World War III: From Impossible to Inevitable

Bible Prophecy clearly states that at the end of the age, the world will experience a significant increase in geopolitical turmoil, including at least three named wars, rumors of war, international distress, and three major military conflicts as outlined in Psalm 83, Ezekiel 38-39, and Revelation 19. Combined with the other "birth pangs" which are all seemingly converging within a single generation. According to Jesus, these signs of the times would signal the end of the current age.

The major issue we have today with recognizing these signs is that the prophecies outlined in Scripture primarily only focus on the major events or "mountain peaks," while remaining largely silent on the "valleys." As such, it is left for those of us who are watching to draw upon various factors associated with any given issue, and then see how these things align with the trajectory of the prophetic outline.

Graphic by Clarence Larkin. My comment (you are here) was added by yours truly for clarification.

With that, I suggest that if Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea (the Iron Coalition) were to form a military alliance, they could potentially overpower a US-led NATO coalition either just before or just after the Rapture of the Church. I call this the "chain reaction scenario" due to its cascading nature. Such a victory could also set the stage for the Gog-Magog War as prophesied in Ezekiel 38-39, which occurs after the Rapture of the Church. As far-fetched as this might appear to any would-be skeptics, might I remind them of the numerous historical conflicts where wars raced from impossible to inevitable, without ever slowing down for improbable. Note the two quotes below:

WW1

"In early 1914, though, it seemed almost impossible that Britain and France would go to war with Germany to defend Russia against Austria-Hungary over a dispute with Serbia. Yet by June 28, war moved straight from impossible to inevitable -- without ever passing through improbable. Four years later, 10 million people had died." Anatole Kaletsky, June 27, 2014

(Source)

WW2

"The settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace. This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine [shows paper to crowd]. Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you: " ... We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again".[3] Neville Chamberlain, the British Prime Minister's now infamous quote on September 30, 1938, about "peace in our time" precipitated the invasion of Poland by a year and one day (Sep 1, 1939) kicking off World War II. (Wikipedia)

Although this perspective (i.e., the chain reaction scenario) seems far fetched, it gains unexpected validation from figures like Gordon Chang (whose insights into China's strategies lend credence to the feasibility of such an alliance). For the diligent, all we have to do, is to ignore what everyone is saying, and watch what they are doing. Just as Russia began building up its forces alongside the border of Ukraine in the months leading up to their attack, at a certain point, actions will move beyond bluster to certainty. As such, much of what China, North Korea, and Russia are doing now, is seemingly preparing for what will follow in the near future.

Geopolitical weakness always invites aggression. Just as the policy of appeasement enticed Herr Hitler to conquer Europe, so to will the current discombobulated rabble of weak kneed leaders cause our adversaries to make the moves they think they can get away with. Peace thru strength is the only way, apart from the return of Christ Himself, will sway the desperate from irrevocable actions that will cause the deaths of millions. As Winston Churchill once warned, "You cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth."

Now, before we get started, let's summarize the state of the world as it stands today. In 2024, the geopolitical landscape is shaped by a mix of longstanding conflicts, new conflicts, emerging technological challenges, and internal political strife within key nations. Adding to the political discord, is the record number of nations entering into a time of political elections this year (76 to be exact). Nevertheless, here is a concise overview based on insights from leading think tanks and advisory firms:

1. U.S. Division: The U.S. faces significant internal strife, especially from the presidential election, threatening social unity and global stature, with the election outcome likely worsening divisions.

2. Middle East Tensions: The potential for escalated conflict between Israel and Hamas could lead to a broader regional war, involving Hezbollah, Fatah, Houthis, ISIS, and others, risking regional and economic instability.

3. Ukraine Conflict: Ukraine may end up partitioned, with Russia solidifying control over Donbas and Crimea. Failure thus far to address these strategic challenges will make territorial losses permanent.

4. Technological and AI Governance: AI and technology's fast development is outpacing governments ability to control it, potentially causing unforeseen effects.

5. China's Slowdown: China's economic slowdown could negatively impact global markets and lead to more protectionist policies, particularly if Trump is re-elected.

6. Global Conflict Hotspots: Rising global conflicts challenge UN and regional peace efforts, with crises in places like Haiti, and Mexico, as well as potential conflicts involving Turkey, China, North Korea, Pakistan, and Israel.

7. Global Economic Pressures: Inflation and high interest rates continue to challenge global economies, limiting the ability of governments to stimulate growth or respond to shocks.
   

How World War III will begin in FOUR Steps

1. Keep Poking the Russian Bear: The West's continuous support of Ukraine through military aid risks provoking Russia further. A violation of Russia's red lines could lead to Russia intensifying its efforts to conquer Ukraine, potentially escalating the conflict regionally. The most likely aggressive moves by Russia may involve (1) targeting US/EU strategic undersea data cables off the unguarded coast of Ireland, (2) controlling strategic maritime points like Gotland Island in the Baltic Sea, and (3) threatening the sovereignty of Baltic NATO members by cutting off the Baltic States of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia by securing the Salki Gap in Poland.

