The next super-power?

[MajorProblem]

Who will it be? The EU (with the United States as a close ally I hope) or China? China has already been making several aggressive moves militarily that have been grossly understated in the media. Contrary to popular belief, China not only has the largest military, but it is fairly well equiped (they have laser-guided weapons, guided missile cruisers, etc.). The EU is very stable and is growing economically from what I understand.

In case you don't know, I hope the US becomes closer to Europe (after Mr. Bush leaves office) and I also would like to see us stand up for Taiwan. Whatever China says, the fact is that they see us as a rival and are trying their best to cut us down. The only hope for America is for us to stop being so aggressive militarily and culturally and combine the strengths of North America with the EU.

[JustTooCrazy]

Whats to say that the US won't stay a super-power?

[h2orowe]

I just hope we all don't die. I just want the war to stop, I'm getting sick of hearing about casualties. It's sad, knowing they were all once children, knowing they are all young, that they haven't lived near as long as they would've.

[Collapse]

Personally it's China. Might be possible that US *may* lose its messianique (sp?) position.

Well, all according to John Titor anyway.

[Kragar]

China, hands down. Europe has a lot of factors in its favor, but China has the raw manpower for production and so much more potential for development. Plus it has an easy supply even cheaper labor in Southeast Asia, where there are a lot of overseas Chinese to act as middlemen. They are already politcally unified, which puts them in a better place to implement reforms that the still-divided EU.

This is assuming the Three Gorges Dam doesn't break, which would change everything.

[Praetorian]

I personally don't see a nation as a superpower when its citizens work 14 hour shifts for a bowl of rice.

This is what is needed to qualify as a superpower.


- Superior economic power, characterized by access to raw materials, volume and productivity of the domestic market, a leading position in world trade as well as global financial markets, innovation and the ability to accumulate capital. - Check. EU, US and China. However, the Chinese economy is relatively fragile as any sudden downturn could usher in economic and political instability.

- A large population, high level of education, well-developed infrastructure and a pronounced cultural and economic ability to shape the regions around them as well as the ones under direct control. Check. EU, US. China doesn't have a high level of education. Yet. At least, relative to the EU and US.

- Pre-eminent military ability, characterized by relative invulnerability, the ability to deter or cause great damage and project military might globally. Check. US and China. EU too, but EU doesn't have one united army, but rather each country has its own. But when combined its ofcourse a force to be reckoned with.

- Having a functioning political system capable of mobilizing resources for world political goals.

EU and the US ofcourse. I don't know about China.



But I say each has a clear potential to be and stay a superpower. The EU with its high(est) GDP, the US with its superb military and second highest GDP, and well, China with its extreme manpower.


Did you guys know that by modern definiton the Dutch were the very first superpower, followed by the Spanish and British?

That's pretty nifty, innit?

[The Obsidian Dragon]

I hear China, Japan, India and Pakistan are making some sort of Colition. One that would Rival USA Econonomicaly and Militarily.

[Mastiker]

USA all the way?

A colition between China, Japan, and those others potentially could suck... But last I checked, India and Pakistan weren't doing anything worth mentioning, and Japan has such a small military, its barely worth calling it a military. I believe China could possibly be the next "superpower", if America's economy turns to crap due to continual increases in gas prices and the whole "Katrina" incident. Not to mention that most Americans are really unaware of what is going on poliitcally in the world... which is what makes this country so great: our ignorance to what's really going on.

Of course, my information is outdated or something to that effect. I haven't really checked on much of this. And some of it is just observations, not actual fact.

[h2orowe]

I thought China and Japan hated each other, and isn't Japan our bitch?

[Mastiker]

I thought China and Japan hated each other, and isn't Japan our bitch?

"President Bush: Hey Japan, America's gonna invade Iraq. We want you to send us some troops for support.
Prime Minister Koizumi: Um, but...we don't really have an army, just a Self-Defense Force. And NOBODY here has anything to do with Iraq, the public is strongly anti-war, it's kind of pointless for us...
Bush: I don't care. Coalition of the Willing. You're coming.
Koizumi: Ok. I'm sorry for my insolence. The troops are on their way.
Bush: Oh yeah. Gaijin Smash"

Thank you Az :D

[h2orowe]

Well, I meant Japan's our bitch, because we stole their military :D now they have a self defence force :p we pwnd them.

[Moe]

Well, I meant Japan's our bitch, because we stole their military :D now they have a self defence force :p we pwnd them.

But at the expense of several thousand lives.

