World War IV

With a POD after Japan surrenders in '45, how do we get to World War IV in the 90s or so? World War III would probably have to be in the early 50s, if we want to avoid a massive nuclear conflict. It goes without saying that WWIII would between Russia and America. What about WWIV? Assuming its an American victory, it could be America v China, or maybe an enlarged War on Terror (where the terrorists have official support of Middle Eastern gov'ts). 10 Bonus Points if its the US versus the EU (-20 if the EU wins, btw :D).
 

Xen

Banned
Maybe a war with the United States and a European Union? Or Asian Union?

Alot can happen between post World War III in which communism falls in the 1950s and the 1990's, more details of what your world looks like in the 1990s would be needed to come up with a good World War IV scenario.
 
Assuming that you have WWIII occur between 1945 and 1955, thus avoiding mass nuclear holocaust, a WWIV between China and the US is very simple to create. Just have Taiwan declare independence sometime in the 1990s. The PRC is not going to like this and will try to place a blockade or declare outright war on their former territory. The US is obligated by treaty to defend the RoC and will put a carrier in the Straits. One Chinese Kilo and one sunken US destroyer later and WWIV erupts.
 
Last edited:

Xen

Banned
Walter_Kaufmann said:
Assuming that you have WWIII occur between 1945 and 1955, thus avoiding mass nuclear holocaust, a WWIV between China and the US is very simple to create. Just have Taiwan declare independence sometime in the 1990s. The PRC is not going to like this and will try to place a blockade or declare outright war on their former territory. The US is obligated by treaty to defend the RoC and will put a carrier in the Straits. One Chinese Kilo and one sunken US destroyer later and WWIV erupts.


But wouldnt China join their Soviet comrades for a world war III in the 1950's, relations between the two countries were at their peak at this time. Most likely a Third World War would result in the destruction of Communism in most forms, much like World War II ended Facisim in most forms, or atleast in the major industrial countries. So something has to happen in afterwards, youre going to have three or major economical powers, an earlier EU, probably an Pacific Union of some sort, and somesort of North American Economic Alliance. We also have the possibility of South America and and the Arabian World becoming major players.

Wars would likely be fought over third world resources, as each power bloc seeks to exploit them for their own gain. It would be intresting if the US can do something like a Marshall Plan II and get Latin America up to industrial par with North America and form the American Union. A three way World War, that could get quite ugly.
 
Xen said:
But wouldnt China join their Soviet comrades for a world war III in the 1950's

I was thinking a WWIII right after WWII, in the late 40s and too early for the PRC to join. But late enough so that the PRC was already formed and the civil war over.
 

Xen

Banned
Had been in fought right after World War II, then you might be right, or the US can prevent another communist country coming to power by supplying more money, equipment and "volunteers" to Kai-check (Sp?).

But according to the original post he wanted the war to be fought in the early 1950s to avoid a nuclear holocaust, so World War IV can be fought in the 1990s.
 
Xen said:
But according to the original post he wanted the war to be fought in the early 1950s to avoid a nuclear holocaust, so World War IV can be fought in the 1990s.

Well, unless he was being really specific, I don't think whether it was fought in 1948 or in 1950 would make all that much difference, with the exception of keeping the PRC out and allowing for WWIV to happen 40 years later.
 
If WWIII is late 40's or early 50's to minimise nuclear combat, say from an expanded Korea after Russia has nominal nuclear capacity, who says either side would use them. More likely you get something like a mega sized Korean conflict, in Europe, ME and large chucks of eastern and SE Asia. However neither side is likely to push the other to the point of destruction. [Without nukes forget about the west conquering all of Russia and China. If the Red army doesn't reach the Channel in the 1st 6 months or so it never will].

As such you have a long a bloody attritional slaughter that ends with some negotiated peace agreement. This frees up WWIV for the final show-down between UAS & USSR, or between either/both of them and China. [Not sure how you avoid widespread use of nukes then, especially if one side is facing total defeat].

The other alternative is the traditional one. Mid 50's WWI with major use of nukes. WWIV is say mid-70's between the two superpowers of Papua New Guinea and Paraguay say]:eek::eek:

Steve
 

Straha

Banned
I consider the codl war to be WWIII and the ongoing war on terror to be WWIV. The first and second world were both largescale conflicts that were different from one another. I see the codl war and war on terror both fitting into that catagory. Basically this is OTL. *finishes reading post* Wait in the 90s? Simply have Bush I get reelected. He'd start the war on terror once the 93 WTC bombing happens. PM Stalin Malone if you want details on that.
 
How about a WW3 between the USA (or NATO) and the USSR (or Warsaw Pact) WITHOUT using nuclear weapons? First and most conventional warfare in Europe, like here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Storm_Rising . Not every war needs to be an apocalypse, and I think it should be possible to have a similar war 20 years or more earlier.
Of course, a war like this wouldn't see a definite winner (you can't utterly defeat a nuclear power by military means), and the USSR would continue to exist, but perhaps fall because of a military coup (becoming a militaric dictatorship that is only Communist in name) or a revolution (shouldn't be too hard to implement this some years after said WW3).

WW4 could be anything else.
However, I don't see USA vs. EU-war, not without lots of ASBs. The cooperation, though complicated often enough, worked out for the satisfaction of both sides after all (those who disagree shall present me a better way without making the EU a copy of the USA or vice versa).
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Isn't WW IV the one that Einstein said would be fought with rocks & sticks?
 
Einstein didn't know his head from his ass when he started thinking about what happens within the atmosphere of this planet. :rolleyes:
Are you seriously claiming that the man who theorised General Relativity and the Special Theory of Relativity didn't know his head from his arse? Please say you're joking.
 
Are you seriously claiming that the man who theorised General Relativity and the Special Theory of Relativity didn't know his head from his arse? Please say you're joking.
I was claiming, in my poetic way, that Einstein didn't know jack about stuff relating to people (war, economics, politics, culture). Not his area of expertise.

Why else would the guy be a socialist? :D
 
I was claiming, in my poetic way, that Einstein didn't know jack about stuff relating to people (war, economics, politics, culture). Not his area of expertise.

Why else would the guy be a socialist? :D

The same reason people are still socialist. They're idealists with too much time on their hands.

BTW, I don't think Red Storm Rising, or a similar war, counts as WWIII. It's a war that's like two months long on one continent, so nope.
 
Top