How Much Of The World Has To Be At War To Be WW

Question

How much of the world has to be at war before it is declared a world war. Currently Iraq,USA, Phillipines, Russia, Georgia, and I don't know how many countries in South America and Africa are at war. So how many countries does it take to qualify for WWIII.

Answer 1

There is no "magic" number..... technically WW I and WW II did not envolve the entire world,,,,,, As far as I am concerned.....WW III is already here......not just because there are more allies envolved in the GWOT than were envolved in WW II......but because potentially there is no limit to the combat zone......we could find ourselves fighting for the safety of America almost anywhere in the world

RICHARD.... You said the GWOT is the "US against....." ......."clue".....America has the largest coalition of nations supporting the war on terror ever recorded in history of the world..... more countries are supporting America in the war on terror than were envolved in WW II....

Even little "Georgia" who is now fighting Russia.....had troops fighting in Iraq.....

Answer 2

i'd say that currently we are mostly seeing only bilateral wars ( Russia vs Georgia, Serbia vs.Kosovo,  ) or multiple actors against one opponent in a local theater. (Iraq, Afghanistan) that are reletively independend from each other.

Both world wars were examples of multilateral wars, with multiple partners on both sides pursuing common interests, and fighting interrelated battles. The US involvement in the war against the n**i's, for instance, was the direct result of Japan's bombing of pearl harbor.

I dont' think the current 'war on terror' qualifies as a world war, because the conflict is mainly that of the US against a number of loose organizations on relatively small scale. The larger scale operations are more like occupations than ongoing wars. (no organized opponent).

But ofcourse, also WW2 and WW1 started with isolated conflicts. (Spain, Finland, Czech Republic)

Answer 3

i think its like 2 or more superpowers at war with each other, but there isn't a specific number

Answer 4

That depends. The First World War was a world war only because the participating powers had colonies around the globe and used resources and people from those colonies; most of the fighting was focused in Europe and the Middle East, roughly the same continent.

The Second World War was a world war only because there were two separate wars going on at the same time, and roughly on opposite sides of the globe: the Pacific and European theatres. However, this time, fighting took place in Africa, North America, Europe, Asia, and Oceania, and involved the largest armies, most powerful weapons, and most destruction ever witnessed. The colonies thing was present here too, but it was less a reason than the First World War.

A Third World War could be any number of things:

1) a true all-out war involving every nation in the world in combat. Unlikely, but possible.

2) a global guerrilla war, against civilization or an ideology. Not necessarily involving any nations militarily, but simply police.

3) a war between powers. This is becoming less and less likely all the time as the powers become economically intertwined.

4) a nuclear war. It doesn't matter who is involved; there will be unimaginable destruction in any case, and if enough nukes are used, the entire world would indeed be affected.

5) a civil war in a power could lead to economic upheaval worldwide, and possibly the civil war could spread from one power to the next.

6) an information war. Since the Internet is global, any nation could attack any other nation, or any group any other group, in cyberspace; I doubt this would really be called a world war, but it meets the definition.

7) a series of proxy wars. This could lead, essentially, to one being able to call the Cold War a world war. Consider that, in the Cold War, proxy wars took place in Asia, Europe, the Americas, Oceania, and Africa, and without the Antarctic Treaty I'm sure we would have seen American or Soviet troops in parkas.

Let's all hope that none of these things happens.

Answer 5

The qualifications for a WW designation are entirely dependent on the media outlets that coin them. Nothing more, nothing less.  

Answer 6

I'm gonna go with a ridiculous answer since this is a ridiculous question....I'm gonna say...the world...

Answer 7

It needs to be bigger then one region. If Japan was not in WW2 it is possible that it would have not been considered a world war but a European war.  

Answer 8

A World War isn't actually declared.  World War One, as we know it, was just The Great War to those who lived through it.  Historians usually decide what is, and what isn't, a world war.  And they usually take a while to get to figuring all that out.  Later it becomes a cultural term.  So, as of right now, we are not in a world war.

I would guess the stakes would have to be a bit higher, too.  Compared to WWI and WWII, we have lost very few troops in our current conflicts.  History will decide, I suppose.