Odds are good for more war

During many tense international incidents during the last century, the comparison has been made to Europe in 1914. For decades, the European powers had been creating vast alliances, building devasting weapons and huge conscripted armies, and playing games of international brinksmanship designed to see who would blink first... or go to war. The "lesson" of most studies of the causes of World War I is that there was no real reason for war, everyone just prepared for it so much that one incident in one country caused the entire world to go to war.

Although it's been done before, I can't but help point out our own precarious situation in regards to a large regional war in the middle east with multiple state and non-state actors. Although I still feel that it's likely that cooler heads will prevail, India and Pakistan seem the most likely starting point for a war. Since the Mumbai massacre, India and Pakistan have been eyeing each other very carefully, with their hands near their holsters. Both countries have rushed forces to their respective borders in preparation for a war. 2 days ago things heated up considerably when the Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, claimed that the Pakistani government had a hand in the Mumbai massacre. The Austro-Hungarian government claimed the same thing of the Serbian government when the heir to the throne, Archduke Ferdinand, was assassinated. The next step is for India to make an ultimatum to Pakistan. A war between the two countries would be disastrous. Both countries possess nuclear weapons, and could greatly damage the environment of the entire world with a limited nuclear exchange. Even barring a nuclear war, any war would undoubtedly destabilize the Pakistani government, which might bring Islamic extremists to power in nuclear Pakistan, or increase the power of the Taliban tenfold. In Afghanistan, the Taliban already controls most of the country and is by all accounts winning the war against the United States. Obama plans to escalate the war and send more soldiers to Afghanistan. With Pakistani troops on the Indian border, the Taliban and other Islamic fundamentalist groups will be able to run wild in western Pakistan and an increase in US troops in Afghanistan will only give them more support, especially if the "Afghan surge" proves to be ineffective.
Tensions are also building in the Middle East over the invasion of Gaza by Israel. Arab states and groups have been emboldened by the IDF's failure in the 2006 Lebanon War and Israeli impotence in being unable to attack Iran, and Israel is scrambling to regain its reputation of invincibility. The attack on Gaza is just the beginning. They may claim that Hamas is being supported by Iran and launch their long-awaited attack. An attack on Iran would cause the Iraq insurgency to heat back up, with new support and attacks coming directly from Iran, and possibly Syria. Israel would have to contend with another infitada launched from the West Bank, as well as attacks from Hezbollah and Syria. A large regional war would have implications throughout the middle east and abroad. Muslim governments with pro-western leaders might be overthrown, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan.
In the scenarios I've outlined above, the United States would not be able to win without conscription, and a massive reorganization of the process of creating weapons, to better mass produce and reduce expenses. This is also assuming that the European Union, Russia, and China don't get involved. If they did, the outcome would be completely unpredictable. In any case, I place my bets on more war for 2009. Any takers?