What would war in the future be about, oil or water?

[Æquitas]

Water can be created.
Many have said that future wars would be about the earth supply of water. Water is very basic, everyone needs it daily, it's the source of life, that will get scarce in the future. There are water creating technology that works well already. "Making water from thin air" http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/10/71898

What about oil?
The that people that believes in future wars being fought about water and not about fossil energy. They believe that we have vast amount of oil undiscovered, or there we will develop better technology to extract them cheaper and more efficient. That there will be alternative, recyclable energy sources.
The difference between water and oil is that oil is chemically much more complicated that water, so they can't at current level of technology be created artifically.
Keep in mind this is about future wars, so current wars like the one in Iraq doesn't count.

 

[HBK]

Its amazing that humans in the last 100 years have spend trillions of dollars fighting over the last few drops of Oil, and funding wars to take over these Oil territories, when all that money time and effort could have been used to find new ways of energy. The world needs to wake the fcuk up b4 its too late.

 

[MuayThai]

I doubt we'll ever have wars over water as 70% of the earth is covered in water.

We are, and have been fighting wars over oil for a long time.

 

[Skel]

I suppose it depends on for into the future you are looking to. I still think it will be about oil.

 

[Throttle]

neither. war isn't caused by conflict over resources.

 

[Create Reality]

Rights to moonsoil.

 

[wolf116]

oil can be used to convert salty water to watery water.

 

[donjuanjovi]

I doubt we'll ever have wars over water as 70% of the earth is covered in water.

We are, and have been fighting wars over oil for a long time.

Unforunately the vast majority of it is salt water.

 

[MuayThai]

Unforunately the vast majority of it is salt water.

Do you think a country will be willing to goto war over the price of some water purification plants? I doubt it.

 

[black_beret]

It will definitely be about oil.

 

[Call_Me_Daddy]

neither. war isn't caused by conflict over resources.

What about oil?

Plenty of wars over that.

 

[bigjohnson]

Power and money, same as every other war.

 

[Æquitas]

Power and money, same as every other war.

Power and money are only words that could have the same meanings as oil and water.
In a desert country, with little water, water is power and money.
In a country that depends on fossile energy to go around, oil is power and money.

 

[Æquitas]

Rights to moonsoil.

My friend why are you talking about science fiction? I said future, but I meant in the future where we all still live on this Earth, not fly around in spaceships.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

personal liberties.

 

[PeterNorthisawesome]

I'm sorry to break the news to all the ignorant Americans who know nothing of foreign relations, but USA is probably the most HATED country in the world.

Ever since Korean and Vietnam War and all the World Police thing and trying to "help" aka not minding your own damn business, other countries grew up to resent the USA. Why do you think China is revamping it's military and putting anti-nuclear bunkers and missile defenses? Many countries want to get rid of US influence by getting rid of bases in their countries like Japan and England/Britain.

Iraq War made everything worse, most of the MiddleEast really didn't have a major beef with the US, but because of War a lot of neighboring countries hate the USA now. Also the war completely destroyed the reserves and men in service. The force is STRECHED THIN right now, if you read recent news the Air Force has to have pilots guard prisons and officers type write. What's more surprising is that USA and it's citizens continues to diss it's Allies like England, France, Canada and Japan. I'm pretty sure that if there's a World War III, USA will need to bring the draft back since France and Canada will be the only allies. The Axis and Allies will look something like this...

Allies - USA, maybe Britain, Germany and Canada. South Korea and Taiwan is useless cuz they're way too small and will be overrun in hours.

Axis - Russia, China, North&South Korea, Most of Middle East and maybe Mexico.

Neutral - Africa (huge mess anyways), Australia, France, New Zealand, Japan, South America.

Future wars is all going to be driven by religion, hate and resources. Oil is going to be gone in around 20 years, so it's already too late and countries are finding other ways of energy.

 

[Æquitas]

bla bla hate against america bla bla

Future wars is all going to be driven by religion, hate and resources. Oil is going to be gone in around 20 years, so it's already too late and countries are finding other ways of energy.

Save your hate and personal feelings about America for another thread, the only thing that made sense in your post is this, the last 2 sentences.
Ok so you added the Religion factor for future wars. A war fought about religion. It sounds very much like past wars but not unlikely in the future either.

However as a spiritual but not religious person, and I know a lot of people are like me. I doubt that future war would be about religion. Any rational person won't fight over religion.
We need water and energy to survive, we don't need some imposed moral or belief to survive.

 

[Call_Me_Daddy]

personal liberties.

Yeah. Ok.

Maybe once a millenium.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Yeah. Ok.

Maybe once a millenium.

Please, everyone in the states seems to be pissed off because they feel that they are being trespassed upon. Don't you hear people referencing their First Amendment rights?

 

[Throttle]

What about oil?

Plenty of wars over that.

name one.

states do not fight over money. they do not fight over power. they fight using both (mostly the latter).

they fight when they disagree about relative power -- country A believes it has what it takes to beat country B, and country B believes the reverse. they stop fighting when the disagreement is resolved (one or both countries fail to achieve their objectives; ie, they lose).

what they actually fight over is irrelevant -- if they agreed about their relative strength, either the weaker would accede to the demands of the stronger, or the stronger would know that it is not sufficiently strong to take what it wants by force.