Will World War 3 be more like WW1 or WW2?

[@Binkov]

Play Supremacy 1914 for FREE on PC, iOS or Android: 💥s1914.onelink.me/TX2k/BINKOV008 Receive a Unique Starter Pack, available only for the next 30 days!

[@Walterwaltraud]

10:55 is a JSOW? I didn’t know they had a tandem warhead. Or what’s the secondary explosion?

[@Join_IT_Army_UA]

🔱🖥⚡🔥😎

[@riskinhos]

dafuk is this shit binkov? on christmas? a nightmare video like this? jeezzz at least let us enjoy xmas. I mean ww3 will last less than 1 hour. all life on earth will be wiped out on a nuclear holocaust and we will all die. can we have a video about peace? about hope? about the end of all wars? ffs

[@miguelb.655]

US can't even force Hamas to release the Israeli captives, let alone fight Russia and PCR forces combined.

[@AlvinHadiyanto-dk9ti]

Binkov please make video analysis about conventional warfare simulation looks like after protracted nuclear war happened. There is some analysis and battleplan from NATO officer that said after full scale nuclear war happened the conventional war would still be continued. It would be very interesting.

[@donaldlee8249]

People thought ww1 would be like Franco Prussian war, they were wrong. Then they thought ww2 would be like ww1, they were wrong. If I’m gonna guess, ww3 would be like something we’ve never seen before, it mostly likely won’t be like the current war in ukraine.

[@Alsvruh]

Artillery, quimical weapons, biological weapons, digital war, AI controled drones swarms, stalemate, trench warfare, nuclear weapons. Destruction and dead as such scale that no war in human history will be compared.

[@klemklemius5091]

I mean... any war between major powers would turn nuclear but assuming the war somehow does not, it would combine the element of precision warefare, the somewhat static forces of modern armies and like in every war, economy and trade would play a huge role. Also, the sides are not clearly defined.

[@JesterEric]

@@donaldlee8249 ww1 was very like the Russo Japanese war

[@Destroyer120296]

As long as no states tries to straight up conquer the other i think nukes are unlikely to be used due to the cost vs reward​@@klemklemius5091

[@bigguy3636]

*then they thought ww2 would be like spanish civil war, they were absolutely right Ukrainian war will definitely be the template... But x1000 more deadly Edit: youtube once sha *dowb*nni*g comments so I'm gonna write this here What u yapping about? You telling me all those new doctrine that were gained from spanish civil kerfuffle, attache in east asia, and from research facilities were only implemented on the climax of ww2?

[@zgalexy83]

Just don't go into the comment section. Its all armchair strategists making wild claims or political statements. For your sanity just scroll back up

[@accalt6519]

Thanks man

[@littleblackcat2273]

You forgot to mention the bot comments, which are also strong on this channel! :)

[@mrgigachad7014]

yea there is no facts only emotions

[@ShadowReaper-pu2hx]

But they’re so funny.

[@johnwright456]

Thanks but comment section is more entertainment sometimes.

[@Playwright-Lorde]

"I don't know what weapons will be used in WW3, but I know in WW4 we will be using fully automated catgirl maids and incelbots with machinegoons" - Albert Einstein, 2016

[@goiterlanternbase]

Wise man😎👍

[@badiskool9159]

Catgirls are weapons of mass destruction

[@StarterOffical-Jousha-lf6ig]

"Good point" -Definitely Albert Einstein, 2024

[@TheGreatCd]

Sigma

[@4ryd511]

"on skibidi this guy is low-key cooking no cap fr fr, no diddy tho" - sun tzu, the art of rizz

[@bryguy306]

It will be like neither. WW1 and II were only possible under a completely different meta: - Tens of millions of spare young men that could be removed from the economy and sent off to war, without the economy collapsing. - High amounts of nationalistic zeal, meaning the young men were engaged in society and willing to fight for their national interests. - Multiple nations around the world actually had parity in deployment capabilities. Literally none of these things are true today. WW3 will be a global proxy war, because that’s all the modern players are capable of mustering at the moment.

[@DinDjarin-l8x]

You're ignoring CCP's ability to brainwash the Chinese.

[@LiezAllLiez]

As gamey as this sounds, its (in my opinion) fairly close to the truth. People are willing to fight for their country when threatened with invasion, but not willing to invade. Back in the "good ol days" people would fight for kings/princes/other term for rulers, but now? Who will fight for a chump elected for president for a 4 year term? Or some prime minister very few people even know the name of? The nationalistic zeal is still there, except covered with a thin blanket of "tolerance", and as we all know, unlike acceptance, tolerance lasts up to a point... The whole "global trade" and mutual respect thing is wearing thin on everyone, given the bullshit they have to endure from "the others". People should own resources - not trade for them, is what i always say.

[@mladenmatosevic4591]

WWIII would have to end with very little important gains. Either side would use nukes if they would start decisively losing.

[@naxureearth4963]

Excactly and that why WW3 did not happen yet. No leader till now was so crazy to actually risk mutualy assured total nuklear Annihilation

[@kushaliyersharma9688]

Ironically most realistic take here. Its sad to see so many warmongers here thinking it would be over by christmas for nato and how russia would fall like a stack of cards. Germany in both world wars was outnumbered and outproduced, out of supplies yet held out for years, here foes are either an autarky or net exporters, such conflict can easily last decades.

[@stassyan]

absolute nonsense

[@charlottefalardeau637]

Only 1 country with nukes in ww2

[@teddypicker8799]

@@kushaliyersharma9688 the Germans didn't have f35 stealth jets and modern missile

[@privatebandana]

Even if nuclear weapons weren't used instantly, no country with nukes no matter the west or east would actually let the enemy force push deep into their country without resorting to nukes, in a WW3 scenario, no side wants to lose. Also, even with nukes aside let's not forget the other horrors that could end up killing hundreds of millions.. biological weapons, which has VASTLY advanced since the WW2 era. All I know is that I wouldn't want to live in a world like that, because it would be an absolute horror show.

[@gradientascent4218]

I don't think so. Ukraine pushed into the Russia territory and we didn't see any response, not even speaking of nuclear weapons.

[@privatebandana]

@@gradientascent4218 That's not even remotely close to the situation we're talking about here. We're talking about WW3 where all countries mobilize millions and every part of the border turns into a battlefield. Ukraine didn't even get close to Kursk itself, they took one strategic cross-section city from russian garrison forces and Russia didn't see it as enough of a threat to even send combat units from eastern Ukraine to deal with it. In a WW3 scenario (without nukes), countries would have millions mobilized and there would be layers of manned defenses across the entire border.. on both sides.

[@KVUAA]

​@@gradientascent4218Because that's just a tiny Russian territory, not some Barbarossa extinct threat invasion style

[@Rägarded]

I think the conflict would be fought over specific areas like Taiwan, Ukraine, maybe even Belarus, and over trade routes. With only small incursions and raids on undisputed territories. Both sides would probably demand concessions and a ceasefire rather than a unconditional surrender. I doubt there could be a total victory scenario for either side without the world basically ending. But I think there could be a major war without nuclear armageddon necessarily being upon us. Let's hope we never find out though.

[@BruceJ999]

​@@RägardedI respect your comment but weapons were made to be used. US eliminated 2 million 1raqis in their invasion. Soo to think that other countries won't do worse In a full out war is wishful thinking.

[@ktwei]

World war 3 will be like World War 3

[@ikGREENY]

Thank you.

[@matthewwebster3143]

How informative 😂

[@Digueirazz]

source?

[@AdotLOM]

@@matthewwebster3143 you say that But it's the only reasonable take that can be made with such a ridiculous question We have no clue what WW3 would look like. People forget about just how many resources it would require, and most countries aren't either willing or able to commit them

[@edwardmoloney7008]

It could actually be a lot different

[@AJSNIPES]

“world war 3 hasn’t happened yet” When i was a kid teachers told me and my other classmates another global war is impossible. But now im in my early 20’s and in the next 5-10 years i can see myself and countless others my age being sent to a war zone sooner rather than later.

[@Cutepanda1943]

World war 3 is unlikely because most major powers don’t want to start a major war.

[@Neteohas1]

Yep same here im 18 and on edge for china vs taiwan which could be the start of ww3 also because usa would get involved and if they start losing we all might get drafted as a last resort

[@joshuabessire9169]

I talked to a time traveler about what WW3 looked like. He couldn't tell me because he was looking towards the flash during round 1.

[@ContentEnjoyer-gm3ky]

Daaaaaaaamn Nice one.

[@connorcrowley1]

Some light viewing on Christmas Eve lol

[@J8DENTHECANADIAN]

We wish you a merry Christmas and a happy wasteland!

[@Mcree114]

No man's air zone. WWIII seeing an airborne version of trench warfare where air forces sling long range munitions at each other then retreat behind terrain like mountains with the valleys in between, where ground trench warfare is happening, being an aircraft graveyard.

[@mikkovalle7944]

Sounds like something stealth planes were made for

[@lolasdm6959]

@@mikkovalle7944 Stealth planes are not invisible, its just less visible, so it can shorten the range.

