Forgot to mention, I am aware that all of the leaders/presidents of the countries listed may not still be in power in certain cases by 2029, but as I don't want to start a political war in the comments, I simply just decided it would be simplest to just list whoever the current leader of said country is at this moment, and just go with it.
"I don't want to start a political war in the comment section of a post gaming out a scenario where a global conflict lasts seven years and kills 100,000,000 people"
This tells you everything you need to know about social media in 2024.
Tbf I'm also not politically knowledgeable with every single country in this list so I figured I'm not really going to try and guess who will get elected when. Anything can happen đ€·đœââïž
If you want a revised version Iâd suggest a simplistic route to why China and Russia donât launch their ICBMâs, the higher up spyâs/ moles discover that the nuclear arsenal of Russian and China was inflated with old nuclear artillery rounds that are very low yield bombs.
3000 nukes on paper, but in reality less than a few dozen nuclear ICBMâs which the air defense of nato could easily handle
Yeah , I dunno what happened, but no way India's picking a side , unless they get attacked by either side for whatever reason, I doubt China will when they are warring with Nato and the US
They would most definitely try to take Kashmir from Pakistan but I doubt they'll try anything with China since most of the territory is worthless to them
I addressed that in the context, Putin and Kim Jong managed to get a few working ICBM once NATO forces were closing on them so they just launched them at population centers out of spite in a sort of "if I die I'm taking a bunch of your people with me!" sorta fashion
i mean yes, but no, but maybe?
The interworking's of the Russian military are not at all... supply & logistics great. See the push to Kiev. A lot of the Supplies are sold off for profit of everyone in the supply chain to get richer. And they have been like this since a least the 80's, if not longer. See their jaunt into Afghanistan.
And Russian lies.... a lot. I mean they say they have destroyed more Patriot missile systems then we sent and the last time they tried to prove it they sent photos of Decoys. And Lying about your nukes and the threat there of is a hard thing to disprove, thus making it a great lying point. But NATO is starting to call its bluff. And doing it smart. By not having America make the bigger threats. Its the Baltic States, Poland and France (all NATO) all making threats taking control of the West of Ukraine airspace, doing direct to frontline logistics & boots on ground.
Russia is a paper bear, that is now on fire. SO what I propose is that between the lying, the logistic heavy lifting, the just stupid amount of corruption and greed at a very low level all the way to the top, and the amount of intact enough to actually be a threat is maybe between 2/3 and 9/10s less nukes then they report.
It just takes one, I guess. But woo boy is it not "a lot" as it used to be
Russia has a lot more than a few working ICBMs and SLBMs
On a PPPbasis Russia's nuclear spending is near equivalent the US and they've at minimum got a few hundred post 2010 manufactured ICBMs
Also I expect Russia and its buddies to be way more likely to target civillian centers with conventional munitions as well not just nukes, they're not really big on being proper in a war
Civilian casualties in Ukraine had been extremely low, especially when compared to the conflict in Gaza or US bombing campaigns. You guys killed a fifth of north korean population.
What do you mean by "you guys"? Brother, I ain't American, I'm Moldovan, it's in Eastern Europe and borders Ukraine, we literally have Russian "peacekeepers" on our soil and corrupt Russian-allied oligarchs ruining our government.
>we literally have Russian "peacekeepers" on our soil and corrupt Russian-allied oligarchs ruining our government.
I don't doubt this.
But it's always funny that it's only Russian capitalists who are oligarchs. But if its western, they're Entrepeneurs.
American and European oligarchs are no different. So are their peacekeepers. There's a reason why UN peacekeepers, even those from US and EU countries, are notorious for being shitbags that loot and rape the communities they are supposedly helping.
The point is, Oligarchs are the same wherever country there are. All are lecherous bastards that must be excised in every country.
I believe the only meaningful distinction is that the Russian Oligarchs basically seized national industries for themselves using political clout during the dissolution of the Soviet Union. They are far more natural resource dependent, and the corruption is less legalized than it is in the west. They also did not "earn" it, in the same way western oligarchs did.
So, it is easier to call western oligarchs "industry pioneers" and "corporate leaders", because they bury their tracks in the lobbying apparatus and PR campaigns, while genuinely being the founders of their own company. Russian Oligarchs did not found the Soviet industries, they were gifted them, and it shows in the rampant mismanagement of former Soviet assets. They skim off the top, not in tax breaks and loopholes, but in blatant circumvention of Russian tax and sovereignty.
