We are on the brink of a Third World war—a moment that feels both entirely avoidable and, at the same time, inevitable.
Lately on social media I have noticed memes and videos circulating that, explains in the canonical history of Star Trek, Earth entered its third world war in 2026. Was Gene Roddenberry prophetic, or did he simply observe the arc of history and project a plausible timeline that aligns with humanity’s unshakable stupidity?
The Strauss–Howe generational theory—often framed as the “Fourth Turning”—argues that roughly every 80 to 100 years, societies face a crisis that fundamentally reshapes them. This idea is not unique. Arnold Toynbee is often quoted as saying, “When the last man who remembers the horrors of the last great war dies, the next great war becomes inevitable.” World War 2 ended in in 1945 and the people who lived through that time have since passed on or were too young to fully grasp the horror I am reminded of what Mark Twain observed, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”
The cyclical nature of human history does not require rocket science to understand it, only open eyes. Human beings repeatedly produce systems—and leaders—that lead to instability, conflict, and destruction. Capitalism and the capitalist class being the latest.
I began with Star Trek, one of the most influential science fiction franchises of all time, because science fiction often serves as allegory— as both cautionary tales and aspirational roadmaps. Stories like Star Trek and Star Wars have played that dual role for generations. For some, they even function like religion.
However as an evolved and enlightened culture we recognize these stories as stories, things to take lessons from but not necessary govern our world view. If a politician ran for office claiming to use “the Force” to guide public policy, they would be ridiculed and dismissed. They might attract a fringe following, (myself included lol) but they would not be taken seriously.
In the 1980s, former First Lady Nancy Reagan regularly consulted an astrologer, Joan Quigley, using her advice to help determine President Ronald Reagan’s schedule. The media criticized the administration for allowing superstition to influence governance, while republican politicians and the white house scrambled to distance and downplay the first lady’s influence on the Presidency.
In contrast when George W. Bush claimed that “God told him to end tyranny in Iraq,” in the early 2000s reactions were a bit more mixed. Some media outlets questioned the statement, but others defended it. Political allies of the President reinforced the narrative, and evangelical voters felt validated. A crack had formed in the wall separating church and state—allowing whimsicalness and religious superstition to “enter the chat”.
The United States was founded on principles rooted in the so-called Age of Enlightenment. Thinkers like John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau inspired a reimagining of the social contract—the idea that people could govern themselves without the authority of monarchs or the church. This was radical idea changed the social contract in Europe and in America’s case, it led to revolution.
The architects of the United States believed that reason—not superstition—should guide those in power. Government would derive legitimacy from the consent of the governed, and policy would be shaped through rational debate, not divine revelation.
The separation of church and state was embedded into the Constitution. The First Amendment explicitly prohibits the establishment of religion. This directly contradicts claims by many on the right that the United States was somehow founded as a Christian nation.
Regardless of the framers’ intent and decades of court decisions reinforcing that separation, recent rulings and political movements have blurred the line. Personal religious beliefs—no matter how extreme—have increasingly influenced law and governance. We have seen rulings that support public funding for religious schools, permit prayer in public institutions, restrict LGBTQ+ rights, and overturn longstanding precedents such as Roe v. Wade. These shifts signal a broader ideological transformation. As a result, emboldened Christian nationalists now occupy key positions across government—including within political leadership and elements of the military.
Recent reports suggest that U.S. service members have been told by commanding officers that conflict with Iran is part of a biblical “End Times” prophecy. According to complaints filed by troops, briefings have referenced the Book of Revelation, Armageddon, and the idea that war is part of “God’s divine plan.” Watchdog organizations report that more than 200 such complaints have been filed across multiple military branches.
The current secretary of defense (or war depending on who you talk to), Pete Hegseth is a known Christian fundamentalist, who wrote in his 2020 book "American Crusade, "those who enjoy Western civilization should "thank a crusader." has been reportedly holding hosts monthly church services for defense department employees, ordered the production of military propaganda videos with Bible verses alongside military footage. This month the secretary’s religious rhetoric to the press is causing alarm to some. Hegseth recently said to CBS’ 60 minutes, “The providence of our almighty God is there protecting those troops, and we’re committed to this mission.” This unapologetic religiosity is dangerous to a secular society.
