Talk:World War III

General Cleanup
This article is sloppy, words are spelled incorrectly, poor grammar is used, and it seems like the author was trying to tell the events in the form of a story. I'll be making corrections and cleaning up the article soon.Pirateking007 12:03, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Title
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the proper way to title this be the Russo-American War? A bit hasty calling it WWIII as well, we don't know the true scale of the conflict at present. Mechanical 42 06:13, December 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * The name is also unofficial, as it is never mentioned anywhere in the game. In fact, I'd argue that it's a bit too in-universe in that it summarises the events of the MW2 campaign and not the big picture. --Scottie theNerd 02:47, December 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair point, and I doubt we'll get clarification. Eh. Mechanical 42 03:08, December 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * I made a point here about how we should go about these articles if we are to keep them. --Scottie theNerd 03:13, December 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * Since the scope of the war is unknown, maybe the page should just be titled "Invasion of the United States" --Kacra 04:29, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * I second what Kcra said, lets call it "Invasion of the United States" 142.166.223.4 22:08, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

Proposed rewrite
Currently, the article is a fleshed-out version of the events that the player experiences through the game. To make it a proper war article, we need to look at the general strategic scope of the conflict; not just the minutiae of a single soldier or a single squad, unless otherwise significant.

I will look into a major overhaul of the article to summarise the main events and omit the individual, specific events as seen through the eyes of Ramirez, Roach or other main character unless it has an impact on the war as a whole. Please let me know if this change is undesirable. --Scottie theNerd 12:44, March 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * That makes an enormous amount of sense. I concur. Icepac K s 12:52, March 7, 2010 (UTC)

Time of year?
I discussed on "Wolverines!" that the lighting during the Virginia and D.C. missions suggested it was during daylight saving time. "Wolverines!" was in the hour of 5pm and it was very bright, and "Exodus," around 6:30pm, was just about to start sunset. DST months are March to November, in this case of the year 2016, March 13 to November 6. It starts raining during "Second Sun" and "Whiskey Hotel," and the month that has the most rain during DST would be April. So, it is possible that the Russo-American War and the events of MW2 occur in April 2016.

- EvErLoyaLEagLE (4/29/2010)

That would make sense. Good Logic. MOBILIZED

Hey! Who the hell edited the date of Russo-American war as March 8, 2016? Whoever edit this must give a good evidence why it's started at March 8, not to mention the game didn't say the date, neither 2016

Gladly accepted. Thanks
 * Removed - like you said, pure speculation. Sgt. S.S. 21:48, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Supported by
Can't it be assumed that the United States would have been supported by NATO, considering they have a defence aggrement and are an offical military alliance? --Kacra 03:14, July 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * COD isn't real life. We can't assume anything that holds true in reality (such as alliances) would work out the same way in Call of Duty. Unless we have a clear source on what is meant to happen, don't assume anything. --Scottie theNerd 10:04, July 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll back you up on that. this is fiction to the point that America and Russia didn't nuke each other first, then go to ground combat and America supported a Russian Government that they don't even like in real life. However, Task Force 141 has mostly NATO soldiers so it would also make sense to conclude that some sort of alliance or support especially from the British and Australians. MOBILIZED
 * Without a specific backstory to Task Force 141, we can't presume the nature of the combat group. We only see a few members wearing Canadian, British and Australian flag patches. That's hardly grounds to assume that it is a NATO force -- considering that Australia is not part of NATO. With only three countries effectively associated with TF141, we can't stretch it to cover all NATO countries unless we get a source for it. --Scottie theNerd 05:07, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just wondering, where does China stand in all of this? I mean China must have some sort of role in this clash of Titans. 75.119.244.202 08:29, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just wondering, where does China stand in all of this? I mean China must have some sort of role in this clash of Titans. 75.119.244.202 08:29, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just wondering, where does China stand in all of this? I mean China must have some sort of role in this clash of Titans. 75.119.244.202 08:29, September 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Doesnt call of duty not branch from OTL until 2011? so NATO would definatly support USA, and possibly China being an ally of the Russian Federation would presumably support Russia.142.166.223.4 16:19, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * China and Russia are friendly but they arent really allied.Kacra 19:45, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but all those saying that the TF141 dont take part in the war are stupid, remember the nuke price used as a EMP, paralyzing all the eletronics in america. Also, the TF141 if made primarily of British SAS and probably Navy SEALS, as well as Canadians and Australia. and Australia aernt part of nato, but they are partners, i mean it would be abit stupid australia being a treaty for a ocean half way across the earth.
 * --Morgan-- 20:39, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

China should be removed as a plausible ally because we know nothing so far in the story and I should also ment the CIS would be a more creditble ally minus the NATO nations.

