Common Sense Conspiracy
Conspiracy Blog
- Messages
- 171
It was a national news story the other day that people were looking up the variations of the search term “World War 3” (variations meaning they combined the totals of other ways of putting it, like World War III or actually spelling it out) more than ever at any point in the history of the Internet. This, of course, came right on the heels of the general wariness of many following Donald Trump’s unexpected ascension to the Presidency and his subsequent bombings of Syria and Afghanistan. Throw in some serious tension with Russia, and you have a lot of reasons for people to feel a little uneasy.
The mother of all bombs, they say. It’s just junior-varsity if you’re talking about nukes though.
Nuclear powerhouses like the United States and Russia having a war of words will always concern many that it could give way to a war of nukes. However, we at Common Sense Conspiracy would like to point out that if you are looking for a nuclear bomb to go off in a World War 3 scenario, neither of these superpowers is likely to be your culprit. It’s called the theory of mutually-assured destruction, a term that rose out of the Cold War arms races and is now considered an unusual method of keeping the peace. See, both Russia and the United States possess enough nuclear weaponry and technology to effectively obliterate the other if it came down to it. They both possess the technology to make a retaliation would still take place, no matter how overwhelming a first strike may be. Basically, either one could decide to take out the other one on any given day, but they would also all but certainly seal their own fate with mutual destruction. And as messed as it may be, that acts as an extremely effective deterrent.
The problem with mutually-assured destruction is it assumes that cooler heads prevail. Putin or Trump on their worst day isn’t ready for a nuclear war with the United States or Russia respectively. There is absolutely nothing to be gained, and perhaps everything to lose. They may do a lot of things up to that point because of overinflated egos or questionable morals and world views, but at the end of the day, no one is pulling that trigger. However, when you look to the Irans and North Koreas of the world, you have a real problem. See, these regimes are different. Cooler heads do not prevail. If they acquire nuclear weapons (North Korea has at least rudimentary nukes already, and the deal with Iran made by the Obama administration could mean that it’s only a matter of time for them as well) and the means to use them effectively wherever they see fit, they don’t worry about mutual destruction. Call it bat crazy or overzealous religious maniacs, but these folks are fully aware that America or Russia could wipe them off the face of the Earth, but that fear is not enough to stop them from potentially going ahead with it. Iranian leaders have actually referenced ushering in nuclear war as a way of helping get on with Allah’s master plan. North Korea’s leadership might rather be a martyr that left a crater in America or somewhere in Asia rather than cooperate with the international community.
So, if there is a World War 3 scenario out there, we don’t really know what it is. If North Korea launched a missile anywhere at all, it would be utterly destroyed in days. If Iran tried something, they might succeed in killing a lot of innocent people, but there would not be a world conflict. They would simply be obliterated. People like to point to China, but if North Korea actually nuked someone, China would most likely condemn it and get out of the way. Unless, of course, they perceived the North Koreans as having a really good reason for what they did.
Furthermore, let’s look at why people feel this way. Tensions between Russia and the United States are heightened, especially with the mess in Syria, but remember, the American government and mainstream media can’t even decide right now whether Trump and Putin are great buddies plotting world domination in the sauna or sworn egotistical enemies set for final showdown with the world at stake. They can’t decide which narrative to push because they can’t decide which one advances their own agenda, which is the only reason the mainstream media exists in this era. The truth is that President Obama publicly stated that he wanted to do something like Trump did in response to a chemical attack. Congress declined to authorize it, and President Obama declined to put his foot down. Whether you think that is right or wrong is a personal decision, but it is fact. So, if you think Trump bombing Syria is some great provocation, it’s really no different than what has been going on for the last eight years, albeit more in-your-face than Obama’s cloak-and-dagger tactics. Believe it or not, Putin may find this strategy more palatable. At least Trump is being forward about it and not trying to array the chessboard against you with seemingly clean hands. Putin probably respects that in a crazy sort of way.
But what about Afghanistan? That war is supposed to be over and done, but here’s Trump dropping the biggest bomb next to a nuke in the American arsenal. Well, two things you need to know about the mainstream media’s portrayal of that. First of all, the MOAB bomb is the biggest, deadliest one up to a nuke. That is true. But it’s a contortion of the facts for the purpose of agenda. A nuclear weapon by today’s standards is more than 250 times more powerful than the MOAB. So, while the statement is true, the MOAB is still not even deserving of being in the conversation with a true nuclear bomb. It’s not even close. Terming that way is designed to make it sound like a lot more than it is. Also, the media makes it sound like Trump is totally behind this. Most likely, Trump had nothing to do with it, besides the known fact that he has authorized the military to do what it needs to do to get the job done against ISIS. Meaning Trump didn’t personally tell them to drop this thing. He told them to use the weapons you need to get the job done. That’s what they did. There is nothing wrong with being uneasy about this. It is natural to feel that way. But do analyze the agenda that is being laid out for you. The media is working overtime to create a narrative, and every little phrase they use to describe every little thing is part of the plan. The problem is that many believe that the mainstream media’s agenda is either Democratic or Republican (Fox or CNN, for example). Nothing could be further from the truth. The real agenda of the collective mainstream media is to influence American minds, keep the two parties divided ideologically as much as possible, and push globalism. This was the case before Trump took office, and it will almost definitely continue to be the case going forward.