[@The_Greedy_Orphan]

Actually, one advantage of the F-35 has over the F-22 is its networking with other planes. So the F-35 can get closer to enemy formations without being detected, or at the very least without being locked onto. The the F-35 can get target locks on all the enemy planes and send that information back to the F-15 E, which will be further back but laden with missiles and then those missiles will be guided onto target.

[@BalthasarGelt-x2d]

Nah, air defense is a meme. “Let’s put hundreds of millions of dollars of radars and missiles on some trucks” - words spoken by the utterly deranged.

[@lolasdm6959]

@@The_Greedy_Orphan A stealth Jet opening it's active radar is basically a beacon. Networking allows only one stealth jet to open its radar while the other jets just shoot at targets without being detected easily themselves.

[@ivancito7790]

It's funny cause in the history books Germany is portrayed as the dominant force and the Allies as the underdog, but the numbers tell a different story.

[@ajnavarro1713]

history is written by the victor

[@mrsoisauce9017]

I mean, all things considered, German forces did punch WELL above their weight. They were incredibly close to taking Moscow before Russian forces drove them back, and their Blitzkrieg strategy was also very effective. They may not have won the war, but they sure as hell almost did

[@kevinw2592]

Germany had superior doctrine for most of the war. As some people say, it's not the size of the tool, it's how you use it.

[@vasilzahariev5741]

Iran and North Korea should also be added to Russia and China, seeing as how Iran supplies Russia with Shahed drones to hurl at Ukraine and North Korea is fighting against Ukraine in the Kursk direction. Some people say that WW3 is already ongoing.

[@klaykid117]

Although in this scenario, Iran would be mostly concerned with its local region than trying to make some kind of expeditionary Force

[@tsarfox3462]

Yeah they can bring the kids if they don't wanna leave any orphans.

[@Uhtred-the-bold]

I think you’re right which is why I think India would be the most important undeclared factor. NATO would need the manpower India could provide and it would be tough sledding for NATO if they stayed neutral or came in on China’s side.

[@robbiedubbelman3024]

@Uhtred-the-bold India coming in to help CHINA? 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Ask ANYONE from India if they see that happening. India will try to be as neutral as possible. Just like Mexico and Indonesia, India doesn't like to pick sides. They're a part of BRICs but certainly not military allies to China or Russia.

[@yohananberrocal4586]

@@robbiedubbelman3024 This

[@cardenassolisrodrigo2601]

One thing that freaks me out is that if WWIII happens, even if you live in a neutral country (like me) and even if this war doesn't go nuclear, with this globalized hyper-connected world, everyone is fucked. If the war starts, the main supply product chains not only from China, but from the whole world would be disrrupted due to blockades, and since many companies rely on chinese manufactures, resources and products, WWIII would lead into an economic collapse we would have never seen since 2008, or even bigger than that. Small companies collapsing due to the disrupt of the supply chains they rely on, tens of millions without jobs, economic crisis all around the world even in neutral states that would lead to social caos and in the worst case scenario, many civil wars because of the low quality life we all going to have even in the neutral countries. Unlike WWI and WWII where everyone else could stay out of the conflict and be fine, or even improve their economies because every coutry had industries of their own, but with the globalization, the moving of our industries to other countries (like China) this won't be possible, and we all going to feel all the economic shock a WWIII would do if it starts tomorrow.

[@staybraaapin3464]

This is why trump wanted Europe to be more self sufficient and well as the United States

[@avroarchitect1793]

@@staybraaapin3464 Trump is an idiot, the interconnected world economy was put in place so no nation could be self sufficient. Because self sufficient nations can risk going to war. By trying to make the US self sufficient he signaled the beginning of an arms race to see who could regain self sufficiency first and then go to war and rule the world. The China trade deficit was part of that. Now they are rearming and preparing for war.

[@Ufthak]

⁠​⁠@@avroarchitect1793 Except all the historical evidence goes against your thesis. Germany and Japan started WW2 (and WW1 in case of Germany) to BECOME self-sufficient, not because they WERE self-sufficient. If you look at the pre-WW2 global trade patterns, you’ll see how painfully dependent on global resources most powers were, particularly those that started the war. The arms race is happening largely because other powers see both danger and opportunity in the free-for-all world with an increasingly isolationist America.

[@cardenassolisrodrigo2601]

Germany was self-sufficient during WWI because they had a big industry of their own, being one of the most industrialized countries from Europe just behind Great Britain, but what they made them collapse in 1918 was the naval blockade imposed by the british and french during the whole war. Japan was far from self-sufficient in WWII, they relied mostly on american oil imports, and then the US suspended and applied an oil embargo on them in 1941, the japanese knew they only had 6 months of oil for their war on China, being the main reason they attacked Pearl Harbour and invaded the Dutch East Indies (nowadays Indonesia) for the oil. Germany was even more self-sufficient during WWII but what they killed them was the constant bombings of allied forces and the massive ammounts of resources they needed against the USSR that ultimately beat them after years of war. What I'm saying is, that even for us that we live in neutral countries we would be all fucked because of the disruption of supply chains due to the blockades all around the world, most countries dont have industries of their own since the 80's and 90's when thanks to the globalization and neo-liberalism they moved all the factories to third world countries for cheaper prices thanks to the cheap labor force, but with naval and aerial blockades during a WWIII that will disrupt these supply chains, all the small companies will be completely fucked without the products they depend on, and this will affect all of us unlike WWI and WWII where every country had industries of their own and didn't depended on the major powers or any other country before the globalization, heck, even countries like latin-american ones benefited because of WWII due to the lack of competition because all the major powers focused their industries for the war, but with a globalized world in this inminent WWIII that won't be possible, we became so dependent on every other country in the world just for cheaper supplies and products, but getting rid of our own industries, and once the WWIII starts, that would rip us out...

[@themightydropbear]

"World War 3 hasn't started yet" Some would argue that it started three years ago but things haven't started to really boil over yet. Kind of like how The Balkan Wars were just the opening act for WWI.

[@bannedaccount540]

Or the Japanese invasion of China being the opening act of WWII

[@NitsuJTrigger]

I think it will be like WW1 but with GoPros and TikTok edits

[@buckybarns5984]

Me and the boys default dancing in the trenches before getting 20,000 pounds of ordinance dropped on our heads

[@CineGisticMedia]

Russia and ukraine militaries 100% have more ground based combat experience now, easily. Especially ukraine. One ukrainian troop deplpyed will see exponentially more combat that 95% of gwot americans at anytime even during the surge in iraq 07-08. Our logisitics however is quite experienced.

[@vasilijesamardzic4151]

US and Europe are not rdy for an industrial war . Military productions is way way less then what it should be. Not to mention that the public wouldnt accept the huge casulties it would bring

[@hirsm]

@@vasilijesamardzic4151 Like in any world war, when the giant wakes it will surpass the enemys production by many times

[@josousa78]

​@@hirsmthe giant is China

[@maximilianodelrio]

​@@hirsmthe US isn't "the giant" anymore. They don't have the same industrial capacity and infrastructure they has in the past, now china has that spot

[@apolloaero]

Ground based combat experience vs air supremacy. The US has vastly more air experience than russia and Ukraine, a ground invasion is only there to hold land. Also, the way US trains and russia trains for ground war is vastly different, we don't do scripted events

[@realah3001]

WW3 would be like a third world war

[@threefrogsbuilding]

😂😂😂

[@d-boi9785]

Flawless deduction

[@Makem12]

You're severely under counting countries that would join the war on side of the West and countries that would exclusively trade with the West. You're also undercounting the same thing on the Sino-Russian side as well.

[@omarid8736]

Do you really believe that African, Asian, and Latin American nation will join the war on either side? Colonialism is dead, Europeans have no “rights” to minerals from the global south. Colored ppl will sit this one out, we aren’t dying for “The West” this go around

[@michalhakala2243]

@@omarid8736 He likely talks about UK, Australia, Izrael, South Korea, Japan, and Norway joining the west, and possibly North Korea and Iran joining the Sino-Russian side?

[@TheRezro]

@@omarid8736 You seams to miss what Russo-China literally attempt to restore? Yes. The colonialism!

[@jason59k55]

@@TheRezro what

[@Pilosoposporo]

​@@TheRezro yeah definitely France and UK have 100% no colonies today RiGHT? Russia and China have none.

[@ethanwatkins6780]

By far one of your best videos. That fact that so many people are having actual discussions about specific points you made in the comments shows the quality of the analysis here is above that of a normal youtube video

[@BrianTheJames]

Has anyone considered that there doesn’t have to be a third world war?

[@SonoftheBread]

That's pretty naïve of you but I like your attitude.

[@user-pn3im5sm7k]

Matter of when not if. War is part of the humanity, the sooner you can accept that the better. Humans naturally take sides. The problem is exasperated by the fact lying satanic warmongerers won WW2. Don't let the emotions triggered by that consume you, the truth will be out anyways.

[@notyouraveragehero6665]

You don't have to pretisapate. I won't I'll be elsewhere I'm not fight for government interest

[@dominuslogik484]

I feel like you are failing to account for the fact that Russian air defenses have been proven to struggle with slow moving low flying drones, if modified light aircraft turned into kamikaze drones can make their way deep into Russia to strike oil refineries without being stopped then it seems that Russia and China for that matter might struggle to protect their airspace from most long range strikes.