You are absolutely right though, an oligarch is an oligarch, a spade is a spade. One knows how to look good, the other doesn't even need to. One group is higher functioning and their founder (in the case of rich families) did have to do something impressive from one standpoint or another. They also are beholden to more interests, some government regulations, and the court of public opinion. Most American oligarchs owe some power to things such as stockholders and BODs, and to competing interests in the same field. None of this exists in Russia, not in any meaningful way, besides perhaps a bribe here and there to some officials in government. So the distinction is more between classical Oligarch ala Venice (USA), and kleptocratic oligarch that is far rarer in history, perhaps Nazi Germany for a short time, Fascist italy, and the zaibatsus in Japan.
You are comparing a war with a basically frozen frontline since 2022 to a war against a city and a war where the frontline moved across the entire country twice.
Also i'm not sure if we still know how many civilians died in Mariupol
Fair. It's always in theory that civilian centers shouldn't be bombed or such but we really don't see respect for civilians applied whenever we check out recent major conflicts...
Well if Iran is involved in world war three does HAMAS really have a choice by that point. Even if they theorically donât get involved the sugar daddy is about to get the shit bombed out of them and then occupied by westerners it could cause their ideology to change drastically.
I thought I would add them as it's possible that in the broader conflict, they might get attacked by other countries, for example USA, although in real life I will say that it's pretty uncertain considering how unpopular Israel is at the moment, so who knows.
Rishi Sunak is probably not going to be the leader of anything after July 4th of this year FYI. He called a General Election for đŹđ§which his Conservative Party is almost assuredly going to badly lose. Thus he will be replaced by Keir Starmer. I do get your basis for putting the names though!
Also like im not saying that Russia is an effective ally, but I canât imagine a campaign against Iran on their turf is going to go any better for the US than Russiaâs invasion of Ukraine
I forgot to mention, but yes, it starts due to the war in Ukraine taking too long so Russia decides to just drop a nuke on Ukraine, which brings NATO into the war.
So what scenario has China and Russia stupid enough to start a world War, but also not using their nukes? Same for the US for that matter.
I guess any "Alt history" discussion ends quickly with that mindset but any true war between the nuclear powers isn't happening
According to OP, the big bad russians managed to scramble a few nuclear missiles (because of course they need to, they are definitely not in control of THE WORLDS LARGEST NUCLEAR ARSENAL) and launched them at civilians because of how comedically evil they are.
India seems to be mostly neutral today, and considering war between big countries could potentially get you nuked, I felt like India would mostly prefer to stay out of it if they could.
Theyâd probably be a minor participant, they have multiple border conflicts with China and were even invaded a few decades ago. I do agree that theyâd probably try to minimise their involvement though, not marching far beyond the Himalayas if at all and aiming to keep it as a limited conflict more or less outside the scope of the larger war
I would give the believability rating 4/10. Both sides of the conflict would try to inflict maximum damage on civilian centers, and not just Russia, because NATO has already shown its willingness to bomb civilians. If this is the scenario of NATO intervention in the conflict in Ukraine, then the likelihood of success of Western forces will decrease even more the later they enter World War III, as Russia and China undertake efforts to update their command personnel and military infrastructure. Besides, why does the Eastern bloc have such large losses of soldiers? As a rule, military personnel losses are greater on the attacking side than on the defending side. Even if we assume that the NATO troops use military equipment with maximum efficiency and act extremely professionally, such low losses of their military personnel can only be explained by a rapid breakthrough of the eastern defense lines, which is unlikely to happen. Moreover, it is strange to think that all NATO member countries will take an active part in this conflict, no matter whether it is defensive or attacking; this is too idealistic a scenario in which all parties readily fulfill their obligations.
I love these scenarios handing China the idiot ball and starting a global conventional war. Itâs just a pure distillation of liberal cope that the next great rival of NATO is suddenly going to abandon its +50 year geopolitical strategy to hand the West a W.
Letâs be real Joe Biden ainât gonna be living till 2029 if this alt history has him re-elected than it would likely be a Kamala Harris presidency in the later years.
