[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/his/ - History & Humanities


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: hot.jpg (202 KB, 683x1024)
202 KB
202 KB JPG
will there ever be a war like ww1 or ww2 again?
or not... was ww2 the pinnacle of all wars to ever come?
>>
there won't, because nukes

hth
>>
No, the pinnacle will be the one to end them all. Wont be much of a war either, just like a 30 minute window between life as we know it and near extinction
>>
>>6122510
Technically we're back in a WWI scenario where the powers of the world haven't fought each other for close to a century and thus have no idea how to really fight each other.

But everyone is now on pussy Proxy Wars and limited conflicts that are followed by treaties.

Gay af desu.
>>
>>6122546
we also have drones, planes and missiles that can be launched from underground bases halfway across the world
>>
>>6122597
and nukes
>>
>>6122510
It's thinkable since mutual deterrence makes it possible that large scale conventional wars between nuclear powers don't escalate into nuclear warfare. I suppose it would take serious environmental damage and ressource depletion to make the cost of waging a war in order to grab land seem profitable for a great power. In any case, it would likely be a guided missiles and drones shitfest, so pretty boring.
>>
>>6122645
Those drones and missiles will quickly be depleted. We would be back to dumb weapons in no time.
>>
>>6122645
It's really hard to see the situation where the great powers wouldn't just use proxies
>>
>>6122672
>what is Google
>>
>>6122510
Nuclear weapons are huge deterrent so most likely no.
>>
>>6122681
Well, lets say a future China crippled by desertification wants to take Siberia. Can't really do that with proxies.
>>
File: maxresdefault.jpg (175 KB, 1280x720)
175 KB
175 KB JPG
>>6122546
>Technically we're back in a WWI scenario where the powers of the world haven't fought each other for close to a century and thus have no idea how to really fight each other.

Except for the U.S., which has the best trained, best equipped and most combat experienced military on the planet.

It's the rest of the world that would be winging it if a fulll-scale conventional war broke out.
>>
>>6122546

US has fought the world's 4'th biggest army in this century.
>>
>>6122700
worst fetish you could have
>>
>>6125765
>most combat experienced
Which is still pretty much fucking nothing if you think about it. A little bit of fighting against completely outmatched third world armies and a couple decades of third world insurgencies are way the fuck less than the experience pre-ww1 european armies had, between all the colonial bullshittery and the occasional spat between powers.
>>
>>6125866
>A little bit of fighting against completely outmatched third world armies

World's fourth biggest army using equipment made by the world's 2nd superpower?
>>
>>6125894
You better not be referring to soviet equipped north korea in the 50s, because at that point every european country has fighting experience too, from fucking ww2. The earliest you should be computing experience oughta be the 80s for your command staff, since the oldest motherfucker joined in '75, and likely the 00s and 10s for the average soldier. And since then the US fought only insurgencies and shit tier third world armies that folded like a piece of paper within a month of fighting.
>>
>>6122546
>thus have no idea how to really fight each other.
we do waaaay more war games and planning for as possible outcomes then was done back then
>>
>>6125924
He's referring to Saddam's conscripts
>>
>>6125974
That's even more retarded. And still 30 years ago.
There gotta be like, a few hundreds gulf war veteran left in the military. Out of hundreds of thousands.
>>
>>6122510
There won't, don't listen to the contrarians who will deny MAD
>>
Nukes are a fucking joke. Everyone thinks that if a war between say, Russia and the USA will immediately kick off with nukes being launched, which is incredibly unlikely in any circumstance. It would be largely conventional, from the beginning. And which is the better option:losing a war conventionally or fucking nuking the world?

You all have drank the nuke koolaid. It's cold war propaganda, and once people realize that, wars will be a bit more often.
>>
>>6125765
>best trained

Good joke.
>>
>>6122546
>what is the franco-prussian war
>>
>>6126267
>what is seven days to the river rhine
>>
>>6126326
For that matter, a century before 1914 the Napoleonic Wars were still being fought.
Still, 43 years since the last war effectively means that nobody fighting ww1 had fought in the franco-prussian war.
>>
>>6126341
Plenty of plans included nuclear arms. Many more didn't. I don't understand what you're getting at.
>>
>>6124492
Simply get those Siberian People's Republic, if would be so much in need to handle thing in that maner.
>>
>>6126326
>>6126351
Hadn't the ruskies just got literally blown out of the water mere moments before deciding that they were ready for the big show and taking out the Hapsburgs and Prussian led Germany?
>>
>>6125765

Can't secure a functioning state in a war lasting 18 years against drug-addicted farmers with rusty kalashnikovs.
>>
>>6126872
Lol do you even history? Occupation is always far more difficult than winning on the field that's why Europeans generally dont try to occupy one another. Napoleon tried and it killed his empire Hitler tried and it killed his. Occupation is a fools errand.
>>
>>6122510
I hate nukes so much. They literally ruined everything.
>>
>>6126845
You mean against Japan? I don't think anybody would have counted that one, between japs being "savages" and the war being essentially a colonial conflict (because of the location rather than the resources involved, fighting over chink villages isn't the same as fighting over Alsace-Lorraine) for both parties. It should probably have been consirdered, but in truth a lot of tech that would characterize ww1 wasn't really used.
Besides, militaries need first hand experience to be effective. Reading accounts is in no way comparable.
>>
>>6127745
The Japanese conflict was a pretty modern naval conflict. Pretty embarrassing for the Tsars definitely should have given them pause about their military preparedness to take on the Hapsburgs and escalate the Balkan conflict into the world war.
>>
>>6122514
This..the aliums that watch us also prevented us from nuking ourselfes, because it would've also affected other lifeforms in the near universe.
>>
boomers of /his/, any of you can share what was it like growing up a chad and fucking cheerleaders before 1994?
>>
>>6127769
>The Japanese conflict was a pretty modern naval conflict.
Whereas ww1 was mostly a land war, and the main key naval element in the war was submarine warfare, which didn't happen in the russo-japanese conflict.
>definitely should have given them pause about their military preparedness
Yes, definitely. I think there's a good argument for why its disregard by western militaries, but the russians really have no excuse.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.