The whole ally thing is crazy thats like saying that Canada is helping since United States and Canada are brother/sister countrys Alertfiend

China is not even mentioned in MW2, Nor is it mentioned in any CoD game, the United Kingdom should not even be mentioned as a supporter because TF141 is not the entity of a single country, it just happens to have Americans, Canadians, British and Australian members. British Servicemen have not taken part in the war between Russia and America 24.215.89.14 02:18, November 15, 2010 (UTC)

This subtopic is a speculation for Modern Warfare 2 players. In my opinion, I would say that the OpFor has backed down, maybe because after the 30,000 Marines were dead, I think the additional Marines will have second wave of invasion against the OpFor in the Arabian Peninsula. So now, more likely I would said, the war is between the Russian Ultranationalists vs. USA and with some help from British, Australian and NATO troops.

China? I doubt China may join the Ruso-American war. If assuming that China is going to side with the Russians, still, it's not possible that China will attack USA due to few reasons:

1) China act as neutral party who are friends with everybody, including their recent "traditional enemies" Japan and Taiwan. Even if there are numbers of Chinese who are anti-American, the Chinese Communist Party government still wouldn't want to wage war against USA. People can say that, China is playing double game. Besides, they are already starting to betray their traditional allies like North Korea and Iran.

2) China has bought too much of America's debt. If the United States economy crumbles as a result of a Russo-American war, China's investment will be worthless (China already panicked when the value of the dollar fell at the start of the economic decline). Hence, its more likely that China will condemn the Russo-American war, not because of sympathy for Americans, but because they want to save USA so that they could let Americans pay their debt to China.

3) China needs modern technology from USA. Today, China has made the copied American website, for example Google. They also make iPhone, GPS, stealth fighters and many other USA technology. Destroying USA will only paralyze their way of modern life. China cannot survive their lifestyle without America.

Hence, you cannot say this is World War III because it only involves two-party warfare. Even if players were fighting against the Brazillian Militias, you still cannot say it was declared as WW3 because it involves a small drug dealer fighting scene.

Russia and USA will nuke each other? That's just ridiculous! Just because Russia has authoritarian and aggressive Ultranationalist government, doesn't mean they will use nuke. Nuking each other will end up like Basrah, Iraq (Shock and Awe in CoD4: MW). Like the previous page about Ultranationalists, they are not terrorist. Prove this can be found by playing levels like Wolverines!, Exodus, Off Their Own Accord, Second Sun and Whiskey Hotel where they don't use nukes. Oh, don't forget that the nuke which triggers the EMP was not done by Russians, but done by Captain Price in the Contingency.

However, it's possible these are the allies of Russia, which is Serbia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Venezuela, and maybe the uprising Cuba may join the Russo-American war. I doubt if North Korea and Iran may join Russia as their alliance.

Myronbeg (Day 4, 2011)

I know. This COD may not happen in the real life, but I'm giving logic fantasy reasons, that's all
 * With respect to your opinions, please keep this talk page relevant to the article. Theories on plot and canon belong on the forum pages. --Scottie theNerd 11:10, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Extent of the War
I would say that Mission Control being able to talk to ISS is a sign that the war is limited to the East Coast. What do you guys think? FinalWish 03:16, December 26, 2010 (UTC)

Or both coasts. Mission Control is in Huston Texas. Sniper team  82308  03:57, December 26, 2010 (UTC)

Name
Why is it called Russo-American War shouldn't it be Russian-American War since it was mostly between those 2 partys? Because the word Russo is a prefix, and we were talking about using prefix words, so it's not appropriate to use Russian-American war. but Russo-American war. This goes same thing as Sino-Japanese war, where people don't use 'Chinese-Japanese war'
 * That's what Russo is... :p 19:04, March 14, 2011 (UTC)

Belligerents of Russo-American War
Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, inside the game we know the people we encounter were Taliban/OpFor Afghans, Brazillians, British, Americans, Canadians, Australians and finally, the Ultranationalist Russians.

This discussion actually came from the 'Supported By' discussion.

Eastern Europe - If the Ultranationalists came from many former Soviet Union countries like Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan etc., most probably, they will fully support Russia. I will also include Serbia, because many of the people were nationalists, and seeing this chance to uprising against their government colluding with Americans, they will join the Russian forces (but not joining their country since Serbia was independent).

Western Europe - Needless to say, throughout the Cold War history, the West don't like the East communist countries. All NATO will join forces with USA, Great Britain (including Canada and Australia) to fight against the Ultranationalist Russia. However, during the period of 2011 to 2016, one of the Western country may quit from NATO due to unknown future factors. My speculation is Greece or Germany. Don't ask me why, but that's my guess.

Middle East - Iran and Syria used to be allies of Russia. But because of the 2011 Middle East protest, mostly likely they will remain neutral. Also, like I said, the OpFor will most likely dissipated by the US forces. However, surely at least 2 to 3 Mideast will join Russia.

Latin America - The possible country to join Russia will be Brazil (Alex The Red), Venezuela (socialist government) and Cuba (Communist government). However, some like Chile and Colombia may join USA, we don't know.

East Asia - North Korea will definitely join Russia because they were communist nation.

Now, up to everybody's call on my hypothesis.