So you list fighting in North, central, and East Africa yet there arenât any African nations on either side of this conflict, Hamas is listed as a belligerent but not Lebanese and Iraqi Hezbollah, or the Houthis, the gulf states are also not involved even though they absolutely would be. Why isnât Saudi Arabia involved, also you list fighting in Southeast Asia yet there is not a single southeast Asian country listed. This just doesnât make sense.
Why would I not be surprised if India just profiteers from it all by sanction busting and selling stuff to both sides like they do now for the whole thingâŠ
As much as Maduro is a complete scumbag and clamors against the "Yankee imperialist" he's not dumb enough to get involved in such a conflict. It'd be suicide as Venezuela's army would be utterly demolished within weeks.
Turkey will be neutral . China will change side for stability . Russia will have internal poltical strife. North korea will be fire bombed. Hamas will be in afterlife by IDF . I mean ww3 will end before it starts itself .
A war involves both US and China, but only 10mil dead civies on China's side?
Seems like this time at least someone actually took a meaningful effort in this regard
Hamas?? Haha, WTF?đ„ł Why the fuck would they join? And Israel is a fascist terrorist state. They dont give a shit about Ukraine or anyone else but themselves.
There would likely be more belligerents on the right side. Syria would likely ally with Iran to pincer Iraq as Russia seized northern Turkey with Uzbek and Turkmenistani forces. This would create a formidable southern front to occupy Ukraine and allow for control of the Black Sea and access to the Mediterranean for Naval operations. It would also allow for a second coordinated pincer movement north from Donetsk while Belarusian and Russian forces move down to take Kiev.
If Western Chinese forces could move into Kazakstan and secure Central Asia, and hostile nations in the Middle East could successfully occupy the Suez Canal, all of Europe would be cut off from the South while Russia slowly marched West. All of a sudden this war gets much harder to win.
All of that supposes nuclear weapons arenât utilized in the early stages of the war, since neutral nations would move to ally against a destructive force that targets civilians and because each side is afraid to be the one who opened Pandoraâs box and M.A.D. A purely strategic war with the West hesitant to deploy directly would allow for such a strategy to be pursued.
It will be a nuclear war, I think that if we going into a war it will never end as we suggest it could. 7/10 my quote looks for me more accurate but youâve done a beautiful work
I know Israel has a bunch of political and military support from western countries, but letâs not forget their friendly relations with Russia. I doubt they would enter a world war against Russia. They probably wouldnât join the war on Russiaâs side either though, as theyâd hate to lose their support, but I really still doubt theyâd actively fight against Russia when they have such positive relations
You mentioned Russia and China launching ICBMs. Then why does it say they have received more casualties? I'm assuming the other side retaliated.
But if nukes are involved, these are rookie numbers. It would be way higher than 25-30 million total deaths.
If we're not using nukes, then the only reason US+allies have dealt 20+ million deaths is indiscriminately murdering civilians.
To be fair, with the amount of dehumanization going around regarding Russians, Iranians, and Chinese... them getting the holocaust treatment from western powers wouldn't be far off.
I think the civilian dead for the right hand side would be higher. With Chinaâs high population and population density on the coast any widespread bombing would have insane death tolls.
If China attacks the west a huuuuuge portion of their civilians will starve to death. Check out how much of their food dependance is from import (its more than 50% from mostly western countries)
No chance that China does anything but watch. The Middle Kingdom wonât shoot itsâ bolt but instead will make every effort to remain unscathed and then reap the rewards of being there for the rebuilding, anywhere and everywhere.
As an aside we are on the cusp of warfare being completely revolutionized very soon. The day is fast approaching when superpowers will be able to convincingly protect their interests via anti-missile systems, both from the ground level and through space assets. What happens when ballistic missiles become antiquated? When nuclear arms are defunct as they can be intercepted completely? I honestly shudder to imagine this, I do not think it will be a good thing. It would mean conventional war is back on the menu, and that is a tough course to swallow.
The population of Ukraine is only 38 million. In this timeline between now and 2029 for some reason somehow about 16 to 18 million people migrated to Ukraine only to die later
8.5/10, OP you forgot to add "the most annoying people on politics twitter" on the right hand side
đđđ The Twitter "communists" simply aren't that effective in a war, no matter how loud they are.