[@jordancarmichael7901]

I agree, and it completely discounts the ability and crucial task of removing air defense capabilities from your adversary. That is one aspect the west has heavily focused on and should not be dismissed.

[@dr.woozie7500]

Russian air defenses also mistakenly shot down a commercial aircraft yesterday

[@jordancarmichael7901]

@@dr.woozie7500 Yeah, somehow I don't think the results of that investigation will ever be released (unless I missed it) but the frag pattern alone on the intact part of the fuselage screams a SAM of some sort.

[@jf-zq2qz]

ruzzia wouldn't even know what happened after NATO bombs the shit out of all its oil and power stations..s400 is trash absolutely trash.. they wouldn't know what the fck happened 😂 this guy loves that ruzzian sausage

[@kitsuenae5366]

​@@jf-zq2qz the fact that the only thing you had to say was that it was trash without taking into account the fact that the only times when Russia hadn't shot down drones is completely reliant on circular logic. If you look at it objectively and actually take into account what s400 is used for. Being aircraft and cruise missiles. Not drones. So I'd hope this brings to light the flaws in your argument in a digestible fashion

[@DatdudeNextdoor]

It won’t be like ww1 or ww2, it’ll be like ww3

[@voytec448]

Gotta get hyped up before release 🔥🔥🔥🔥

[@RonWiki]

WW3 will be fought on Reddit.

[@ShadowReaper-pu2hx]

The Reddit VS 4Chan war.

[@AlreadyTakenTag]

​@@ShadowReaper-pu2hxLet's just keep this a world war. We don't want to go that drastic.

[@MKG71]

I think WW3 is gonna be like WW3. Thanks for coming.

[@notyouraveragehero6665]

Actually I think ww3 will be like a big war and will be called ww3

[@buckybarns5984]

Actually WW3 would be a combination of WW1 & WW2, because 1+2=3

[@Komainu959]

I like how people are always like: Binkov is so biased for the US then the next video for China, for Russia etc just because the video doesn't agree with whatever view they have. Stop having such fragile ego's. That's what gets us into wars, fragile ego's + greed.

[@michaeldonnelly6747]

@@Komainu959 apparently in Ukraine’s case a dictator on their border is what got them into war

[@I2yantheGreat]

it's his job to get things correct. if people are complaining it's probably because he's just simply wrong lmao

[@johnnyscifi]

WW3 will just be ppl debating when ww3 started...

[@342Rodry]

one thing is sure and that's it's really going to affect everyone, the modern economy is so interconected that everyone is going to feel the punch.

[@buckybarns5984]

I think we should all just Gangnam Style together and dance our differences away

[@captainmorgan123]

Paper Hat

[@Cunat121]

😂

[@the.real.padre.pio_2.0]

North Korea leaves the chat

[@oriontheraptor8119]

World wars as game modes World war 1 capture the flag or capture the trench Ww2 conquest Ww3 last man standing

[@NPC13377]

Can't we all just get along?

[@Red_Salmond]

It is just as late Kennedy said : "We either learn to live with each other or we destroy each other and stop existing". I am pretty sure China and Russia does not give actual current numbers of its economy or military, it is all pumped to look good in front of actual super powers. I do not think with todays capabilities of both countries that they can sustain war with the west. Even better, we the west are incredibly habile in crushing our enemies, we proven that over and over, our will is unbroken, nothing can stop or will stop the west from being the top dog. In terms of raw numbers, we can crush them many times over. That being said, wanting peace is what we all wish. War is done not only for conflict but power and economical gain. Russia did not gain as much by attacking Crimea as it was hoping, instead they learned of giant underground natural Gaz and oil under the sea, this is why they keep pressing, it is worth 2-3 trillion by latest estimates. When a country attacks another country, it has already evaluated how many human lives it can sacrifice to potentially get what they want if it considers it will help them. Russia initially wanted Ukraine to surrender and was nearly showing a show of force on its borders before sending its Nazi boys into Ukraine to instill Nazi propaganda, yes it took 3 years to do it but it worked and it gave Putin a reason to invade. Economically, Russia has increased inflation, it has a strong resilience because it tries to be self sustaining but China can only buy so much... Ukraine and Russia has a long history of camaraderie and brotherhood, that all went to sh*t when Putin lunched the invasion that turned in a red era today... The red here is the blood of the young Russian soldiers spilled for greed. Like many I thought Russia was distracting everyone with the invasion and doing something else in the background but it turns out its the other way around. I am fairly certain the west is here to remain, but if some countries can't play along well we have more than enough capability to mass produce the weapons that costed us hundreds of billions to develop... We even have anti nuke technology emerging since the early 2000s and it is rapidly becoming good at what it is meant to be doing... I reckon the next 2 decades will determine if whoever wants peace to be peaceful or if they somehow want war, well be eradicated, that is the nature of war. "War is pointless if you cannot crush your opponent" -Some Cossack

[@lonemaus562]

No

[@the.real.padre.pio_2.0]

Well, we normal people do get along. The problem are the powerful ones that care only about business or hegemony in general.

[@blueguy2128]

​@@Red_Salmondyou are stupid if you really believe Putin sent Nazis into Ukraine 😂 Ukraine had real Nazi sympathizers doing a lot of killing during WWII. They have history there

[@bunnyg404]

What a wonderful video for christmas

[@michaelsulkoske4373]

Let’s not find out.

[@taraldomland8657]

I just hope ww3 won’t happen

[@user-qw1rx1dq6n]

It’s damn impossible to predict what’s going to happen soon because the magnitudes and exact timings of effects are unknown.

[@Christopher-fr1sj]

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Come to Jesus Christ today Jesus Christ is only way to heaven Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. Jesus

[@vereferreus5262]

I miss one little detail....the Russian losses in the war against Ukraine.

[@J8DENTHECANADIAN]

Yeah…

[@asianparentsarecoldhearted6510]

China have plenty of troops lol, they won't give up on Russia as long U.S is too strong

[@DoomSprite236]

@@vereferreus5262 manpower losses are moot when the enemy has over a billion numbers. Best not to fight this war at all

[@HoumousNet]

difficult to go till the end of this one... how you transpose the fact that Israel destroyed all Iranian anti-air capacities, including S300 and maybe even an S400, in a couple of hours, to your WW3 scenario? you believe the US won't be able to do the same? or even better?

[@malcolmt7883]

If there's no evidence presented, then, the claims of destroying a target are probably just war propaganda.

[@trumpforever6706]

Comparing Iran with Russia or China is a mistake. Applying your criterion in reverse, since the US and its Western allies have not been able to defeat the Taliban in 20 years of war/guerrilla warfare, since they are now in charge in Kabul, then it is obvious that the West cannot even defeat Iran, Russia, China or North Korea, much stronger than the Taliban. In other words, it is correct to say that each conflict is a case in itself. Thinking of being the winners from the start often leads to bitter disappointments, as in Vietnam.

[@Potetskrelleren]

​@@trumpforever6706Russia can't maintain logistics on their own border, and as far as anyone can tell nor can China. So waging a war in Europe or anywhere else is impossible. And stop conflating asymetric wars with symetric wars. Ignorant takem

[@SpoNick]

@@Potetskrelleren Со слов про логистику я прям заржал в голос. Да, проблемы с логистикой у нас были в самом начале войны, но только их исправили буквально за месяц

[@danielmlinar4892]

The fact thag there is 9 likes on this comment just shows that 80% of the channel followers are 60 IQ nafoids. Who is claiming these fantastical achievments? IDF? We have seen dozens of missiles hitting Nevatim air base in Israel and no evidence for your claim on the other hand.

[@davem20us]

Some important things are surprisingly overlooked in this. China and Russia would be stuck in a defensive war. Russia has almost no capacity at the moment to strike any of Nato offensively. China really can only hit South Korea and Japan. They would probably get Taiwan but outside of that neither have really any ability to strike Nato industry. Russia has no real navy now and China would be completely hemmed into the South China sea. Ultimately no real large chunks of land would change hands before nukes are fired but Russia and China would take a much worse beating.

[@boabython]

Japan, Korea and Taiwan don't have any oil reserves and they import 50-90% food, fuel and energy. China in currently world leader in drone tech, so naval/drone blockade would put these countries to heel in a year or two. Sure US could blockade China but the fact that Russia country with 1/10 Chinas production capacity is out pasing NATO+ allies in arms production. China would flood the ocean with millions of drones and put global commerce to a halt.

