Tell me where you think WWIII is the most likely place to start. Be serious and don't clog this thread with unnecessary comments.
I will be compilation your thoughts and make final WWIII simulations for each logical and explained idea.

There are a few places of high tension. There might be a great war in North America, due to the political tensions between natives, conservatives, liberals, Quebec, Texas, Mexico and all. Other nations would be drawn in by opportunity to gain land and/or alliance. This isn't too likely. I know there's lots of tension in Central and South America, but I don't think they have the political or economic significance to draw too many nations into a conflict. In Europe there's tensions, especially between Russia and Europe, but Europe's a bit too stable for a major conflict to seem likely. A conflict in Europe would likely be sparked by outside events. I really don't know about Africa, at all. The middle east is a hot bowl of political turmoil, so it's no surprise a lot of people predict a world war starting there. Syria, Israel/Palestine, Kurdistan, Iran and Iraq, you know. South and Southeast Asia, don't think so. Central Asia, no. East Asia, like Europe, conflict there would be sparked be an outside event. The stuff in Hong Kong could seriously escalate, don't think it would though. I don't know about Oceanic politics.

It'll start between Chad and the Virgin Islands. I sense it.

Might be because of USA, Mexico, and the wall

If ww3 does start it will be between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Any number of the ongoing proxy wars in the middle east could draw Iran and Saudi Arabia into direct conflict.

Remember, state vs state wars are somewhat common in the middle east unlike the rest of the world. Iraq-Iran war. iraq-Kuwait war. Libyan-Chad war, ect. Its likely that Saudi Arabia will go to war with Iran. (And lose.)

Europe gets their oil from Russia and Africa so they don't have to worry about the conflict too much. But it will cause massive shortages in East Asia as Saudi Arabia and Iran target each other's oil facilities. And competition over the remaining last scraps of oil will put China and Japan into a war. Canada + US as a system is oil independent.

Edited 4/5/2020 01:46:23

Unless it's between America and China, the conflict is too small to be considered a third world war.
The several many wars during the Cold War taught us that, pedants.

I agree with Templar, WWIII would have to be started by Chinese aggression into American/UK/Australian lands. Because those three are allies, and everybody else is either allied to them or enemies with them, any aggression to one of them will start a very large war. And China is the only country with the sauce to do it.

I've heard lots of theories that the next big conflict between Pakistan and India will result in WWIII, especially as both countries are now nuclear powers. How this conflict would start up I'm not entirely sure; perhaps it begins with India finally being given a seat on the UN security council. Pakistan's leaders would feel angry and fearful enough to commence hostilities against India and invite various nations of the world to aid their cause. This could divide the UN and lead to regional squabbles flaring up all across the globe, with the intervention of the great powers on opposing sides at last confirming the plunge into the Third World War.

(How plausible this actually is I'm not too sure as the specifics are just my best guess, but I have heard plenty of times that World War III could begin from a new India-Pakistan conflict)

All ideas that are well explained and possible I have liked. All nonsense ideas I have disliked. All possible ideas that are not explained enough I have not liked or disliked.

A possible start could be domestic war between islam and secular population in europe, india or what-not

An Escalation Of Syrian Civil War Caused by Turkish Attacks on The Kurds

I will make simulations of WWIII on:
Middle East
Russia and Europe
North America
USA and China
India and Pakistan
Saudi Arabia and Iran
Turkey and Syria
I am currently working on Middle East. I had to change dates because of the Coronavirus.

IT WILL START OVER BRITISH IMPERIALISM IN THE MALVINAS

That is quite an interesting topic. Definitions first:

"What is meant by WW3?"
Most likely an industrialized war of global proportions in reference to the conflicts later called World War 1 and 2. There are several issues with this. These wars were caused by a multitude of factors, but they are characterized by primarily two factors: Industrialization combined with the theme of recurring European Wars. Continent-spanning conflicts were common in Europe since the age of reformation, as parallel wars had the tendency to be often merged into a single conflict. By the 1700 it became the norm to get great powers involved into almost every European wars. There wars were already global if the powers in charge were colonial powers. Still, the wars were not seen as that devastating as for the lack of industrialisation (this is a missconception birthed by todays bias, as for example the 30 years war, Deluge or the French revolution had societal changes as consequences that can very well be compared to the ones after the modern World Wars). Industrialization however had annother, bigger effect on war in the form of mass-conscription.

"Is it possible right now in the strict sense?"
Likely not, as several factors are missing compared to the first two. First, colonial empires are almost inexistant, so the global escalation would be doubtful. Second, the majority of powerful countries have moved away from mass-conscription. Let me give an example: From the Great Powers of WW1, only Great Britain had no draft-model when it entered the war. Comparing this to the postmodern world, only the powers of Brazil and Russia have a draft enabled, and they both train less that 20% of a cohort, so a large mobilization in time would also be difficult for them as well. Nukes would also be taken into account, a factor that did not exist at all in the two mentioned conflicts this would be based on. So major global change would have occur first to make this happen (like something that disables or greatly dimished theeffect of nuclear weapons, remilitarisation of the great powers,...).

"Is it possible in the future and in a more broad sense?"
It you take it as more a war between two powerful countries and in a limited region, then yes it is still not that likley, but possible. Kashmir is the most likely region as both India and Pakistan have still high tensions, both are strong military powers (not taking nukes into account, but they have them as well) with especially Pakistan being a highly militarized society. China does also border them both, but the Himalayas would put anyone advancing over there is a really bad position. Still, i would not call that a "World War", as China has few reasons to join, the USA even fewer and Russia, the remaining European powers and South America have ZERO interest in partaking in such an endevour.

You are welcome.

Edited 5/5/2020 09:05:35

all you need is a spark in a room full of dynamite to explode it never say never we cant see the future but we can learn from the past

Show me the proof. links people LINKS.. I want references.. YOUTUBE.. WIKIPEDIA.. FACEBOOK.. PORNHUB ANYTHING

in the most realistic scenario i can think it will be because nato building a base just too close to moskow causing russia to attack to defend their capital

YOUTUBE.. Why Should You Trust This
WIKIPEDIA.. What should we link?
FACEBOOK.. The Most Untrustable site as referance yea no
PORNHUB TF IS THIS I NEVER HEARD OF THIS SITE BEFORE

((Thinking about if a porn picture post is worth the suspension))

but what if the porn is historical