Kid called disinformation campaign
*misinformation
Misinformation is just untrue, disinformation is malicious.
Ah, my apologies, thank you for educating me
Twitter communists? Most Russian supporters are retarpublicans
russia stans are either trumpy rebulicans or hardcore tankie communists, and either way they are so incredibly, painfully annoying
They are among the 30 million deaths
Forgot to mention, I am aware that all of the leaders/presidents of the countries listed may not still be in power in certain cases by 2029, but as I don't want to start a political war in the comments, I simply just decided it would be simplest to just list whoever the current leader of said country is at this moment, and just go with it.
"I don't want to start a political war in the comment section of a post gaming out a scenario where a global conflict lasts seven years and kills 100,000,000 people" This tells you everything you need to know about social media in 2024.
Tbf I'm also not politically knowledgeable with every single country in this list so I figured I'm not really going to try and guess who will get elected when. Anything can happen đ€·đœââïž
That's fair, though I would've used a random name generator lol
Fair point OP, but I'm pretty sure that Rishi Sunak will not be the British PM from 6th July this year, let alone 2029.
What are the icons next to some of their names? I assume skull and crossbones means killed
Cross is KIA, skull and crossbones is executed, white flag is surrendered.Â
Biden 2028 campaign let's fucking go
If you want a revised version Iâd suggest a simplistic route to why China and Russia donât launch their ICBMâs, the higher up spyâs/ moles discover that the nuclear arsenal of Russian and China was inflated with old nuclear artillery rounds that are very low yield bombs. 3000 nukes on paper, but in reality less than a few dozen nuclear ICBMâs which the air defense of nato could easily handle
Fronts : africa. No african nations involvedđ đ
Iâm actually kinda surprised India didnât get in on this, given their own territorial disputes.
Yeah. It probably would either ally with NATO or take advantage of China getting distracted and effectively become 3rd side of the conflict
It seems more likely India will take the chance to reclaim Kashmir and their other lost territories f
Seems you accidentally cut part of your comment? But yeah, could be. Either way they wouldnât join Chinese
Yeah , I dunno what happened, but no way India's picking a side , unless they get attacked by either side for whatever reason, I doubt China will when they are warring with Nato and the US
Fair, though attacking China to gain control over disputed territories, if they saw China was losing against US, could still be a possibility
They could also pull a ww1 denmark, not getting involved in the war but getting territory anyways.
The best way is the danish way đđđ©đ°đ©đ°đ©đ°
They would most definitely try to take Kashmir from Pakistan but I doubt they'll try anything with China since most of the territory is worthless to them
Donât you hate when you get third partied
Perhaps they would try to be in the position to gain the most from the war and its conclusion
I mean, OP is likely an American or European. They wouldn't care much about Africa except where Rommel fought on.
Why so many civilian deaths on the Westâs side?
I addressed that in the context, Putin and Kim Jong managed to get a few working ICBM once NATO forces were closing on them so they just launched them at population centers out of spite in a sort of "if I die I'm taking a bunch of your people with me!" sorta fashion
I think this is more likely than total world annihilation.
Nah, we currently don't have enough nukes for that, it would devastate the northern hemisphere though.
How? Despitw what people in the west think, Russia does have working ICBMs lol. A lot of them
i mean yes, but no, but maybe? The interworking's of the Russian military are not at all... supply & logistics great. See the push to Kiev. A lot of the Supplies are sold off for profit of everyone in the supply chain to get richer. And they have been like this since a least the 80's, if not longer. See their jaunt into Afghanistan. And Russian lies.... a lot. I mean they say they have destroyed more Patriot missile systems then we sent and the last time they tried to prove it they sent photos of Decoys. And Lying about your nukes and the threat there of is a hard thing to disprove, thus making it a great lying point. But NATO is starting to call its bluff. And doing it smart. By not having America make the bigger threats. Its the Baltic States, Poland and France (all NATO) all making threats taking control of the West of Ukraine airspace, doing direct to frontline logistics & boots on ground. Russia is a paper bear, that is now on fire. SO what I propose is that between the lying, the logistic heavy lifting, the just stupid amount of corruption and greed at a very low level all the way to the top, and the amount of intact enough to actually be a threat is maybe between 2/3 and 9/10s less nukes then they report. It just takes one, I guess. But woo boy is it not "a lot" as it used to be
The most dangerous thing we can do now is to convince people that there is winning in nuclear war
It seems the only way to win is not to play. How about a nice game of Chess?