[Snake eyeS]

Without even researching it, im pretty sure the EU and USA will rise together, EU taking the lead and USA learning from EU. Even though USA is a pretty shitty country(the are planning on banning FAKE weapons but keep selling real ones?!?) at the moment. Im sure their puberty days will be over in 20+ years and that they will listen from their parents: the EU. and when they are grown up, we will be one big happy family, maybe china/japan bieng the far away cousins who we like around for holidays, but are fine with them staying on their side of the planet.

but its just a long wait till USA doesnt acts like teenages, trying to prove themselfs to the world. ones USA was considered a great country with sharing their wealth and technology, now its known as a country who has to size up their dicks with everyone else.

well thats sounds pretty weird, but thats my opinion :)

[whispering]

China, almoust. But after they start sounding really nationalistic and militaristic, it scares the rest of the world. After that EU countrys with US, Canada, Australia, Japan and Taiwan (Russia wount take any side) are gonna make one big alliance, that if China attacks, all must take action, witch results in the third WW, due to a conflict in Taiwan. After that comes a huge depression in Eurasia and N-America, that with the greenhouse effects results into a new ice age. Then comes a new era of Human geenmanipulation, in hope to alter humans so that they would survive through the ice age. Some survive, most dont. The colonists that desided to leave earth, now living in Moon and Mars slowly become the biggest Super Power.

[StormShadow]

I think that America will remain a super power merely because we constantly make innovations in military technology. China may have numbers, but just like a body, if we have the capabilities to take out the leaders, the limbs will flay about and not know what to do. How many other countries have stealth technology? And you might be saying to yourself, well, why can't China develope good military tchnoology? There is a good reason for that. America as at war. Look at most of the acheivements of the past century and look at how many things were either improved for the war effort, or developed for a war effort.

[Mushu]

UNA

United Nations of Africa - if they freakingly get asses to gather, which is happening

[Praetorian]

I think that America will remain a super power merely because we constantly make innovations in military technology. China may have numbers, but just like a body, if we have the capabilities to take out the leaders, the limbs will flay about and not know what to do. How many other countries have stealth technology?.


The Eurofighter Typhoon is superior to any American aircraft currently available.

[StormShadow]

NO country has the level of Stealth technology that America has. What good are typhoons if they are destroyed on the ground? They wouldn't even know what hit them.

[Praetorian]

NO country has the level of Stealth technology that America has. What good are typhoons if they are destroyed on the ground? They wouldn't even know what hit them.


While the Typhoon lacks the all-aspect stealth technology of the F/A-22, the design does incorporate many low-observable features, resulting in a much smaller radar cross-section than earlier fighters. It is also capable of sustained supersonic cruise without using afterburners. The F/A-22 and the Rafale are the only other current fighter with supercruise capabilities. - Wikipedia.


Planes are to perform in the air, not on the ground. And so far this baby has outperformed anything the US has thrown at it.

[Pete]

China - the only country with enough manpower/technology to challenge the US before they acquire total hegemony.

[Praetorian]

Yes, because Europe's technology is vastly inferior to US' technology.

[StormShadow]

I think also China and the US have the ability do lea their own troops. If the EU got into a scuffle, whose troops would be used? Who would direct them? Would the French be cool with their troops being guided by a German? Vice versa? Would you have several government generals fighting over who gets sent where to fight, and how? I think that those internal problems would undercut some of the EU's abilities.

[Praetorian]

Honestly, as far as I can see the EU is perfectly happy with the US being the only military superpower. The way I interpreter it, they basically say 'we like to talk, but we don't want to get our hands dirty'.

[whispering]

If the EU got into a scuffle, whose troops would be used? Who would direct them? Would the French be cool with their troops being guided by a German? Vice versa? Would you have several government generals fighting over who gets sent where to fight, and how? I think that those internal problems would undercut some of the EU's abilities.
You have to remember that EU is still very young. Things dont happen in one night.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Rapid_Reaction_Force

[StormShadow]

I know things don't happen in a night, but I think that until the EU is tested on this issue, a structure won't be set up. And if a structure is set up, I still think that until this is tested people will have complaints.
Ok, you say your in Finland. Let's say a French General controls the ground forces. How would you react to Finnish soldiers being on front lines all the time? What about always being sent on the most deadly campaigns? What if a German person was in charge, telling the French how to run their army? It really won't be tested until a conflict comes, and even then, I doubt all the kinks could be worked out.

