this post was submitted on 06 May 2025
104 points (91.3% liked)

World News

46384 readers
3430 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
104
Many in US and western Europe think ‘third world war likely within five to 10 years’ (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 15 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

As Europe prepares to mark the 80th anniversary of VE Day, the YouGov polling also showed large majorities felt that events during and before the second world war were relevant today and must continue to be taught to younger generations.

Between 41% and 55% of respondents in the five European countries polled: Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Spain, said they thought another world war was very or fairly likely within the next five to 10 years, a view shared by 45% of Americans.

Majorities of 68% to 76% said they expected any new conflict would involve nuclear weapons, and between 57% and 73% also said a third world war would lead to greater loss of life than in 1939-1945. Many (25% to 44%) believed it would kill most people in the world.

top 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 16 points 8 hours ago

World War III started in 2022. Some argue it started as early as 2014 or 2008.

but there can be no question that it started in 2022 at the latest. Society has basically married the term WW3 to the idea of a nuclear holocaust, and because there arent nuclear weapons being used yet, many will deny its happening.

yet massive armies are on the move, the sides were drawn, and some of the armies have already started fighting. There's over a million dead in Russia and Ukraine, thats officially a major conflict, and it shows no signs of stopping. If we could compare this to WW2, We're no longer in the Spanish Civil War or Italian Africa phase, we're in the Sino-Japanese phase. (China and Japan were at war in 1936. and that conflict was merged into what became known as WW2)

[–] [email protected] 30 points 10 hours ago

You know, surveys show 100% of people polled about the future don't have a fucking clue what the future holds.

BUT! Over half of respondents predicted the scary future, here's a picture of a nuclear mushroom cloud

[–] [email protected] 23 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Not at all.

What we'll get is not one big World War of Axis vs. Allies, but everyone at war with some kind of small regional pissing contest or insurgency.

Sure, most of the world will be in some form of conflict, but it won't be a "World War" in the same sense of a 20-on-20 prolonged conflict with well-defined nation-states on each side. Not that this opinion survey can really capture that.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

That’s a lot of what the first two world wars were, under the sheet. Germany and Japan had few aligned interests, but they agreed to help one another to each pursue their own local imperial ambitions.

I actually think I’m agreeing with you. I’m just saying that large wars have always been an excuse for regional pissing contests.

It scares me. Think about Putin and Ukraine. The conflict in Gaza helps Putin, because it distracts the world from what he’s doing. Imagine if there were 5 or 6 Ukraine sized conflicts in the developed world. He’d have a much easier time and there would be less available aid for Ukraine.

How many Putin-style assholes need to figure this out and launch their little wars before the world is overwhelmed and descends into a chaos where all bets are off?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Not many. The thing about globalization and repealing the 20th century is that its a wobbly 3D Rube Goldberg domino landscape. 1-2 dickheads per continent is all it takes.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I tend to agree. So far there hasn't been enough taking sides for a proper world war to take place. But my fear is that with authoritarians in place in all the major world powers that we will just have the large powers conquering the small for the next few years.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

You're correct, however, keep in mind that authoritarians have fragile egos and are often focused locally, often on how to further subjugate their populations and garner favor. That usually means conflicts like insurgency or cross-border attacks like Russia into Ukraine (x2), Russia into Georgia, US into Mexico/Canada, India and Pakistan fighting over Cashmere, PRC and Taiwan, Serbia and Kosovo, Kenya/Somalia/Somalil and, Uganda and eastern DRC, etc. etc.

Boomer pissing contest fantasies of China and the US duking it out in the Pacific are foolish as neither wants to risk direct conflict with no tangible gains expected. It's a guarantee of either outright loss or maaaaybe a Pyrrhic victory of you already control your media. No landing party flotilla will land in Los Angeles or Hong Kong. The US only stands to lose.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 hours ago

Can I just point out how cute Americans screaming "Ukraine isnt our war" is expecting the rest of NATO to join their side against China.

China isnt our war, yeah they're not good, but the only reason America and China are at odds, is because they're both competing for who gets to be the hegemon and slave driver of the world, respectfully, yall can murder each other into extinction on your own dime, the rest of us would rather do something else with our energy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Those are precisely the kind of conflicts I'm talking about.

