gaza has continued, with the war there now in its 15th week. At least 713 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli bombardment since last Sunday, raising the death toll there since 7 October to almost 25,000, according to the Hamas-run health ministry. On the Israeli side, eight soldiers were killed in the same period, bringing its combat death total to 188.

Israel intensified its offensive on the southern city of Khan Younis this week, while troops reached their furthest point south since the start of the war, the Israeli military said. Meanwhile Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the conflict could go on until 2025, Israeli TV reported this week.

Israel was also hit by a car-ramming and stabbing attack on Monday, for which police arrested two Palestinian suspects from the occupied West Bank. The attack, which was praised by Hamas, killed a woman and injured 17 other people. It was one of the first such attacks inside Israel since the start of the Gaza war, heightening anxieties among Israelis still reeling from the 7 October attacks.

Violence has also escalated in the West Bank alongside the war. Israeli air strikes there on Wednesday killed nine Palestinians, medics said. Israel said at least five of the dead were planning an imminent attack.

OTHER ARENAS

Attacks by one country into another have also been happening in other places in the Middle East this week.

Turkey carried out air strikes against Kurdish militants in northern Iraq and a US-backed Kurdish-led militia alliance in northern Syria on Monday, its defence ministry said. The latest strikes are part of a decades-long and bloody conflict between Turkey and armed Kurdish groups which Turkey, which has a large Kurdish minority, regards as terrorist organisations. One of the strikes is reported to have hit a prison holding more than 3,000 IS prisoners.

There were also rare air strikes by Jordan across its border with Syria. Ten people, including children, are reported to have been killed. It is thought to have targeted drug smugglers. Iran-backed militias in Syria have been accused by Jordan of trafficking the amphetamine Captagon into the kingdom and on to Gulf Arab states.

In Iraq, the US military says several of its personnel are now undergoing "evaluation for traumatic brain injuries" after missiles and rockets were fired at Al Asad airbase by Iranian-backed militants. At least one Iraqi service member was wounded, US Central Command said.

Source: BBC

www.bbc.com

Understanding a week of missile strikes across Middle East

From the Red Sea to Gaza to Iran, the past week has deepened fears of conflict spreading.
www.bbc.com
 
North Korea fired hundreds of artillery shells in waters near South Korean border islands on Jan. 5. Last week, it said it no longer regarded the South as inhabited by “fellow countrymen” but as a “hostile state” it would subjugate through a nuclear war. On Friday, it said it had tested an underwater nuclear drone to help repel U.S. Navy fleets.

That new drumbeat of threats, while the United States and its allies have been preoccupied with the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, has set foreign officials and analysts wondering whether the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, has moved beyond posturing and is planning to assert more military force.

For decades, a central part of the North Korean playbook has been to stage carefully measured and timed military provocations — some aimed at tightening internal discipline, others at demanding attention from its neighbors and the United States, or all of that at once.

But to several close watchers of North Korea, the latest round of signals from Mr. Kim feels different. Some are taking it as a clue that the North has become disillusioned with seeking diplomatic engagement with the West, and a few are raising the possibility that the country could be planning a sudden assault on South Korea.

Two veteran analysts of North Korea — the former State Department official Robert L. Carlin and the nuclear scientist Siegfried S. Hecker — sounded an alarm this past week in an article for the U.S.-based website 38 North, asserting that Mr. Kim was done with mere threats. “Kim Jong-un has made a strategic decision to go to war,” they wrote.

Analysts broadly agree that North Korea has been shifting its posture in recent years, compelled by an accumulation of both internal problems, including a moribund economy and food and oil shortages, and frustrations in its external diplomacy, like Mr. Kim’s failure to win an end to international sanctions through direct diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump. And most agree that the North’s recent closeness with Russia, including supplying artillery shells and missiles for use in Russia’s war in Ukraine, will be a game-changer in some way.

But there is still stark disagreement over where Mr. Kim’s new tack might be leading.

Many say that Mr. Kim’s ultimate goal remains not a war with South Korea, a treaty ally of the United States, but Washington’s acceptance of his country as a nuclear power by prompting arms-reduction talks.

“The North Koreans won’t start a war unless they decide to become suicidal; they know too well that they cannot win the war,” said Park Won-gon, a North Korea expert at Ewha Womans University in Seoul. “But they would love their enemies to believe that they could, because that could lead to engagement and possible concessions, like the easing of sanctions.”

Analysts in China, North Korea’s most vital ally, were also deeply skeptical that Mr. Kim would go to war unless the North were attacked. Prof. Shi Yinhong, at Renmin University in Beijing, asserted that the North’s leadership, not being irrational, ultimately acted out of self-preservation — and that starting a war would work against that goal.

Others noted that the North could assert itself militarily, including through smaller conventional strikes and bolder weapons testing, without necessarily triggering a deadly response.