[Praetorian]

I think that with this European force there is no such thing as 'Finnish soldiers'. Rather, 'European soldiers'.

[Snake eyeS]

USA, in the course they are heading now... will be pushed aside military and economy wise aside by others... your country is running dry on cash.
And a super power is not someone who has the biggest military, its more about who is the most stable and has the best economy. if USA decides to take over, they will get buttfucked by EU(including rusland)Chine/japan and afrika. if any other country would try it, the same result, nobody can become a superpower no more, the weapons are to destructive nowadays.
Even luxembourg could win any war if they shot a few nukes. its not about size and mantroops, its about ..Weapons of mass destruction. they will be used, because we are people, and people are weak and like to cheat to win.

Lets just hope we can all get along without the use of military forces, cause we will all loose when that happens.

[StormShadow]

Even if they are considered 'European soldiers' they still came from Finland, right? Does it all become 'Europen Union' instead of a group of nations under one agreement? So what perentage of "EU Soldiers" come from which country? I think that even if they say, "100 EU soldiers killed in battle today" every Finnish person's first thought will be "How many of those were Finnish?".

[Snake eyeS]

Even if they are considered 'European soldiers' they still came from Finland, right? Does it all become 'Europen Union' instead of a group of nations under one agreement? So what perentage of "EU Soldiers" come from which country? I think that even if they say, "100 EU soldiers killed in battle today" every Finnish person's first thought will be "How many of those were Finnish?".

IF the EU has to defend itself, then people will react to as if their own country is bieng attacked. pretty much all of EU is at peace with eachother, so i dont think we will see germans running back to home because the french started to tease them on the frontline. they will defend their country(which is slowly becoming the EU) if your not from the EU you will not get the fellowship most countries have with eachother, you should visit Brussel someday.. all the major countries are cuddling eachother on a daily basis there :p

[StormShadow]

You play a good game, I'll give you that. But one final thought. Depending on who is in control of the military, somebody is going to get dicked over, and it probably won't be the country of origin of who is in control.

[Pete]

Yes, because Europe's technology is vastly inferior to US' technology.

I said manpower and technology, they need a combination of both to be able to contend with the US. One without the other is useless against the US (has been since Vietnam).

[Snake eyeS]

another thing you can add to your mix of manpower and technology is endurance, and i think USA wont last that long if they insist on pushing trough with they war against terrorism. As i said before, it seems USA is running dry on cash and followers, alot of people are in uproar about the bush administrating, with an unsatisfied country you wont win a war.

I hope USA does a 180 and decides to help with bringing peace in a peaceful way, if the soldiers brought a shovel/learning book instead of an M16, i think many of the iraqis woudnt hestitate to let USA "help" iraq be free again., not by shooting up people and bringing peace with force. USA can still be great, you guys just need to shape up.

[StormShadow]

another thing you can add to your mix of manpower and technology is endurance, and i think USA wont last that long if they insist on pushing trough with they war against terrorism. As i said before, it seems USA is running dry on cash and followers, alot of people are in uproar about the bush administrating, with an unsatisfied country you wont win a war.

I hope USA does a 180 and decides to help with bringing peace in a peaceful way, if the soldiers brought a shovel/learning book instead of an M16, i think many of the iraqis woudnt hestitate to let USA "help" iraq be free again., not by shooting up people and bringing peace with force. USA can still be great, you guys just need to shape up.

Dude, the U.S. forces in Iraq aren't shooting everything in site. The U.S. has brought in doctors and medicine. I read an article the other day about a medic who spends all his free time working on prosthetics for children. The Iraqi people are helping the GIs on the ground. Most of teh insurgents are NOT Iraqi, but Saudi, Yemeni, Irani, or some other Arabic country. IN Afghanistan girls couldn't go to school. As they can now, wouldn't you say that that is a lot liek bringing in books? The Army corp of engineers is training Iraqi Engineers, which they did not have prior to now, on how to make sidewalks and other things. Despite what the media makes you think, things are better, and tehy get better all the time.

[Kragar]

- Superior economic power, characterized by access to raw materials, volume and productivity of the domestic market, a leading position in world trade as well as global financial markets, innovation and the ability to accumulate capital. - Check. EU, US and China. However, the Chinese economy is relatively fragile as any sudden downturn could usher in economic and political instability.

Asian contagion ring a bell? The Chinese economy has not only weathered economic storms during the past decade, its stability actually creates instability for others in the region and around the world.

- A large population, high level of education, well-developed infrastructure and a pronounced cultural and economic ability to shape the regions around them as well as the ones under direct control. Check. EU, US... China doesn't have a high level of education. Yet.

