the 4th world war

[imdisturbed]

they say that by the time the 3rd world war is over the 4th world war would be fought with sticks and stones imagine going from the dominate spieces on earth to monkeys with clubs in a year

[The-King-of-Wolves]

We really wouldn't be monkeys. We'd be just very very impoverished people. Einstein was trying to describe the devestating effects of a nuclear war. It shouldn't be taken literally.

[BeFell]

I imagine it would be a lot like the Road Warrior, that was after nuclear war right? Everyone would roll around in pimped out go carts and Mel Gibson would go around kicking ass.

[imdisturbed]

Oh we need to take it literally though....it would happen unless a survivor had a gun on him ok mabey not sticks and stones but atleast bows and stone maces. Or stone hatchets like indians that is what we'd be

[stafffighter]

Given the world we have, a lot of survivors would have guns on them. plus it's not like the weapons would all disentegrate when the bombs hit

[Reform]

At 5/10/04 06:04 PM, imdisturbed wrote: Oh we need to take it literally though....it would happen unless a survivor had a gun on him ok mabey not sticks and stones but atleast bows and stone maces. Or stone hatchets like indians that is what we'd be

Can you please for once make sense.

[TheShrike]

Mad Max. I love those cheesy movies.

[imdisturbed]

At 5/10/04 06:06 PM, stafffighter wrote: Given the world we have, a lot of survivors would have guns on them. plus it's not like the weapons would all disentegrate when the bombs hit

no they wouldnt disinagrate they'd melt into puddles a huge nuclear weapon can do that im not talking fat man and little boy im talking the fucking nuke missles that we have that can whipe out the whole country of iraq and yea this is replying to death yea mad max and waterworld cheesy but cool

[TheShrike]

Yeah, but an atomic assault that would wipe out ALL of our toys would also wipe us out.

[imdisturbed]

At 5/10/04 06:12 PM, TheDeath wrote: Yeah, but an atomic assault that would wipe out ALL of our toys would also wipe us out.

not in one assualt the president goes underground and launches our underground nukes :)

[stafffighter]

You think the people who go underground don't think to bring guns?

[Proteas]

Pray tell, dear disturbed, just why would anyone want to build a nuclear weapon large enough to destroy everything and everyone on the face of earth?

[BeFell]

At 5/10/04 06:56 PM, Proteas wrote: Pray tell, dear disturbed, just why would anyone want to build a nuclear weapon large enough to destroy everything and everyone on the face of earth?

If somebody mangaed to kill me with nuke I would want one rigged up to kill everyone else. I am a very bitter person though.

[Proteas]

Please tell me that you are not so ignorant as to believe that if such a bomb was dropped, there would actually be anyone left to declare a world war 4?

[stafffighter]

You build a country destroyer to hold your enimies at bay, you build a world destroyer to say " If you make me use this no one wins." I don't agree with the logic but the weapons are there

[Proteas]

that wasn't directed at you befell, it was directed at disturbed.

[BeFell]

At 5/10/04 07:00 PM, Proteas wrote: Please tell me that you are not so ignorant as to believe that if such a bomb was dropped, there would actually be anyone left to declare a world war 4?

Oh I think the original post was idiotic too. I was just trying to come up with a reason to have a nuke that could destroy the entire world. Vengence is the only reason I could come up with.

[Ben-Fox]

At 5/10/04 06:56 PM, Proteas wrote: Pray tell, dear disturbed, just why would anyone want to build a nuclear weapon large enough to destroy everything and everyone on the face of earth?

Number one, because we can.

Number two, the age old adage of peace through superior firepower and the principle of mutually assured destruction. Quite simply put, you're going to step very softly around a nation sitting on the capability to turn the entire planet into a ball of radioactive ash.

[subpar]

I assume you mean that nukes will destroy 99% of the world and then a few survivors will be left.

Actually we'll all mutate and die eventually so no, there will not be another war afterwards.

Mutating sucks. I say if there is a WW4 it will be fought with sticks and stones held by a third arm growing out of the forehead.

[imdisturbed]

At 5/10/04 07:00 PM, Proteas wrote: Please tell me that you are not so ignorant as to believe that if such a bomb was dropped, there would actually be anyone left to declare a world war 4?

yes there would a few people would survive and then after years when humans began to grow again ww4 would happen and to your other question why nuke everyone or somethin cause its fun! :)

[Fiend-Lore]

i think its just implying that everything would be destroyed, and time (technology-wose) would literaly be forced to start over. seeing how everything owuld be devestated. but I doubt the sticks and stones thing though. Because if we were reduced to that kind of technology, then we couldnt reach every other country at the speed we could, so then it wouldnt be much of a world war.

[RedSkunk]

Many people like to call the cold war 'world war 3', and this latest, sustained campaign against 'terrorism' as possibly a 'world war 4'.

[Fiend-Lore]

the cold war hardly involved the entire would. It was pretty much just the U.S. (and maybe the U.K.) versus communism
and with the minor violence compared to other wise, i would hardly concider the conflict in iraq a world war.

[RedSkunk]

At 5/11/04 12:38 AM, Fiend_Lore wrote: the cold war hardly involved the entire would. It was pretty much just the U.S. (and maybe the U.K.) versus communism

The cold war involved the entire world. There was more fighting, over a longer time, over a much larger area (basically every continent) than either WW1 or 2.

[Fiend-Lore]

not as much violence, and it wasnt as much of a bloodshed issue, even thought there were many assasinations.

[bumcheekcity]

At 5/10/04 06:02 PM, The_King_of_Wolves wrote: We really wouldn't be monkeys. We'd be just very very impoverished people. Einstein was trying to describe the devestating effects of a nuclear war. It shouldn't be taken literally.

I dunno. I think it sould. WWIII will wipe out our electricity, weapons and all our sense of Government.

[Fiend-Lore]

it should be taken seriously. there have been so manyt conflicts. a nation could just press one little button, and end the civil world.

[Ben-Fox]

There was plenty of violence. It just happened in small countries that nobody noticed or cared about. Intelligence operatives from both of the major superpowers of the time instigated and supported quite a few bloody coups to install or remove regimes according to their political and strategic needs; the type of regime that was installed was of very little consequence so long as it was on 'our side.'

[Der-Ubermensch]

Purification by fire... very biblical. For anyone who enjoys these apocaliptic scenarios, read Stephen King's "The Stand". Its far superior to all that's being made in HollyWood these days.

[RedSkunk]

At 5/11/04 02:41 AM, Fiend_Lore wrote: not as much violence, and it wasnt as much of a bloodshed issue, even thought there were many assasinations.

Like ben_feld said, there was a lot of fighting during the cold war. It was only 'cold' specifically on US and Soviet soil. Fighting embroiled every continent, perhaps with the exception of Antartica.