[@CarlosD374]

That's probably right, but that scenario can also play to Russia's and China's advantage in some ways. Most of the members and allies of NATO (with the exception of Poland, the countries that border Russia and those that are near to China) are likely to lose morale somewhat early in a war, especially the US. Even after the war of Ukraine had just started many analysts already voiced their concerns that "war fatigue" in the west (specially among those countries that are not geographically close to the conflict) could become one of Ukraine's biggest problems after a few years, which turned out to be accurate. Russia and China won't be affected as much by this issue since the conflict would be taking place close to their borders, and because as autocracies/dictatorships their governments will probably care little about the public's opinion. It's also a problem (to the collective war effort) because if the conflict is taking place near Russia and China, then it is also happening far away from the economies that would fuel the entire war effort (this is of course a good thing for their civilian populations): the USA and Europe's big 5 (Germany, UK, France, Italy and Spain), and something similar to what we are seeing today, where the countries that feel the most disconnected from the conflict harbour strong domestic political opposition that supports pulling out of the conflict even at the expense of their allies, which could slowly make the most powerful militaries reduce their participation. It's not nice, but with the current political spectrum in the US it's not hard to imagine them ditching Eastern Europe. The same applies to Europe where countries like Spain, Italy and France have contributed relatively little to Ukraine, when compared to the size of their economies. Now, it does also provide some advantages to NATO since having the frontlines near Russia and China could cause political destabilisation (mutinies, rebellions, etc) that eventually brings their regimes down , which is the most optimistic scenario. The exception to all this could be Japan and South Korea, which have sizeable economies, strong democracies, and are unlikely to lose motivation since they have China quite near.

[@BruceJ999]

RUSSIA has no navy???be realistic I know you hate RUSSIA but come on They posses the 3rd largest navy in the world, US is the only powerful nation in NATO, the rest are weak..You can't really expect Germany (which doesn't even have advanced missiles) to go up against Russia. Without US Nato is just a cowardly group. Be realistic with your analysis and stop analyzing with your feelings.

[@hyhhy]

Russia "no real navy now"? Russia is churning out missile submarines and frigates bro. Russia also has things like Oreshnik and Tu-160.

[@davem20us]

@hyhhy The only real thing they have is some subs, almost all of which are in a poor state aside from a few unproven newer ones. And even those are well behind American counterparts in a technical and experience sense. Frigates? I haven't heard that but that's probably because it's almost completely a non factor. Best they can do is some coastal protection. How about their one aircraft carrier they can't keep from catching fire? Where are the destroyers, the transports? You can't run from the truth that aside from subs naval power hasn't been a priority for Russia. Sadly what little they had hasn't been maintained and certainly isn't a focus with the terrible losses they are taking in Ukraine. In WW3 what little navy they have would do just as I said it would play defensive around their coasts. Maybe some subs venture out but they would quickly get hunted down and destroyed by Nato.

[@jakegreen5682]

Merry Christmas binkov

[@dankengine5304]

I think WW3 will have the casualties of WW2 but at the speed of just a few months to a year or two

[@Averagegunenthusiast]

I think the casualties of world war 3 would dwarf world war 2, and do so within months.

[@berserker4940]

Definitely like WW1. No one has tens of thousands of armored vehicles or multi million man standing armies to be able to do WW2 style big arrow movements

[@SpoNick]

Но у России есть преимущество: десятки миллионов человек, которые, если начнется война таких масштабов, будут готовы пойти воевать

[@lennart266]

They also didn't have thousands of armored vehicles at the start of ww2, they build them during the war. The difference is the technology and capability which is present today. It would definitely look more like ww2.

[@TheRezro]

I really suggest you to not take information from stupid media. Even including catastrophic loses of Russia.

[@berserker4940]

@@lennart266 They did have them

[@kylehomenik8775]

I agree with most of your points. What I don't agree with is your estimation of how well Axis air defenses will hold up. Look at Israel attacking Iran's s300s for an example.

[@SuperMrHiggins]

The World Wars are a warning, not a goal.

[@TonyMidyett]

❤

[@zullottrocker]

You underestimate western AA and airforce.

[@froggywam]

He is clearly basing western power based on how they are doing in Ukraine, which is poor analysis. He is completely ignoring the results of the Major US conflicts such as the gulf or iraq war. Overall this is a very bad video

[@AhaanMishra-yp7kl]

The fronts in South Asia and the Middle East will be very important not just for troop movements but the flow of resources and stuff like missile and air bases.

[@Sahil_Ombale]

No india will be neutral

[@daffyduck780]

@@AhaanMishra-yp7kl I could see India being like Italy in ww1. Seeing which way it goes and open to offers

[@JesterEric]

@@AhaanMishra-yp7kl China is Pakistans main arms supplier and Russia is the biggest arms supplier to India

[@dr.woozie7500]

@@daffyduck780 yep India will punch well below its weight. It’s military is laughably weak compared to the Russia, China and Iran. They’ll play up the alliances and take advantage when necessary.

[@sujitbala1492]

@@daffyduck780 India follows a non-aligned policy, until either side attacks India.

[@dannyferguson9415]

I don't know about the Russia, China side but as an American I do not see much that would indicate a sane approach to avoiding nuclear war from either US political party.

[@ian_b]

With all major powers nuclear armed, it would inevitably turn nuclear. I guess carrier groups will be nuked on day one at the very least. It terrifies me to see people in this day and age talk of "limited nuclear war" as if that is both desirable and achievable.

[@emiliopenayo4738]

china has a no first attack policy

[@johnulmer6715]

Both, it'll be in the trenches like WW1, but then like WW2 when the nukes fly. We'll get the best of both worlds.

[@SuperDrake85]

World War 2 wasn't really a single war, it was a series of major power wars intertwined with each other and some smaller ones that all occurred at the same time. Spanish civil war Nazi war of aggression against the Western Allies and the Soviets. Fascist Italy conquest of Greece, and the African and Middle Eastern colonies of the Western Allies Soviet conquest of Poland Soviet conquest of Finland Second Sino Japanese War Chinese Civil War part I Japanese conquest of Southeast Asia Japanese invasion of India through Burma Pacific War (itself very broad and multifaceted) Plus all of the espionage going on in Latin America between democratic, nationalist, socialist and fascist elements. (Which its disappointing that there aren't any movies or mini-series about, because that would be epic!) So it's more a collection of wars that influenced each other and occurred at the same time.

[@johnroberts9922]

Experts expect the detection range of the F-35 by the extremely advanced S-400 SAM battery to be around 21 miles. Given that a J-20 and SU-57 AESA radar's power output is orders of magnitude lower than ground systems, it should be no problem for a US stealth fighter to fly up the tailpipe of those fighters without ever being detected.

[@tristingoode4722]

SAMs are beginning to prove incredibly blunted in modern exchanges, for example, the Israelis demonstrated the overwhelming superiority of launched Air to Ground munitions over the alternatives

[@ArayStrak]

WW3 will have a slow buildup where we'll eventually see both sides trying to strategically take out equipment in certain locations and launch major offensives before the opposing side is able to reestablish a fully functioning front. In previous world wars you could confidently hold a line with sufficient manpower and relatively few additional factors. Technology has made the difference between a fully supported military unit and a poorly supported unit much more significant.

[@666wurm]

So, the world would be screwed. Once again. Maybe try avoiding WWIII?

[@majorian4897]

That would be anti-Semitic

[@SG003]

I have a feeling that India, Turkey, Vietnam would would sit this one out

[@thegamerthatnoonewanted2621]

We will,we are required to wit this one out to solve our damn problems first.

[@inocry940]

Youre forgetting that india is clashing with pakistan and india😂😂😂

[@thegamerthatnoonewanted2621]

@inocry940 Ahh yes,India is clashing with India.

[@mappingshaman5280]

Vietnam probably wouldn't have a choice. The rubber is too valuable to china. As for india and turkey, they'd probably try to exploit the war however possible.

[@AvoidTheCadaver]

​ Getting India on side would be pretty important given the amount of manpower they could bring. And if it meant being able snap up some of the disputed territories rallying with the west would at least be worth considering by the Indian government. The Asean nations would also benefit if they could force China from the south China Sea.

[@Robotrik1]

Hey Binkov, I enjoyed this video, but with respect I see it as a bit out of date, considering what is coming, and what already exists . Please consider that both US and China can likely deploy thousands, if not tens or hundreds of thousands of ground drones (dogs and other styles) , as well as other cross connected air or sea related drones . To see what's now available at sea, please see : Naval experts reveal the future of USV employment in modern warfare , by the KZbin channel Sub Brief . For my 2 cents, I predict that the major powers will run out of smart ammunition far faster then they will run out of drones that are cheaper to make & some can be 3D printed for the most part . Not the war we were told about as kids .

[@toddberkely6791]

uuuuh merry christmas to you too binkov

[@michaelhowell2326]

I think that troop numbers are a bit deceptive. Western countries would be outnumbered but the quality of troops and equipment are so much better.

[@MarcoSamuelGerena-gv3ur]

Not right now though, especially europe and canada. If war breaks out we are out of ammo, manpower, vehicles and everything in general. Stockpiles are old and budgets have been dogshit for decades now

[@rinaldoman3331]

In Europe, the army of each country can hardly recruit half a million, not to mention that, unlike the Russians, Europeans do not tolerate a significant decrease in the standard of living that would occur in the event of war. During World War II, German factories worked in one shift until the USSR entered the territory of the Third Reich and defeat became obvious. And this is in militarized Germany of the last century!

