• Welcome to New Hampshire Underground.
 

News:

Please log in on the special "login" page, not on any of these normal pages. Thank you, The Procrastinating Management

"Let them march all they want, as long as they pay their taxes."  --Alexander Haig

Main Menu

World War 4...did I miss something?

Started by dysurian, December 11, 2007, 10:15 PM NHFT

Previous topic - Next topic

dysurian

Several times lately (most recently in Andrew Sullivan's Blog) I've heard people refer to "World War 4." I've heard it a few times lately, and it's almost always used in the same context that people used to  use World War III...to mean the next big paradigm-shifting war. Has anyone else noticed this phenomenon, and/or know where it came from? Wikipedia wasn't as helpful as usual. Did calling it WWIII just get too old and cliche, so they needed to be cutting-edge and move to the next faux war to keep ahead of the competition? Was there an actual WWIII while I was sleeping off my hangover on Saturday?  ;)

KBCraig

Quote from: dysurian on December 11, 2007, 10:15 PM NHFT
Was there an actual WWIII while I was sleeping off my hangover on Saturday?  ;)

We're in it. The so-called "global war on terror" is being called WWIII by the pundits.

J’raxis 270145

It's the Cold War that the neocons like to call WWIII.

David

Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on December 11, 2007, 11:24 PM NHFT
It's the Cold War that the neocons like to call WWIII.
That is what I hear as well.  The 'global war on terror', is the so called WW4. 

Jim Johnson

What about the War on Drugs, is that WW I.1.

I think the UN War on Poverty is WW III.68.

That's assuming WW III started in Sept. 1945 through the end of 1989.

If we call it a World War every time the west bitch slapped people in multiple countries, I think we would be up around WW XXVIII.

The US Senate gave the US Military the power to fight anywhere in the world in 1941 and I don't believe they ever rescinded that power.   So I believe the Russians were right, this is still WW II.

Lloyd Danforth

Perhaps the 'War on Education' was WW3.  They won that one.

Russell Kanning

interesting ... I haven't heard wwIV going around
if WWI was the war to end all wars .... then what is dick's never ending war on terror? ... the war to start all police states or police actions

dysurian

Quote from: Russell Kanning on December 12, 2007, 07:07 AM NHFT
interesting ... I haven't heard wwIV going around
if WWI was the war to end all wars .... then what is dick's never ending war on terror? ... the war to start all police states or police actions

Hehe. I hope to someday meet someone who talks about WWI as the "War to end all wars," so I can just ask about their logic behind it. I don't so much want to embarrass them with their own stupidity as genuinely understand why anybody ever thought killing lots and lots of people would lead to no more killing (unless you just killed everybody, which would do the trick, I guess).

J’raxis 270145

Quote from: dysurian on December 12, 2007, 08:05 AM NHFT
Quote from: Russell Kanning on December 12, 2007, 07:07 AM NHFT
interesting ... I haven't heard wwIV going around
if WWI was the war to end all wars .... then what is dick's never ending war on terror? ... the war to start all police states or police actions

Hehe. I hope to someday meet someone who talks about WWI as the "War to end all wars," so I can just ask about their logic behind it. I don't so much want to embarrass them with their own stupidity as genuinely understand why anybody ever thought killing lots and lots of people would lead to no more killing (unless you just killed everybody, which would do the trick, I guess).

WWI nearly destroyed Europe (not just in terms of people killed, but arable land, industrial capacity, cities, &c.). Some people thought that this was sufficiently shocking that governments wouldn't ever want to fight another industrialized war.

error

Government not wanting to fight a war? Surely you jest.

Lloyd Danforth

Quote from: dysurian on December 12, 2007, 08:05 AM NHFT


I hope to someday meet someone who talks about WWI as the "War to end all wars," so I can just ask about their logic behind it.

I think that phrase was just used for the short period between 1918 and 1938.

jaqeboy

Quote from: dysurian on December 12, 2007, 08:05 AM NHFT
Quote from: Russell Kanning on December 12, 2007, 07:07 AM NHFT
interesting ... I haven't heard wwIV going around
if WWI was the war to end all wars .... then what is dick's never ending war on terror? ... the war to start all police states or police actions

Hehe. I hope to someday meet someone who talks about WWI as the "War to end all wars," so I can just ask about their logic behind it. I don't so much want to embarrass them with their own stupidity as genuinely understand why anybody ever thought killing lots and lots of people would lead to no more killing (unless you just killed everybody, which would do the trick, I guess).

Don't know who coined the term, but it may have been related to the fact that "Wilson hoped the League of Nations and disarmament would secure a lasting peace.", ie, by fighting this war, people would seek "peace" through an international body like the League of Nations (who would "end all wars").

dysurian

Well, reading through the responses to this thread, I'm sufficiently convinced that it's OK for me to be confused about the use of WWIII and WWIV as terms in popular culture and media because it seems everyone has a different understanding of what they mean  ;D It's probably just a case of some ambitious reporter/blogger wanting to be the first cutting-art, state-of-the-edge guy to use the term World War 4. I plan on not using it until it starts to take on some sort of actual meaning (hopefully never). Who's with me?  :icon_pirat: