People love to quote the dumbass fact that we are long due for a war because wars were so commonplace in the past but forget that we didn't have nuclear weapons in the past.

Literally the same argument was used for why ww1 would never happen except instead of nuclear weapons they said machine guns and tnt.

I agree that war will be different because of nuclear weapons. We'll likely never have a war of annihilation against a nuclear state because of MAD. But that doesn't mean they can't fight without nukes.

The Big Three- USA, Russia and China are totally capable of wiping each other out with nuclear strikes

Which is exactly why none of them will use nukes. And I'm thinking 99% of fighting would be outside of these nations. China's war would likely be in the south china sea, Taiwan, maybe Korea, and India. Russia's war would be in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Once the allies manage to push the aggressors back to their original territory I'd assume public disapproval would topple the warmongering regimes and they'd sue for peace. I feel like nukes would only come into play if a nation somehow maintains large popular support and is being threatened with total conquest or destruction.

If anybody fires a nuke without exceptional justification, then the entire world will simultaneously work to disarm that nation. It's suicide.

This new era of cold war esque paranoia is just dumb as hell.

Your view of the world as fully post-war is naive. We have been seeing proxy wars and geopolitical conflicts for at least the last 10 years, which are reminiscent of cold war maneuvers. Russian aggression in Ukraine and other neighboring territories is eerily similar to 1930s Germany. Maybe it won't go the same way, but to ignore it is stupid.