Almost certainly not in our life time.

After World War II, there were systemic aspects in place globally to ensure there wouldn't be another repeat, after learning grossly from the failures of the aftermath of World War I. Also, nuclear weapons themselves actually help prevent global war through the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). MAD is the mechanism that kept the Cold War cold. And that concept is still in play today - Iran isn't dangerous with nuclear weapons on the premise they would use them, because they wouldn't. But it would give Iran a huge bargaining position, one of which the US doesn't want.

The only way World War III begins is through an unattached terrorist lone wolf or terrorist group. But this is highly unlikely - for a terrorist to gain the nuclear bomb (or materials to build a nuke), they would almost certainly would have to get it from a supporting nation (which is why Bush's harboring terrorist/with us or against us mantra was spot on). But why would a rouge nation even do this, as MAD surely applies even if it's indirectly. And, what's more, even groups like ISIS aren't hell bent on destroying the entire world, but rather want to set up their own Islamic State world, which is the very antithesis of destroying the world in a WWIII cataclysmic disaster.

To say that there's a good chance of WWIII in our lifetime is naive, and simplistic at best, as it ignores everything that has taken place since 1945. History does suggest that there will be WWIII, but that same history suggests that we're currently very safe. I believe the true "statistic" is that we're at the safest we've ever been. Pretty damning, no?

After World War II, there were systemic aspects in place globally to ensure there wouldn't be another repeat, after learning grossly from the failures of the aftermath of World War I. Also, nuclear weapons themselves actually help prevent global war through the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). MAD is the mechanism that kept the Cold War cold. And that concept is still in play today - Iran isn't dangerous with nuclear weapons on the premise they would use them, because they wouldn't. But it would give Iran a huge bargaining position, one of which the US doesn't want.

The only way World War III begins is through an unattached terrorist lone wolf or terrorist group. But this is highly unlikely - for a terrorist to gain the nuclear bomb (or materials to build a nuke), they would almost certainly would have to get it from a supporting nation (which is why Bush's harboring terrorist/with us or against us mantra was spot on). But why would a rouge nation even do this, as MAD surely applies even if it's indirectly. And, what's more, even groups like ISIS aren't hell bent on destroying the entire world, but rather want to set up their own Islamic State, which is the very antithesis of destroying the world in a WWIII cataclysmic disaster.

To say that there's a good chance of WWIII in our lifetime is naive, and simplistic at best, as it ignores everything that has taken place since 1945. History does suggest that there will be WWIII, but that same history suggests that we're currently very safe. I believe the true "statistic" is that we're at the safest we've ever been. Pretty damning, no?