igorfrankensteen wrote:I'm not sure why anyone would WANT to define "world war" in the way required to pretend that the Korean conflict was really WW3. It doesn't accomplish anything functional to do so, thus it strikes me as being a petty semantic argument about how to write a minor entry in a dictionary.

There ARE wars that COULD be said legitimately to have been world wars, but were not so labeled. Many historians these days, would accept relabeling WW one, as actually being the second, third, or even higher numbered World Conflict. The American Revolution was a small side affair relative to Great Britain, since they were struggling world wide against France. A number of historians have suggested that THAT period was also a World War.

But Korea? the fact that a number of nations sent representative contingents in support of the U.N., doesn't fit the same framework that the participants in WW1 and 2 did. Most of the participants in Korea did NOT declare war on North Korea. I don't believe any of them did, actually. So calling it WW3 is a bit silly.

The designation of "World War" is also a very POLITICAL one. There IS no "authority" who controls what is or is not a world war, or even what is or is not a war of any kind. these are political labels, not independently verifiable analysis results.

So why the fuss? Really??

Rome Existed wrote:The definition of a world war is only that a number of major nations are involved. The definition never contained anything about how large an area, multiple continents, etc. That's what people have added today to it.

Rome Existed wrote:Try the Oxford English Dictionary. The original intent of the term was a war involving major nations. It was a very Eurocentric term.

igorfrankensteen wrote:

Well it's just a matter of history. The term world war was only coined a few years before WWI and as such even given the term can be applied to many, (Napoleonic wars come to mind) they aren't named as such as they by that time had names fixed in the collective parlance.

Error: World War One was called the Great War at the time, and only became World War One after WW2 got going. Point is, these designations are given by politicians and historians. It doesn't matter when in the past someone "coined" a term. The only thing that matters is how we choose to use it.

As for the notion that ANY dictionary possesses the AUTHORITY to declare what should or should not be considered to be a world war, is ludicrous. Dictionaries don't even have the authority to declare what the "real" meaning of a word is. They are REFLECTIONS of our society, not authorities over it. If a dictionary failed to properly define a term like "world war," that doesn't mean that what is or isn't well described as being a world war has changed. It just means the dictionary writers blew it at performing their primary job.