US tanks arrive in Germany to help Nato defences

Please don't treat me like a fool and we will get along in the future.

 

We fund many Islamic fundamentalist fighting groups. Have been doing this since the end of WW2.

 

I'm not sure how you're connecting pockets of extremists to a conventional world war.

 

Islamic fundamentalist fighters or "terrorists" connected to a state actor could gain control of a bomb. If I were king of the world I'd have a magnifying glass over Pakistan 24/7.

 

Again, war in the 21st century is fought via proxy. "Terrorists" are usually connect to a state actor. Not these "lone wolf' copycat guys but large organized attacks are basically intelligence operations. You think Al Qaeda isn't connected to a nation state? You think ISIS isn't connected to a nation state?

 

That wouldn't start a world war. The world would ban together and destroy Pakistan (in your example). It would unite the world against one enemy.

- - - Updated - - -

Not to mention, the world would know if terrorists got their hands on a nuclear weapon. Also, they'd have to know how to use it. That would give neighbors plenty of time to take care of it. In this case, many world powers would just start bombing Pakistan and that would be that.

 

Lol that's not new. That's been around for decades. It's a 100% different type of fight. A world war is so different than what you're claiming.

Sure ALQ and ISIS have sponsors, but an entire nation will not go to war over them. We're not at war with the nation of Afghanistan for example. Just some people in it. Afghanistan has not declared a war on the US.

You have a vast conspiracy with no substance.

 

I don't think you have a clue what I am debating about.
I don't think it would be wise to pull our troop out of Europe.

I was asking ArmySoldier questions, because he want to remove them because we have nukes.

 

i see. i thought your position was to withdraw and not use nukes even if attacked. a misunderstanding, nevermind.

 

The nature of war itself has changed, yes it began in the post WW2 arena during the Cold War. Nation states use proxy forces in lieu of direct conflict. We're in a proxy war with Russia and Iran as we speak. The entire point is that Islamic fundamentalists, backed by state actors, could very well get a hold of nuclear weapons. It's not a conspiracy theory it's the reality of 21st century war. Pakistan is perhaps the biggest threat. They could give nukes to Saudi Arabia or directly to a proxy force. They already helped fund 9/11. Not a conspiracy theory.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jul/22/usa.september11


War changes over time. At one point soldiers would stand in line on a battlefield waiting to be shot. Then guerilla tactics were introduced in the Americas and battlefield tactics changed. Over time war has evolved to include proxy forces and deception- intel agencies constantly facilitating attacks which can't be directly linked to a nation state. Proxy war is the new face of war in the 21st century. Subversion, destabilization etc.

The last ten years we've been arming, training and funding Islamic extremists in the region. It's nothing new but the scope has widened. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Yemen and Iran have also been using Sunni/Shia "non-state actors" as proxy forces. Russia and China use proxy forces. The threat of nuclear warfare via proxy is very real. Asymmetric warfare via smaller nation states is also a sort of guerrilla warfare including a wide range of tactics. If a smaller nations can't beat a larger nation they'll use proxy forces. Actual war between nation states with soldiers fighting on a defined battlefield is mostly a thing of the past.

The new face of war is multi-sided but mostly includes subversion and the use of proxy forces. Even when we attack a nation state such as Libya most of the fighting is done through proxy forces and subversion.


To the point- nation states that can provide nukes to Islamic fundamentalists are a real threat. Right now Pakistan is probably the biggest threat in the ME. They have too many people in their government linked to Islamic proxy forces. Same with Saudi Arabia. Iran would be next on the list. This is a major reason we don't want nuclear capabilities to spread throughout the Middle East. These weapons could very well fall into the hands of Islamic terrorists or proxy forces. If that happens we're screwed. It's a worse case scenario.

 

I can tell you first hand that there are two types of wars.

Government contracting itself contradicts this "change of war". It's not that "war has changed" it's that there are different types of war. World wars where nations battle other nations in coalitions, then you have pockets of extremist terrorism. Pakistan does have it's security threats, but we would certainly level them before they did anything stupid. Geospatial imagery is for that very purpose.