Now, given the clear advantage that NATO has over Russia in terms of strength and size, it would seem suicidal to do this...however, when you factor in the cascading chain reaction that may already be in the works, you can see how the following will work together to dismantle the Western stronghold over the world in just a few steps.

2. China makes its Move: Russia having already secured military support and aid agreements with China before it invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Russian expansion becomes the catalyst for China to make its own moves. These agreements would include things such as recognition of Taiwan once China repatriates it back to the mainland, as well as providing a majority of China's energy and food supply needs, which Russia has in abundance. Moreover, the Chinese could easily augment the Russians with air and ground forces via airlifts providing tens of thousands of PLA soldiers to help secure areas once they've taken it.

At the same time, China readies the bulk of its military forces to retake Taiwan. Whatever support might have come from other global forces against Russia in a single war/theater conflict, are now at a minimum, split in half between European and Pacific theaters to protect Taiwan. China knows if it takes Taiwan, it will likely suffer massive repercussions via sanctions and embargoes, but it can then use the former Taiwanese microchip monopoly as leverage against the West against those moves. Even if Taiwan destroys its microchip capabilities, reuniting Taiwan is a must.

IMG courtesy from Reallifelore (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBY5veWGBd8)

3. Unleashing North Korea: Concurrent with its invasion of Taiwan, China then gives North Korea the green light to begin its assault on South Korea. While most of the North Korean EMP threats the US has been briefed on over the past 20 years have focused on an EMP strike against the United States mainland, the threat doesn't match North Korea's goals. NK wants to reunify the entire Korean peninsula.

A more likely scenario would be if North Korea initiated its attack on the South by detonating an EMP over its airspace, which wouldn't (presumably) hurt Pyongyang much given its antiquated infrastructure and analog systems (see image below) but would decimate the high-tech capital city of Seoul as well as the rest of South Korea and even Japan. It's unlikely that NK could hold the whole of the peninsula, but the attack may successfully move the 38th Parallel DMZ much further south gobbling up resources and wealth along the way. This splits US forces a second time in the Pacific theater, further weakening US resolve, capabilities, and resources.

IMG (https://www.geospatialworld.net/blogs/two-koreas-10-maps-show-vast-contradictions/) Satellite imagery at night shows the sharp contrast between the two countries.

Quoting from the same source:

South Korea is renowned as a technology manufacturing hub and for fast internet connectivity, whereas more than 60% North Korea is not even electrified. Similarly, the transportation networks of the two Koreas are vastly disparate as well. In South Korea 97% of the roads are paved, while in North Korea only 8% of the roads are paved.

Every power player knows that it must play to its strengths, and when your country remains stuck in the 1950s, while your adversary is almost entirely high-tech, it makes sense to lead off with the most damaging assault up front, which is to crash the entire electrical grid of South Korea and follow that up by a massive artillery bombardment of Seoul. When you add in the various other missile attacks, amphibious assaults on key areas of the south, as well as minimal US participation (given the missile blanket protection from China), the North would take advantage of this scenario.

4. The Iranian Dream: In conjunction with the aforementioned actions, Iran could then make a move against Saudi Arabia and Bahrain in an attempt to take control of Islam's holiest sites of Mecca & Medina, not to mention its vast oil reserves in the east. They could use their conventional military comprising 587,000 active duty soldiers, plus another 200,000 in reserve forces while keeping the Basij (civilian militias in reserve) to assist in maintaining control in Tehran and other key cities.

• the Islamic Republic of Iran Army (Artesh)

• the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (Sepah)

• the Law Enforcement Force (Faraja).

When you factor in all the additional Shia militia forces in Bahrain, and Iraq, as well as the Houthis rebels in Yemen, it would be a formidable size to take over a country like Saudi Arabia. While the Saudi kingdom is large in land size, it only has three or four major population centers to account for its 37.3 million citizens. The rest of the country is largely uninhabited deserts. Again, this would presumably draw in Western forces effectively splitting US forces a fourth time to help protect this OPEC member and Middle East partner.

IMG Courtesy of Task and Purpose (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGtXa8dUH5c)

If the above situation occurs, it leads me to ultimately conclude that WWIII appears more likely, than less, and it's happening, allowing for the final stage setting of the last day's coalitions.

Conclusion

Despite sounding impossible, the convergence of just two of the four events mentioned above would make World War III inevitable. However, acknowledging some undeniable facts first is essential.

Historically, nations with conflicting interests have often allied against common threats, embodying the principle that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. This isn't about friendship among nations but about strategic alliances formed in response to being collectively cornered by the West.

The Western push to maintain a world order dominated by the USA, aiming towards global governance, is resisted by countries like Russia and China, who are prepared to oppose this shift to the end. Underestimating their resolve to prevent a global governance system would be a mistake.

Moreover, humanity is grappling with increasingly complex challenges that many argue could only be resolved through global governance. This suggests an inevitable shift away from the current world order which is increasingly faltering under a 20th-century model, despite fierce resistance. This then creates a volatile transition period between what is and what will be, and presents an enticing momentary window of weakness that the East will seek to exploit regardless of the steep costs they may pay in the near term. They know their window of opportunity is closing quickly, and they may never get this chance again.