It has a high level of education in important sectors. Not the whole society, but there have been superpowers with uneducated lower-classes.

China also has a remendous cultural and economic influence around its region. Just ask all the overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia who still think of China as their motherland, and all the governments who get string-free loans from the PRC.

- Having a functioning political system capable of mobilizing resources for world political goals.

EU and the US ofcourse. I don't know about China.

Have you heard about the anti-Japanese riots?

[Praetorian]

I said manpower and technology, they need a combination of both to be able to contend with the US. One without the other is useless against the US (has been since Vietnam).


There are also more people living in the EU.

[Snake eyeS]

Dude, the U.S. forces in Iraq aren't shooting everything in site. The U.S. has brought in doctors and medicine. I read an article the other day about a medic who spends all his free time working on prosthetics for children. The Iraqi people are helping the GIs on the ground. Most of teh insurgents are NOT Iraqi, but Saudi, Yemeni, Irani, or some other Arabic country. IN Afghanistan girls couldn't go to school. As they can now, wouldn't you say that that is a lot liek bringing in books? The Army corp of engineers is training Iraqi Engineers, which they did not have prior to now, on how to make sidewalks and other things. Despite what the media makes you think, things are better, and tehy get better all the time.

I think you assumed that i was againt the war in iraq, im not.. just dont agree with the way they did it, and their timing. I hope iraq will be a better country when they are gone. what i dont get is that they are staying there.. so that they can keep the peace? the fight on the street is over, saddam is taken and will be dealt with. i dont see much use that they will stay there and keep fighting the growing group of terrorisms who want them out of iraq. iraq has a new gouverment, a new system. people are more free then they were before. thanks USA and the rest of the world, now please fuck off and stop shooting eachother because your afraid of bomb attacks.

in a way im trying to say: dont help them with keeping peace by guarding the streets and bieng their as the international cop, be there as the proffesor, the teacher, the diplomat, the builder.. not as their army.

[Praetorian]

I have to say, as nice as the things you say sound, Snake, ruling a country just doesn't work that way.

[Snake eyeS]

the war was needed, i've followed the war from south across the river to bagdad and i know that it was nessacery, but mission accomplished? saddam is gone and his army is gone, the people are free now. why stay around and be subject to everyday suicide attacks? the way i see it is, that those freaks keep blowing stuff up aslong as we (EU/USA) are there.. why not back off and only let a few people stay back educating the people?

[StormShadow]

Dude, have you not read about the training the US is giveing the Iraqis? We are training their military leaders, so that they can in turn train themselves. The U.S. is there as an auxiliary force, constantly training the Iraqis. The Iraqis go on their own mission now, with the U.S. holding hands, but they conduct some of their own stuff. Any period of reconstruction is going to require a military force to be their for some time. The military their are fulfilling roles as police, military, and whatever else they can do, while they train the Iraqis to do thses things themselves, until Iraq can do it for itself.

[Snake eyeS]

why in the hell would iraq an army?
i would rather see USA teach them real things, not teaching them to be agrrive again. bring peace with peace. why wage war and afterwards give them a new army?
Thats whats pissed me off, why always the focus on army/military, fighting? learn them how to plant a friggin tree, not how to shoot someone. the iraqi are no retards, they have had a police force and an army for themselfs.. eventhough saddam was a major biatch there and suppressed his country.. his country had everything any other country has there.. teaching a country that has had quite a few wars how to form a new army... am i the only one who thinks this is bizar?

[StormShadow]

Iraq kind of doesn't haev a police force, or e real army. And we are not teaching the Iraqis how to wage WAR, merely DEFENCE. What country doesn't haev an army? It is an adherent right of any sovereign nation to maintain it's own fighting force, for DEFENCE. You mention these wars. Do militaries start wars, or is it the politicians? Who was in power the last couple times Iraq went to war? Hmmmmm..... that one is quite the brain buster. Armies do more than just wage war, btw. Look at Americas guard units, what do yu think the Corp of Engineers do? How old are you? You seem to have a very simplistic and naive view of the world. And oh yes, I forget to mention this, servicemen in Iraq build playgrounds for children. What the fuck is wrong with that?