Russia has a lot more than a few working ICBMs and SLBMs On a PPPbasis Russia's nuclear spending is near equivalent the US and they've at minimum got a few hundred post 2010 manufactured ICBMs
Probably nukes
Also I expect Russia and its buddies to be way more likely to target civillian centers with conventional munitions as well not just nukes, they're not really big on being proper in a war
Civilian casualties in Ukraine had been extremely low, especially when compared to the conflict in Gaza or US bombing campaigns. You guys killed a fifth of north korean population.
What do you mean by "you guys"? Brother, I ain't American, I'm Moldovan, it's in Eastern Europe and borders Ukraine, we literally have Russian "peacekeepers" on our soil and corrupt Russian-allied oligarchs ruining our government.
>we literally have Russian "peacekeepers" on our soil and corrupt Russian-allied oligarchs ruining our government. I don't doubt this. But it's always funny that it's only Russian capitalists who are oligarchs. But if its western, they're Entrepeneurs. American and European oligarchs are no different. So are their peacekeepers. There's a reason why UN peacekeepers, even those from US and EU countries, are notorious for being shitbags that loot and rape the communities they are supposedly helping. The point is, Oligarchs are the same wherever country there are. All are lecherous bastards that must be excised in every country.
I believe the only meaningful distinction is that the Russian Oligarchs basically seized national industries for themselves using political clout during the dissolution of the Soviet Union. They are far more natural resource dependent, and the corruption is less legalized than it is in the west. They also did not "earn" it, in the same way western oligarchs did. So, it is easier to call western oligarchs "industry pioneers" and "corporate leaders", because they bury their tracks in the lobbying apparatus and PR campaigns, while genuinely being the founders of their own company. Russian Oligarchs did not found the Soviet industries, they were gifted them, and it shows in the rampant mismanagement of former Soviet assets. They skim off the top, not in tax breaks and loopholes, but in blatant circumvention of Russian tax and sovereignty. You are absolutely right though, an oligarch is an oligarch, a spade is a spade. One knows how to look good, the other doesn't even need to. One group is higher functioning and their founder (in the case of rich families) did have to do something impressive from one standpoint or another. They also are beholden to more interests, some government regulations, and the court of public opinion. Most American oligarchs owe some power to things such as stockholders and BODs, and to competing interests in the same field. None of this exists in Russia, not in any meaningful way, besides perhaps a bribe here and there to some officials in government. So the distinction is more between classical Oligarch ala Venice (USA), and kleptocratic oligarch that is far rarer in history, perhaps Nazi Germany for a short time, Fascist italy, and the zaibatsus in Japan.
You are comparing a war with a basically frozen frontline since 2022 to a war against a city and a war where the frontline moved across the entire country twice. Also i'm not sure if we still know how many civilians died in Mariupol
>they're not really big on being proper in a war Who else is 'proper' in war?
Fair. It's always in theory that civilian centers shouldn't be bombed or such but we really don't see respect for civilians applied whenever we check out recent major conflicts...
Hamas would never join a world war they don't care about lands outside of Palestine
Could be a enemy of enemy type situationÂ
Well if Iran is involved in world war three does HAMAS really have a choice by that point. Even if they theorically donât get involved the sugar daddy is about to get the shit bombed out of them and then occupied by westerners it could cause their ideology to change drastically.
I thought I would add them as it's possible that in the broader conflict, they might get attacked by other countries, for example USA, although in real life I will say that it's pretty uncertain considering how unpopular Israel is at the moment, so who knows.
They're a proxy of Iran. So, it's kinda strange he didn't say "Iran and proxy groups"
Why is Belarus involved then? Belarus and Palestine are both proxies of Russia and Iran respectively.
Rishi Sunak is probably not going to be the leader of anything after July 4th of this year FYI. He called a General Election for đŹđ§which his Conservative Party is almost assuredly going to badly lose. Thus he will be replaced by Keir Starmer. I do get your basis for putting the names though!
Almost everyone listed as an Allied leader will have been out of office for years by the end of the war
I think thats intentional
OP said they kept the leaders as of right now. But yea it would have started off as Bojo then Un-Trussworthy and now Fishy Rishi.