“There are many rungs of the escalation ladder that North Korea can climb short of all-out war,” said Victor Cha, a Korea expert at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Kim is not that confident in his capabilities to deter U.S. reaction if he were to do something rash.”

If Mr. Kim wants to climb that ladder, recent history suggests that this might be the time.

North Korea has liked to unsettle its enemies at their most sensitive political moments, and both the United States and South Korea are holding elections this year. The North launched a long-range rocket in late 2012, between the United States and South Korean presidential elections. It conducted a nuclear test shortly before the inauguration of a South Korean leader in 2013. In 2016, it conducted another nuclear test two months before the American presidential election.

North Korea could also attempt provocations in the coming weeks to try to help liberals who favor inter-Korean negotiations win parliamentary elections in South Korea in April, said the analyst Ko Jae-hong at the Seoul-based Institute for National Security Strategy. Through provocations, North Korea hopes to spread fears among South Korean voters that increasing pressure on the North, as the current administration of President Yoon Suk Yeol has tried to do, might “lead to a nuclear war,” he said.

North Korea “will continue to increase tensions until after the U.S. elections,” said Thomas Schäfer, a former German diplomat who served twice as ambassador to North Korea. But “at the height of tensions, it will finally be willing to re-engage with a Republican administration in the hope to get sanctions relief, some sort of acceptance of their nuclear program, and — as main objective — a reduction or even complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula,” Mr. Schäfer said in a rebuttal to Mr. Carlin’s and Mr. Hecker’s analysis.

Since Mr. Kim came to power in 2011, he has committed to building North Korea’s nuclear capability, using it both as a deterrent and as a negotiating tool to try to win concessions from Washington, like the removal of United Nations sanctions, to achieve economic growth.

He tried it when he met Mr. Trump in 2018 and again in 2019. It failed spectacularly, and Mr. Kim returned home empty-handed and in humiliation.

He then vowed to find a “new way” for his country.

Since then, the North has rejected repeated calls from Washington for talks. It has also rejected South Korea as a dialogue partner, indicating from 2022 that it would use nuclear weapons against South Korea in a war and abandoning its long-held insistence that the weapons would keep the Korean Peninsula peaceful as a deterrent. It has tested more diverse, and harder-to-intercept, means of delivering its nuclear warheads.

There is doubt that the North has yet built a reliable intercontinental ballistic missile that could target the United States. But two of the North’s main enemies, South Korea and Japan, are much closer.

On the diplomatic front, Mr. Kim has taken pains to signal that he no longer views the United States as a critical negotiating partner, instead envisioning a “neo-Cold War” in which the United States is in retreat globally. He has aggressively improved military ties with Russia, and in return has most likely secured Russian promises of food aid and technological help for his weapons programs, officials say.

“I worry that his confidence might lead him to misjudge with a small act, regardless of his intention, escalating to war amid a tense ‘power-for-power’ confrontation with the United States and its allies,” said Koh Yu-hwan, a former head of the Korea Institute for National Unification in Seoul.

Despite its own increasingly aggressive military posture in recent years, China may prove to be a damper on any North Korean military adventurism.

China and North Korea are bound by a treaty signed in 1961 that requires each country to provide military assistance if the other is attacked. But China has little incentive to be drawn into a war in Korea right now.

“A war on the Korean Peninsula would be disastrous for Beijing. An entire half-century of peace in East Asia, a period of unprecedented growth for the P.R.C., would come to a crashing halt,” said John Delury, a professor of Chinese studies at Yonsei University in Seoul, referring to the People’s Republic of China.

The United States has long leaned on Beijing to rein in North Korea. By drawing close to Moscow, Mr. Kim has been putting his own pressure on China’s leader, Xi Jinping.

“It is notable that Kim made his first post-pandemic trip to the Russian Far East, skipping China, and he just sent his foreign minister to Moscow, not Beijing,” Mr. Delury said. By raising tensions, Mr. Kim “can see what Xi is willing to do to placate him,” he added.

Source: NYT

www.nytimes.com

Is Kim Jong-un Really Planning an Attack This Time?

An intensification of nuclear threats from North Korea while the world is preoccupied with other wars has ignited an urgent debate over Mr. Kim’s motives.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
Britons 'face call-up if we go to war with Russia': Head of the Army will tell ministers troops numbers are so low he would need 'to find more people' if Putin's war in Ukraine escalated and public's 'mindset' must change so they are ready

Head of the British Army will call for ministers to 'mobilise the nation' today. General Sir Patrick Sanders has been outspoken on dwindling UK troop numbers

The chief of the British Army is set to warn Brits that they could be called up to fight for King and country in the event of war with Russia – because the military is 'too small' to handle the conflict on its own.

