Will World War 3 be more like WW1 or WW2?

now World War II hasn't happened yet it could take different forms for brevity this video will assume just one scenario if it's to truly be a World War by definition it can't be just China versus us or just Russia versus Nato even more so because Russia could not survive against NATO without resorting to nukes it's having trouble winning over just Ukraine with limited NATO support so we will Define the next World War as a war where China and Russia are fighting the entire NATO and a few more pacific allies when most people think of world wars they think of World War II indeed there haven't really been many world wars and the second one was bigger deadlier and has remained fresh in people's memories but if one would ask which of the two Wars was an outlier an exception to the rule of how Wars go [ __ ] of thinks that World War I would also be a suitable comparison this video will also show how and why some aspects of World War to the Gulf War and such wars were an aberration it will show that certain battles remain fixed in people's Memories distorting the view of the entire War ultimately the video will show which aspects of the next World War will be closer to World War II and which are more likely to resemble the slow crawl of World War [Music] I today's modern Ukraine war has a lot in common with World War I award that you can try winning Yourself by playing Supremacy 1914 a free online PVP strategy sponsoring this video in it you choose a real country to lead during World War I I'm currently playing as Spain Portugal beware you can play against 100 or more real players each leading their own country Supremacy 1914 is a very Grand strategy and it's real time but paace is methodical matches can take weeks to complete I love that I can play with the same account on both PC and mobile and Supremacy just added Heroes historical and non-historical cards alike they will bring special skills and abilities to your army there's more about the game after our video but for now know that binka viewers get a special gift click on the link in the description to create an account you'll get 15,000 gold and 1 month of Premium subscription for free choose your country and conquer the world World War I had battles where hundreds of thousands of troops fought in fairly small areas of a few dozen kilometers across to move the front you needed Untold supplies to support all those forces even if there was next to no enemy in front of you the movement was still slow the initial fastest phase of the war had Germany advanc roughly a dozen kilometers per day through Belgium with fairly Little Resistance involved World War II introduced motorized Warfare and tank usage on a much larger scale personnel carrier vehicles and a massively bigger motor pool of various trucks were present to haul around supplies all that enabled some fairly quick dashes in World War II there were examples where a very large force would move over 50 km per day Behind Enemy Lines once the initial front line was broken one example would be the German 1941 rush to encircle Minsk where Germans reached the Northeast Minsk in just 5 days having crossed over 300 km so the ization certainly helped there enabling a few times faster movement but without Logistics maintaining Pace without scouting ahead that wouldn't have been possible radio and communication enabled all that and also helped Germany achieve initial success during operation barbarasa though Swift conquests taking huge areas quickly it was due to differences in applied technology like radio Germany used it a lot but Soviets could not utilize it as much on the tactic IC level it was also due to surprise as talin did not believe the attack would come it was also due to experience the entire German Army had 2 years of war experience the Soviets had less on such a scale in World War II there would be far less surprise both politically as the cold war is upon us and due to technology as large formations simply can't be hidden anymore while they're being assembled while China has the least actual War experience Russia has the most US troops of the 2000s had most experience but by today that has somewhat dissipated other NATO and Allied troops haven't seen combat much either except Ukrainian ones in World War II the technology used would be similar on both sides that's unlike in World War II where one side with a much more developed economy could Leverage The Tech Advantage like Recon and Sensi platforms over its opponent in World War I the difference in technology between belligerant was gener Aly similar rifles and machine guns used everywhere were similar on both sides artillery guns were similar fighter planes were similar it can be argued that the difference in technology levels between two belligerent was smaller in World War I than it was in World War I one big difference was the usage of Tanks where the Allies had thousands of Tanks while Germany had almost no tanks but tanks came to be dominant only in the late stage of the war though no tanks was also on industrial problem for Germany not just technological one that applied technology difference sort of ties into the difference in production volumes tanks were an extreme example but the Allies were ahead in aircraft produced as well Germany and Austria Hungary made onethird of the Allied plane count but the aircraft themselves weren't as important in World War I so the difference wasn't as important either artillery shell usage is another metric even though ultimately artillery did not pro prove as decisive for breakthroughs it still shows the Central Powers made fewer than half the shell totals of the Allies finally let us look at troop numbers of World War I Central Powers had mobilized roughly half the Allied troop numbers the US figures are not added so they don't distort the picture too much as the US presence wasn't really felt much before 1918 even Russia here distorts the total with its 12 million mobilized and unusually high 9 million casualties Imperial Russia performed badly in World War I and ultimately dropped out of the war as Germany then relocated its troops towards the West it wasn't until mid 1918 when the US numbers really started to get felt and when Germany was in big industrial and mobilization problems that the German line started cracking to sum up World War I one side had doubled the troops more than double the artillery shells three times the aircraft and in late War a massive advantage in armor vehicles and that side won but only after 4 years of a slog of a war with the front lines in the west moving very very slowly another crucial Advantage the winner enjoyed was the economic blockade of its opponent Germany being landlocked