Worldwide Conflicts

mckenney99

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Messages
2,592
Reaction score
7,923
Location
OH
Question for our well informed membership.




Monday morning thoughts.
Do you think there are more widespread armed conflicts taking place in the world today or are the same old ones just getting more media coverage currently?

If there are an increased number of expanding scale conflicts in the world today, is there a realistic increase in the risk of some warring faction getting their hands on a weapon of mass destruction and setting it off?

It seems like the media would have plenty of other favorite targets to cover or use as click bait.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Register to hide this ad
Regardless of how much or where our "news" comes from, internet or otherwise, things are happening out there that have not happened in quite some time. I would suggest that in the current climate of world events and national state of affairs that one would do well to stay informed and be prepared for whatever may come to pass.
 
"Wars and rumors of wars" have been a staple for some time now. The 24/7 news media just makes us think that there are more of them, just as they do "climate disasters".

The same goes for "rampant crime", "social upheaval/the end of America" and every other major talking point. Statistics show that things are not nearly as bad as people think they are, yet if you watch the news it's like talking to the guy walking around downtown carrying the sign that says "The End Is Near!".

Case in point, our local news recently featured two different stories about murders in other cities that were each no less than 1000 miles away from us - yet had absolutely zero connection to our area. Yes, our LOCAL news...:mad:
 
Take away the internet and cable TV and problem is solved.
I just imagine what Viet Nam would have been like if it was fought with internet and MSNBC available.

I think of Viet Nam as the first televised war. I can vividly remember growing up, sitting down to eat supper every night and watching the evening news about the Viet Nam war, The body counts, fire fights, bombings, gorilla activity, the politics and watching to see if we could catch a glimpse of any son's of family friends. However, it seemed like Viet Nam was the only conflict in the world at the time.
I realize that somewhere in Africa is seemingly in a constant state of conflict. It just seems like there are an ever increasing number of regional armed conflicts all over the globe today.
 
There is indeed an information glut these days and it is highly sensationalized. That being said the world is in more turmoil than usual. There is apparently talk in Europe of starting military conscription in several countries. There have been rumors of it here.
All this talk certainly makes one keep an eye on the current events and try to decipher facts from hype.
If the conscription rumblings are of substance there is the question of why?
 
Take away the internet and cable TV and problem is solved.
I just imagine what Viet Nam would have been like if it was fought with internet and MSNBC available.

I was really young when they first started talking about Vietnam on the news. I never paid any attention to it, but did hear about gorillas. My dad had to explained to me they were not fighting apes.
 
Same old bad news as always. The difference is the volume available now and since humans are hard wired to look for threats it all becomes a bit much
 
The world is figuring out who is "next" to be in charge. Most "players" understand that 21st century warfare will make previous conflicts (yes, WW2 included) seem minor. Currently, no one is looking for a Pyrrhic victory but that could change in minutes. Joe
 
Last edited:
This could go with the "Red Flag" thread. We are distracted by one hand with the shiny object, while the other hand picks our pockets.
 
[FONT=&quot]"When the sentence for a crime is not quickly carried out, people's hearts are filled with schemes to do wrong."[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Read that in a Book somewhere . . . .[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]That piece of wisdom applies to everything from minor street crime to corporate theft on a global scale; from "de-criminalizing" the possession of mind altering drugs that will send you to prison (. . . maybe . . . sometimes . . .) if you happen to drive under their influence and kill someone, to 'life sentences' that have no teeth or deterrence since many times they aren't enforced; to ignoring rioters and their arson in the name of political correctness to congress critters with inside knowledge and the power to put their thumbs on the scales to enrich themselves with things that would send their 'subjects' to jail; To allowing people to roam the streets doing 'smash and grab' robberies and making it corporate policy NOT to confront or resist shoplifters, vandals, and violent thieves; from equating restricting the movements across a border for failing to adhere to peaceful legal behavior to the wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians in the stated name of wiping a people and their nation off the face of the earth.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Excuses. Equivocation. Ignoring common sense. Failing to call it what it is. Not upholding the law or enforcing it because someone is "offended by it" . . . Impotence and stupidity :mad:
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]All these things simply embolden others to emulate the bad behavior because they see little or no downside to the unlikely possibility they'll be caught, much less punished.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"When the sentence for a crime is not quickly carried out, people's hearts are filled with schemes to do wrong."[/FONT]

:cool:


[FONT=&quot].[/FONT]
 
Back
Top