[@SuperDrake85]

yeah - this isn't right. On paper, a combined unit of Russia, China, and Central Asia (Team Red) does technically have all the resources needed to hold out against The US, EU, Australia, Korea, Japan, Taiwan (Team Blue). In this I'm assuming Philippines, Indonesia, PNG, Singapore, Malaysia are sympathetic to Team Blue, meaning they allow Team Blue to use their waterways, ports and airspace, but are not direct combatants. In this scenario I'm assuming that India diplomatically recruits Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, and Afghanistan into some sort of armed neutrality league, where none of these countries open their borders or waterways to any of the belligerents, though smuggling, spycraft and espionage abound. I'm also assuming that Pakistan secretly agrees to abide by the same rules, but does not publicly join anything with India in it. China domestically produces about half of the energy and food that it needs to survive, Russia produces about half of the specialty equipment and parts that it needs to keep it's energy, food and transport sectors running (generous estimate). Neither country has sufficient overland rail or pipeline links to exchange their goods with each other in sufficient volume. And that assumes that the thousands of miles of existing (insufficient) overland rails and pipelines that run through remote areas with no air defense cover would not be attacked by team Blue (which they would). This also assumes that team red suffers no disruptions to the hydroelectric power supply, that the US does not use any of it's zero day exploits that it has in its back pocket for this type of scenario. Result: A 10 year period of isolation at the end of which team red suffers significant food and material shortages, violent coups, and then finally multi-party civil wars skewing along geographic and ethnic lines. Team Blue learns how to make iphones and batteries with robots, and ultimately drifts out of the comic-book movie franchise phase into making movies about video games.

[@the.real.padre.pio_2.0]

Sad but true.

[@andreasl_fr2666]

People underestimate the extent to which china has industrially outcompeted tge western world. Especially when it comes to key heavy industry goods like steel.

[@minecraftfox4384]

People overestimate the extent to which china undercompetes with the West. Especially in areas like steel.

[@Dratchev241]

@@minecraftfox4384 people forget the west gave up manufacturing to the CCP and now can't really produce shit and have become nothing more then a bitch to the CCP. Hell a shit load of the electronics for mil equipment in the west is made in china along with most of the other stuff...

[@toddsmith5715]

I'm a bit disappointed that the video did not include India as a potential major factor. They would surely enter the fray against China and would field millions of troops. Its military is currently undergoing fairly rapid modernization as well.

[@counterrevolution8077]

And given the population size could produce large number of factories adding to US/EU numbers.

[@chocochoco5186]

Nope we dont wanna be part of another colonial wars. India would have good time in sidelines.and we hate west as much as we hate china

[@AjayTiwari-en9nz]

​@@chocochoco5186 India doesn't really hate west but it rather distrusts west. But we do hate the Chinese government, nothing against the people.

[@yohananberrocal4586]

To be fair India is rather neutral and it's on its own side, I don't think they would belong to the same military alliance as China (Pakistan might also be part of the reason why), but for now they have been going on pretty well with Russia, so I guess this is why Binkov doesn't really include India into the equation

[@dodgedaytona7435]

India can't really join, unless guarantees are made because China controls the land their fresh water originates on.

[@craigquann]

The allies also had a secret weapon. Vicious storm troopers that took no prisoners and used ungentlemanly tactics. They referred to them as Canadians.

[@Ulises-Gonzalez-3131]

😆😂🤣

[@damolux3388]

I'd take anything this channel says with a grain of salt. Given their assessment of the Russian military capability pre the Ukraine invasion.

[@jackjack-sm2jg]

He assumed zero international support in his assessment so that video doesn’t have any application to real life

[@damolux3388]

@jackjack-sm2jg his assessment wasn't vs Ukraine, it was in general. Russia is supposed to have a military capable of opposing Nato........

[@PandaPanda-ud4ne]

@@damolux3388 Binkov made the same mistake as many top analysts in the field, who are paid much, much more than he is. He looked at the absolute numbers too much. Yes, if you count the numbers of tanks, airplanes and soldiers, Russia was always capable of opposing NATO. But when you dig deeper, and get to the relative numbers, the numbers that tell you about the training of the soldiers in the tanks, the existence of the NCO corps (Russia does not have one!), the corruption level in the armies (Russia´s is off the charts), the combined arms operations training and experience (NATO is very much better than RUssia and China in this), then you see that there never was any parity, really.

[@damolux3388]

@PandaPanda-ud4ne 100% then add Chinese tyres, fake body armour, rubber ERA tiles, tampon bandages and its all down hill 🤣

[@missk1697]

@@damolux3388 Down hill like your soldiers confused about their gender 🤣

[@Leanalir]

Turkey fought against Russian proxies in Syria, Libya, Azerbaijan and several African countries and yet there are people still yaping like in this comment section. "Ignorance is bliss" is the motto as it seems.

[@AsukaLangleyS02]

Ignorance is bliss

[@Leanalir]

@@AsukaLangleyS02 yes you are right, i didn't realize i wrote "bless"

[@AnneHeloisaStar]

It's incomprehensible to have such a concept of a Full Scale Thermomuclear Spasm Attack.

[@NYG5]

I don't think any country has the industrial capacity, civic unity or manpower to churn out present day technology or the necessary specialist troops en masse the way they did in either world war.

[@GavinMalia]

I truly believe that the USA is a sleeping giant

[@terminallydrunk1900]

In total war of course they will you just haven't seen it yet.

[@tylermeldrum4007]

Am I the only person who thinks that WW3 will be more like “The 30 Years War”

[@007kingifrit]

modern wars are too expensive for such a long war

[@d-.-5180]

@@007kingifrit everybody said that before ww1, the russo-japanese war ended shortly because nearly both sides went broke, everyone thought that ww1 would be short. And than it lasted for 4 years. Not to mention how starved the central powers were, and how much the blockade has affected them. While right know even a blockade isn't going to have much effect. not to mention it won't even matter, China and russia still hace the abilit to trade on land. And the west would be also incredibily hurt by china's disapperanc of the world enconomy. This war won't be quick by any means.

[@007kingifrit]

@@d-.-5180 4 years is a pretty short war.

[@zadovrus1624]

It would be economic war. People are going to be poorer

[@jonraybon8582]

Pretty much, thanks to nukes, wars will involve a small handover of territory and/or other concessions. We won't see anything like WW2, where the objective was not to negotiate peace, but to completely annihilate nations/governments. In short, war has gone back to its roots, at least when great powers are involved. Wars of annihilation are a fairly new concept.

[@rdf4315]

So I'm guessing India the only country that could easily match China's numbers, sits this war out .

[@tcsmagicbox]

In infantry, yes, but how does India match up in terms of planes and ships and everything else?

[@rdf4315]

@tcsmagicbox if I'm not mistaken this channel already has a video talking about the numbers between China and India, China has a bigger navy, while there Air forces is slightly bigger then India, but definitely more advanced, my point about India that this video seemed to just skip over, is whichever country that managed to get India on their side in a potential ww3 will have a major advantage.

[@HazelnutColossus]

Good analysis here, I agree with most of your points. Losses would be enormous on all sides and no decisive victory would be achievable by any side. Smaller scale conflicts over more localized strategic interests seems more likely. Taiwan being the most likely flashpoint.

[@KnightsWithoutATable]

Respectively, I don't agree with the Commissar's assessment of the capabilities of NATO and Pacific air forces in this potential conflict, the impact of stealth technology in air combat or penetrating air defenses, or how well Russia's radar and SAM systems could cover it's territory and vulnerable targets. First, the stealth for the F-35 means that in any air combat will get a missile lock first since it has a smaller radar signal. That means you will see the other plane first, assuming equivalent tech on electronic warfare or even an edge on the Russian side since a lack of lock when you see the other side and can't lock would mean you just sneak away OR you use the Link-16 system that all NATO radars and air to air systems have and have then nearest AWACS lock on for you since it has a powerful active radar, allowing you to remain fully stealthy. See how that works? Any plane or even ground based system can be the eyes for the stealth jet to shoot at them and since it's a directional link, it's very, very difficult to jam. Next, for bombing and achieving air superiority, the first thing that will be done is Wild Weasel missions or using advanced anti-radiation cruise missiles that do the mission and strike themselves. This will degrade the radar and SAM coverage on the front rapidly. Next, in order to achieve coverage to spot and shoot down stealthy aircraft like the F-35, and B-2, Russia would need to place their SAM systems very, very close together as they range that they can cover is significantly shortened. That means that covering the entire front and keeping them on passive mode wouldn't work as they would get destroyed quickly by Wild Weasel attacks. This limits them to protecting things like bases and production facilities near Moscow. As for moving production facilities to near the Ural Mountains or getting equipment from China, that involves shipping it along rail lines that simply can't be protected for every single bridge. You also need to put valuable SAM systems and early warning radars at these new factories since they can still be reached from any approach by stealth bombers. How, you ask? Well, a B-2 or B-3 is over 5600 statute miles. Not far enough, you say? Well, you do an in air refueling over the north pole when leaving and returning and it'll make it and can take a long and winding path that avoids the radars by using the curvature of the Earth, geography, and that reduced radar return that stealth provides to allow a cruise missile to do the rest of the journey. It's like they were designed to do this to Russia and China so that they would have to build so many SAM systems and radars that it would be too expensive to possibly even think about defending themselves using this tactic. And again, the SAM systems are the targets. Once they are down, glide bombs are then switched to since they are cheaper, just as accurate, and we have so many more of them. I'm not worried about WWIII starting or how it will be fought. I'm worried about China and Russia freaking out about how badly they start to get spanked before infantry even really get into serious fighting and then throwing nukes.