and blocked by the Royal Navy and Italian Navy the losing side also lost due to lack of resources one might argue that had Germany had full access to Natural Resources it could have lasted for a year or two longer World War II figures show that the second war was largely a continuation of the first one though there are differences us figures include 1940 as the US was sending large numbers of Hardware to its allies even before it entered the war allies made some five times more heavy armored vehicles than the axes in artillery and mortars the difference was even more lopsided considering the axes were especially focused on mortars artillery wise the difference was 10 to1 in aircraft the Allies again outproduced the axis 3 to1 in terms of Naval output it was far far worse still enough so that Germany and Japan were strangled economically due to Naval blockades starved of resources during the war despite their advantage and submarines finally when it comes to troops mobilized during the war its visible World War II was similar to World War I again the Allies were roughly two times more numerous Here China is included in the fight as they tied up quite a bit of Japanese Ground Forces even though China was poorly equipped but even with earlier figures we saw the second war was much of a repeat of the first the side that lost was low on resources as the war dragged on low on oil Metals chemicals and so on it was low on Hardware like tanks and planes and far lower on guns compared to World War I ultimately it was also behind on Manpower World War II is likely to lower the Gap in TR numbers between two belligerant from roughly 2 to1 to 1 and 1/2 to1 with the Western Allied side being the side with few were troops eventually just imagine what it took to do the Normandy Landings in World War II what the US was considering for invading Japan before it gave up on that idea it rather used nukes given China's size there is virtually no chance of the US and its allies assembling enough Force to land in China and take its home territory so China could afford to send most of its land power to Western Russia if needed depending on the political winds in Europe if that happens the combined land might of Europe and the US may be short on Manpower they might find themselves outnumbered over time as the war progresses into Mass mobilization one side would have a visible close to two times bigger advantage in the number of combat planes but set advantages 2 to1 not the 3 to1 advantage of previous world wars it's very likely production of new planes would ramp up more quickly in NATO and allies favor for at least several years despite China's numerous Industries however it's also plausible NATO would be far behind in production of Sam systems air power has massively changed warfare in World War I airplanes were still mostly there for scouting and to deny Recon to the other side bombing raids were limited compared to what went on in World War II today on one hand Raiders and sens ERS are better than ever non- stealthy planes are at a significant disadvantage but stealthy planes are proliferating greatly causing the radar networks to detect them later and sometimes even not at all when standoff weapons are involved in World War II a plane had to overfly a Target today especially seen in Ukraine the norm has become to release weapons from dozens to hundreds of miles away technology has enabled those bombs and missiles to still hit targets even from such distances in World War II air defenses were largely hit and miss you could overcome them with sheer numbers come Vietnam the US Air power found itself suffering some unsustainable bomber losses for a while until it leveraged its technological and numerical superiority more modern missiles in recent decades managed 50% kill rates and today in Ukraine Russia is basically afraid to go over the front lines in Ukraine as then its aircraft losses would skyro rocket modern Sam systems are simply too dangerous unless you can seriously outnumber them or beat them with Superior technology neither seems likely for World War II today the red team has nearly 2 and 1 half times more landbased long range Sam systems than blue team NATO and allies and approximately four times as many medium-range Sams ones with enough reach to close the airspace above them coupled with lethality of today's Sams compared to the Flack air defenses of the yesterday year the blue side Reliance on air power would not be as pronounced in World War I Sams would partially blunt that edge allies would see some more success in the air but their enemies air bases factories and ports would not nearly be bombed to the degree Germany were in World War II the air War would for the good part be fought over an invisible no man's airspace buffer zone notely venturing enough inside China or Russia allies would occasionally attempt deep strikes but given the unsustainable losses those would produce such strikes would not be regular it would be near stalemate in a way that may resemble more the air war of World War I where air clashes were most often done fairly near the Frontline Technology is only part of the reason there other part is geography while long range Air Raids in world wars were done over a few hundred miles the distance from Germany to Britain and vice versa in World War II those distances would increase substantially and the depth of enemy territory that a plane would have to overfly would be a few times greater giving more opportunities to the defender to spot and shoot down a plane today even stealthy bombers would be hard pressed to fly for an hour inside enemy lands while being observed by enemy Radars from multiple angles thus standoff missiles would be used a lot but compared to the number of targets there are orders of magnitude too few such missiles available those won't make much of a dent during the 3 years of the war in Ukraine Russia attacked Ukraine with some 7,000 Precision missiles of which one3 was intercepted by air defenses to frankly a result that hasn't really been decisive and the EU us China and Russia are far far bigger countries with several dozen times more targets if the war happens fairly soon there wouldn't be enough missiles during both world wars Germany was basically at the Allies doorstep to hurt Russia one first needs to take quite a bit of territory to even get most missiles in range one thing that would likely be a repeat of World War II is Russia moving its industry more Inland making it harder to be reached China may be more compact than Russia but it has a seab buffer surrounding it adding to its strategic depth World War I was one on land no question about that World War II was one on land but air power played a massive role