General Sir Patrick Sanders, Chief of the General Staff, will stress the need for ministers to 'mobilise the nation' in the event of a wider conflict against Russia amid its invasion of Ukraine.

His warning comes nearly two years after he said that Britain was facing its '1937 moment', a reference to the two years leading up to the Second World War.

Gen Sir Patrick – who has been openly critical of staff shortages in the military – believes there should be a 'shift' in the mindset of the public who should be willing to defend the UK against foreign adversaries.

But while the Army head – who is standing down in six months after allegedly falling out with Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, the overall chief of the Armed Forces – is not thought to be in favour of conscription, Nato bosses have warned allied nations to be prepared to take any and all actions necessary to fight Vladimir Putin's forces.

Source : Daily Mail
 
third world war won't be conventional it would be more like a biological war now and Corona was one of its trial runs.
 
Most Brits do not want to join the armed forces. They are more educated now in knowing these war are for profits not for security.

If Russia ever goes to war with Nato, UK will be the first to be targeted.

Imo the people here will rise up against the UK government first before wanting to go to war with Russia, which will end in nuclear devastation for the everyone.
 
KingKhanWC said:
Most Brits do not want to join the armed forces. They are more educated now in knowing these war are for profits not for security.

If Russia ever goes to war with Nato, UK will be the first to be targeted.

Imo the people here will rise up against the UK government first before wanting to go to war with Russia, which will end in nuclear devastation for the everyone.
Click to expand...
People in the UK are not interested in getting into war? Then why British government engage into unnecessary conflicts? What was the reason to hit missles over Houthis?
 
FearlessRoar said:
People in the UK are not interested in getting into war? Then why British government engage into unnecessary conflicts? What was the reason to hit missles over Houthis?
Click to expand...

UK government are complicit in Israeli genocide, attacking the Houthis was an extension of this. Most in the UK do not support Israeli actions so using the excuse of trade issues, higher prices, inflation or risk of oil prices skyrocketing in any larger regional war has bought back some support.

UK public is not the same as it was in the 40's. Any invasion by Russia would meet little true combat resistance.
 
The US has approved plans for a series of strikes on Iranian targets in Syria and Iraq, officials have told the BBC's US partner CBS News.

The strikes would take place over a number of days, officials say, and weather conditions will likely dictate when they are launched.

It comes after a drone attack killed three US soldiers in Jordan, near the Syrian border, on Sunday.

The US has blamed an Iranian-backed militia group for the attack.

The Islamic Resistance in Iraq - which is believed to contain multiple militias that have been armed, funded and trained by Iran's Revolutionary Guards force - has said it was responsible for the strike.

Iran has denied any role in the attack which injured 41 other US troops at the military base.

While US officials have pledged to respond to the drone attack, President Joe Biden and other officials have said the country is not seeking a wider war with Iran.

Several Iran-backed groups have increased attacks on US and Israeli-linked entities since the beginning of the Israel-Hamas war on 7 October.

The Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen, for example, have attacked ships in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, prompting strikes from the US and its allies.

A US defence official told CBS that a drone was shot down overnight in the Gulf of Aden, while an unmanned sea drone was struck and destroyed in the Red Sea.

The bodies of the three US soldiers killed in the attack are expected to be repatriated to a Delaware Air Force base on Friday. The White House has announced that President Biden will attend.

Source: BBC

www.bbc.com

US approves plan to strike Iranian targets in Syria and Iraq, officials say

The strikes in Syria and Iraq will take place over a number of days, American officials tell CBS News.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
The Bald Eagle said:
Britons 'face call-up if we go to war with Russia': Head of the Army will tell ministers troops numbers are so low he would need 'to find more people' if Putin's war in Ukraine escalated and public's 'mindset' must change so they are ready

Head of the British Army will call for ministers to 'mobilise the nation' today. General Sir Patrick Sanders has been outspoken on dwindling UK troop numbers

The chief of the British Army is set to warn Brits that they could be called up to fight for King and country in the event of war with Russia – because the military is 'too small' to handle the conflict on its own.

General Sir Patrick Sanders, Chief of the General Staff, will stress the need for ministers to 'mobilise the nation' in the event of a wider conflict against Russia amid its invasion of Ukraine.

His warning comes nearly two years after he said that Britain was facing its '1937 moment', a reference to the two years leading up to the Second World War.

Gen Sir Patrick – who has been openly critical of staff shortages in the military – believes there should be a 'shift' in the mindset of the public who should be willing to defend the UK against foreign adversaries.

But while the Army head – who is standing down in six months after allegedly falling out with Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, the overall chief of the Armed Forces – is not thought to be in favour of conscription, Nato bosses have warned allied nations to be prepared to take any and all actions necessary to fight Vladimir Putin's forces.

Source : Daily Mail
Click to expand...

Can't blame the people for not wanting to join the army.