[Random]

China, almoust. But after they start sounding really nationalistic and militaristic, it scares the rest of the world. After that EU countrys with US, Canada, Australia, Japan and Taiwan (Russia wount take any side) are gonna make one big alliance, that if China attacks, all must take action, witch results in the third WW, due to a conflict in Taiwan. After that comes a huge depression in Eurasia and N-America, that with the greenhouse effects results into a new ice age. Then comes a new era of Human geenmanipulation, in hope to alter humans so that they would survive through the ice age. Some survive, most dont. The colonists that desided to leave earth, now living in Moon and Mars slowly become the biggest Super Power.

/me follows your theory.

I still await the day we see, on TV everywhere, soldiers pulling Bush out of a cave / mountain hideout(and arresting him, vis a vis the Saddam thing).
Do you think that will ever happen?

[Pete]

There are also more people living in the EU.

That's only a factor if conscription starts up. China have the largest currently trained army, followed by the USA.

Unfortunately the War in Iraq was always going to necessitate a long occupation as they were effectively stirring up a hornet's nest in the middle east. The amount of terrorists now in Iraq pre-war is shocking.

Mission wasn't accomplished with regards to Iraq as no WMDs were found.

[Cybren]

I don't think the USA could be removed from its hegimony at this point. From its position of power, it would be hard for a country to approach it without a response.
China, I doubt would be able to reach super power status regardless. But we'll see.
What i fear, is the United States increasingly anti-intellectual laws preventing many students and scholars from around the world from moving here, which has in the past been a source of most of our technological innovations

[setrict]

i would rather see USA teach them real things, not teaching them to be agrrive again. bring peace with peace. why wage war and afterwards give them a new army?

Iraq is not a unified country. There are many different and opposing groups, each with their own agenda both political and religious. Creating and army there is a way trying to glue the country together, where the factions cannot work independently without risking reactions from the whole. Saddam, as bad as he was, was the stabilizing glue for that country. To remove him and expect the Iraq people to unite and pick up the pieces is unfortunately, just not realistic.

I agree that we should 'teach', and in some ways that is what we are trying to do by helping them come together as something other than pieces help in place by a regime. When they are unified for their common good, that is the time to do the things you suggest.

Superpowers

I hope the days of any superpower will come to an end. America for a long time has been reaping the benefits from being at the top of the economic wave created by the industrial and technological revolutions. This position cannot be maintained indefinately. As the world becomes a smaller place thanks to technology, we are seeing a redistribution. If it's not handled well, the standard of living in the US will go down, and the world standard of living will come up in it's place. My hope is that America will stabilize, get some common sense, and stop being a glutton so that we (the world, not just the us) can work to bring the standard of living up to the same or similar levels all over the world.

The most important restraining factor against a military superpower at this point is our growing economic inter-dependence. As long as we can make war unprofitable, I think we'll do ok. Maybe.

*The Allied military and civilian losses were 44 million; those of the Axis, 11 million.
I don't mean to belittle the loss of life in Iraq, but in comparison with WWII it seems insignificant. We talk of military superpowers, but can you imagine anything of this scale happening now? The US military is stretched with what in comparison is a minor skirmish, and we are supposed to be a military superpower?

*source (http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/WWII.html)

[Snake eyeS]

Iraq is not a unified country. There are many different and opposing groups, each with their own agenda both political and religious. Creating and army there is a way trying to glue the country together, where the factions cannot work independently without risking reactions from the whole. Saddam, as bad as he was, was the stabilizing glue for that country. To remove him and expect the Iraq people to unite and pick up the pieces is unfortunately, just not realistic.

Ok that clears things up for me, i wasnt really 2 sure about what was happening over in iraq, only that the international troops having no real goal, except to protect their own. my statement was based on the tought that it was silly to train someone his army after you have destroyed it. its not like the whole world came to Germany to train them a new army. i was seeing it from that point of vieuw. Thanks for clearing it up for me. So the troops just have to sit there and keep things fairly peaceful till the iraqi people unite?
i would hate to be one of those troops :(

[Praetorian]

I hope the days of any superpower will come to an end. America for a long time has been reaping the benefits from being at the top of the economic wave created by the industrial and technological revolutions. This position cannot be maintained indefinately. As the world becomes a smaller place thanks to technology, we are seeing a redistribution. If it's not handled well, the standard of living in the US will go down, and the world standard of living will come up in it's place. My hope is that America will stabilize, get some common sense, and stop being a glutton so that we (the world, not just the us) can work to bring the standard of living up to the same or similar levels all over the world.


Although you're right in what you're saying, you must not forget that there are countries in the world with an even higher standard of life than the US. Incidentally, 4 of these are European. I realise this didn't add anything to the discussion, rather I just wanted to point this out as I often talk to Americans whom, for some reason, think that their country has the highest quality of life in the world. Although you're in the top 10, and there probably isn't much of a difference.

