If World War III happened in twenty years, would there be much use of infantry, or just nuclear bombs?
954009
Nuclear bombs would be used. But it is recognised that there is a ceiling to the number of bombs that would destroy the Earth utterly. Countries involved would limit strikes to below this number as part of the new nuclear war doctrine. China and the US have vast territories so some civilians and military would survive- China has less than 500 warheads, while the US only has a few thousand ready for use.\n\nIf World War III kicks off the theatre will be global and incalculably vast- there would be low level skirmishes all over the place. Hence infantry would be used and see action all over the globe- they have an ability to avoid destruction tanks and planes cannot.\n\nThe world would instantly become a more violent place- so other wars of a conventional kind would erupt, and the US would intervene where strategically helpful.
271340
Got news for you.  The others you speak of will develope new systems no matter what we do.  So yes, it is justified by that alone.  In the history of Humankind, those who do not prepare for war are always defeated, at least initially, by those who did.\n\nLessons include the French in WWII who saw the Germans re-arm, saw the tactics of the German Army in Poland, saw that their tactics and equipment (the French Char Bis tanks were good, but suffered from limited usage of radios) were not up to par, and frankly wished the war away until it was too late.\n\nBritton also saw the comming of WWII, but was slow to arm, upgrade, and change tactics.  Several humiliating losses later, they matured very quickly while London burned.\n\nGermany, while advancing steadily in WWII, chose to ignore logistics and over-engineered their systems to the point a Panzer Division sometimes had 10 different tank types from PZ-38t's to PZIIIs (model A-J), PZIV's (models A-F), Tiger's (2 models), King Tigers, assault guns (STUs), Mobile AT guns (based on the different PZ chasis), etc and so on.  This became a mechanic's nightmare of systems.\n\nThe US in WWI-WWII had spent little money on upgrading/producing systems and suffered greatly in WWII.  The venerable M1 Garand rifle was not available until mid 1942 in large numbers and the USMC at Wake, Midway, the fall of the Phillipines, and Guadal(sp) Canal still used bolt action M1903A3 Springfield rifles and ancient machineguns.  US tanks were the inferior in armor and firepower to the Germans until the M26 Pershing came out in 1944.  At the current rate of soildier casualties in the War on Terror, it would take the US 200 years to equal the casualties it suffered in WWII.\n\nThat is but one example.  But here is what you, as a civilian get from these projects (short list): Surgery, Open-heart surgery, prostectics, blood clotting agents, infectious disease control research, computers, hybrid vehicles (the first were submarines), GPS, Helicopters, radar, microwaves, the internet, nomex/kevlar fire resistant materials, nano-machines, intelligent robots (one even crawls through natural gas pipes to check for leaks), Gortex, increased gasoline engine efficiency, nuclear power, x-rays, etc and so on.
1187168
Its doubtful.\n\nIn 1944 the German military was far from being a spent force and fought hard along the whole line of advance. Also the D-Day landings were only part of the issue as to properly equip and maintain the invasion forces you had to have a working port, which is why the British pushed quickly north and fought so hard to capture Antwerp. \n\nIt was only then that Motgomery and Patton could get the basic supplies they needed to push forward without over extending supply lines, so there was a strong logistics hold up.\n\nThe third element was Hitlers last gasp attempt to break the allies in the Battle of the Bulge, which no-one expected. Whilst ultimately defeated that German attack set the war plans back at least two months whilst units were rested and re-cycled into and out of the battle zone.\n\nIt is also true that Patton and Montgomery were halted before the wars end so that the Russians could take Berlin. This was against the advice and wishes of Churchill who could see what was going to happen. lke however didnt want the casualties associated with street fighting in the German capital.
608439
How could it not be a nuclear war.  A "world" war assumes that differences cannot be settled by political means.  If the object is victory, then can you assume that every means possible would be used to achieve victory.  Do you fight a world war, knowing that you didn't do everything possible to win?  If both sides go to war with the cruel illusion that victory at all costs was the motto, then, of course, nukes will be used.  \n\nIf tactical nukes are the only means to stop overwhelming numbers of conventional armies, then NATO and the US have already committed to that strategy in the Fulda Gap and the 38th Parallel.  Once one tactical nuke is used, there's no stopping the use of strategic nukes.  A chain of events leading to nuclear showdowns, hair trigger responses, and faulty communications will ultimately be the legacy of WW III.
424634
Some people believe we are already involved in World War III.  It is known as "the war on terror".  I believe this is a sort of World War.  Believe that or not, if it gets much bigger, it definately will be World War III.
1136086
well world war three would probably start because of america and it be something like the whole world vs. the united states the result earth is blown into oblivion
973780
I totally agree about the bombing part. I mean what have we got an Airforce for anyway. It worked during WWII, it would work now. We are way to worried about looking PC. \n\nTo quote Gen Patton, " May God have mercy on their souls, because I sure won't!"
600783
German resistance would have collapsed sooner.  The Allies were going for "Unconditional Surrender" no matter who was in charge for the Germans.  The result for the most part would have been the same, probably saving a significant number of lives on both sides. The political climate may have been more friendly between east & west over the next 60 years.  There might not have been the partitioning of Germany the way it was.  And maybe it could have freed up a lot of needed resources to get the Pacific war ended sooner also.
414768
Yes, eventually (maybe not 50 years, but sometime not so far off), the US will have claimed that no country will be able to be trusted with nuclear weapons, and the US will bomb and take over every country. 50 years after that, people will realize that the true irony was that, in all of history, the US was the only country to use nuclear weapons.
934132
Yes, it probably will be a major force again someday.  We historians have a quote we live by: "The only thing we learn from History is that we don't learn anything from History."  Ideologies like communism never die because people forget what happened before them.  There are still people who believe in it as the way to stop world strife.  They often claim that Soviet communism just wasn't "done right" or that it has to be tried worldwide to be successful (communism can't survive copmetition which should make one wonder if it is a viable system to begin with).  Every ideology has its true believers and someday, communists will get an upper hand in some unfortunate nation where they'll wreck havoc for a couple of generations before being tossed aside again.
95861
It is a possibility but the consequence would probably be third world war. I hope that it never happens.
393049
Yes, and it will be the start of World War III
650869
Somebody will as the world's existance could easily be at stake. If Iran develops nukes it almost assures WW III will come about inside a decade of them aquiring Nukes. If somebody dosen't all that stood by signs a death warrent for the world.
135701
Probably just after WW 2.
153040
"I don't know what weopons will be used in world war3 but world war 4 will be fought using sticks and stones!!!"  Einstine
1080786
If Hillary Clinton were to become President, we would experience World War III.
274267
No.  WWI was long over by the 30's.\n\nWWII? Maybe.  Very difficult to say.  I think that delayed is more likely.