These stupid wars benefit the elites mostly. Soldiers and regular people lose the most.
 
sweep_shot said:
Can't blame the people for not wanting to join the army.

These stupid wars benefit the elites mostly. Soldiers and regular people lose the most.
Click to expand...
Britains will never ever dare to actually go on a war with Russia. As long as Putin is there.
 
With this Iran-USA tension situation is getting worse now.

Trust me this world is not ready for World War 3.

I feel like this is a pre planned conspiracy.
 
US State Secretary Antony Blinken lands in Saudi Arabia on latest Mideast crisis trip

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken landed in Saudi Arabia on Monday to kick off his latest regional crisis trip aimed at securing a new truce in the Israel-Hamas war.

The top US diplomat’s plane touched down in Riyadh, said an AFP journalist traveling with him, the first stop on Blinken’s fifth tour of the Middle East since the October 7 attacks by Hamas which prompted massive Israeli retaliation.

Source: Al Arabiya

 
What's going on here? I'm sure he hasn't come to promote peace. He might have come to give instructions to escalate violence in the Middle East so that they can sell more weapons.
 
The threat of World War Three is looming large in the public consciousness.

Last week, Defence Secretary Grant Shapps warned the world could be engulfed by wars involving China, Russia, North Korea and Iran in the next five years, and said we are moving "from a post-war to pre-war world".

The head of the British Army said UK citizens should be "trained and equipped" to fight in a potential war with Russia, describing those living today as the "pre-war generation".

General Sir Patrick Sanders' comments prompted anxiety about conscription - something Britain's former top NATO commander General Sir Richard Sherriff said it was time to consider.

Sir Patrick added that the war in Ukraine was a "pressure point" and added that "we cannot afford to make the same mistake" as our predecessors who "stumbled into... ghastly wars", such as the First World War in 1914.

Meanwhile in the Middle East, UK and US forces have launched airstrikes on Yemen in response to the Iranian-backed Houthis' attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea.

'We are in a pre-war era'

Simon Diggins, military analyst

"In one sense, we are always in a 'pre-war' world, as wars can start from miscalculation, from hubris, or misunderstandings as well as deliberate design.

"However, the last months have seen some loud rumblings, and the sense that the inevitable tensions of a complex world may only be resolvable by war.

"Nothing is inevitable, but the Ukraine invasion in particular has shown that Russia sees war as an instrument of policy, as a tool to change the world order in its favour, and not simply as a means of defence.

"China likewise seeks reunification with Taiwan, and Iran, in its region, wants its 'place in the sun'.

"What this means, in short, is that the presumption against the use of force - which was the basis for the post-WWII world order, for anything other than defence - has been lost.

"Who started this, is, of course, moot. While we can point the finger at Russia as a destabiliser, the Russians point to both the 2003 Iraq invasion - as an illegitimate use of force - and also what they regard as the "structural violence" of the eastern expansion of NATO to Russia's borders.

"The West sees that expansion as a natural and reasonable choice by individual nations. The Russians, who have long regarded themselves as a surrounded people, believe they need a bulwark of friendly, or at least, compliant countries to protect 'Mother Russia'.

"It is this disconnect of world view, combined with the willingness to use force, that makes the situation in eastern Europe so very dangerous.

"The last element is more immediate. Russia has, in the last year, doubled its defence expenditure: it now spends 6% of its GDP, or one third of all government expenditure, on the military. By contrast, we spend just over 2% of GDP or some 4.5% of government expenditure.

"Much of this is required to fight the war in Ukraine, but the Russians, ever adaptive, are using the crucible of war to reform, restructure and re-arm their forces.

"There will be a ceasefire, or some kind of uneasy stalemate - possibly this year, almost definitely by next year in Ukraine.

"We will then be faced with a 'New Russian Army', to be used where President Putin wills - and he has a long list of 're-adjustments' to correct what he sees as the disaster of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

"We are, most definitively, in a pre-war era."

Sky News
 
Azerbaijan is planning a “full-scale war” against Armenia, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said Thursday, two days after a skirmish on their border left four Armenian troops dead.

Tensions between the two Caucasus neighbors have remained high since Baku recaptured the Armenian-populated region of Nagorno-Karabakh last September in a lightning military offensive.

“Our analysis shows that Azerbaijan wants to launch military action in some parts of the border with the prospect of turning military escalation into a full-scale war against Armenia,” Pashinyan said at a government meeting.

“This intention can be read in all statements and actions of Azerbaijan,” he added.

Yerevan is concerned that Azerbaijan, emboldened by its success in Karabakh, could invade Armenian territory in order to create a land bridge to its exclave of Nakhchivan.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, who won re-election this month, said in an inauguration speech Wednesday it was Armenia, not Azerbaijan, that had outstanding territorial claims.