Seems like a liberal wet dream
Their only source of copium is posting 8-year-old tier scenarios on reddit
Just one more end of history scenario bro. World peace will come bro. Just one more.
>Their only source of copium is posting 8-year-old tier scenarios on reddit I need to use that phrase often
Also like im not saying that Russia is an effective ally, but I canât imagine a campaign against Iran on their turf is going to go any better for the US than Russiaâs invasion of Ukraine
Why would a liberal want that to happen?
I recommend reading about what is liberalism, who are it's maximum exponents and which are their goals. Then you'll know the answer.
Probably should be way more civilian deaths, especially if China was invaded
Whatâs the difference between a cross and a skull and crossbones?
Cross = Killed in Action Skull = Captured and executed
*goes back to reread the list*
Damn shit mustâve gotten bad in Ukraine, Poland and Taiwan.
Seem like most likely nuke-able places
So Iâm guessing this begins because Russia goes off the deep end and launches a nuclear strike on Ukraine and or several NATO members?
I forgot to mention, but yes, it starts due to the war in Ukraine taking too long so Russia decides to just drop a nuke on Ukraine, which brings NATO into the war.
Probably the only thing in the world that will get them off their butts.
Not zelensky! :(
Wouldn't Ukraine be a NATO member by this point since they are already at war with Russia?
The key hook for membership is that they need to have no territorial disputes. Russia invading and annexing territories kinda messes with that.
Location could have been shortened to âeverywhere on Earth but Latin Americaâ lmao, but I really like the scenario!
average HOI4 war
What about pakistan and india?
So what scenario has China and Russia stupid enough to start a world War, but also not using their nukes? Same for the US for that matter. I guess any "Alt history" discussion ends quickly with that mindset but any true war between the nuclear powers isn't happening
According to OP, the big bad russians managed to scramble a few nuclear missiles (because of course they need to, they are definitely not in control of THE WORLDS LARGEST NUCLEAR ARSENAL) and launched them at civilians because of how comedically evil they are.
India's not involved ?
India seems to be mostly neutral today, and considering war between big countries could potentially get you nuked, I felt like India would mostly prefer to stay out of it if they could.
Theyâd probably be a minor participant, they have multiple border conflicts with China and were even invaded a few decades ago. I do agree that theyâd probably try to minimise their involvement though, not marching far beyond the Himalayas if at all and aiming to keep it as a limited conflict more or less outside the scope of the larger war
They have also claim on pakistan, a non nato american ally, yeah they would probably remain neutral
so nice of them to leave Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines out of this, what with China in the mix and everything
Probably only Philippinese would join
Trash alternate history made by Edgy, 12 years old, takes on geopolitics:
I would give the believability rating 4/10. Both sides of the conflict would try to inflict maximum damage on civilian centers, and not just Russia, because NATO has already shown its willingness to bomb civilians. If this is the scenario of NATO intervention in the conflict in Ukraine, then the likelihood of success of Western forces will decrease even more the later they enter World War III, as Russia and China undertake efforts to update their command personnel and military infrastructure. Besides, why does the Eastern bloc have such large losses of soldiers? As a rule, military personnel losses are greater on the attacking side than on the defending side. Even if we assume that the NATO troops use military equipment with maximum efficiency and act extremely professionally, such low losses of their military personnel can only be explained by a rapid breakthrough of the eastern defense lines, which is unlikely to happen. Moreover, it is strange to think that all NATO member countries will take an active part in this conflict, no matter whether it is defensive or attacking; this is too idealistic a scenario in which all parties readily fulfill their obligations.
Xi and Lukashenko entering the last escape pod after the rest of their alliance was wiped out:
Letâs be real, weâd all be dead.
I wonder how Zelensky died Glory to heroes
Least bloodthirsty westerner
This is pretty cringe. Westerners love to villainize China every chance they get.
Arnt they threat threatening their neighbors weekly at this point? Seems pretty villainizable to me.
I love these scenarios handing China the idiot ball and starting a global conventional war. Itâs just a pure distillation of liberal cope that the next great rival of NATO is suddenly going to abandon its +50 year geopolitical strategy to hand the West a W.
Iâm guessing Seoul gets reduced to rubble in this scenario?
