All countries of the world prepare for war

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Rome offers you peace or Rome offers you war, it matters not to Rome which you choose.

Precursor to the Second Punic War?

Either way, war is bad for the people, if not for the government. And modern warfare is simply unpalatable on a grand scale, as WWI and II showed.

Originally posted by Haunebu
after that Russia will invade Europe and that will trigger WW3!

What could you possible base this on? I have heard this several times on this site and the people who say it obviously haven't a clue what they are on about.. no offense. Also, Pravada.ru is one of the most ridiculous propaganda rubbish sites online.


1. The collective military expenditure of the EU is $312,259,000,000 while Russia is $39,600,000,000.. There is absolute no comparison between forces.

2. Russia depends almost solely on the EU for its new economic expansion.. without the EU economic dominance, expenditure and stability in that third of the world, Russia would have nothing. Now they are too used to making money and like China, why would they want to lose that?

3. Russia would get absolutely annihilated by NATO.

4. The West, mainly the US is the aggressor towards Russia.. not the other way around. These other emerging powers are building their forces because in the eyes of most of the rest of the world, the US has been on a rampage for the past decade and they need to ensure they can defend themselves.. simple as.

[edit on 15/6/09 by Dermo]

reply to post by Dermo

well said, but im from finland we still have the scares from our indepence war and winter war and continous war(ww2) what russia did start, but finland did win them

Originally posted by gravytrain

Originally posted by MBF
When we come to the end of "cheap" oil, I'm sure there will be huge wars. Countries will do anything to feed its people. I'm sure that time is getting close, maybe in a couple of decades. Now is the time for countries to stock up on arms and not wait til it is too late.

Yes, when the cheap oil runs dry the world will change. But there is hope. If we can manage to find a new energy source, or find new ways to use old ones we can make it through the transition. It can be done.

We can find plenty of new energy sources, the problem is that the powers that be are in no hurry to develop them. Look at Brazil, back in the 70's when we had the first energy crisis, they took the que and developed their own alternate energy source in alcohol and import no energy today. This country could have done thing. It makes you wonder how many people in power have ties to the oil industry.

I think one of the more dangerous things is the food and water supply. As the worlds population grows and climate change affects crops and fresh water supplies people will starve. Millions will die. War is inevitable as has been shown in the past.

The food industry is tied to energy. Fertilizer and chemicals are mostly oil based. The water problem for cities could be critical in the near future if we continue to have to droughts. Look at the problem that Atlanta had this past summer. Those people were scared.

reply to post by Haunebu


Can we please keep out tabloid news sources, please. I feel like I'm at the supermarket check out line reading garbage while I wait to pay for my groceries. It's not even news, countries are always preparing for war. That is part of what countries do, it is not news.

Originally posted by Watchdog-Finland
well said, but im from finland we still have the scares from our indepence war and winter war and continous war(ww2) what russia did start, but finland did win them

Thats understandable, it takes a few generations for those kind of scars to pass, many of my country people still hold grudges against the UK for their occupation.

But do you not think that the arming in the Nordic/Scandinavian region is more about securing resources in the Arctic for NATO in the future. This kind of arming and confrontation will only put Finland directly in the firing line..

BUT when you think about it reasonably, who would want a full scale war against the EU? Who would want a collapse of 30% of the world economy? Who would want to fight a war against NATO and invade a region with half a billion people, a ridiculous military spending and alliances so strong that they might as well be the same country? I honestly dont think anyone would.. especially not Russia.

The only reason defence spending has increased slightly in the UK recently is because succesive governments have run our armed forces down to such an extent that we were incapable of effectively carrying out any worthwhile military operations and were unable to defend even our own borders!

Unfortunately it is also a fact that investment in the military spurs technological advancement.

Edit to add.

I also don't understand why anyone would suggest Russia will invade Europe.
Why would they?

[edit on 16/6/09 by Freeborn]

I picked this line up quoted in the sun article, listed in the OP:

"A US Air Force stealth bomber penetrated UK air defences without detection in a secret mission from Missouri to Lincolnshire"

A tad worrying when we dont even know our allies our popping over for a visit........

Lets hope and pray that the leaders have brains enough not to start WW3

Didnt WWI start this way? There was newer war-tech and every county on the block had to get it not because they wanted war but because it the latest and greatest. For every nation that built up on the new tech a neighbor was made uneasy. For every uneasy neighbor a treaty was written for every treaty an ally. All it took was one murder and the dominoes fell into the Great War.

Granted, there isnt much new war-tech out there save unmanned drones but an awful lot of the countries involved are at such a low level of military spending that they have a lot of catch-up to do. Catch-up that is being coerced by "rogue" nations playing the "new to me" war-tech game of nukes and bio.

We also have all sorts of tentative and precarious alliances being set up not the least being the effects of the U.S. and their missile shield deal.

I just wonder who will be the victim of the murder that sets the world on fire.

World War is not very difficult to start. We've already had two in a 30 year period. Some would say the seemingly perpetual garbage in the Mid-East is a WW of another kind with each nation taking turns meddling for fun and profit. I guess if nobody is bombing London it can't be a World War? Nearly every nation on the planet is involved right now. It's only a matter of time before it spreads past the desert.

I'm not near any nuke targets and there is no reason on Earth anyone would invade my area (well, Canada might, those bastards) so I say let them all kill each other. It'll give me some leg room.

Originally posted by Dermo


What could you possible base this on? I have heard this several times on this site and the people who say it obviously haven't a clue what they are on about.. no offense. Also, Pravada.ru is one of the most ridiculous propaganda rubbish sites online.

There is a German book called "WW3" by Jan Udo Holey in which they tried to compare prophecies with one and other to see if there were similarities.
One of them is Russia invading Western Europe and that it will happen when the financial crisis will be at its height. This book is from 1996 and also has a prophecy that strikes 911 in a frightening way. There are several Prophecies that say that there will be an atomic bomb dropped in the North Sea by the Russians, it would wipe out London and half of the Netherlands in one strike.

I keep these prophecies in the back of my mind, just to check if they come true. And the Financial Crisis came true, just like the eminent war with Iran is fulfilling its self in the near future. And I keep an Eye on Russia and I see more and more developments that indicate that they are regathering strength.
Tensions will grow, staged or not.
seattletimes.nwsource.com...

Originally posted by Dermo
1. The collective military expenditure of the EU is $312,259,000,000 while Russia is $39,600,000,000.. There is absolute no comparison between forces.

How reliable are those figures and how much of that goes to bureaucracy, private companies, "Black Projects" and UN missions like in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Originally posted by Dermo
2. Russia depends almost solely on the EU for its new economic expansion.. without the EU economic dominance, expenditure and stability in that third of the world, Russia would have nothing. Now they are too used to making money and like China, why would they want to lose that?

"As far as other global problems are concerned, we have a sustainable economy," he said. "We have enough material and intellectual resources not to depend on anyone."
President Dmitry Medvedev
uk.reuters.com...

Originally posted by Dermo
3. Russia would get absolutely annihilated by NATO.

There's always the element of surprise.
www.thesun.co.uk...

Originally posted by Dermo
4. The West, mainly the US is the aggressor towards Russia.. not the other way around. These other emerging powers are building their forces because in the eyes of most of the rest of the world, the US has been on a rampage for the past decade and they need to ensure they can defend themselves.. simple as.

Ever heard a Russian talk about Germans or other Europeans? You really should find out how they feel about the "West". They already showed it back in '44 and that era is also something they haven't forgotten.

"In the farmyard stood a cart, to which more naked women were nailed through their hands in a cruciform position...Near a large inn, the 'Roter Krug', stood a barn and to each of its two doors a naked woman was nailed through the hands, in a crucified posture....In the dwellings we found a total of 72 women, including children, and one old man, 74, all dead....Some babies had their heads bashed in."[2]

en.wikipedia.org...