World War III Thread

I kind of want a place where I can speculate upon a future global conflict. Many are pretty naive to the fact that WW III is actually a very distinctive possibility right now. Global tensions have reached a level on par with the Cold War, while the number of territorial disputes and acts of aggression have increased three fold.

In the past, the sheer size and economic power of NATO had deterred World War III, but now we have third world countries leveraging huge militaries, and the ability of NATO to resist a combined offensive from nations like China, Russia, and Italy is being put into question.

That is my justification for this thread. I will mostly discuss my own scenario for what WW3 would look like here, and I invite others to join me.

Blackflag: *correction, I meant Iran, not Italy

Here are some of the locations I feel would be the sites of major battles in the event of WW3, starting with Poland

The Polish Front


Bialystok, Poland

?eb2dbb

Bialystok is the first major city across the border from Belarus, and also runs right through the road into Warsaw. The superior and near infinite number of tanks leveraged by Russia and Belarus would have to go through Bialystok to reach combat in Eastern Europe, therefore Bialystok would become a major flashpoint of WW3.



Belarus would be the vanguard before any Russian forces were to arrive at the scene. The impressive 1500 T-72 medium tanks fight with poor efficiency when put into chokepoints and urban areas. Poland has more soldiers and superior technology (including anti-tank weapons), but the weight of Belarus's offensive military would mean holding Bialystok would be a very difficult task.

Hundreds of Belorussian tanks would be destroyed traversing into the heated combat around Bialystok before the city was taken. If the city is taken fast enough, then Belarus can secure the road and surrounding countryside long enough for the Russian army to arrive at the scene, which would spare the Belarssuians from having to repel a Polish counterattack, which in all fairness, would probably succeed. I had simulated this specific battle with some of the old Cold War military simulations. Belarus's offensive military can drive deep right through Bialystok all the way to the outskirts of Warsaw, before inevitably being pushed back by the Polish Armed Forces all the way to Lukashenoko's presidential palace in Minsk.

Gdansk, Poland



Gdansk is location of the Polish fleet, and is located right in the middle of the road that leads to Lodz, one of the most strategically important cities for Russia to take in the event of a war with NATO. Gdnyia is a major city which is connected to Gdansk.



The Polish navy is just strong enough to defend its coastline from the Russian naval forces based in Kalingrad for awhile. Taking Warsaw is a momentous task, and were Germany or even Polish Reserves to reinforce Warsaw before it could be taken, the assault would result in tremendous casualties. Encircling Warsaw therefore becomes of the utmost importance to Russia. The best way to do this, is to control the city of Lodz, which runs through the Berlin-Warsaw highway. It also completely isolated the Polish forces in Poznan from reaching the capital, and also blocks Katowice's quickest route to Warsaw, which in turn makes it really difficult for Czech forces coming in from the South to reinforce Warsaw

To take the city of Lodz, you must first take the city of Gdansk, which the major road runs through. The Russian forces stationed in Kalingrad would have little trouble taking the city, although the time in which they need to do so in order to take Lodz in time to block the Germans is demanding. They would also be able to hit the Polish 16th Mechanized Infantry Division right in the rear. In addition, there is a major airport in Gdynia, while the capture of the port would strengthen Russia's naval position.

Since Lodz does not have a major garrison, taking Gdansk and arriving at the scene before forces from Poznan can dig into the city, will determine whether or not Russia can establish a frontline and cut off Warsaw long enough.

Warsaw, Poland



This is the big battle. Warsaw is cut off from all reinforcement points outside Krakow/Katowice, The Germans will be stopped in battle at Lodz, while the Russians shell the city with artillery fire, and pinch the cities flanks with tanks, before finally entering the city to engage in fierce urban combat.


At the same time, Belarussian tanks with the support of Russia can descend upon the city of Lublin, which is the only thing stopping Russian tanks from surging Slovakia, forcing Romania into a two front war, sealing their fate. Upon success of the two week Polish offensive, Russia would have established a front line encompassing half of Poland, and put itself in a position to knock Slovakia out of the war, and possibly Romania after awhile.

Nice. This could perhaps be considered a successor to the Cold War II thread.
One thing about WW3 is that it won't necessarily go nuclear. A country will go nuclear (assuming that its leaders are rational human beings) only whenever it's in a hopeless situation when its annihilation is guaranteed, or whenever it's better to die rather than lose the war.
If the USA, Russia, and China avoided explicitly invading each other, it could potentially be an entirely WMD-free conflict. Even if Russia or China or the United States were to be invaded, their leaders would probably be aware that a post-war state of occupation would only be temporary and they could eventually regain their influence in the world. Also, losing would just be a black mark on their military record and not the end of their civilization.
Under rational leaders there's no reason for WW3 to go nuclear, though people are stupid and it'd probably end up going nuclear anyway for this reason.

WW3 would be nuclear yes, as a war between the USSR and America would have been had the war become a hot war.

I'm not sure why people are so convinced there will be a WW3 though. I think humanity is more likely to encounter problems from global warming, overpopulation, deforestation, etc. before WW3.

Bolshevik-: It'd be irrational for either side to resort to the use of nuclear weapons, especially before any of the 3 big players get invaded.