 

They've already done something stupid.


Anyhow, my point stands. Islamic fundamentalists linked to nation states are a real nuclear threat. Our military plans for this exact scenario. It's a scenario our foreign policy is actually helping to create when we destabilize more secular Arab nations. When nations like Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Yemen etc turn further and further towards Islamic fundamentalism our world becomes a more dangerous place.

Advanced weapons of warfare in the hands of religious fanatics is perhaps humanities number one threat in the 21st century. Especially when these fanatics are linked to nation states. (Which is usually the case.)

A world war is already bubbling under the surface with Russia, Iran and China forming a sort of axis. We've been using Sunni proxy forces and fascists to fight Iran and Russia. Islamic fundamentalism is a wildcard, a dangerous wildcard. That sort of fanatical ideology nullifies mutually assured destruction. If these people get their hands on nukes they will use them.

 

Obama has 9 days left to try to antagonize Russia on behalf of the neocons, war mongers and military industrial complex. Fortunately, the Democratic Party of War lost the election.

Putin is not taking the bait. Rather, just waiting for the Obama presidency and all his minions to expire.

 

What? We have no reason to fear Russia whatsoever. Where on Earth did you get that idea? Remember, it wasn't Britain who instigated the only crisis in history which could have led to global thermonuclear confrontation. That was America in 1962.

 

Then why are the brits beginning us to keep up the defense shield?

 

America instigated the crisis in 1962? America? Who introduced medium range ballistic missiles into Cuba?

 

A world war is not bubbling anywehere. The US and Russia are about to have a friendship. As far as spying? We've been caught a dozen times so far. You always spy on your allies, friends, and everyone else. Everyone has always spied.

Islamic terrorism will never spark a world war. An axis of nations banding together to fight other people can. However, we're about to open a major trade door so China and Russia will be making some cash with us.

 

The danger of the future in terms of war and weapons of mass destruction is not Russia or China. It is the Empire of Islam, which fundamentally is imperialistic and warmongering. The religion itself was started by a warlord and it grew by war and forced submission. For over 1000 years this has never changed.

The USA made a horrific mistake continuing to treat Russia as an enemy after the fall of the USSR and another mistake pushing for the break up of the Russian federation - leaving micro countries we are now supposed to defend since inherently they can not defend themselves.

The USA and Russia have a common enemy - radical Islam - and rather than treating Russia as an adversary we should join forces with Russi against radical Islam. Us attacking in Syria to promote, train and arm radical Muslim insurgents is one of the best examples of how the goals of the militarists and military industrial complex can be 100% against American interests solely for the motive of profit and greed.

The USA should form a military coalition with Russia against radical Islam.

 

Indeed; if America had not first installed nuclear missiles (15 Jupiters in June 1961), in Turkey, pointing at Russia and hugely provocative, Russia would not have responded in kind. Read some history.https://turkeywonk.wordpress.com/20...important-player-in-the-cuban-missile-crisis/

 

I don't treat you as a fool.

 

Stop using our military for your personal protection force, we pay for this crap with our tax dollars and it helps us ZERO.

 

Doesn't help us either; on the contrary it makes us a potential target. Take your crap home please, we're quite capable of defending ourselves.

 

Count me in. Removing american soldiers from EU would tickle the ego of some russians but at the end of the day it would provoke the world war in the region where it always came from.It would be nice though if NATO doesn't play on our nerves, because Putin is exceptionally cold-blooded guy, but next time (in a decade or two) we might have our own Obama or Trump who would get the real military threat and the biggest attacking nuclear arsenal, which was made to overcome american strategic defense.

 

I've always supported taking our crap home, but moron politicians want an empire.

 

You are partly right. Europe have to pay more for its protection force. But Canada, Germany, United Kingdom also sends soldiers, tanks, missiles to Russia's doorstep. Not only US sends.