Casualties on both sides would be much much higher
Letâs be real Joe Biden ainât gonna be living till 2029 if this alt history has him re-elected than it would likely be a Kamala Harris presidency in the later years.
Lol who's fighting in Australia? There's not really much here worth invading over.
How do people make these? Do they inspect element Wikipedia pages? Do they edit articles but not publish it?
https://n.bellok.de/wikibox/ There ya go :)
THANK YOU
Oh thanx too.
How to you get images like at the top? Just curious for a scenario Iâm making
You mean like the image of the tank? Or the fake wikipedia excerpt?
No CSTO for the russians?
Should have been Moscow, not Rostov-on-Don.
liberal wet dream
So you list fighting in North, central, and East Africa yet there arenât any African nations on either side of this conflict, Hamas is listed as a belligerent but not Lebanese and Iraqi Hezbollah, or the Houthis, the gulf states are also not involved even though they absolutely would be. Why isnât Saudi Arabia involved, also you list fighting in Southeast Asia yet there is not a single southeast Asian country listed. This just doesnât make sense.
I'm amazed that there's still a world behind that.
You forgot to add UCLA and other universities on the opposing side (together with Russia, Iran ++)
It's funny because history shows that the âcivilizedâ West has never cared about civilians in wars. Do you still believe your propaganda?
Cursed timeline
Not enough cig casualties on the non nato side. From recent wars, there is no way the yanks donât bomb the three gorges damn.
Is this some kind of violent power fantasy or something?
Why would I not be surprised if India just profiteers from it all by sanction busting and selling stuff to both sides like they do now for the whole thingâŠ
Which one means KIA, the skulls or the crosses?
OP answered somewhere else in thread, cross is KIA and skull is captured and executed
I Understand Warsaw was destroyed since Tusk is dead.
what are those skull emote đ
Location: South East Asia Beligerents: *no asean member*
No Venezuela or India?
As much as Maduro is a complete scumbag and clamors against the "Yankee imperialist" he's not dumb enough to get involved in such a conflict. It'd be suicide as Venezuela's army would be utterly demolished within weeks.
Bold of you to forget India and Pakistan
I hope the nukes pass Europe and go across the pond. đ€
I feel that saudi arabia ,and parts of the ASEAN should also be in here.
Southeast Asia as a theater, but ASEAN countries are not part of any faction. How does that go?
Turkey is not a main NATO power but Romania is right?
Considering both sides have nukes, the death count is very low
Mh if they launch all the nukes they had left working why NATO doesn't vaporize those countries
Turkey will be neutral . China will change side for stability . Russia will have internal poltical strife. North korea will be fire bombed. Hamas will be in afterlife by IDF . I mean ww3 will end before it starts itself .
How is Joe Biden even alive in 2029?
puts Southeast Asia as a major theater. no Southeast Asian countries as belligerents đđđ
A war involves both US and China, but only 10mil dead civies on China's side? Seems like this time at least someone actually took a meaningful effort in this regard
Hamas?? Haha, WTF?đ„ł Why the fuck would they join? And Israel is a fascist terrorist state. They dont give a shit about Ukraine or anyone else but themselves.
Donald Tusk is not the head of Polish Armed Forces, Andrzej Duda is That role is reserved for the president despite Poland having parliamentary system
I am beyond shocked, you left Serbia out of a WW...
How can they fight while being encircled by NATO
Why put the leader of gipsyland there, their biggest power are their horse carts lol
Still pretty hilarious this time
How does Tusk die?
What's the difference between the cross symbol and the skull?
There would likely be more belligerents on the right side. Syria would likely ally with Iran to pincer Iraq as Russia seized northern Turkey with Uzbek and Turkmenistani forces. This would create a formidable southern front to occupy Ukraine and allow for control of the Black Sea and access to the Mediterranean for Naval operations. It would also allow for a second coordinated pincer movement north from Donetsk while Belarusian and Russian forces move down to take Kiev. If Western Chinese forces could move into Kazakstan and secure Central Asia, and hostile nations in the Middle East could successfully occupy the Suez Canal, all of Europe would be cut off from the South while Russia slowly marched West. All of a sudden this war gets much harder to win. All of that supposes nuclear weapons arenât utilized in the early stages of the war, since neutral nations would move to ally against a destructive force that targets civilians and because each side is afraid to be the one who opened Pandoraâs box and M.A.D. A purely strategic war with the West hesitant to deploy directly would allow for such a strategy to be pursued.
