Is state-on-state warfare a thing of the past?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Curiousity, Sep 12, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Putting together an essay, any feedback, opinions and questions welcome.

    • Is state-on-state warfare a thing of the past?

    • If not which countries are most at risk and how will this affect us?



     
  2. chrisg46

    chrisg46 LE Book Reviewer

    Starter for ten. Israel vs Iran. Increased chance is severe subtan
     
  3. TheIronDuke

    TheIronDuke LE Book Reviewer


    No

    Little states with big neigbours

    Define 'us'?

    Thank you for your contribution to the ARRSE Current Affairs, News and Analysis forum. Do call back, yah?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. No, it's not. It remains a tool in the 'international relations for big kids' book. It just happens that it's not the only one and since the advent and spread of nuclear weapons states have been more careful about who they pick fights with.

    The answer to your second question follows on from that: weak countries without nuclear weapons are most at risk and it affects us by providing a convincing rationale for them to obtain ones.

    If it's been sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk then I'm probably pissed.
     
    • Like Like x 1

  5. No but it's increasingly unlikely amongst nations of what used to be known as the first world and the European second world.

    Just about anywhere in Africa, Asia or South America. If we're smart... very, very little.
     
  6. Kanly and a war of assasins, using poisons and the like laid down in the 'book of assassins'.

    More likely to be used by small countries against big countries that they can't take on conventionally.

    But would be a disturbing development, never the less.

    Poss guerilla business techique? ie Microsoft could start offing Apple employees for example, particularly if Corperations become more ominipotent.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Someone's been reading too much Gibson. :)

    Not to say it couldn't happen, I've seen some spectacular cases of industrial sabotage.
     
  8. meridian

    meridian LE Good Egg (charities)

    Have a look here

    [h=1]Future Character of Conflict[/h]
    I think the likelihood of state on state conflict between the UK and any other state is pretty remote but various shitholes around the world will continue to fight over resources and various other areas of stress into which we might take sides or get drawn in
     
  9. Read 'Another Bloody Century' by Colin S Gray.
     
  10. The Spice Must Flow!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Ha, you've got one Boumer. I had to check up for Koschei, but there's another film reference in there not spotted.
     
  12. I blame reading Dune at an early age for the mess that I am in now!

    Anyway, sorry I can't contribute properly to the state on state argument!
     

  13. 1) Define 'State'- There's a lot of them about. There's a lot of them in the process of dissolving.Over the next century, the last of the old 'Colonial' borders might start to disappear, to be replaced by ethnic or sectarian statelets which exist on the ground but not in diplomacy. Somaliland, Kurdistan etc...


    2) Read the INCREDIBLY long and interesting (hah!) Water Wars thread. That'll let you guess which the next car crash victims will be- Then overlay that list with NATO membership, Commonwealth membership, large oil deposits or others that we have treaty obligations with. QED.

    Oh. And I think Dune was awful.
     
  14. I fully agree with you about points one and two mate!

    As to Dune, we'll have to agree to differ. Sorry, I love it.
     
  15. 1st book interesting; subsequent books awful and get worse; film should be burnt.