[caseylim]

Let's hope that Malaysia become the next superpower. Eventhough it won't happen.

Actually to thinkk that China to be the next super power is not so logic. As you can see, the westerners are not fond of asians not matter how much they like their product. US or Eu wont be so kind hearted to share their technology to china except for producing cheap labour products.

Being a super power needs coorperation from nearby advanced countries, and to think that china and Japan would be friends after the Yasukuni shrine incident, it won't. So china has not much chance in doing so. Japan on the other hand can't because of it's population.

But to stop US from emerging as the superpower, all countries will just have to sabotage US and support another country. Anyway I ope that there is no suer powers. Everyone is fair. not communism but fair.

[baslisks]

anyone else see a 1984ish way of life forming with the tech advances and the military advances?

[Slartibart]

Well when the average chinese earns one sixth , or the average indian earns one forth of an average american their countrys economy will be bout that of the USA. And still their workforce will be six or four times cheaper. Meaning they can have 4-6 times more scientists , 4-6 times construction workers , 4-6 soldiers etc.. Given the opportunity china/india will grow big, fast.

The prospect of 1,5 billion blue nationalistic communists with advanced tech and weaponry is kinda scary tho :S

[Quartermaster]

Japan. More later.

[Mr.Babalo]

I'm Seventh Day Adventist, we all know the bible points to china will be the last superpower before jesus comes.

[Ahimsa]

Europe...USA....China....? Don't forget about .... Pinky and the Brain >.<

[Scapegoat Handy]

The next super-power will be that first ape that realizes that the scorched bones of the creatures that came and went before him can be used as weapons.

[MajorProblem]

Just remember guys, it probably won't be through a military confrontation, but the US WILL fall from it's pedestal, and right now it's starting to lose it's balance. If you can name a major world power that stayed that way forever, I'll go to the post office and mail you a cookie. I think that before the US falls, though, Europeans will have achieved much greater unity, and the powers such as the USA, Canada, Taiwan, etc. can tag along and face China diplomatically at least. But that's just the opinion of a naive 16-year-old.

[hahaman]

there probaly won't be a next superpower
if the us falls watch it take the rest of the world in to bloody hell with it

[Praetorian]

there probaly won't be a next superpower
if the us falls watch it take the rest of the world in to bloody hell with it


Haha, man. Like all the former superpowers did?

[Invictus]

Well, the biggest superpowers of the last two millennia have been Rome, Britain, and the United States.

Rome falls: Dark Ages. Life is nasty, brutish, and short.

Britain deflates: In most of the countries Britain once occupied, life is nasty, brutish, and short.

United States falls (I'd put more money on a fall than a deflate): ??? You can rest assured that life will be nasty, brutish, and short, though...

[h2orowe]

Heh IM THE NEXT SUPER POWER!

What if Jamaica was the next super power? They'd bomb us with Ganja bombs.

[Praetorian]

Well, the biggest superpowers of the last two millennia have been Rome, Britain, and the United States.

Rome falls: Dark Ages. Life is nasty, brutish, and short.

Britain deflates: In most of the countries Britain once occupied, life is nasty, brutish, and short.

United States falls (I'd put more money on a fall than a deflate): ??? You can rest assured that life will be nasty, brutish, and short, though...


Keyword for Britain being 'countries Britain once occupied'. I doubt the European Union would suffer too much if the United States would fall as a superpower. Also, the Mongolian and Alexandrian superpowers were larger than any of the above superpowers. Let us not forget about the (relatively tame in comparison) Ottoman Empire. Hell, even my very own country (the Netherlands) was the worlds very first modern superpower (before the Spanish and British Empire). All of these have (partially or fully) fallen in a way, and none of these brought any political instabilities for a long period (notable exception being the Alexandrian Empire, with his generals all wanting to be the next Alexander and such).

And I'd definetly not put the United States on the same level as the Roman or British Empire. Heck, I'd not even put it on the same level as the Netherlands Empire. You are not the (relative, ofcourse) most powerful superpower ever. Sure, you have a relatively large amount of influence over the world, but so does the European Union, and many of you say we're not a superpower. Unless you were to sling over your entire nuclear arsenal before you would fall, it's unlikely that the world would be doomed. Ofcourse if your economy would suddenly crash, that's a different story. But even then, I think the richest countries in the world would be able to survive. At least if their currency isn't tied to the USD.