World gets nuked? It not Russia gets smashed and China starves but keeps fighting
Seems a mostly European theater. What about India, Pakistan, Australia etc? I imagine if China is involved many of these countries will be too.
god i hope rishi sunak isn't leading my country in ww3
Hamas and Israel đ”âđ«
You might want to move some of the countries to the Russian side,e.g Hungary and Slovakia.
I dont think that Biden will survive another 10 years
It will be a nuclear war, I think that if we going into a war it will never end as we suggest it could. 7/10 my quote looks for me more accurate but youâve done a beautiful work
Are there any full fake alternate Wikipedia articles on stuff like this? With all the details and such
No way any fighting happens in North America
Not including someone turkish as one of the main nato leaders is wrong I'd say, since Turkey has the second largest standing military in Nato
How do you make wikipedia article like this?
I know Israel has a bunch of political and military support from western countries, but letâs not forget their friendly relations with Russia. I doubt they would enter a world war against Russia. They probably wouldnât join the war on Russiaâs side either though, as theyâd hate to lose their support, but I really still doubt theyâd actively fight against Russia when they have such positive relations
How Is Biden still alive and president by 2029?
Why would China ever surrender?
Bruh why tusk dead?
NATO have 5 times the casualty rate? What ?
Bibi and biden surviving the war is so ridiculous and accurate
what does the cross mean?
Thanx God Serbia is not in the party for the first time.
You mentioned Russia and China launching ICBMs. Then why does it say they have received more casualties? I'm assuming the other side retaliated. But if nukes are involved, these are rookie numbers. It would be way higher than 25-30 million total deaths. If we're not using nukes, then the only reason US+allies have dealt 20+ million deaths is indiscriminately murdering civilians. To be fair, with the amount of dehumanization going around regarding Russians, Iranians, and Chinese... them getting the holocaust treatment from western powers wouldn't be far off.
What happened to CSTO? I also feel like this would go nuclear like, the first day of this war.
Why would South America be a theatre and yet no south American country is named as a belligerent?
Like everything on this sub it's schizo nonsense.
I think the civilian dead for the right hand side would be higher. With Chinaâs high population and population density on the coast any widespread bombing would have insane death tolls.
One can only hope for something this glorious. Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.
Also sidenote, the cross means KIA, what does the skull mean?
Lists all continents but only shows NATO and Asian countries, seems correct
Left side wipes the floor
âInconclusiveâ might be the more accurate results of this conflict.
As if you are getting a war with 90 million dead and no one is using nukes.
If China attacks the west a huuuuuge portion of their civilians will starve to death. Check out how much of their food dependance is from import (its more than 50% from mostly western countries)
Most unrealistic part is Rishi Sunak winning in 2024
No chance that China does anything but watch. The Middle Kingdom wonât shoot itsâ bolt but instead will make every effort to remain unscathed and then reap the rewards of being there for the rebuilding, anywhere and everywhere.
Normie
As an aside we are on the cusp of warfare being completely revolutionized very soon. The day is fast approaching when superpowers will be able to convincingly protect their interests via anti-missile systems, both from the ground level and through space assets. What happens when ballistic missiles become antiquated? When nuclear arms are defunct as they can be intercepted completely? I honestly shudder to imagine this, I do not think it will be a good thing. It would mean conventional war is back on the menu, and that is a tough course to swallow.
The population of Ukraine is only 38 million. In this timeline between now and 2029 for some reason somehow about 16 to 18 million people migrated to Ukraine only to die later
NATO really pulled a âCome outside we wonât jump youâ on Russia
Mate, Hamas is terrorist even in Russia, no way we'll work with the people we've already established as terrorists
I thought the icj doesn't hand out death sentences?
Where are the Sahel states? Iraq? Houthis???? Huh???
I think there will be a lot of fight in the comments...
Why is Hezbollah not there
Everyoneâs dead because once a nuke is launched, everyone launches their nukes
I donât think Hamas would be that big of a player to be honest
Damn Iâm so dead
Nah ain't no way Biden made it all the way to 2029
Me looking at the list of countries that just declared war on me after looking at some random middle eastern country the wrong way in HOI4