“We have no territorial claims to Armenia. And they should give up their claims. Talking to us in the language of blackmail will cost them dearly,” he said.

Pashinyan and Aliyev previously said a peace agreement could have been signed by the end of last year, but internationally mediated peace talks have failed to yield a breakthrough.

On Tuesday, both sides accused each other of opening fire on their volatile border, in a skirmish Armenia said left four of its soldiers dead.

Al Arabiya

 
So every day, news of war from a new region is coming, and actually, wars do start.
 
Turkish drone strikes in northeastern Syria on Wednesday killed at least three members of a local Christian force and wounded others, including civilians, a Kurdish official and a Syrian opposition war monitor said.

There was no immediate comment from Ankara. Turkey has been attacking Kurdish fighters in Syria for years but attacks on the fighters from the country’s Christian minority have been rare.

The force that was targeted, the local Christian Syriac police known as Sutoro, works under the US-backed and Kurdish-led Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria.

Siamand Ali of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces told The Associated Press that the Turkish drones initially hit three Suturo vehicles near the northeastern town of Malikiyah. When a fourth vehicle, a pick-up truck, arrived at the scene to retrieve the casualties from the strike, it also came under attack, he said.

The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an opposition war monitor, said three Suturo police members were killed, as well as one civilian. The Observatory said the attack was the latest of 65 such strikes so far this year in northeastern Syria that have killed 18 people, mostly Kurdish fighters.

Turkey often launches strikes against targets in Syria and Iraq it believes to be affiliated with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party or PKK — a banned Kurdish separatist group that has waged an insurgency against Turkey since the 1980s.

Turkey says that the main Kurdish militia in Syria, known as People’s Defense Units, or YPG, is an affiliate of the PKK.

Turkey’s state-run Anadolu Agency however, reported on Tuesday that the Turkish intelligence agency, MIT, had killed a senior Kurdish fighter member in an operation in the northern Syrian town of Qamishli.

The report identified the woman operative as Emine Seyid Ahmed, a Syrian national, who allegedly went by the code name of “Azadi Derik.”

She reportedly joined the Kurdish Women Protection Units, or YPJ, in 2011 and allegedly planned a number of attacks against Turkish security forces as well as cross-border missile attacks targeting civilians in Turkey, Anadolu reported.

Al Arabiya

 
Turkey has a history of attacking Kurdish groups in Syria, viewing them as affiliated with the PKK. In this instance, it's unclear why the Christian militia was targeted, as attacks on Christian minority groups by Turkey have been rare.
 
A leader that goes outside its borders is not cruel?
The guy is equally bad as other “cruel” leaders.
 
FearlessRoar said:
Azerbaijan is planning a “full-scale war” against Armenia, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said Thursday, two days after a skirmish on their border left four Armenian troops dead.

Tensions between the two Caucasus neighbors have remained high since Baku recaptured the Armenian-populated region of Nagorno-Karabakh last September in a lightning military offensive.

“Our analysis shows that Azerbaijan wants to launch military action in some parts of the border with the prospect of turning military escalation into a full-scale war against Armenia,” Pashinyan said at a government meeting.

“This intention can be read in all statements and actions of Azerbaijan,” he added.

Yerevan is concerned that Azerbaijan, emboldened by its success in Karabakh, could invade Armenian territory in order to create a land bridge to its exclave of Nakhchivan.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, who won re-election this month, said in an inauguration speech Wednesday it was Armenia, not Azerbaijan, that had outstanding territorial claims.

“We have no territorial claims to Armenia. And they should give up their claims. Talking to us in the language of blackmail will cost them dearly,” he said.

Pashinyan and Aliyev previously said a peace agreement could have been signed by the end of last year, but internationally mediated peace talks have failed to yield a breakthrough.

On Tuesday, both sides accused each other of opening fire on their volatile border, in a skirmish Armenia said left four of its soldiers dead.

Al Arabiya

Click to expand...

What's going on? Another conflict?

We already have these:

Russia-Ukraine
Somalia-Ethiopia
Sudan civil war
Palestine conflict
Houthis
Lebanon-Israel
Myanmar civil war
Syrian civil war

This now.

World is in a vulnerable shape currently.
 
Don't push Russia to insanity
=====
Russia is ready for nuclear war - Putin

Putin warns United States against sending troops

Putin says Russia is ready for talks on Ukraine. Putin says the West has failed to defeat Russia

MOSCOW, March 13 (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin warned the West on Wednesday Russia was technically ready for nuclear war and that if the U.S. sent troops to Ukraine, it would be considered a significant escalation of the conflict.

Putin, speaking just days before a March 15-17 election which is certain to give him another six years in power, said the nuclear war scenario was not "rushing" up and he saw no need for the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

"From a military-technical point of view, we are, of course, ready," Putin, 71, told Rossiya-1 television and news agency RIA in response to a question whether the country was really ready for a nuclear war.

