Talk:World War III

Bangladesh liberation War of 1971

The phrase in bold in the following defeats me! The U.S. establishment perceived to the impression that they needed Pakistan to help stop Soviet influence in South Asia.... The total lack of refs in this whole section doesn't help. Davidships (talk) 23:55, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

I see no sources in this article or in Bangladesh Liberation War that says that it was a close call. I suggest that we remove the section. Sjö (talk) 11:14, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

New England Journal of medicine???

A 1998 New England Journal of Medicine overview found that "Although many people believe that the threat of a nuclear attack largely disappeared with the end of the Cold War, there is considerable evidence to the contrary".

Journal of what??? Btw it doesn't explain it at all in the article. Might even be a confusion, or an error.

--OjuzKiopo (talk) 17:57, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

OjuzKiopo (talk · contribs) I attempted to stitch this sentence to the next two with a copy of the relevant ref. If you still think the sentence doesn't work, you can drop it outright. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:57, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Russian aircraft shootdown in Syria: 24 November 2015

(2015 Russian Sukhoi Su-24 shootdown) I believe this should be part of the historical close calls. I added this backed by references and it was reverted by someone saying Twitter trends are not meaningful. But this situation isn't just about Twitter, we have numerous news and analytical articles about the incident that shows it stoked fears of a WW3. What do other people think of this? --WR 21:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

2021-2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis

Considering the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis that's currently ongoing between Russia and Sweden, Finland, the other NATO countries and Ukraine, should we add it into the close calls section or should we wait it out and see whether these tensions start to calm down again? Balkanite (talk) 15:41, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

It depends on whether you can find reliable sources describing the potential outcome as World War III. I think those shouldn't be hard to find. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

I'll attempt to find some sources first. Once that's been done, I'll go ahead and add a new section for the Russo-Ukrainian crisis. Balkanite (talk) 19:30, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

We can't be sure until the crisis is resolved or an actual war breaks out, and complaining about it isn't going to help. Since the last serious comment in this thread, MarioProtIV (talk · contribs) contested an addition of this entry by Balkanite (talk · contribs). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:56, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Actual war has broken out, but even now we are too close to the events to be sure that this is a "close call". There will be a fair amount of scaremongering in the next few days, for various reasons. We have no hurry to write the article, so I think we can wait until the dust settles to decide what we should call it. Besides, a "close call" is when something could have happened but it didn't happen, and I am afraid that we can not be sure about the "didn't happen" part. Sjö (talk) 15:46, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

we are to close... 2ofthe22ofthe2022 (talk) 00:50, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2022

Request to add Global catastrophic risk and Human extinction under the section World War III#See also.

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. That "See Also" section appears to consist exclusively of other nuclear or war related articles. SpinningCeres 15:05, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Human extinction is already linked (in the caption to the top image). Global catastrophic risk mentions nuclear warfare and I think it is reasonable to add it to the See also section if it can't be linked in the text. Sjö (talk) 15:25, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2022

Add The Russia-Ukraine Conflict. Any possible uscalation of Russia or NATO can start WWIII. Thegoodguyas (talk) 01:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: A number of users disagree with you, as seen above. You'll need to check for reliable sources indicating that this is a widespread belief. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:27, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2022

Russian-Ukrainian Crisis

Currently ongoing, the Russian-Ukrainian crisis has led to fears of a possible third world war. This began after Russian President, Vladimir Putin, sent troops to the Ukrainian border as well as into two regions of Eastern Ukraine that claim to be independent. Morgan Gam 101 (talk) 11:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The first source is not reliable, and the second source does not mention world war. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Can the Netherlands get attached?

