[nojvek]

We will have countries against each other fighting for their borders but world war is v unlikely in our lifetime.

We love our cheap goods, cheap-ish energy and ability to change presidents and prime ministers.

Yes China, North Korea and Russia banding against the rest of the world is a real threat but China has shown it is selfish too and cares more about its economy.

[Ancapistani]

> We love our cheap goods, cheap-ish energy and ability to change presidents and prime ministers.

I'm not saying I don't agree, but this is almost identical to arguments made prior to WW1.

[nojvek]

No mutually assured destruction back then.

WW1 was a pretty inefficient war, WW2 got better weapons and communication infra, but modern war fare is seriously destructive.

Intercontinental missiles fired from stealth submarines with nuclear payloads that break apart in air into 20 little payloads that then destroy an entire city 1000s of kms.

Modern warfare doesn’t need armies of millions of men. Whoever can best see their enemy via satellites and oceanic array, direct the most destructive energy using missiles and drones decapitates their enemy.

One nuclear warhead possesses multiple times the energy spent on both world wars combined.

[eru]

> Yes China, North Korea and Russia banding against the rest of the world is a real threat but China has shown it is selfish too and cares more about its economy.

I really want to believe that. But the same logic did not stop the first world war.