Putin said the U.S. understood that if it deployed American troops on Russian territory - or to Ukraine - Russia would treat the move as an intervention.

"(In the U.S.) there are enough specialists in the field of Russian-American relations and in the field of strategic restraint," said Putin, the ultimate decision maker in the world's biggest nuclear power.

"Therefore, I don't think that here everything is rushing to it (nuclear confrontation), but we are ready for this."
Putin's nuclear warning came alongside another offer for talks on Ukraine as part of a new post-Cold War demarcation of European security. The U.S. says Putin is not ready for serious talks over Ukraine.

The war in Ukraine has triggered the deepest crisis in Russia's relations with the West since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and Putin has warned several times the West risks provoking a nuclear war if it sends troops to fight in Ukraine.

Source: Reuters
 
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has warned Europe is in a "pre-war era" and Ukraine must not be defeated by Russia for the good of the whole continent.

He said war was "no longer a concept from the past", adding: "It's real and it started over two years ago."

His comments came after Russia launched a massive attack on Ukraine's energy system on Thursday.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said this week Moscow had "no aggressive intentions" towards Nato countries.

The idea that his country, which has one of the world's largest nuclear arsenals, would attack Poland, the Baltic states and the Czech Republic - which are all members of the Nato alliance unlike Ukraine - was "complete nonsense", he said.

However, he warned that if Ukraine used Western F-16 warplanes from airfields in other countries, they would become "legitimate targets, wherever they might be located".

After Russia launched its full-scale war in Ukraine in February 2022, relations with the West reached their lowest ebb since the worst days of the Cold War.

Almost 100 missiles and drones were used in the latest Russian attack on Ukraine, leaving several regions experiencing partial blackouts.

It was the second attack of its kind - in which Russia fires a large number of weapons simultaneously to overwhelm Ukraine's defences - in the space of a week.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has called the tactic "missile terror" and warned attacks on hydro-electric power plants could lead to a major environmental disaster.

Speaking to the BBC, the mayor of Kharkiv - where small businesses are relying on generators and industry is struggling amid blackouts - described the damage to the grid as "very serious" and said it could take two months to fully restore.

Appealing for urgent military aid for Ukraine, Mr Tusk warned the next two years of the war would decide everything, adding: "We are living in the most critical moment since the end of the Second World War."

Mr Tusk and Polish President Andrzej Duda held talks earlier this month with President Biden at the White House
Delivering his stark intervention on European security, he pointed out Russia had attacked Kyiv with hypersonic missiles in daylight for the first time.

He said Mr Putin's attempt to blame Ukraine for the jihadist attack on Moscow's Crocus City Hall without evidence showed the Russian president "evidently feels the need to justify increasingly violent attacks on civil targets in Ukraine".

Mr Tusk used his first interview with European media since returning to the office of Polish prime minister at the end of 2023 to urge leaders around the continent to bolster their defences.

He said Europe did not need to create "parallel structures to Nato" but the continent would be a more attractive partner to the US if it became more self-sufficient militarily, regardless of who wins America's November presidential election.

Poland now spends 4% of its economic output on defence, while other European nations have not yet achieved the Nato target of 2%.

Source: BBC
 

Air strike hits building next to Iranian embassy in Syria​


A suspected Israeli strike has destroyed a building next door to the Iranian embassy in Syria's capital, Damascus, Syrian state media report.

Pictures showed smoke and dust rising from the flattened multi-storey structure, which was located on a highway in the western Mezzeh district.

The state media reports did not mention any casualties, but a monitoring group said that six people were killed.

There was no immediate comment from the Israeli military.

The Syrian military said earlier that its air defences had intercepted "hostile targets" in the vicinity of Damascus, according to state media.

www.bbc.com

Air strike hits building next to Iranian embassy in Syria

Pictures showed the flattened remains of a building that was next door to Tehran's embassy in Damascus.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
Now, should we expect a direct confrontation between Israel and Iran?
 
FearlessRoar said:
Now, should we expect a direct confrontation between Israel and Iran?
Click to expand...

Iranian military leader is 'killed' alongside five others as building next to embassy in Damascus is destroyed in missile attack - as state media accuses Israel of being behind airstrike​


A building next to Iran's embassy in Damascus has been destroyed in an airstrike, reportedly killing a senior commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps - with state media saying Israel was behind the attack.
Pictures show the building in Syria's capital razed to the ground, with emergency responders on the scene. A war monitor has reported that six people were killed in the building.

IRGC leader Mohammed Reza Zahedi was killed in the attack, security sources have reported.

Syria's official news agency SANA said 'the Israeli attack targeted the Iranian consulate building in the Mazzeh neighbourhood of Damascus'.