[Josh]

China does have some cool military stuff but their main battle tank, the most widly used anyway, sucks. In field tests it was taken out by an Iraqi T-72. Sure, China also has laser guided stuff and their new tank even has a little laser that keeps it from being hit with other laser guided stuff so easily. But that doesnt matter when your gettin hit with depleted uranium rounds.

To say Europe is inferior to America in terms of military stuff isn't completely true. They have some sweet air units and Britain and Germany have the second and third best tanks in the world. The EU as a military power though is weak as hell because as mentioned no one nation wants their troops led by another nation. But still, they are pretty good force.

Lets not forget that India has a lot of manpower as well as a decent armed forces and if America goes to war with China, chances they will too. China has been checkin out Nepal for a while now and they would probably try to take it before the Americans got their main force anywhere near Asia. As im sure some of you know the M1A2 Abrams is a heavy son of a bitch. It takes one c-5 cargo plane just to carry one. Ergo, it would take some serious time to get them into action giving China a good amount of time to get what they need and buckle down.

I probably put too much emphasis on tanks though... We could just bomb their power plants. They are going to be low on power for a few more years anyway.

I think China does have what it takes to become a super power though, if they play their cards right.

Oh yes, I don't think India and Pakistan will be joining a coalition. They hate eachother a whole lot. They might have gotten past that, I havent heard anything about it. Korea and China are also "allied" and Korea wouldnt take kindly to being allied with Japan, even indirectly.

[Urban~Ninja]

Im think Australia, i mean look at us, we do hardly anything and we are pretty high up, if we actually started to think about doing more things with the large amounts of area we have we could easily become a very big power, but we are in drought so i dunno if we could supply water.

[paul]

Hahaha, taiwan isn't even worth mentioning. The US doesn't give a shit about taiwan, they pretend to just to stay on the edge against China. One missile and boom, there goes taiwan. I've met many taiwan people, many friends who are from there. I can say that most of them bear no agression against chinese mainland, nor vice versa. They are almost identical except for the fact that they believe they grew up in a "more caring and democratic society", the effects of which I have yet to see. As far as they're concerned, we are the same people, and I can say that for us as well. In fact, on both coasts, we have this 2-coasts-same-people-friendship program sponsored by the government and its been tehre for a long time. I feel that the chinese governemnt (like any government) is simply not backing down from anything. There are no conflicts between the citizens, its the governments.

As for Australia, when I was living there, the last I heard the Australian government pays the indonesian government for not invading them XD (joke). Anyway, the news last time said the australian airforce sent 2 fighter jets to shoot down a large weather balloon, spent a couple of thousand dollars worth of rounds, failed in shooting it down XD.

[Invictus]

You are not the (relative, ofcourse) most powerful superpower ever. Sure, you have a relatively large amount of influence over the world, but so does the European Union, and many of you say we're not a superpower.

I would greatly prefer that you not assume I am an American just because I believe the United States is a superpower... ;)

[StormShadow]

Oh yes, I don't think India and Pakistan will be joining a coalition. They hate eachother a whole lot. They might have gotten past that, I havent heard anything about it. Korea and China are also "allied" and Korea wouldnt take kindly to being allied with Japan, even indirectly.

Both India and Pakistan had a hand in the coalition against Afghanistan. The only reason you don't really hear about htis is because the U.S made a deal with Pres. Musharraf that the U.S. would really act as though India was involved, just so the Packistanis wouldn't be upset with the government.

[Praetorian]

I would greatly prefer that you not assume I am an American just because I believe the United States is a superpower... ;)

Never did I say the US is not a superpower, just not even comparable to some of the world's former superpowers.

[whispering]

The EU as a military power though is weak as hell because as mentioned no one nation wants their troops led by another nation. But still, they are pretty good force.
The EU is weak, they dont even have an army :p Its the nations that are part of the EU that make it strong. What ive read, The EU's rapid force "test" missions went really well. And in my understanding the squads are from one country, and the squads work together. Like e.g. US and UK in iraq. But the point of EU is NOT to start wars. The forces are there to resolve conflicts, a force that can quickly be mobilised. I dont think it can even be compared to single country armys, as the EU one is more like peacekeepers. But if a country in far future desides to attack an EU country, i doubt they would be facing an army of one nationality.

Still, the US is IMO in military stuff far more superior then any other country, equipment and experience wise. Still there are tons of other things that would matter in a real situation. To speculate witch country would win witch country. Is like speculating the effects of global warming. SO witch is military wise more powerful, EU, US or China? I hope we'll never know for sure.