Why is that window closing you ask?

1. Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China's populations are shrinking and/or aging out

2. New technologies like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, digital currencies, and Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS) are quickly making the 20th-century power projection model of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) irrelevant

3. Formerly weak EU nations such as Poland, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, France, Italy, and the United Kingdom are rebuilding their strength in light of the current Russia-Ukraine war

4. The Abraham Accords and the Third Jewish Temple aspirations threaten Iran's ambitions of uniting the Muslim world against Israel

5. The geopolitical and economic decline of the United States presents a unique opportunity to open up a multi-theater war

The ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, though not directly mentioned in the Bible, suggests the following prophetic outcome: the consolidation of Europe into a formidable military power. For example, Poland is emerging as a significant force in mainland Europe, aiming to build a 300,000-strong army with modern tanks, artillery, and fifth-generation fighter jets by 2030, potentially rivaling Russia's formidable SU 57 fighters. This indicates that any delay by Russia (or similar challenges faced by China with Taiwan and Iran with Saudi Arabia) in confronting its adversaries will only complicate their objectives, especially against a backdrop of globalist ambitions for a unified government.

There are three scenarios in which the West could trigger Russia's "red line".

1. Accident: Given all of the automated and nonhuman systems we use, it's completely feasible that at some point, a system fails, and by it, sets in motion an unfortunate chain of events.

2. Slow burn: Both sides continue to amp up the rhetoric and warmongering until it reaches of a point of no return, and one side does something it cannot take back.

3. Intentional: An even more frightening scenario, reminiscent of "The Sum of All Fears," envisages European elites manipulating the US and Russia into mutual destruction by covertly triggering the Kremlin's red line much in the same vein as the Nordstream Pipeline sabotage. This may snowball the way for the aforementioned chain of events.

While this may seem far-fetched, history reminds us that major conflicts can start from minor events, making such outcomes not entirely implausible. This speculative landscape also includes the likelihood of cyberattacks, activation of sleeper cells, and direct assaults on Western infrastructure, exploiting vulnerabilities to force a swift end to hostilities. As such, it leads me to three questions:

Question 1: So for the sake of argument, let's say that Russia can achieve most, if not all of its goals above. Similarly, China retakes Taiwan, North Korea destroys and plunders South Korea, and Iran retakes the Muslim holy sites and strategic oil reserves. How does BRICS fit into this WW3 scenario?

Answer: Most likely, it would splinter BRICS and force a restructuring of it that excludes India, Brazil, UEA, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and South Africa (not to include those new nations who just joined.) The new coalition might include China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Turkey. However, if it were to include all the former Soviet Satellite states (i.e., the Central Asian states of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) it may be rolled up into the existing Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

This broad coming together is reflected in other Eurasian groupings: SCO – the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, including China, India, Iran, Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Pakistan; and ECO – the Economic Cooperation Organization, including Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Critics deride the lack of cohesiveness in these organizations but they miss the point. Eurasia is coming together despite its differences. It has learnt to navigate diversity. (Source)

Question 2: How does the above scenario set the stage for a future Gog-Magog War as we see in Ezekiel 38-39?

Answer: While we don't know exactly how this unfolds, we do know by their presence (and notable absences) that the three key players, Russia, Iran, and Turkey, are still around for this future conflict. We also note, that there are no nations like the United States mentioned as influencing or preventing Gog and Magog from amassing a massive coalition of Eurasian and African nations that seeks to destroy Israel. While Saudi Arabia (Sheba and Dedan) and Western Europe (the merchants of Tarshish, and all their young lions) will be in no shape to stop this massive coalition from coming against Israel.

IMG Courtesy of Christ in Prophecy (Source)

Question 3. Does this WW3 scenario mean nuclear war? The threat of nuclear war has always carried with it the idea of "mutually assured destruction," meaning when fought this way, nobody wins. I believe that the world's militaries have such a vast array of weapons at present, that nuclear detonations would be the very last straw any nation would take. Even still, cyber-attacks and other forms of digital and electronic warfare may make nuclear war infeasible. The only "nuclear" attack I see coming is when used to provide an Electro-Magnetic-Pulse effect.

Biblical Implications: In losing some or all of Eastern Europe, NATO would be forced to dissolve and restructure itself into an EU Army. I believe this EU Army, which will be rebranded as the New Roman Army or Rome 2.0 (or some variation of that) is what becomes the primary military force that the Antichrist uses to solidify his control over the other ten kings (Dan 7:24, Rev 17:12) after the rapture. This move by the EU then, could be what triggers the Gog Magog participants to solidify their coalition after achieving their immediate goals, and eventually turning their sights on Israel when the dust settles from a WWIII scenario. While it seems possible that this scenario plays out before the Rapture of the Church, it may happen in conjunction with the Rapture or shortly thereafter.

But when you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be troubled; for such things must happen, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be earthquakes in various places, and there will be famines and troubles. These are the beginnings of sorrows. Mark 13:7-8

Extra: While not necessarily related to the topic at hand, found this to be very fascinating