Historically, religion has often been used by elites to mobilize populations and justify violence. Monarchs ruled by divine right. Empires expanded in the name of God. Wars were framed as sacred duties rather than what they often were: struggles for power, territory, and wealth, i.e. “Hegseth’s crusades”.
The American experiment was meant to depart from that model—despite its own contradictions. While the nation spoke of liberty and equality, it simultaneously upheld slavery and enabled the genocide of Indigenous peoples. Still in spite of the cognitive dissonance and baked in hypocrisy of the men crafting the constitution, the founders understood the dangers of theocracy and sought to prevent it.
Despite technological advancement and increased access to information, the past several decades has seen the consolidation of religious influence within American politics. The Christian Right has largely captured the Republican Party and continues to exert influence across the broader political landscape.
A significant segment of American Christians believes that the return of Christ is tied to a sequence of End Times events—often associated with the modern state of Israel. In this framework, geopolitical conflict is not merely political; it is prophetic. This belief system represents a powerful voting bloc and a major source of political funding.
Political opportunists have long recognized the utility of this alignment. Evangelical voters see prophecy fulfilled. Politicians secure loyalty. Defense contractors benefit from sustained conflict. For years, it functioned as a mutually beneficial indulgence.
Now, however, we are witnessing a convergence: individuals once dismissed as fringe are increasingly occupying positions of real authority. This shift is occurring alongside declining public trust, geopolitical instability, and waning global support for U.S. foreign policy.
Benjamin Netanyahu has advocated for military action against Iran for decades but previously lacked a willing U.S. partner. Until Trump no President was foolish enough to start a serious conflict with Iran. The American people has no stomach for this war following unpopular wars in Iraq and Afghanistan people are over it.
With 60 percent disapproval according to polling, and a limited ability to justify our actions on strategic or defensive grounds, war hawks and some conservatives are shifting the narratives toward religious a framing—casting war as divinely sanctioned.
I am not a constitutional professor but I believe it is safe to state emphatically that, the Constitution does not authorize holy wars! Members of the military swear an oath to defend the Constitution—not religious prophecy. Armageddon is not a strategic objective. The Rapture is not a post-war reconstruction plan.
The United States has long criticized extremist groups for waging religious wars—labeling them backward and dangerous. Even now the terms radicals, and zealots are being thrown around to describe those in the Middle East, The pot is definitely calling the kettle black, or the lunatic is calling cleric crazy, take your pick.
The question we must ask ourselves: Is the government being driven by genuine religious zealots who believe they are ushering in the End Times? Or by calculated actors who understand the power of such beliefs and exploit them to justify policy?
The answer is likely both.
History shows us that elites rarely act on religious conviction alone. More often, religion regularly deployed as a tool to mobilize support while underlying motives—power, profit, and control—remain the true drivers.
At the same time, there is a growing presence of leaders who openly reject scientific consensus, dismiss empirical evidence, and prioritize ideological authority over institutional norms. Recent policy directions—impacting education, public health, and environmental regulation—raise serious concerns about governance grounded in evidence and accountability.
Taken together, this creates a volatile mix: ideological extremism combined with political opportunism.
And that is what makes this moment particularly dangerous.
Ironically, Ali Khamenei was criticized by some within Iran’s leadership for allowing his religious convictions to restrain the country from pursuing more extreme retaliatory actions against the West, as well as from more aggressively advancing nuclear weapons development.
With his death, and with Ramadan having recently concluded at the time of writing, it is possible that more forceful counterattacks—shifting from a defensive to a more offensive posture—could follow, particularly as violence during this holy period is generally discouraged in Islamic practice.
Sources
The Guardian – “US troops were told war on Iran was ‘all part of God’s divine plan’, watchdog alleges”
Middle East Eye – “US troops were told Iran war ‘anointed by Jesus’ to bring on Armageddon, watchdog says”
Esquire - The Iran War Is God’s Plan, Say U.S. Military Leaders (Who Believe Trump Was Anointed by Jesus)
Military Leaders See Iran War as “God’s Divine Plan” — a Chilling Turn for Trump’s Fascism
Pete Hegseth’s Christian rhetoric reignites scrutiny after the U.S. goes to war with Iran