• betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I can see an argument in either direction. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine may be considered a regional war since it hasn’t yet involved open and direct fighting between other major global powers. Supplies, intelligence sharing, and other forms of assistance between various parties on either side are involved but for the most part, it’s been limited to Russians and Ukrainians exchanging fire. North Korean soldiers and individual contractors from some other parts of the world are there too but that’s still pretty limited. Epstein Fury is another regional war for now as well.

    It would (and maybe will) be different if we had combined NATO forces and China / Russia / Iran / North Korea in direct conflict. Since it’s not happening yet, I’m hesitant to call it a full-on world war at this stage. Would say it seems likely to occur (unless some major changes happen soon) and then this part would get included as a long lead-up to what comes next.

    Not up to me though, I’m just along for the ride with the vast majority of everyone else.

    • Kazel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      33 minutes ago

      It would (and maybe will) be different if we had combined NATO forces and China / Russia / Iran / North Korea in direct conflict. Since it’s not happening yet, I’m hesitant to call it a full-on world war at this stage. Would say it seems likely to occur (unless some major changes happen soon) and then this part would get included as a long lead-up to what comes next.

      that is also where i am at