So, when did WWIII begin?
Was it on Feb 22, 2022, the day Russia invaded Ukraine, igniting a full-scale war in Europe for the first time since the last world war? Was it in 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea?
The truth is, history always is easier to understand in retrospect, and so, growing talk about WWIII already having started is mere speculation. There is nothing inevitable about a new global conflict.
Which is not to imply that the world isn’t becoming more dangerous, or that major powers aren’t coalescing and conspiring to push the United States off the world stage, or that the United States shouldn’t be doing more to prepare itself to defend freedom.
The threats are real, and growing.
Was it on Feb 22, 2022, the day Russia invaded Ukraine, igniting a full-scale war in Europe for the first time since the last world war? Was it in 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea?
The truth is, history always is easier to understand in retrospect, and so, growing talk about WWIII already having started is mere speculation. There is nothing inevitable about a new global conflict.
Which is not to imply that the world isn’t becoming more dangerous, or that major powers aren’t coalescing and conspiring to push the United States off the world stage, or that the United States shouldn’t be doing more to prepare itself to defend freedom.
The threats are real, and growing.
The alarm bells began ringing in earnest this week as it became apparent that Russia is preparing to send thousands of North Korean troops into the conflict with Ukraine. Biden administration officials have underscored the seriousness of this development, saying it could cause those soldiers to become military targets.
House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, said the U.S. ought to consider "direct military action" if those soldiers become actively involved in the conflict. That would indeed escalate the war closer to a world conflagration.
Beyond this disturbing development, here’s a sampling of recent opinions by experts and noted pundits:
Conservative Washington Post syndicated columnist George Will last week flatly declared that WWIII already is underway. Comparing today to 1940, he enumerated a shocking uptick in terror attacks across Europe, believed to have been orchestrated by Russia’s intelligence agency GRU.
These, he wrote, “are aimed at disrupting arms production, intimidating politicians and sowing panic in the streets.”
Last July, foreign policy writer Mark Toth and long-time military intelligence officer Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Sweet made a similar declaration in The Hill, asserting, “We are facing death by a thousand Russian and Chinese cuts around the globe, and the vast majority of the country remains unaware of our growing peril.”
In Britain’s The Telegraph this week, David Axe wrote that the introduction of North Korean troops in Ukraine could draw South Korea into the conflict, as well. Some British and French politicians are suggesting their nations do the same. “It’s now a global war, potentially a world war,” he wrote, adding that NATO doesn’t seem to understand what’s at stake.
A few months ago, the Commission on the National Defense Strategy, a bipartisan group Congress assigned to analyze President Joe Biden’s National Defense Strategy, issued a stark warning.
“The U.S. public (is) largely unaware of the dangers the United States faces or the costs (financial and otherwise) required to adequately prepare,” it said.
And as I’ve reported from my recent travels, Sweden and Finland are beginning to prepare their people for the possibility of armed conflict. The latest, from the Helsinki Times, is that each country is separately planning to instruct its citizens in November on how best to compile emergency kits, among other things.
Well ,,, enough, already. Maybe it’s time to breathe deeply and take a reality pill. The introduction of North Korean troops into Ukraine is likely a sign that a desperate Russia is suffering too many of its own casualties to continue as it has been. Numerous news reports document China’s current economic challenges. Iran is indeed fighting proxy wars against Israel and developing its own nuclear weapons, but it, too, is economically strapped.
Despite concerns about runaway debt, the United States and its allies are comparatively economic giants.
It’s hard to know which of the two world wars provides the best context for understanding the current situation. NATO’s charter obliges military action if any member is attacked, similar to treaty obligations that divided Europe before WWI.
In WWII, Axis forces in Germany, Japan and Italy united, out of convenience, to oppose the United States and its allies. Today, some are referring to the new Axis by the acronym CRINK, for China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.
But history never truly repeats. It does, as others have said, occasionally rhyme.
The Atlantic recently quoted diplomat-historian Philip Zelikow saying the next U.S. president has a 20% to 30% chance of being involved in “worldwide warfare.”
He said the biggest danger of that will come in the next three years. If the U.S. can navigate this successfully and make it clear that the nation’s economic and military might dwarfs its enemies, a war could be averted.
That doesn’t mean Americans should relax. Both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris should be letting voters know how they intend to deal with troubling work events, and neither is doing so.
But despite growing tensions, World War III is not inevitable.
House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, said the U.S. ought to consider "direct military action" if those soldiers become actively involved in the conflict. That would indeed escalate the war closer to a world conflagration.
Beyond this disturbing development, here’s a sampling of recent opinions by experts and noted pundits:
Conservative Washington Post syndicated columnist George Will last week flatly declared that WWIII already is underway. Comparing today to 1940, he enumerated a shocking uptick in terror attacks across Europe, believed to have been orchestrated by Russia’s intelligence agency GRU.
These, he wrote, “are aimed at disrupting arms production, intimidating politicians and sowing panic in the streets.”
Last July, foreign policy writer Mark Toth and long-time military intelligence officer Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Sweet made a similar declaration in The Hill, asserting, “We are facing death by a thousand Russian and Chinese cuts around the globe, and the vast majority of the country remains unaware of our growing peril.”
In Britain’s The Telegraph this week, David Axe wrote that the introduction of North Korean troops in Ukraine could draw South Korea into the conflict, as well. Some British and French politicians are suggesting their nations do the same. “It’s now a global war, potentially a world war,” he wrote, adding that NATO doesn’t seem to understand what’s at stake.
A few months ago, the Commission on the National Defense Strategy, a bipartisan group Congress assigned to analyze President Joe Biden’s National Defense Strategy, issued a stark warning.
“The U.S. public (is) largely unaware of the dangers the United States faces or the costs (financial and otherwise) required to adequately prepare,” it said.
And as I’ve reported from my recent travels, Sweden and Finland are beginning to prepare their people for the possibility of armed conflict. The latest, from the Helsinki Times, is that each country is separately planning to instruct its citizens in November on how best to compile emergency kits, among other things.
Well ,,, enough, already. Maybe it’s time to breathe deeply and take a reality pill. The introduction of North Korean troops into Ukraine is likely a sign that a desperate Russia is suffering too many of its own casualties to continue as it has been. Numerous news reports document China’s current economic challenges. Iran is indeed fighting proxy wars against Israel and developing its own nuclear weapons, but it, too, is economically strapped.
Despite concerns about runaway debt, the United States and its allies are comparatively economic giants.
It’s hard to know which of the two world wars provides the best context for understanding the current situation. NATO’s charter obliges military action if any member is attacked, similar to treaty obligations that divided Europe before WWI.
In WWII, Axis forces in Germany, Japan and Italy united, out of convenience, to oppose the United States and its allies. Today, some are referring to the new Axis by the acronym CRINK, for China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.
But history never truly repeats. It does, as others have said, occasionally rhyme.
The Atlantic recently quoted diplomat-historian Philip Zelikow saying the next U.S. president has a 20% to 30% chance of being involved in “worldwide warfare.”
He said the biggest danger of that will come in the next three years. If the U.S. can navigate this successfully and make it clear that the nation’s economic and military might dwarfs its enemies, a war could be averted.
That doesn’t mean Americans should relax. Both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris should be letting voters know how they intend to deal with troubling work events, and neither is doing so.
But despite growing tensions, World War III is not inevitable.
RSS Feed