[@JinKee]

What is a B-3?

[@centurymemes1208]

​@@JinKeehe prob meant b21. Or something else 😂😂

[@goiterlanternbase]

@@centurymemes1208Something else😏

[@ACRus19]

@@KnightsWithoutATable you are skipping one important point. WW3 will reach american land, and you don't have a response to Oreshnik. It could decimate americna infrastructure. You best believe americans will feel war on their homeland

[@KnightsWithoutATable]

@ACRus19 You want to launch an ICBM at US soil that we can't tell if it has a nuclear payload or until it hits? We would have to assume it was carrying full nuclear payload and was part of a first strike, so it would trigger a full nuclear response from the US and the rest of NATO. That means Russia would have everything fired at them. Then they would fire everything at the US and NATO. Then the world has nuclear winter. See why this weapon as a conventional warhead delivery system is a really stupid idea? The weapon system you named is not capable of reaching North America and maxes out in range in France, possibly the United Kingdom. It just doesn't have the range. There is also not enough of them to launch attacks effectively against any nation as the missile is really expensive and only just finished testing. With the war in Ukraine going on, Moscow can't afford to mass produce these missiles. They also don't have a very large area of effect or the ability to penetrate reinforced bunkers as the warheads are small and lightweight. Then there is the flight time and trajectory for reaching targets at the longer range allowing for the target of the strike to be easily be roughly determined, air raid alarms started, and plenty of time for people to reach shelter. This is because of the high parabolic trajectory the missile takes and long flight time this results in. The weapons system might be flashy, but it's completely useless. It's for show to try and make the ignorant and fearful panic. To the informed and educated, it's a waste if money and possibly an indication that Russia's ICBMs won't be replaced since they are too expensive and technically difficult as they wear out and this is the best they could come up with. It is also possible that this is a prototype for a medium range ballistic missile that they intend to give the technology to North Korea in exchange for manpower and war materials. I would also remind you that the two times in modern history that US that an attack has taken place, the US has utterly decimated the other side in a long and bloody war that we won even though we weren't prepared. Since Russia couldn't launch more than a few dozen missiles of this type, it would just be kicking a hornet's nest. The same result would happen if Putin decided to attack any NATO nation, just in case you forgot, even with Trump as President.

[@slightlytwistedagain]

As far as I'm concerned we're already in WW3 with the first proxy war, Ukraine being Chapter 1. Mass mobilization hasn't happened because western oligarchs would lose all their business contracts and investment money that they pumped into building factories in China. Their shift towards building them in places like India and Vietnam shows that decoupling from China is underway for the west to go to war with the country. China and Russia have been stockpiling gold in record numbers and the Saudi's have said publicly that they view China as their main trading partner for the next 50 years. With BRICS threatening the USD, America will have to use force if it wishes to keep its global imperial financial system or its supremacy will wither away.

[@oldluke7653]

We really do just want to grill, bro.

[@unhippy1]

Syrian "rebellion" in 2009 was the start of the current war proxy wars......ukraine's anti russian "revolution" and immediate attempt pressure from EU to join nato in 2013 was the second act intended to put nato armour forces on russia's border with no geographical impediments between them and moscow (unlike where nato has forces on the russian border in the Baltic states....I sort of get the impression by the actions and attitudes of the US, EU and Nato leadership that everything is going according to plan so far.......we live in interesting times......

[@oooshafiqooo]

soo WW4?

[@Ulises-Gonzalez-3131]

I disagree, because direct conflict would accelerate the dollar's fall, the same way with the british pound due to WWII and Churchill's attempt to help Poland and Belgium vs Germany using their imperial expeditionary forces, that destroyed british economy and their rule over most of their colonies, excepting Canada, Australia, and a few islands, now deceptively called as a "mancommunity" (or whatever) to get their subjects's compliance..

[@J8DENTHECANADIAN]

Georgia, The Middle East (post Arab spring), Ukraine, etc is chapter 1. The war on terror is like a prologue and Yugoslavia was like the post credit scene from the Cold War.

[@pietero.o6792]

Why do we have to make it a trilogy?

[@SauceyMan76]

Its up to them tbh

[@RotatingDevelopment]

Because most stories end after the trilogy (Humanity in this case)

[@justarandomname420]

Read the Protocols of the Eldars of Zion to understand the grand narrative unfolding.

[@counterfit5]

​@@justarandomname420you mean the antisemitic hoax that's been known as a hoax for decades?

[@antib4las73]

@@justarandomname420 🤡

[@MrRollerDutch]

It would be like WW3 because WW2 was over 60 years ago. They didn't have automated computer targeting, DEWs, robots and laser-guided weapons.

[@deanfirnatine7814]

Most US and allied troops that are heavily experienced from Iraq and Afghanistan are still young enough to be brought back as officers, NCO's, specialists etc. Most are in their forties or even mid to late thirties, their experience would be invaluable coupled with the West's vastly superior training.

[@yonkokaido6955]

Sort of. The issue is we fought insurgents, not competent militaries. It's a totally different kind of warfare.

[@NoelNaggis]

This is actually completely inaccurate. As we have seen just how inneficent the "Superior trained" NATO soldiers have been in ukriane. Apparently fighting insurgents in the mountains, armed with matchetes and Aks, is completely different from fighting an enemy with modern equipment, drones, artillery, and an actual air defence system

[@itslight8859]

Don't forget the Asian partners of Nato. Vietnam, Thailand, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Australia, Philipines. They would pressure China for sure.

[@taichi2245]

They're barely a drop in the bucket. At best ROK can fight off NK, but would be overwhelmed by Chinese PLA in short order afterwards; with a major war in Europe raging in this scenario, the US wouldn't have enough manpower to hold ROK in the long term -- most likely what would happen would be a desperate defense at the 34th parallel. If the war went on too long the entire Korean peninsula would likely be lost over time. US marines and army simply don't have the assets to hold the peninsula against the PLA, if push comes to shove; it'd be a repeat of the original Korean War, just worse given the US's engagement in Europe. Japan would be defensible, due to the sheer might of the US Navy and standoff from Chinese territory; they'd act much like Great Britain during WW2, most likely. Most of the war would take place in the Pacific, just out of range of Chinese land-based missiles, and/or their sensor platforms. PLAN doesn't have the ability to take the fight to the US Navy outside of territorial waters and won't have that capability anytime in the projected future. Taiwan is a tossup, most likely it would become the most bloody battlefield of the entire war, with entire divisions of armies from both the US Marine corps and PLAN Marines basically being wiped to a man on the island via long range fires from the Chinese mainland or US CSG strikes. The rest of SEA probably would not play a significant role in the war unless China made the strategic error of trying to attack them; pretty much all of them are tarpits that would cost the PLA more than they're worth, and they don't have significant offensive capabilities able to threaten China outside of their own territory. It would probably be most realistic for them to capture islands where they would then build up hardened bases, but taking the major cities, as we have seen in Ukraine, is a major fucking headache, no matter how much manpower you have, and would also likely spell disaster for the PLAN Marine troops. Most likely possibility is that China makes a major grab for Taiwan, which is taken after months of incredibly bloody combat, and then makes limited grabs against the Philippines and Indonesia while trying to sink enough US carriers to for the US to sue for peace via long range ASHM strikes. Europe would likely become a stalemate. Nobody's ever successfully conquered Russia before, and the capability of the combined armies of Western Europe do not have the ability to, not even close. In a scenario with US directly taking on just Russia it's possible, but with China in the picture US assets are entirely tied up fighting the war in the Pacific; most of Europe is going to be left to fend for itself. It's likely they would hold with whatever limited support would be left from EUCOM, and the war would stall on that front, probably somewhere in Poland. Ukraine would likely lose much of its territory in this scenario, possibly even all of its territory as Russia deployed its full set of reserves to the front. (Yeah, they still have reserves; more than most people think. They're not using them because deploying them would be expensive politically; losing them would be outright disastrous, and Russia's not willing to go all in on Ukraine, but if WW3 broke out they still have stuff they can draw upon, home guard units etc.) Ultimately I don't see this war ending in a complete victory for either side, unlike previous wars. There's no possibility of invading either the US or Chinese mainland, and Russia is impossible to invade while having inadequate ability to invade Europe. At some point someone would probably sue for peace once enough damage was done -- all 3 of the superpowers involved are internally fragile right now in different ways. My money would be on Russia giving in first, given how many losses they've already sustained fertilizing the fields of Ukraine; it would look a bit like a repeat of WW1 in that way, I guess? More likely would probably be a simple status quo scenario though, I think. China and Russia are both self sustaining, and it could end up looking much like how things look in the Korean peninsula today. No actual peace declared, but nobody willing to restart the bloodshed again either. This is why I believe that Taiwan's military readiness is crucial. A lot of people say that the US will come save them in case of a war breaking out, but realistically the US has no way to force China to capitulate, only settle into a status quo. As such, the initial battles on the island will determine the future status quo heavily, and the early hours of any war taking place in the Pacific would be highly crucial, and Taiwan's current military readiness and stockpiles are very likely not up to the task of holding the island until help can arrive -- they might not lose the entire island, but if WW3 breaks out we'd probably see the island split in half much like Germany was post WW2.

