Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

what do you think? is the current mess in the middle east a greater threat to the world than the omni-present tensions of the cold war were?

Originally posted by leonidas
what do you think? is the current mess in the middle east a greater threat to the world than the omni-present tensions of the cold war were?

Well, from our perspective now we can pretty much say that we weren't close to war at all during the cold war, so...now I guess...

Yeah, dont piss people off, some people are not very tolerant.

Absolutely now. There will be a general war between a coalition of the United States, Europe, and Israel against Iran and Syria within the next 10 years. Once some crackpot blows up the Eiffel Tower, the Louvre, or the Hague, Europe will drop it's apathetic stance vis-a-vis the rise of Islamic fascism and support military action with a vengeance.

I'm gonna say I think everyone's overreacting and we're not as close to a war as people believe.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm gonna say I think everyone's overreacting and we're not as close to a war as people believe.

-AC


I disagree, especially if both Syria and Iran don't sit in on the "peace" talks between Lebanon(Hezbollah) and Israel.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I'm gonna say I think everyone's overreacting and we're not as close to a war as people believe.

-AC

that may be, but we weren't close to war in the cold war era at all, were we?

Originally posted by Soleran
I disagree, especially if both Syria and Iran don't sit in on the "peace" talks between Lebanon(Hezbollah) and Israel.

Middle Eastern war then, I don't think it'll reach the levels of invasion in Europe like WWII.

-AC

Originally posted by Dr. Zaius
Absolutely now. There will be a general war between a coalition of the United States, Europe, and Israel against Iran and Syria within the next 10 years. Once some crackpot blows up the Eiffel Tower, the Louvre, or the Hague, Europe will drop it's apathetic stance vis-a-vis the rise of Islamic fascism and support military action with a vengeance.

I doubt it. Really, really doubt it.

And what is "closer to war now"? Nuclear war? Not a chance. WWIII? I doubt it - the Cold war was very cold, but it could have easily escalated with an alarming swiftness, and due to hegemonic influences would have had wide ranging effects. As it was there were proxy wars though, within spheres of influence. A war of tension, a war of constant threat, a war of deterance. A war, really, of the mind - not conventional battles.

Today that tension is gone, as is the flash point that could potentially drag countless nations in. So Iran and N. Korea rattle their sabres. So? How is this different from any number of things in the past that never materialised? So, the US is involved in Iraq - once again, not like the US hasn't been involved in military conflicts before. I see no reason to believe that the modern world is teetering on some on the edge of what could turn out to be a testing war. Sure, there will continue to be wars, like always, but they aren't going to be, in the near future at least, and more or less exceptional then any number that have gone before.

I'm feeling too lazy and tired to come up with anything substantive. So "Ditto".

well, we eliminated the iraqi dick-hole dictator saddam, so thats one mark down. but if the iraqi's keep fighting their new government then therell be more problems because theyll blame it on the US which throws a bunch of shit everywhere again. and its prolly not a good thing that the new iraqi leaders are directly connected with terrorist organizations, but what the hell, so is north korea.

meh, whatev.

*caugh* ...A-BOMB... *caugh*... JAPAN... *caugh caugh*...

Originally posted by .pace Opera:.
*caugh* ...A-BOMB... *caugh*... JAPAN... *caugh caugh*...

You misspelled "cough". Your post makes no sense.

Originally posted by .pace Opera:.
*caugh* ...A-BOMB... *caugh*... JAPAN... *caugh caugh*...

True - but there would be differences in thought processes when one takes into account the other side can make a damn good retaliation (unlike Japan at the time.) And the fact that if China/US hurt China/US bad enough they would also be hurting themselves - as bad as I agree the utilisation's of the A-Bomb was, it was bad for humanitarian reasons, not because it would have an adverse effect on the world economy (which nuking China or the US certainly would)

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
True - but there would be differences in thought processes when one takes into account the other side can make a damn good retaliation (unlike Japan at the time.) And the fact that if China/US hurt China/US bad enough they would also be hurting themselves - as bad as I agree the utilisation's of the A-Bomb was, it was bad for humanitarian reasons, not because it would have an adverse effect on the world economy (which nuking China or the US certainly would)

excellent posts. i find myself agreeing with you at almost every turn.

Originally posted by leonidas
excellent posts. i find myself agreeing with you at almost every turn.



Thanks. I try to do my best.

The Cuban Missile Crisis was a close call that almost led to a nuclear confrontation. The Korean War also could have gone badly.

Originally posted by leonidas
what do you think? is the current mess in the middle east a greater threat to the world than the omni-present tensions of the cold war were? I'm not srue if we were ever really close to war in the Cold War. It was just that, in fact: a 'war' in which America and Russia were pissed off at each other. I doubt there was any possibility of real war during those times.

However, during this, to quote the Daily Show: "Crisis in Israfghyianonanaq" Actually began with real military action, with Hezbollah and Irael firing missiles at each other and troop movements. This conflict is far more likely to grow into a war, and probably will eventually. But it is not a harbinger of WWIII. It's just another war in the Middle East.

Originally posted by Strangelove
I'm not srue if we were ever really close to war in the Cold War. It was just that, in fact: a 'war' in which America and Russia were pissed off at each other. I doubt there was any possibility of real war during those times.

Well technically there was real war, but it was a war of proxies and influence. Coups, both sides supporting proxies in civil wars, lots of money spent trying to get people around to their way of thinking etc. Technically there were conflicts where the both the US and USSR got burnt trying to enforce idealogical stances (Afghanistan for the Russkies, Vietnam for the Yanks) and get a leg up over the other.



Well, there is a cease fire in effect, or was, or will be. But really so much of the middle eastern tension is linked to flash points that could fire up, but could also burn out quickly unless specific conditions are met. No terrorist organisation can fight a conventional war, unless Isreal does something to bring in Syria and Iran then that conflict lacks the speed to turn into something bigger. I feel the best chance for a bigger conflict will be if the US withdraws from a unstable Iraq and Iran moves in (and they have far better chance of doing it now then they did back before the rise of Saddam.) However if that did occur I can't help but suspect the US might not interfer this time...