in softening up the enemy and in the Pacific the Navy enabled both land and air power to approach the enemy today large vehicle formations don't seem to be working there were many reports from Ukraine saying that tanks aren't being used like they were used in previous Wars now they set far back and are used as fire support whenever either side tries a mass vehicle rush it ends up in a massacre in World War II Open Fields were conducive to large fast mov moving vehicle formations today such assaults would end up in said formations getting killed unless Absolute Air superiority is achieved first which we showed is unlikely to happen today's sensors have simply gotten too numerous and too good you can't assemble a large force and keep it a secret you can't surprise your opponent with a large attack and cheap defensive options like anti-tank guided missiles remotely laid Mine Fields guided artillery rounds and especially pilot guided kamikazi drones I mean that vehicles are simply not viable it's no wonder that both sides in Ukraine reverted to small squads of soldiers on foot often during nighttime to try and make minimal gains or that Russia has often used electric noisess motorbikes again in small squads to get from Village to Village in a way that's similar to specialized infiltration and trench assault units used in late World War I people tend to forget there was a lot of trench war fa in World War II as well especially the Eastern front in 1942 and 1943 when large parts of the front did not meaningfully move for months quite a bit resembling either World War I fronts or the front in Ukraine today when it comes to the technology Gap the US is somewhat leading in Cutting Edge stuff but when it comes to numbers of applied and fielded technological systems the Gap to China is almost non-existent Europe is in many regards behind China when it comes to the the number of actually fielded high-tech systems Russia is behind Europe in some regards similarly to how it was behind Germany in World War 2 for example Russian deep Recon and surveillance assets are still not numerous enough though it can be said that the Ukraine war has made Russia fairly capable when it comes to surveillance of the immediate front lines by sheer number of small Recon drones but generally Russia is behind in electronics and derived Technologies generally speaking the technological Gap of World War III belligerent seems to be somewhere in between the situation seen in two world wars again not conducive to a quick war finally what about resources and economic blockade famously both world wars had Germany and its allies severely strapped for resources during World War I Germany was especially starved of oil and food as the war went on World War 2 Germany was better prepared there though eventually it too was largely out of fuel today Russia is already heavily sanctioned and its economy turned inwards and towards China China will not really be trading with the West either if it comes to war China today is much more oriented to exporting various commercial products than Germany was in World Wars China's Naval trade routes to neutral countries would be cut by Western navies so a huge chunk of the World Market will not be there for China anymore before the majority of the oil and iron was used to produce non-war Time products once the war War start and the market access Narrows China would find itself in a surplus of oil chemicals and iron that would be valid even without Russia and with Russia in play pretty much all natural resources missing will be traded via plentiful land routes compared to previous world wars there would be no one belligerent side strapped for resources both would have enough fuel food chemical steel and other stuff to last for years if not a decade in a way World War II is a bit closer to the World War III situation but only because World War I Germany was so strapped for resources then again World War II Japan was low on everything due to the war and the US blockade from oil food to Steel But ultimately if one wanted to compare World War II Germany and Japan to today's Russia and China the latter two would be much more self-sustainable and much more resilient economically during a long War World War II had large swats of territory change hands faster than in World War I but when both sides were evenly matched when there was little surprise involved then the front lines were also quite static the gulf Wars of 1991 and 2003 may lead some to think that future Wars may be quick but keep in mind the US Coalition was hugely Superior to its opponent in technology morale information and surveillance and even in numbers where it mattered what about the Ukraine war that's basically the most recent War there is in the early period Ukraine had more troops and managed some territorial successes during most of 2023 both sides had similar numbers and the front lines hardly budged and now that Ukraine is still falling behind in troop numbers Russia is slowly taking advantage of that numbers matter in world wars not just people but the size of economies and with the size of economies involved in the next World War it seems likely we are looking at a very very protracted World War unlike anything we saw before one way to shorten it might be nuclear weapons but that's a route no one sayane wants to take now before we elaborate on Supremacy 1914 gameplay existing players may be interested to learn that they can help support binkov directly through the game when purchasing anything through the in-game web shop a small part of your payment will go towards supporting my channel you just need to enter the code Bank of during the checkout process anyway what I love about Supremacy 1914 is that it's streamlined there are various units like Cavalry tanks planes railroad guns and more but it's easily manageable sometimes I don't want to decide on Research Supremacy simply unlocks new stuff for everyone as the match progresses yet all the depth of Province and morale management as covering the stock exchange for good deals and sweet talking your neighbors into key alliances all that is present there are various game modes available like a 500 player big world map a hypothetical us 1914 War map but I'm inclined towards the classic World War I also when I play I usually get a month of premium account for six bucks it just streamlines the game a bit with rally points building cues and other perks remember click on the link in the description if you want to create an account and try it out you'll get 155,000 gold and 1 month of Premium subscription for free that offer is available for 30 days only so don't lose time and remember bov may talk about war but only real peace can bring us all together