Americans are still not worried enough about the risk of world war

Found the &quot;should&quot; statement at the end. I think more political takes should have a &quot;should&quot; statement. Maybe up top, even.<p>&gt; All of this should scare you a bit.<p>I don&#x27;t think the world benefits much from me being scared or worried about world war.<p>I have to tactically vote Democrat either way because the Republican party is off their rockers and maybe has been since before I was even born.<p>Beyond that, I don&#x27;t think I have much influence over global politics - I&#x27;m pretty busy with my own life. I suppose I could change my own actions - Get some PV panels and batteries and a plug-in hybrid in case war changes the economics of energy and fuel production. Or simply because I already wanted those things for fun.<p>More Americans should vote Democrat with me.

The article neglects to address the fact that the US and China are both nuclear powers. It also neglects to address the war with the US and Europe is not in China’s interest as we are their largest trading partners. A more likely negative scenario is a new Cold War.

Relatively or absolutely? It seems big picture worries are underrepresented generally, also the climate catastrophe to which americans have much more influence over as the most co2 intense big country economy and one of the biggest oil and gas producers.

Maybe the article’s premise is true but there are more evident issues that also aren’t talked about much. Americans are still not worried enough about the risks of government spending and debt.

I agree with most of the assessments in this article. The United States engages in proxy wars around the world. The United States purposefully waits for places to become destabilized and then does not engage in a campaign of stabilization but in a campaign of neighbor destabilization.<p>I can&#x27;t speak for other US citizens about why they don&#x27;t worry about the prospect of a world war but I can explain why I don&#x27;t worry about that prospect. The United States military establishment learns its lessons very well. The pattern of is destabilization and stabilization that it engages in is very strategic around the world. It would be nice if everyone got along and it wasn&#x27;t needed but the days of that kind of grand Utopia will not be for several lifetimes. So instead of risking countries banning together as we saw in previous world wars there is constant meddling to prevent that. When certain powers become aggressive such as Russia with Ukraine we don&#x27;t have to physically engage we can simply engage with support and equipment.<p>This kind of support allows us to effectively drain the resources of Russia and by connection China by really only spending money. The US military when it shows force it typically shows an overwhelming force. When we talk about a war with China even a direct war with China I&#x27;m not sure people comprehend the military might of the United States. China loves to put out propaganda as does Russia and so when you see something like the Chinese Navy is nearly double the size of the United States Navy it sounds impressive. But when you look at the actual tonnage in the water and the capabilities of the fleet the United States Coast guard which operates worldwide could take out the Chinese Navy.<p>When other countries are afraid of 50-year-old jet technology that the United States developed that tells you how far advanced we are compared to anyone else. They may field a few advanced technologies but all of the things the United States Fields is advanced technology.<p>The only cause for concern I would have in a war with another major power is not anything with conventional weaponry it would be with nuclear weaponry. Because once nuclear weapons begin to be fielded in an exchange there is no winners. A conventional war the only hope that others would have against the United States is if they could band together long enough and support each other long enough to exhaust the supply of smart weapons that were able to field. That would be an incredibly difficult thing to do for China and still remain a viable fighting force. The United States does rely much to heavily on Smart weapons and that risk is they do not get replaced as quickly as dumb weapons. There is something to be said about fielding a battleship that can just throw many tons of high explosive shells cheaply and repeatedly.<p>The really scary thing is that the F-22 is effectively old technology and it has never been allowed to engage and intercept an enemy. Enemies flee the field of battle to protect their planes when an F-15 comes within range because it does done hundreds of interceptions and have never been shot down. I know people like to bring up the battle scenarios that we engage in with other countries and point out that they&#x27;re able to defeat us in many cases in these contrived scenarios. It&#x27;s important to realize that the United States intentionally handicaps themselves in these scenarios because we learn more from losing than we do from just defeating everyone.<p>The real risk in a world war to the United States is the war of propaganda more than of military might. Because the sway of the people will hold our victory or our defeat in our hands not the capability of our military establishment. Both China and Russia know this fact which is why they would never challenge us in conventional warfare. They wage these proxy wars as well to see what the capabilities are.

Noah Smith&#x27;s outline of the tensions and conflicts of the 1930s that led to WWII and of the War itself is excellent and should be read by all. I also share his concerns about parallels between those incidents of the 1930s and present-day world tensions. History might not repeat itself but some of its notions certainly do.<p>As a teenager who lived through the Cold War and especially the 13-day Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962 I&#x27;ve never since been so worried about a major war outbreaking as I am now. No doubt tensions haven&#x27;t yet reached those 13 worrying days but it seems we could be heading that way. I just hope to hell I&#x27;m wrong.<p>What I find most troubling is that no matter how much new upcoming generations are taught about political tensions, risks of war outbreaking and its horrible and tragic consequences by their fathers and grandfathers they always remain unprepared and ill equipped to prevent it. As those who&#x27;ve lived the experience and suffered often repeat, nothing prepares one for war other than war itself.<p>Tragically, as the old adage goes, wisdom doesn&#x27;t fit well on young shoulders. It&#x27;s as if our inability to convey adequately how important such notions are to upcoming generations is a flaw in the human condition.

Americans have more immediate things to worry about. The possibility of war, which is not something individual Americans have control over, doesn&#x27;t make the list when prices for everything are going up and people can&#x27;t find jobs, a place to live, or friends.<p>In any case there&#x27;s little point to worrying about things you can&#x27;t affect or change. No amount of worry will prevent a war.

Right out the gate on this article a heavy application of an unethical use of ethos by the author. You, you, you....<p>Also anger and worry only distracts. Stay focused on the task at hand.<p>Also what&#x27;s with these crazy long responses in this thread. That&#x27;s why I have a quit posting for 10 years. Who is has the time to put together these mini novels.<p>It&#x27;s an election year. People are getting paid to post. People are getting paid to sway opinions.

Americans and their leadership are far too blasé about logistical disruption. I don’t think the US would do well in a world war where global shipping were seriously and intentionally disrupted. Covid was the easier case and we did terribly.<p>Though in terms of war, I worry more about civil war than world war.

I only fear 2 things: nuclear war and dynamically typed languages

Perhaps more than the US-USSR coldwar, one should be looking at US-Japan relations before WW-II to see how things could pan out in the next 20 years.<p>US and Japan pursued policies over time that lead to escalation rather than de-escalation.