Could World War 3 break out tomorrow? Sure. But it probably won’t be for any of the reasons that the average person is walking around being worried about. It’s the unknown factors that are the real reason for concern.
Source: Common Sense Conspiracy
The mother of all bombs, they say. It’s just junior-varsity if you’re talking about nukes though.
Nuclear powerhouses like the United States and Russia having a war of words will always concern many that it could give way to a war of nukes. However, we at Common Sense Conspiracy would like to point out that if you are looking for a nuclear bomb to go off in a World War 3 scenario, neither of these superpowers is likely to be your culprit. It’s called the theory of mutually-assured destruction, a term that rose out of the Cold War arms races and is now considered an unusual method of keeping the peace. See, both Russia and the United States possess enough nuclear weaponry and technology to effectively obliterate the other if it came down to it. They both possess the technology to make a retaliation would still take place, no matter how overwhelming a first strike may be. Basically, either one could decide to take out the other one on any given day, but they would also all but certainly seal their own fate with mutual destruction. And as messed as it may be, that acts as an extremely effective deterrent.
The problem with mutually-assured destruction is it assumes that cooler heads prevail. Putin or Trump on their worst day isn’t ready for a nuclear war with the United States or Russia respectively. There is absolutely nothing to be gained, and perhaps everything to lose. They may do a lot of things up to that point because of overinflated egos or questionable morals and world views, but at the end of the day, no one is pulling that trigger. However, when you look to the Irans and North Koreas of the world, you have a real problem. See, these regimes are different. Cooler heads do not prevail. If they acquire nuclear weapons (North Korea has at least rudimentary nukes already, and the deal with Iran made by the Obama administration could mean that it’s only a matter of time for them as well) and the means to use them effectively wherever they see fit, they don’t worry about mutual destruction. Call it bat crazy or overzealous religious maniacs, but these folks are fully aware that America or Russia could wipe them off the face of the Earth, but that fear is not enough to stop them from potentially going ahead with it. Iranian leaders have actually referenced ushering in nuclear war as a way of helping get on with Allah’s master plan. North Korea’s leadership might rather be a martyr that left a crater in America or somewhere in Asia rather than cooperate with the international community.
So, if there is a World War 3 scenario out there, we don’t really know what it is. If North Korea launched a missile anywhere at all, it would be utterly destroyed in days. If Iran tried something, they might succeed in killing a lot of innocent people, but there would not be a world conflict. They would simply be obliterated. People like to point to China, but if North Korea actually nuked someone, China would most likely condemn it and get out of the way. Unless, of course, they perceived the North Koreans as having a really good reason for what they did.
Furthermore, let’s look at why people feel this way. Tensions between Russia and the United States are heightened, especially with the mess in Syria, but remember, the American government and mainstream media can’t even decide right now whether Trump and Putin are great buddies plotting world domination in the sauna or sworn egotistical enemies set for final showdown with the world at stake. They can’t decide which narrative to push because they can’t decide which one advances their own agenda, which is the only reason the mainstream media exists in this era. The truth is that President Obama publicly stated that he wanted to do something like Trump did in response to a chemical attack. Congress declined to authorize it, and President Obama declined to put his foot down. Whether you think that is right or wrong is a personal decision, but it is fact. So, if you think Trump bombing Syria is some great provocation, it’s really no different than what has been going on for the last eight years, albeit more in-your-face than Obama’s cloak-and-dagger tactics. Believe it or not, Putin may find this strategy more palatable. At least Trump is being forward about it and not trying to array the chessboard against you with seemingly clean hands. Putin probably respects that in a crazy sort of way.
But what about Afghanistan? That war is supposed to be over and done, but here’s Trump dropping the biggest bomb next to a nuke in the American arsenal. Well, two things you need to know about the mainstream media’s portrayal of that. First of all, the MOAB bomb is the biggest, deadliest one up to a nuke. That is true. But it’s a contortion of the facts for the purpose of agenda. A nuclear weapon by today’s standards is more than 250 times more powerful than the MOAB. So, while the statement is true, the MOAB is still not even deserving of being in the conversation with a true nuclear bomb. It’s not even close. Terming that way is designed to make it sound like a lot more than it is. Also, the media makes it sound like Trump is totally behind this. Most likely, Trump had nothing to do with it, besides the known fact that he has authorized the military to do what it needs to do to get the job done against ISIS. Meaning Trump didn’t personally tell them to drop this thing. He told them to use the weapons you need to get the job done. That’s what they did. There is nothing wrong with being uneasy about this. It is natural to feel that way. But do analyze the agenda that is being laid out for you. The media is working overtime to create a narrative, and every little phrase they use to describe every little thing is part of the plan. The problem is that many believe that the mainstream media’s agenda is either Democratic or Republican (Fox or CNN, for example). Nothing could be further from the truth. The real agenda of the collective mainstream media is to influence American minds, keep the two parties divided ideologically as much as possible, and push globalism. This was the case before Trump took office, and it will almost definitely continue to be the case going forward.
Could World War 3 break out tomorrow? Sure. But it probably won’t be for any of the reasons that the average person is walking around being worried about. It’s the unknown factors that are the real reason for concern.
Source: Common Sense Conspiracy