As for USA vs China, it all hinges on what happens in Taiwan. If the USA feels it can onshore all chip fab it probably will let Taiwan get overrun. But I don't think that likely in the term in which this conflict is likely to happen, so I think the US will be pretty directly involved in this one.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The Chinese are making a lot of noise about Taiwan and that's why Taiwan is the last place you should be looking at. Look at Outer Manchuria, instead, especially in the face of Russian weakness and looming chaos.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago

I don't disagree with you here either. It will be one or the other.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Gotcha, sorry I thought you meant in a sort of a more large-scale coordinated way with the authoritarians.

The easiest way for China to take Taiwan back is to wait for something complicated to occupy the military and WH, even only at the very top leadership level. A protracted and undeniable scandal, another major shake-up while the boss is out of town, or the end result of all this internal military use for law enforcement that seems to want to end posse comitatus within I think 80-ish days at this point, are all options. Spin up the machine to catch it's own tail and the response elsewhere will be too little and too late because of the more hierarchical nature of decison-making now. Steve Bannon's own "flood the zone with shit" tactic, inspired by Tsun Tzu.

Chip fab won't matter because nothing else logical has mattered so far. Why jump straight to a trade war with all your largest trading partners without even preparing for it? Foolishness and ego. Same same here as well.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Honestly, I fully expect China to just wait out Taiwan right now because the US is busy hurting itself. Who wants to distract their enemy when they are constantly making huge mistakes?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago

Literally a chapter in the Art of War.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I don't see much war happening between Asian neighbours nor Latin American ones, but I can easily see America violently balkanizing (always a matter of time but Trump is the great accelerationist, lol) and Eastern Europe being a hot zone too.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

What about India and Pakistan? Or China invading Taiwan?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Somehow I see China absorbing Taiwan without much bloodshed, maybe I'm optimistic. India and Pakistan is something else, you're probably right. Oh well. :/

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago

India and Pakistan is mostly posturing, there won't be a full fledged war between the two, just some limited strike by India to show they did something as a political stunt.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 hours ago

I think if the Taiwan conflict ever goes hot Taiwan is going to lose no matter who "wins" just by being the battlefield and we can also forget about getting any chips from there.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

If things keep going on the current path, eventually it's likely to happen, even if I really don't like that idea and want to be wrong. The best hope at the moment is in the US dealing with its situation internally and regaining at least some sense of normalcy before it gets to a point of true non-return and external retaliaton. With some indirect push by other nations like tariff retaliation and cutting strategic benefits to the US, just enough for the people to wake up and fight the oligarchs, but not so much shock that it triggers an actual war.

And I'm not joking. Trump literally said he rules America, as well as the world. He has stated that he won't stand for Canada and Europe partnering up to compensate for the lack of the US partnership, and he's won't let go of his wet dreams of annexation for several territories. He wants to be remembered as a "great man" in the history books, and not just another footnote billionaire. That kind of ambition is dangerous. Hitler-level dangerous.

For someone like him any excuse is valid. And just like he didn't take his 2020 election loss lying down, calling it rigged and urging an insurrection, he sure as hell won't leave the White House without sweat and blood being spilled, now that he's got his hooves on it again. We are dealing with savages who think themselves superior, and won't stop willingly.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 13 hours ago

I am certain that Trump admires Hitler for being THE human name synonymous with evil.

Compare him to, say, Reinhard Heydrich. He is a man that all of us should know, though I imagine that some may need to look him up. No one needs to look up Hitler. And Trump wants to be sure that no one needs to look him up for the next thousand years.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Oligarchs can't make money if everyone is dead. This will not happen.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Oligarchs will have already stripped the coffers bare by then. Proof of that is just how much of the world's wealth has been concentrated in the top 0.1%.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

They still need peasants to stomp. A scenario where they and a security team are the only humans left alive is a fail state for them - all the stompable people will be dead.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 hours ago

In these hypotheticals what stops the hired security forces from just killing their employers who they likely outnumber and taking everything for themselves?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

And they will be on their own private islands with all the wealth they've stolen, with all their guards/gardeners supplying all their food.

Or on Mars ... whichever comes first.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

A life of luxury is not enough for the oligarchs. They must consume more. A private island where everything outside of it is dead will bore them very quickly.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 13 hours ago

Why? If there's another 20 billionaires/trillionaires who also live nearby they'll have all the entertainment they need.

And don't forget Musk and Bezos will continue working on spaceships and Mars/moon accommodations for them as well.