Going by what Stag described, it'd take Russia sufficiently long to take Poland for NATO to mobilize a force in Europe to fight back. There wouldn't be any German-style Blitzkrieg this time around.

Dassault Papillon: Germany could respond pretty fast in the event Poland, the one NATO nation that is touching a Russian major ally, were to be invaded.

The Polish Armed Forces are not a joke though. They are well equipped to deal with forces four times their size. Modern warfare is mostly about maneuvering. Chokepoints like Bialystok can be extremely destructive for the attacking force, but when these chokepoints are taken, Russia has a lot more tanks and motorized infantry it can leverage quicker than NATO can establish defenses.

The NATO doctrine in case of a Soviet invasion of West Germany was very simple. They did not have the numbers or the tanks to match Russia in Europe, therefore they would engage in a doctrine of hedgehog defense, forcing the Soviets into pitched battles in which NATO would lose, but would result in higher casualties for the Soviets than the defenders. They would keep pricking the Soviet tank fist, until the war machine was signifigantly slowed down, at which point they would counterattack.

It is the same deal today. France and Germany are not capable of quickly mobilizing and blunting a Russian tank offensive without first seriously wounding it in a series of pitched battles

Okay, I got a little carried away with Polish battles, because Bialystok was the only one up there that was 100% sure to happen in WW3. The others were just speculation.
That is why I am only going to post battles like Bialystok, which are 100% sure to happen in the event of WW3.

Constanta, Romania



The Black Fleets superiority in the Black Sea makes the Romanian city of Constanta a definite place of conflict. The Russian navy can easily clear out any defenses on the land, and capture and occupy the city with relative ease. This is the reality of modern century warfare. If you have an undefended coastline, and your enemy has huge battleships, that coastline isn't going to be in your hands for much longer.



Constanta will be an opening source of aerial and naval battle, regardless of the situation on other fronts. Whether Russian marines decide to occupy the city is up to them, but there is no real reason why they wouldn't.

Pictures too

Bialystok



Constanta
?w=762

Dassault Papillon: Preemptive nuclear strike. If nuclear powers are at war, lets say China vs USA, then they wouldn't want to get hit and annihilated by nukes first so each will use them.

Navrik, Norway



This town is a major port in which all of Norways precious metals and coal leave through. Norway isn't a huge power, but they have the resource wealth to supply an entire war. The region of North Norway, which contains the major centers of Tromso, Petasmo, and Navrik, is also very important to Russia as it contests their claim to the artic circle.



NATO runs many defense plans on how to defend upper Norway from a Russian invasion, while Russia has ran twice as many exercies on how to invade Northern Norway.

Bolshevik-: I think both sides understand the concept of mutually assured destruction. Neither side would likely launch a nuclear weapon for two reasons. The first reason is that they naturally do not want to be the ones to call in the death of tens of millions.

Second reason is that both sides understand that a nuclear war isn't winnable, therefore the sending of a nuke is just confirming that both nations are completely annihilated.

Can it be fair to say that these nations would definitely be involved in some shape or form in a hypothetical WW3?

- Saudi Arabia
- Iran
- North Korea

Both World Wars were a series of overlapping conflicts were merged into a greater global conflict.

Due to the high amount of unstability during a world war, my theory is that World War III would also come to encompass several of these conflicts

- A Chinese War with Taiwan
- A Second Korean War
- Iranian-Saudi Arabian War
- Second Ethiopian-Eritrean War
- Fifth Kashmir War

I strongly believe these wars would erupt in the event of a war between the superpowers. If these wars were to happen, the alliances would probably look like this

Taiwan (NATO)
South Korea (NATO)
Saudi Arabia (NATO)
Eritrea (NATO)
Iran (Eastern Powers)
North Korea (Eastern Powers)
Ethiopia (Eastern Powers)
India (co-belligerence with NATO)
Pakistan (co-belligerence with Eastern Powers)

Pakistan and China will most likely end up fighting India together, but Pakistan would not join the Chinese war against NATO. Similarly, it is highly doubtful that India would declare war on Russia, just because it shares a mutual enemy in China with NATO.

BTW, it would be pretty cool if they ended up tagging them as the Eastern Powers during WW3.

I agree with @Swag

It is highly doubtful that World War 3 would enter the territory of any nuclear powers, those including the UK, US, France, Russia, and China.
Iran doesn't have any nukes, but they are expected of having nuclear powered ballistic missiles, which can devastate a lot of neighboring countries. That is my primary concern.

Another threat is the nuclear weapons hosted by India and Pakistan. They have a formal policy of resorting to nuclear wafare upon hostility, although both sides could be bluffing.

Blackflag: Well America dropped atomic bombs on a defeated non nuclear country simply to flex their muscles in front of the Soviet Union. If its about survival, preemptive nuclear strikes would be launched by a country in the hopes of destroying the enemy before the enemy destroys you.

I agree with @Swag

It is highly doubtful that World War 3 would enter the territory of any nuclear powers, those including the UK, US, France, Russia, and China.
Iran doesn't have any nukes, but they are expected of having nuclear powered ballistic missiles, which can devastate a lot of neighboring countries. That is my primary concern.

Another threat is the nuclear weapons hosted by India and Pakistan. They have a formal policy of resorting to nuclear wafare upon hostility, although both sides could be bluffing.