The state news agency said that the building, an annex next to the embassy, had suffered major destruction and neighbouring buildings in the upmarket area of the city were also damaged.

There was no immediate comment from Israel, which has stepped up strikes on Iran-linked militant groups amid its Gaza war raging against Hamas since October 7.

Iranian media also reported that the strikes in Damascus completely destroyed the annex building, and that the ambassador was unharmed.

'Hossein Akbari, ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Damascus, and his family were not harmed in the Israeli attack,' Iran's Nour news agency said.

Two AFP correspondents at the site confirmed the building next to the embassy, had been razed to the ground by the strike.

Britain-based group the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said 'Israeli missiles... destroyed the building of an annex to the Iranian embassy... in Damascus, killing six people'.

Syria's official SANA news agency earlier reported that 'our air defence systems confronted enemy targets in the vicinity of Damascus'.

The incident came days after the Observatory reported Israeli strikes that killed 53 people in Syria, including 38 soldiers and seven members of the Iran-backed Hezbollah.

It was the highest Syrian army toll in Israeli strikes since the Israel-Hamas war began on October 7, said the monitor.

Since the Iranian-backed Palestinian faction Hamas's attack on Israel on October 7, Israel has ramped up airstrikes in Syria against Lebanon's Hezbollah militia and Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), both of which support the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Iran military leader 'killed' as building next to embassy is destroyed

A building next to Iran 's embassy in Damascus has been destroyed, killing the leader of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to reports, with state media blaming Israel.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
 
We are at the beginning states of world war 3. By 2033 you will see a nuclear conflict UNLESS some leaders emerge who change course .

We here some Hollywood fangirls who think the US & Nato are too strong . In reality , when you’re awake , hypersonic missile technology cannot be countered by Joe Biden or James Bond .
 
KingKhanWC said:
We are at the beginning states of world war 3. By 2033 you will see a nuclear conflict UNLESS some leaders emerge who change course .

We here some Hollywood fangirls who think the US & Nato are too strong . In reality , when you’re awake , hypersonic missile technology cannot be countered by Joe Biden or James Bond .
Click to expand...

We are half way there already, so much despair in the world; the day of reckoning is not too far away. I don’t who is more extreme between the far right and liberals, but the thirst for blood is stronger then ever
 
shaz619 said:
We are half way there already, so much despair in the world; the day of reckoning is not too far away. I don’t who is more extreme between the far right and liberals, but the thirst for blood is stronger then ever
Click to expand...

Right & left are the same , when resources are low , selfishness becomes the norm . Evil is in abundance everywhere but in the west they can no longer simply loot the planet , thus the decline in living . But they do possess WMDs in abundance. They won’t want to live poorer , theyd rather destroy everyone. There is nothing which can stop this .

Some fans of Hollywood or Western civilisation do not realise even in a conventional war , the youth in the west are not the same as those in the 40’s . They are not combat skilled and more importantly do not have the heart to fight , most will cry & hide .
 
shaz619 said:
We are half way there already, so much despair in the world; the day of reckoning is not too far away. I don’t who is more extreme between the far right and liberals, but the thirst for blood is stronger then ever
Click to expand...

Dana lol

 
FearlessRoar said:
Now, should we expect a direct confrontation between Israel and Iran?
Click to expand...
yes its on the verge now after Israel's attack on Iranian consulate in syria.... it might be possible that Iran openly confront Israel now on the nasis of these attacks.
 
Cricket Warrior said:
yes its on the verge now after Israel's attack on Iranian consulate in syria.... it might be possible that Iran openly confront Israel now on the nasis of these attacks.
Click to expand...
There is that possibility as this attack is a serious escalation and very audacious. But at the same time, Iran does not want to be dragged into an all-out war and is smart enough to realise that is what Israel wants.

So in all likelihood, despite the increased rhetoric my guess is that the response will come though the Iranian proxies, ie Hezbollah. Though, I'd love Iran or anyone really to give a good kicking to the Israelis.
 
Kroll said:
There is that possibility as this attack is a serious escalation and very audacious. But at the same time, Iran does not want to be dragged into an all-out war and is smart enough to realise that is what Israel wants.

So in all likelihood, despite the increased rhetoric my guess is that the response will come though the Iranian proxies, ie Hezbollah. Though, I'd love Iran or anyone really to give a good kicking to the Israelis.
Click to expand...
Yes, but it's possible that Iran may further increase its proxies after this because they now have a strong reason to escalate.
 
