A "World War" probably isn't characterized by its "size" (whatever that means) but rather by the fact that the combat theatre extends over much of "the world", or that much of "the world" are active belligerents. Ukraine is right now a localized conflict; I don't think it counts.

FWIW, as one potential size metric: casualties in Ukraine (so far) are comparable to the Korean or Vietnam War, and an order of magnitude less than the World Wars (even though the world has roughly 4x the population now than in 1939). It's much more comparable to those conflicts than either of the World Wars.

▲

cenamus 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Russia has had more casualties than the UK/US/France combined in WW2

	▲	wk_end 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		British, American, and French deaths made up only a small fraction of the 60M-75M killed in WWII, which speaks to the global ("World") nature of a World War. I believe it's also the case that more Vietnamese died during the Vietnam War than the UK/US/France combined during WWII as well.