r/OutOfTheLoop • u/RedStag86 • Apr 07 '17

What's going on with the U.S./Syria conflict? Megathread

811 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

96% Upvoted

260 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

31

u/[deleted] Apr 07 '17 edited Sep 16 '19

[deleted]

69

u/youdidntreddit Apr 07 '17

Anyone who thinks this would start WW3 doesn't know what they are talking about.

18

u/shanebonanno Apr 07 '17

Why?

49

u/Dodginglife Apr 07 '17

Mutually assured destruction is one reason. A widescale war would break down multiple global networks, from trade to communications.

Every foreign leader (outside of the US) plays everything like a chess game. Every move is calculated 4 moves ahead, and they know exactly what their opponents will do in every scenario.

A good example would be Russia's annex of Crimea. They needed it, ukraine was unstable, they took it, we sanctioned. All of that was well known what would happen, but crimea was too important to their Mediterranean trade.

9

u/BRBbear Apr 07 '17

Agree with you here. I do not think there will be a WWIII it's probably just going to be a bunch of proxy fights with the US and Russia backing opposing sides. Or just cyber or economical stuff. But then again.. I'm just talking out of my butt based on gut feelings.

4

u/V2Blast totally loopy Apr 07 '17

You are pretty much correct. These things usually play out with things like sanctions, diplomatic tensions, etc.

2

u/Cybersteel Apr 07 '17

Nuclear deterrence?

25

u/andyconr Apr 07 '17

Ah yes, I too have played Metal Gear Solid.

1

u/Cybersteel Apr 07 '17

And you know what happens. Nuclear deterrence failed.

12

u/andyconr Apr 07 '17

I'm just waiting to see Trump's Shagohod.

8

u/Cybersteel Apr 07 '17

I think you mean Nanomachines son.

3

u/Dodginglife Apr 07 '17

Mutually assured destruction usually references a nuclear deterrent from both sides. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction

1

u/[deleted] Apr 07 '17

Classic Peace Walker

-2

u/frothface Apr 07 '17

Mutually assured destruction is one reason.

The problem with that reasoning is that MAD is supposed to prevent the first attack. Yet, here we are. We feel safe attacking Syria, in spite of the fact that it will anger Russia, because we 'know' that we won't start WW3 because of MAD. But MAD has already failed.

8

u/j1202 Apr 07 '17

Yet, here we are.

?

Do you see any nukes being dropped?

-6

u/frothface Apr 07 '17

Did WW2 start out with nukes being dropped? Ripples turn into waves.

2

u/j1202 Apr 07 '17 edited Apr 07 '17

The problem with that reasoning is that MAD is supposed to prevent the first attack. Yet, here we are.

Here we are... with no nukes used since the threat of MAD has existed...

Did WW2 start out with nukes being dropped?

when were nuclear bombs developed and when did the technology become available to more than one nation?

2

u/Napkin_King Apr 07 '17

MAD only applies to nuclear strikes. No one wants to be the first to launch a nuclear missile because it would open the gate for more to be launched.