Are the Netherlands gonne get attached because the send soiliars to Ukrainian 77.167.4.190 (talk) 21:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Are you seriously? Netherlands? Look at map! After Ukraine is Poland, Romania, Moldova, Estonia.--Terraflorin (talk) 11:58, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Russian invasion

Should there be any mention of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in this article. Multiple news source and public perception have been labelling this as close to WWIII USA Today, CBS, VOA, public perception and Business Today. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Support: I quite agree, these sources are reliable. -- Nick.mon (talk) 09:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Those are pretty weak sources for that statement. Task & Purpose says nothing about the risk of WWIII, VOA says that it is not the start of WWIII and USA Today (linked from your link) also says that it is not. If it should be mentioned at all (which I think is premature as of today) we could mention that there is mentions and worries about WWIII but that historians do not see it that way. Also remember WP:HEADLINES in the current click-hunting media landscape. Sjö (talk) 12:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I made the following paragraph under the (now replaced) section heading: "Current conflicts with potential to turn into a larger conflict".
— Preceding unsigned comment added by FlyDragon792 (talk • contribs) 23:15, 25 February 2022 (UTC) Following failed diplomatic talks with NATO and allies, Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022 in what many are calling the "largest military conflict in Europe since World War II." There are concerns that the conflict could escalate into a more widespread (and potentially a global) conflict if Vladimir Putin decides to approve a military offensive on the Baltic States or Poland, which are NATO members protected under Article V. Furthermore, there are fears that the invasion would cause China to attack Taiwan and Iran to create a nuclear weapon and attack Saudi Arabia, all of which "may well signal the death knell of the postwar global order." My sources: 1 2 FlyDragon792 (talk) 18:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

• Yes, I think this should be included. Here is some story. In 2015 (seven years ago), historian Yuri Felshtinsky and Michael Stanchev published book in Russian "World War III: Battle for Ukraine". It was published in Ukraine [1], [2] because all publishers in Russia refused for obvious reasons. They predicted that Russia/Putin will inevitably attack Ukraine and that will be a beginning of WWIII. He developed some of these ideas later in his book (From Red Terror to Mafia State: Russia's Secret Services in the Struggle for World Domination.), [3]; some of his interviews about it can be found here [4],[5] [6]. Right now he insists in interviews that the currently happening invasion is the beginning of WWIII, exactly as he predicted. Unfortunately, this is all in Russian language. My very best wishes (talk) 19:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

And BTW, Putin already threatened “military and political consequences” for Finland and Sweden on Friday if they attempt to join NATO [7]. Sure, it is very much possible that Finland is next, given the previous history of wars/attacks by USSR on Finland, and given the fact that Finland and Poland were part of the Russian Empire. My very best wishes (talk) 19:52, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

No, no, no, no no. This whole article is based on speculation. The invasion of one country by another IS NOT WWIII. If it was, we would be including every invasion the USA has carried out the past 50 years. We really must calm down and wait a bit. A LONG bit. HiLo48 (talk) 02:21, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

• It does not matter if it was Russia or USA. If an invasion X by USA was claimed in RS (and especially in scholarly RS) a beginning of "WWIII", then it should be included on this page. Same with a war started by Russia or any other country. Is it really a beginning of WWIII? We do not know that for sure (this is just a claim), hence it does belong to this page precisely because it is about hypothetical scenario. My very best wishes (talk) 02:35, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Not saying that World War III will happen because of Ukraine. Rather, I am saying that even if it doesn't look likely to happen as of now, a global war is possible. Just think that a single attack on one NATO member could trigger a wider conflict. For example, after taking out Ukraine, Russia can launch an attack on Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, or Romania. This would pull all 30 members of NATO into war. Again, not saying that a global conflict will happen, but there is a nonzero chance of that happening. FlyDragon792 (talk) 02:52, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

That's been the case since the day NATO was formed. You used the word "could" twice in that comment. That's a lousy basis for an encyclopaedia article. HiLo48 (talk) 03:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

In the article are listed various events, like computer errors, simple military exercises, regional wars and even a standoff at an airport. We're talking about the largest full-scale invasion occurred in Europe since WW2, in which Russia and a NATO-backed country are facing off. There's a plenty of sources citing this as a possibile close call, so I think we should include it. -- Nick.mon (talk) 12:25, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

• Just note that Russian Duma pointedly authorizes Putin’s Request for Military Deployment anywhere in the world outside Russia. It did do it before (the previous authorizations were more specific). Although a formality, it tell about their intentions. According to Felshtinsky, if they succed in Ukraine, next target is Moldova. My very best wishes (talk) 06:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

By the way, even President Biden has repeatedly stated that the only alternative to international sanctions would be World War III. Moreover, Bielorussian president and Putin's closest ally, Lukashenko, has just stated that sanctions are bringing Russia toward a nuclear war. Ok, this is clearly propaganda, but it's another sign of a close call. I mean, if this isn't a close call, what is it? -- Nick.mon (talk) 12:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