[@Akim-rx1jy]

Vietnam is a neutral country They are not a MNNA

[@shashwatsinha2704]

Great analysis​@@taichi2245

[@Wookstar27]

Ha, Aussie military can barely defend its own border. We have less than 100k troops including reserves.

[@jorgenguyen7641]

@@Akim-rx1jy Spot-on. Vietnam is a bit less friendly with China than with the west, but I think there's a 0% chance they could be convinced to join a war against them unless it was basically already won

[@HenryElfin]

People want wars but don't understand how horrible it would be to every human on the planet

[@TheRezro]

You mean Russians want wars? I don't see anyone else, who actually would want that?

[@droidzilla22]

WW3 will look more like something from the Terminator series of films than anything in the past. Nukes, AI, drones, bioweapons and Robots.

[@finleystrine7339]

I’m not sure about China being fine on resources, they import a ton of food in general and Russia wouldn’t be able to feed the masses of China alone

[@henrywang3977]

It is often ignored that, China has a much different energy and chemical prodution and consumption structure than the rest of the world. China is not sef-sustainable in oil&gas but mines 90% of the coal it needs, which is as much as almost half of the entire coal production of the world, making up 2/3 of China's energy demand. Unlike the rest of the world where crude oil is mostly converted into fuel, in China about half of the crude oil is to make chemicals, which are mostly serving for platics and rubber production, demanded mostly by exportation civil goods to the West. So in a potential full blockade, the crude oil demand would drop as well as the supply, the gap can be filled by coal chemical industry, making the situation less undesirable.

[@PecosChico]

"What will happen, we do not know." ~ Genghis Khan

[@Bacontruffle]

I'm somewhat confused that Binkov seems to ignore SEAD here. Iraq was feared partially because of its extensive SAM systems network, but this didn't last very long due to very effective Allied SEAD missions. Ukraine has been given some SEAD missiles jerryrigged to its Soviet planes and those have resulted in Russian SAM systems having to turn off their radar to avoid being destroyed, only turning on their radars when the risk is worth trying to take out airborne threats in the area. On top of this, S300/S400 systems haven't exactly had the best track record as of late, and have even been taken out by drones/HIMARS. I think Binkov is overestimating Russian AA. Another example is Israel's deep strikes into Iran using stealth planes such as F-35, successfully disabling Iranian defences (again, mainly Russian made) without losing airframes. Allegedly, the Iranians were unable to even spot the Israeli attack until it was already too late. The age of Russian SAM systems terrifying NATO are long gone.

[@darthvader1494]

I agree. It was Russias air superiority in the beginning of the war that keept Ukrainian airforce on the ground not AA systems. Now that Ukraine have an AA system 🇷🇺 don't fly close to Ukraine. Hell Ukraine even fly drone planes in to Russia and seem to have no problem sending missiles deep into Russia.

[@Bacontruffle]

​@@darthvader1494 Exactly this. Russia seems to have gotten complacent, S400 still essentially uses the same type of radar systems they've been using since the 90s, which while indeed powerful struggles with clutter and hasn't proven particularly great at actually identifying stealth planes. (ironically why they've stuck with this older tech since the 1999 downing of an F-117A, but that's a long story) Russia's doubling-down on this tech makes their SAM systems weak to both drone threats (can't tell them apart from birds) and stealth planes using stand-off munitions.

[@missk1697]

If you count Japan and Australia for NATO side then you should also count Iran and North Korea for China/Russia side.

[@caseycardenas1668]

I'd refrain from downplaying the amount of financial support and hardware support Ukraine is receiving from the USA and NATO, and how much of a role said support plays in keeping Ukraine relevant in the fight. People truly underestimate just how much this type of aid can change the battlespace. This war would've been long over if not for the aid. A somewhat relevant parallel would be the Eastern Front in WWII and how the Soviet Union was able to survive via the Lend Lease Act.

[@boringnoninterestingname65]

I think he’s saying limited in the sense that it’s not a lot compared to what the U.S. could fully leverage. The Vietnam war alone was around 8-10% of the total U.S. gdp at the time. Meaning if we’re to spend as much on the military rn as we did during Vietnam it would be 2.6 trillion a year. And considering we have sent only 61.4 billion in military aid since the start of the war we could albeit not easily send a much much larger amount.

[@fergie123able]

the resource argument is absurdly simplistic. Modern militaries need more than oil, iron and steel. A lot of the advanced manufacturing technology and equipment russia and china have (and currently are) been using is sourced from the west. Once a world war pops off they will have an incredibly difficult time getting a lot of those parts needed for modern military equipment.

[@EdwarkDiyaz]

😂？？？？惊人的笑话，事实是西方依赖中国的工业体系，而不是相反

[@oreodepup]

A world where Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea forms an axis is horrifying for everyone. While it’s true the East sources a lot of material from the west it is also true that those materials are dependent on a variety of simpler base materials from the east. In short, a war would see both sides have horrible logistical issues as the world has been so thoroughly globalized that a collapse in that system would create a shortage of nearly everything tech related.

[@RichelieuUnlimited]

@@oreodepupThose base materials are also available in the West, they’re simply often times untapped due to higher labor costs and environmental concerns. Something that could be rectified easily if push came to shove.

[@freedomfighter22222]

@@RichelieuUnlimited Yeah, people don't know that a resource "reserve" is classified on whether it is economically profitable to extract, the reason China has the most Rare earth reserves isn't because those don't exist in plenty other places, it is because China keeps prices so low it isn't profitable to develop extraction other places. When access to Chinese rare earths disappear mines in plenty would be built in other places and the prices would skyrocket short term before stabilizing later not very far above what China sold them for.

[@oreodepup]

@@RichelieuUnlimited yes while what you say is true it would take years if not decades to get production up and running in these areas. America and the west has already deindustrialized to some degree and we rely on eastern factories for production. In contrast China could mass produce Cold War era technology while our modern technologies would face a nightmare of logistical issues for at least the first year of the war. It would essentially be a repeat of the WW2 pacific front on a much more massive scale. The longer China fails to achieve its operational objectives the more likely it is that we reindustrialize and create the components we need from domestic production. China would need to strike decisively and swiftly as you are right to point out that we DO have the materials here in the west to compete in the longer run. If China can break our will to fight before their window of opportunity ends they would have an advantage in production capacity. Both sides would likely be unable to produce new gen military equipment at scale to be viable in conflict for at least a year which would mean China would have to leverage its mass production and population to defeat us.

[@Mustapha1963]

"I know not with what weapons Word War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."- Albert Einstein

[@summerlovemvp]

Nobody ever thinks about logistics. Let's assume that China mobilizes 10 million men (something it can easily do). How will they feed such an army daily? The amount of resources to maintain them is insane. Another small detail, let's ASSUME that Taiwan sides with the allies. This means that the allies have control over 99% of the world's chip production. In this hypothetical exercise, the allies control resources and technology, while the other side manages to mobilize incredible numbers of men and put up a lot of fight in the short/medium term. (until the resources run out) Russia/China would have to win fast, otherwise time is against them. ( or just use nukes xD )

[@hashteraksgage3281]

The red army in WW2 had more than 10 million men, and the Wehrmacht had almost 10 million. It's not that hard to do.

[@StelfBrettro]

China the most logical, sophisticated people on earth. People are just engineers and scientists. I highly doubt they start something.

[@Antnee659]

So theyre going to have to take taiwan fast so they can feed 10 million men chips

[@StelfBrettro]

@@summerlovemvp And you realize most 'fighting' these days is done by drone, or Predator missile right? It's why the Ukrainians are holding back Putin. If I remember right, the Chinese President don't even like Putin, it's just American media that associates the two. Putin an annoyance to them too.

[@bosanaz2010]

@@hashteraksgage3281 soldiers back then only needed food and 1 maybe 2 kinds of bullets for infantrie....what do we all need now. Supplie chjains are far more complex today.Even if broken down only to infantery gear. Allone Small arms ammunition,batteries,First air( back then not much then bandages,tq,Morphin,now your Personal IFAK covers more wounds then a medic in ww2)

[@bullramis4179]

WW3 ended with break up of USSR into Russia. We're in WW4 which is not nation vs nation but war against humanity.

[@igorwinnicki9834]

Yeah, no cold war sure as hell wasn't a world war xD

[@chupacabra304]

Interesting perspective 🤔

[@goiterlanternbase]

So we facing WW5 then? Because WW4 is already happening, considering the staggering losses of Russian military personal and Ukrainian civilians.

[@mono4on]

ima be real with ya chief, they can launch them nukes when they ready, im comin harambe

[@PandaPanda-ud4ne]

Harambe wants you to live. That noble Gorilla died for a human baby, how can he like that you do not want to live? LIVE. Eat a banana for Harambe, but do not seek death.

