Huffy Flounce

Watching it now. It's a rather excellent (so far) piece of BBC TV where they take a number of ex-Military senior leaders, ex-politicians and ex-diplomats into a war room and play out a war game starting with Russian political interference in Estonia that rapidly escalates and triggers NATO article V.

It shows the debates and decision making process that might go into a decision to have to go to war with Russia.

Pretty gripping TV.

Well, that was depressing. Basically no way to win and NATO is structurally hamstrung.

You found it a surprise that no one wins World War III?

If humanity wipes itself out, the universe wins.

Well, the galaxy. I seriously doubt we'll have universal impact.

All right. Our specific solar system.

I've always believed that WW-III was the so-called Cold War.

I believe future historians will agree.

The author I'm writing my dissertation on says that it is climate change. World War III: The War Against Our Grandchildren

neglet wrote:You found it a surprise that no one wins World War III?

Not surprised. It was just depressing how once a certain point was crossed - quite early on - there was no way back whatever all the major players did.

The Swollen Goiter of God wrote:...universal impact.

Universal Impact? I smell a JCVD movie cross-over!

I had a hunch somebody would point out how much like a movie title that sounded. It occurred to me a few minutes after I posted it. My head even made the JCVD connection. Because of Universal Soldier and Double Impact. Same reason as Mal, probably.

Double Impact. I remember there was a girl with nice boobs in that and she spent some time naked.

The Swollen Goiter of God wrote:I had a hunch somebody would point out how much like a movie title that sounded. It occurred to me a few minutes after I posted it. My head even made the JCVD connection. Because of Universal Soldier and Double Impact. Same reason as Mal, probably.

I can see it now: Triple the Dammage!

Editorial in The Times today worth a read. Doesn't say anything new but says it well.

The world is out of equilibrium. In North Korea, a rogue dictator is hurtling towards the construction of a deliverable nuclear bomb undeterred by the United Nations or by the disapproval of some of the most powerful nations on earth. Along the Turkish-Syrian border there is fear that Ankara will turn a humanitarian crisis into an outright confrontation between Nato and Russia. And in eastern Europe, the Ukraine conflict simmers, its potential for sparking an East-West showdown still not extinguished.

A miscalculation leading to accidental war between states is becoming even more of a menace than it was during the Cold War. The uneasy stability of the bipolar world from 1945 to 1989 has been replaced by an extraordinarily volatile international system.

Insurgent nuclear powers will always present a problem; the more serious issue has become the inability of great powers to contain the threat or head off an unintended war. It has taken Kim Jong Un’s reckless launch of a long-range missile to highlight this pressing danger.

The United States now appears to be ready to deploy with South Korea an advanced missile defence system known as the terminal high altitude area defence platform. The plan is clearly to act against further movement by Mr Kim towards obtaining ballistic missiles and to shield both South Korea and Japan. China, however, believes the missile defence will be used against its own weaponry to stall Beijing’s challenge to American naval dominance in the western Pacific. Yet China refuses to apply more pressure on Mr Kim, fearful that the collapse of the North Korean state would quickly lead to unification with the south and the arrival of a close American ally on Chinese borders.

Mr Kim’s campaign for a bomb — a fifth nuclear warhead test is expected soon — has two consequences. First, a madcap attempt by the dictator to disrupt the world order is going substantially unchallenged. Second, there is a growing risk of China and the United States stumbling into a conflict over the South China Sea.

The US finds it is fast losing its ability to restrain or influence its allies. That increases the chances of a slip-up, with devastating consequences. Last November Turkey shot down a Russian warplane that Ankara said had intruded on its airspace. Moscow claimed it was over Syrian terrain at the time. The clash did not escalate into a wider military conflict, though there has been a great deal of diplomatic and commercial friction since. Moscow has stepped up support for left-leaning Kurdish fighting groups. Ankara worries that with Russian firepower backing these groups, they will succeed in joining up various Kurdish enclaves to form a coherent Syrian Kurdistan on the southern Turkish border.

President Erdogan yesterday told Washington that it had to choose between supporting him or supporting the Syrian Kurds; there was no middle ground. For the president it seems that Russia really is on the brink of an undeclared war not just with Islamic State, but with Ankara itself. Any new incident on the northern Syrian border, planned or unplanned, could thus draw the Turks, who are key Nato allies, into open conflict with Russia.

From the South China Sea to the southern Turkish border, these are fundamental fault lines. They are danger zones that demand a special sensitivity by politicians on all sides. After the Cuban missile crisis of 1962 the White House and the Kremlin set up a hot line, a dedicated emergency phone for direct conflict management. If accidental war is to be avoided, today’s leaders need to find more sophisticated ways of de-escalating tensions. Politicians must seek rational outcomes that minimise risk in times of peril, even when some leaders are irrational.