In fact, there is already a worldwide economic war. Will Putin drop some nuclear bombs? He wants others to think that he might [8]. Some commenters believe this is merely a blackmail, but who knows? What does the Doomsday Clock show? There is an interesting book, Nuclear War Survival Skills, and it might be a good idea to have a radiation dosimeter. My very best wishes (talk) 20:14, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

P.S. Russian forces already started sabotaging Ukrainian nuclear plants [9], as one could expect. They do not need any nukes. I watched interviews with Andrei Piontkovsky (e.g. here [10]). Just like Felshtinsky (see above), he argued that NATO is making a huge mistake by not helping Ukraine right now by creating a "no-fly zone", or at least by providing them fighter planes. This is because Putin already decided to use tactical nuclear weapons at some point in a near future, according to Piontkovsky. My very best wishes (talk) 01:39, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

External image link dead

The first link under the section ‘hypothetical scenarios’ leads to a Facebook 404 page. I have no idea what I should do here, any help? UsersLikeYou (talk) 15:42, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Quote

Could someone add the Einstein quote: "I do not know how it(wwiii) will be fought,but I know how ww4 will be fought:with sticks and stones" 2A00:23C7:184:6000:2815:F07D:90F4:6E64 (talk) 13:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Is there going to be a world war lll

. 184.97.223.62 (talk) 13:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@184.97.223.6: Hopefully not. Unfortunately, this is not the place to discuss World War III. It is the place to discuss improving the article. I hope I answered your question. ☢️Plutonical☢️ᶜᵒᵐᵐᵘⁿᶦᶜᵃᵗᶦᵒⁿˢ 15:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2022

Requesting a change to the Russian Invasion section; it states that commentators, Joe Biden, and Lukashenko "had seen" the Invasion as a "nuclear close call". I believe this to be alarmist writing, and false since President Biden has never mentioned any nuclear threat considering the sources provided. Lukashenko has also never stated the conflict as a nuclear close call, but in the source had said that "a nuclear war would be a disaster" according to the source provided for his statement. "A nuclear close call" is alarmist and should be removed from this section. Twennstrom (talk) 17:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

One could compare the russian-ukrainian conflict with other "close calls" listed on this article (e.g. "Norwegian rocket incident: 25 January 1995", and "Incident at Pristina airport: 12 June 1999"). Consider that Putin 1) reminded the world about its nuclear weapons arsenal at his TV speech the start of the war, and 2) that he raised the readiness of the forces equipped with nuclear weapons. I agree that the sentence should probably be rephrased though. Also, Lukashenko is not a good source. · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 18:08, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. As there is some objection to this edit being made, I am disabling the edit request for now. --Ferien (talk) 22:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Rename Suggestion

I recommend we change the name of this page by adding "hypothetical event" due to the extreme likelihood we may be headed into World War III for real and therefore the current title here will as such apply should this happen. Experiment632 (talk) 20:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

It is unclear what it is that you want. We could update this article in case we enter ww3, or maybe we could seek shelter ;) For now the article is kindof okay i think · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 21:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I think this should be considered if/when this war escalates and is officially called “World War III.” Right now however, we wait. RehmanK786 (talk) 06:42, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Should in that case this article be renamed "World War III (hypothetical event)", or should the current article be under a heading such as "Hypothetical event", "Previous speculation about World War III", "Previous speculation before the current war"? What do you think? , (talk) 21:46, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I guess when it get´s a little bit worse with Chinese forces maybe then yeah or else we seek shelter 2ofthe22ofthe2022 (talk) 00:07, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2022

X-2 Y-4 2001:4453:630:D000:D088:4697:685F:30F5 (talk) 01:00, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Dawnseeker2000 01:21, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

War in Ukraine

Are there sources that describe this conflict as WWIII or possibly leading to it? The passage does not make that clear. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

For example https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2022/02/24/russian-invasion-ukraine-questions-explained/6921368001/ , (talk) 21:42, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 March 2022

Regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict, this can be added in the section: [11] 2600:387:15:611:0:0:0:C (talk) 16:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:12, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Regarding Russian invasion of Ukraine: 24 February 2022 – ongoing

The section is a list of facts, historical stuff that happened, up to the last sentence:

Fiona Hill, an international affairs analyst, has stated that the invasion of Ukraine is another sign that World War III already is in progress.