[@smokeyhoodoo]

It should be noted that germanys lower shell production in ww1 was affected by the fact that they produced a lot more 105mm than the allies. French and british production was almost entirely 75mm.

[@chrisken8902]

- Nowadays you just can't make large scale attacks undetected. (President Zelensky) - Hah! Watch this !!

[@July41776DedicatedtoTheProposi]

Food? China would loose most of its agricultural inputs and within a year it would be faced with famine.

[@EdwarkDiyaz]

哎呀呀，中国又要崩溃了，中国是世界最大粮食生产国，今年中国的粮食产量已经达到7亿吨，中国每年的粮食产量都在增加，中国进口粮食是因为中国的发展中国人的消费理念变化，而不是中国会缺乏战时粮食供应，如果你觉得不够，中国每年还储备世界一半的粮食，即便中国完全不种植粮食，中国的储备粮食也足够全中国14亿人吃3年，然后，如果你计算蔬菜水果鸡鸭鹅牛羊猪海鲜水产品所有农产品，你会发现中国的总体农产值是美国的5倍而不是美国的1.3倍。

[@EdwarkDiyaz]

你究竟明不明白你们有多么愚蠢，中国每年制造世界一半的工业品，中国当然要从国外进口能源矿产，比如中国存在大量优质稀土，中国政府依旧禁止大规模开采国内稀土，中国的稀土基本上从蒙古越南俄罗斯巴西加拿大美国阿根廷进口然后加工出口给世界各国，但是这会被计算成中国的能源矿产进口数量，中国虽然大量进口能源矿产，但是不代表中国缺乏战时能源矿产，因为战时政府会将一切能源矿产优先应用于军事，并且加大国内资源开发规模，然后这是假设美军有能力封锁中国，事实是美国没有能力封锁中国，或者说中国也有能力封锁西太平洋印度洋澳大利亚亚洲海域，美国只有3亿人要如何自己自给自足生产第三次工业革命所有工业品？美国甚至连抗生素都是依赖中国提供

[@EdwarkDiyaz]

美国百分之98的抗生素依赖从中国进口，一场与中国的大规模战争，即便是美军受伤美国也没有足够的药物治疗美军

[@HanSolo__]

@@EdwarkDiyaz China is the world's largest grain producer. China is also a big food importer and can not sustain itself without imports. The US is the world's largest food exporter. It is also, nearly 100% self-sustainable which allows it to prosper at its current level without any imports.

[@EdwarkDiyaz]

​@@HanSolo__哈哈哈哈哈，中国进口粮食只是因为人民生活水平变化，中国人要生活多样化，我都说了中国现在每年的粮食产量还在增加，明年中国的粮食产量可能达到7.1亿吨，即便中国不进口粮食。14亿中国人也就少吃点猪肉，这不会对中国造成什么影响，中国完全不进口任何粮食，中国人的平均粮食肉类蔬菜水果食用量依旧超过世界百分之70的国家

[@Chrischi3TutorialLPs]

I think you're overestimating Russian air defenses here. Ukraine has mauled the Russian air defense so badly, at this point, they are stripping far eastern bases of entire batteries to maintain the airspace denial over Ukraine. Again, this is JUST the damage Ukraine did. Now imagine what damage they'll suffer once the US starts roflstomping their air defenses in a coordinated strike from air, land, and sea, with all the best gear NATO has to offer. I give their air defense a month tops before nothing is left and the stealth bomber fleet can start taking out what is left - both in terms of air defenses and air bases - with impunity. Also, let's not forget that the B-2 Spirit is still the stealthiest plane in the world, even compared to the F-22. They literally would not see them coming. See, NATO has tested the F-35 against turkish S-400s. The result was that, contrary to Russian claims, the S-400 cannot detect the F-35 beyond maybe 10 miles, if that. Do you realize the F-35 can kill these things with glide bombs that have 8 times the range? How well do you think that thing will do against a plane like the B-2, or even the B-21 when it enters service in a few years? Not to mention, Russian air defense could not even stop a remote controlled Cessna from hitting a target hundreds of kilometers in their rear. How do you expect THAT air defense to stop a stealth bomber? And trust me, the US has learned the Ukrainian tricks, they are watching this war very, very closely.

[@sss-gl9et]

thought the same

[@coinlazergaming8516]

Definitely agree for the most part. The only thing I would add is that Soviet era air defense systems used by the ukrainians is performing far better than in the hands of the Russians. Russia cannot stop missiles and drones flying into its airspace even with its vastly superior numbers of air defense systems.

[@j4genius961]

You sound like this: 🥸🥸🥸🥸🥸 lmao 1- Your fantasy scenario would never happen because Russia or any other nuclear power including the US would use them as soon as they start losing badly 2- US bases and warships are struck by cheap drones ALL the time in the middle east, try to educate yourself kid, this isn't a video game,no air defense system has a 100% interception rate, especially not in a high intensity war ( you know, the kind the US hasn't fought in DECADES )... Jesus Christ 3- While you're trying to b0mb Russia or China they will be doing the same to your territory, the ocean won't save you this time, long range bombers, submarines and ballistic missiles are now a thing... Anyway, let's all hope that ww3 never happens so that mor0ns like you can find out what war actually looks like😊

[@Evan-iq8hd]

Then why hasn't Biden sent his pilots to save poor Ukrene?

[@reiudfgq3vrh34ur]

The US struggled in Iraq and in Afghanistan this idea that us is op is crazy

[@flhxri]

I was researching a relative who was in WW1. I learned something no one talks about. The US took over France's railroads. They rebuilt all the railroads and sent over 1000 Baldwin locomotives. They even put narrow gauge railroads right up to the trenches. The US also took over Russia's railroads. The improved logistics did a lot to do in Germany.

[@vasilzahariev5741]

Team Blue has a huge advantage in stealth jets, which makes Team Red's advantage in SAM systems less impactful. The quality of Team Red's SAM systems should also come into question, since Russia has lost many SAM systems during the war in Ukraine, among which are also the overrated S-400.

[@tsarfox3462]

Also team red doesn't have better SAMs. They can't even shoot down F-16s. China and Russia have paper tigers, we have the real thing.

[@Kongongongg]

Holy molly American delusion is high

[@missk1697]

@@tsarfox3462 Come and try messing around with China then lmao

[@davidwl343]

Surely you are underestimating the technological edge of the USAF. To say that their air superiority wouldn´t be a significant factor in the war seems like a stretch.

[@Maperator]

You're underestimating modern SAM capabilities. USAF just like the US army has much "experience" only in fighting 3rd world guerilla forces or armies with Soviet military stock.

[@Link9058]

USA would dominate in air vs air. Air vs land is what they’re talking about here.

[@TheCynicsCynic]

@@Maperator Like the S-400?

[@KRGruner]

Yep, absolutely. This would be a massacre in the air, and for the Red side air defenses. Stealth is a huge advantage. Which explains why everyone is buying F-35s (if they are allowed), or trying to build something like it.

[@KRGruner]

@@Maperator The Israelis just took out the entire Iranian SAM system in ONE raid. Think about that. Sure, it's Iran not Russia or China, but it was Russian systems.

[@tainechen1634]

Maybe we should rename ww1 as European civil war.

[@Clagna]

it's gonna be something that we've never seen before

[@matthewwilliamson1133]

Why Russia + China vs Nato? Not Russia, China, Iran, North Korea? Bit weird starting point imo.

[@stormzilla37]

Valid, tbh as Japan, Australia, and South Korea were mentioned

[@Pilosoposporo]

Team Russia/China also add South Africa, Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Ethiopia (BRICS+) with Cuba, Venezuela, ECOWAS, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, and Palestine against Israel and NATO plus Philippines, Australia, South Korea but minus Hungary, Turkey, Ireland, Serbia, and Slovakia. Neutral are the rest of countries not mentioned here.

[@mrkekskopf5904]

​@Pilosoposporo did you really just say India and Pakistan would fight on the same side? I knew people like you weren't the brightest matchsticks in a light bulb store, but that shit is just straight up delusional. Truly nothing but "west bad" going on up there.

[@AUTO6]

@@Pilosoposporo What is the reason for South Africa to join China/Russia team? Also good luck with China, India and Pakistan in one team :D

[@Pilosoposporo]

@AUTO6 Pakistan is a solid ally of China. South Africa has a deep historical grudge against Israel and will NEVER support that Zionist regime or any of its allies. Remember it was the Soviets who supported the armed faction of Mandela's ANC. India will also NEVER support it's former oppressor/colonizer the UK due to history too. DUH. Do you understand now white boy? Nobody likes you in the South.

[@AndrewsPx]

People forget all the terrorist and revolutionary/rebel groups Russia,China and Iran are tied to,that could be a problem.

[@leonardod808]

US its equally if nots more tied to terrorist, rebel and revolutionary groups.

[@VasVordokas]

Will have attributes of both WW1-2 plus new attributes such as cyber warfare. Pretty grim recipe.

[@rozmanek5472]

Let's just say you'll be cannonmeat like in ww1 but with ww2 technology that also has a laser on it and connects to your fridge.