Nostradamus predicted Third World War will happened between Muslim nations Vs. Rest of world…. But I doubt it considering the current unity amongst Muslim nations.
How many countries backed Palestine in israels war against terrorism
 
WW3 started some years back. Almost every country is involved in some sort of conflict now. Indeed, our generation will witness the Al-Malhama Al-Kubra a massive war foretold by the Prophet(saw) where at least half of the world's population will be wiped out. The Arab''s in particular will be killed in absolutely massive numbers. Teachers of all religions have been foretelling this for a few years now. All these nukes and weapons are made to be used. The major signs are all around us. Not kidding when I say enjoy the internet, TV, and mobile phones while we still have it.

Al-Malhama Al-Kubra - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
We are definitely heading towards another world war. ISrael is poking its nose in every other country now. It will not end good for many.
 
FearlessRoar said:

Iranian military leader is 'killed' alongside five others as building next to embassy in Damascus is destroyed in missile attack - as state media accuses Israel of being behind airstrike​


A building next to Iran's embassy in Damascus has been destroyed in an airstrike, reportedly killing a senior commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps - with state media saying Israel was behind the attack.
Pictures show the building in Syria's capital razed to the ground, with emergency responders on the scene. A war monitor has reported that six people were killed in the building.

IRGC leader Mohammed Reza Zahedi was killed in the attack, security sources have reported.

Syria's official news agency SANA said 'the Israeli attack targeted the Iranian consulate building in the Mazzeh neighbourhood of Damascus'.

The state news agency said that the building, an annex next to the embassy, had suffered major destruction and neighbouring buildings in the upmarket area of the city were also damaged.

There was no immediate comment from Israel, which has stepped up strikes on Iran-linked militant groups amid its Gaza war raging against Hamas since October 7.

Iranian media also reported that the strikes in Damascus completely destroyed the annex building, and that the ambassador was unharmed.

'Hossein Akbari, ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Damascus, and his family were not harmed in the Israeli attack,' Iran's Nour news agency said.

Two AFP correspondents at the site confirmed the building next to the embassy, had been razed to the ground by the strike.

Britain-based group the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said 'Israeli missiles... destroyed the building of an annex to the Iranian embassy... in Damascus, killing six people'.

Syria's official SANA news agency earlier reported that 'our air defence systems confronted enemy targets in the vicinity of Damascus'.

The incident came days after the Observatory reported Israeli strikes that killed 53 people in Syria, including 38 soldiers and seven members of the Iran-backed Hezbollah.

It was the highest Syrian army toll in Israeli strikes since the Israel-Hamas war began on October 7, said the monitor.

Since the Iranian-backed Palestinian faction Hamas's attack on Israel on October 7, Israel has ramped up airstrikes in Syria against Lebanon's Hezbollah militia and Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), both of which support the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Iran military leader 'killed' as building next to embassy is destroyed

A building next to Iran 's embassy in Damascus has been destroyed, killing the leader of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to reports, with state media blaming Israel.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
Click to expand...

Tel Aviv GPS is scrambled over fears of Iran revenge attack after consulate strike​


Navigational signals were scrambled over the Tel Aviv metropolitan area on Thursday as Israel braced for a potential Iranian attack on the country’s economic center.

Traffic was delayed, food delivery was disrupted and transportation applications showed Tel Aviv residents to be in Beirut, Lebanon. The preemptive measure aimed to disrupt GPS-navigated drones or missiles fired by Iran or its proxies.

On Monday, a strike at a diplomatic compound in Syria is widely assumed to have been done by Israel killed senior Iranian military officials. Iran vowed to retaliate.

Israel hasn’t issued new security directives to its citizens since that strike, but the military paused leave for all combat units and bolstered manpower in its air defense units.

For months, the military has been interfering with navigational signals in northern Israel and the Red Sea port city of Eilat. Both have come under frequent rocket and drone fire from militants in Lebanon and Yemen.

The military hasn’t publicly acknowledged the GPS disruption in Tel Aviv although it has dominated all conversations in the city. Thursday marked the first time that step was extended to the area during the past six months of the Israel-Hamas war.

The GPS interference affected numerous applications without warning, including Waze, Google Maps, Gett Taxi, Moovit and Wolt.

 
I guess Iran won't retaliate so quickly. They will act with careful consideration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FearlessRoar
[PICTURES] Who are the Houthi rebels and why are they attacking Red Sea ships?
2 3 4
Replies
292
Views
7K
hassan918
hassan918
James
‘Double standards’: Western coverage of Ukraine war and discourse towards Russia criticised
Replies
73
Views
10K
The Bald Eagle
The Bald Eagle
hoshiarpurexpress
China and the US are locked in a superpower tech war to 'win the 21st century'
Replies
20
Views
1K
daytrader
daytrader
MenInG
[VIDEOS] The Palestinian and Israeli conflict
6 7 8
Replies
594
Views
39K
Cricket Warrior
C
MenInG
"Had there been another Indian leadership, we would have had a good relationship" : PM Imran Khan
2
Replies
83
Views
5K
Itachi
I
Back
Top