This is basically just her opinion. Yes, she is a heavy-weight advisor, but I bet one could also find lots of other heavy-weights that have the opposite opinion. They all have agendas and reasons to say whatever they say (e.g. hawkish military spin doctors). If speculations and opinions are to be included, maybe it is better to add multiple peoples opinions. Or maybe its better to just stick to historical facts? · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 09:19, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

"15:02, 6 March 2022‎ Omnissiahs hierophant talk contribs‎ 82,797 bytes −2‎ until it is ww3, it is not ww3. Undid revision 1075570768 by Wikarth"
Well, you know, Omnissiahs hierophant, a definition like this is often applied years later. It's equal to being in a battle and dont knowing what hit you. My study subject in this matter is History. All the best from 15:20, 6 March 2022 (UTC) Wikarth (talk • contribs)

High chances right now i know it´s just a opinion but a few other´s have the same opinion to such as Bill Ackman Donald Trump 14 March 2022 (UTC) 2ofthe22ofthe2022 (talk • contribs)

It is a conflict that has the potential to become a WW3, but currently it is not WW3. We can update the article if/when it becomes WW3 ~:) Imho calling a war between two countries WW3 is stretching it quite a bit. There are almost 8 billion people on Earth, so finding a rather lengthy list of people that think this is WW3 is not difficult. Basically, by adding them, it creates a bias on the "this is WW3"-side, since it's not like the other 99% that don't think it's ww3 would need to say it is not ww3. Few newspapers would say "its still not ww3! same as yesterday btw." But whatever, maybe people that read the article can think for themselves. And I am not going to delete the this-is-ww3-statements, so this entire talk-section is rather pointless. · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 21:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

In fact this one isn't an article about the Russo-Ukrainian War being labeled as WW3, this is an article about WW3 and its (past and present) potential close calls. The ongoing war is not WW3 (and we hope it'll never become) but it's exactly a potential close call. -- Nick.mon (talk) 22:48, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes it is a close call but there are also multiple wars we can add to make this World War not to add North America and South America are in crises because of gas prices getting higher all because of the war, NATO has also been sending supplies but Russia has not invaded them but they are close to because Putin want´s back his old land so he will try everything to. 2ofthe22ofthe2022 (talk) 00:05, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

References

When it becomes WW3 we can change it, also to correct something Belarus has also had Russia´s side letting Russian tanks into their countries to invade Ukraine there is also a war in Yemen and Syria and conflict between Israel and State of Palestine and a cold war between Israel and Iran 14 March 2022 (UTC) 2ofthe22ofthe2022 (talk •

Fiona Hill: quote or paraphrase?

In the Wikipedia article this is shown in quote marks, suggesting that it's a direct quote:

Fiona Hill, Russian expert and advisor for several Republican and Democratic US administrations, most recently for Donald Trump, has stated in regards to the war in Ukraine and World War III, that "We are already in the middle of a third World War, whether we’ve fully grasped it or not."

But the cited Politico article shows it without quote marks, suggesting that it's a paraphrase:

We are already, she said, in the middle of a third World War, whether we’ve fully grasped it or not.

A simple solution would be to remove the quote marks, but that might make the sentence harder to understand. (In particular, it might be less clear what "whether we've fully grasped it or not" attaches to.)

Jruderman (talk) 15:31, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

I do not think that matters, but she is definitely a great expert on the subject. After reading views by some other people, the consensus seem to be that Pu is not ready to press at the "big red button", but he thinks that using a smaller tactical nuke somewhere could serve his purpose. And that is when the war would escalate. My very best wishes (talk) 19:59, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

P.S. Here is an alleged intercept of discussion of Putin with Shoigu recently posted on YouTube [12]. This sounds very much authentic. Putin gives Shoigu 2 days to fix the military failure in Ukraine. After that, he promised to do something (he does not explain what exactly) that he discussed with Valery Gerasimov. My very best wishes (talk) 15:28, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

References