[Kaji]

Kind of amusing how people think the US will be learning lessons from the EU when in the end chances are it'll be the other way around. The citizens of the US didn't start without a background somewhere in the old world, after all. Most of our founders started as British, and as such took much from the British system, removing the elements they saw as bad (e.g. the king). We had English, Irish, French, Dutch, Germans, Italians, Russians, and just about anything else you could name, and they've all found ways to work together. Furthermore, the independent nations that sprung up as the former colonies after the war found out how to work together, and did so even more quickly since they didn't have time to develop an extensive history independent of each other before uniting. The EU (compliments of France) can't even agree on a single common tongue compliments of the French wanting to hold onto the glory days of a past 200 years gone.

[KiwiKitty]

I hear China, Japan, India and Pakistan are making some sort of Colition. One that would Rival USA Econonomicaly and Militarily.

I think you're referring to the BRIC alliance (Brazil, Russia, India, China), which hasn't been reported on in western media very much at all. It's a political and mililtary alliance, be interesting to see what comes of it.

[Pierrot le Fou]

Military power is beyond useless at this point. First of all, the US has the power to destroy the world with its nukes. Anyone planning to take out the US, even if they do have the ability, will be screwed. There is no functioning missile defense system, and not many countries that could afford it even if there were. And while it may protect the country who holds it mostly, all it takes is a few nukes to really ruin your day.

Discussing tanks, planes, and other military miscellany really matters more in smaller wars -- not between superpowers. There's a reason that the US and the USSR fought by proxy through podunk countries rather than out in the open after all...

Furthermore, the advances in transportation and communication have made this world truly global, with 24 hour markets across the world's major economies, and economies so dependent on imports and exports that a loss to one of the major economies would be disasterous. The US economy is growing at a healthy rate, despite all the nay-saying about the world, and doesn't look to be in danger of collapsing. After all, the rest of the world isn't dumb enough not to buy incredibly reliable bonds to keep them afloat.

The EU is a lost cause. While it has a strong economy, the economy is incredibly dependent on the various countries inside the EU, the currency is still new and not a staple of the international community like the dollar, not to mention the serious problems with having a 'united' conglomeration of languages, cultures, and ethnicities. There's also the problem of Britain not swapping to the Euro, considering that the British economy is one of the strongest, if not the strongest in Europe.

China on the other hand has huge political problems, and is currently riding a wave of economic growth on the back of early industrial growth. Their currency is unreliable because they don't let it valuate itself (using economic protections to assure cheaper exports, much like Japan did to bring itself into the world market), and their government is unreliable (because it is unresponsive to the people, and refers to the capitalist-friendly policies as an experiment of sort, despite its success, and the fact that any idiot can see how beneficial it's been).

China is a long way off from being a superpower, but they definitely are an important piece of the international economy, along with the EU and Japan, but doesn't look to be able to rise to the level of the US in our lifetimes. Anything is possible, of course, but the only recent economic example of an exploding economy of that sort was Japan's bubble which burst violently in the 80's due to the fact that they didn't open their markets up early enough to allow the market to adjust to changing practices.

China seems to be doing better, but it also means that they are going to be suffering from a slower growth rate than Japan did with their periodic changes of their protectionist policies. They're still going to be in for a shock when/if they open their markets up for real, and we don't know how strong that will be because of their government, but it probably will prevent them from kicking unholy arse as we all thought the Japanese were doing 20 years ago.

Russia was a superpower because we had the abilities to blow each other up, and nobody else had the ability to destroy either of our countries. That allowed for MAD (mutually assured destruction) which was the foundation of the Cold War being Cold. We are alone now, with a ton of nukes, and control of the world economy (as unreasonable economic policies such as huge inflation to reduce the debt would sink the world economy in a real hurry, while doing the same to the Euro wouldn't have anywhere near as powerful an effect on global markets). The US isn't going to leave the superpower stage any time in our lifetimes without taking the world down with it.

And everyone knows that.

[Praetorian]

Military power is beyond useless at this point. First of all, the US has the power to destroy the world with its nukes. Anyone planning to take out the US, even if they do have the ability, will be screwed. There is no functioning missile defense system, and not many countries that could afford it even if there were. And while it may protect the country who holds it mostly, all it takes is a few nukes to really ruin your day.

You're not the only country that has nukes. While you indubitably have the most, it doesn't really matter anyway. Most larger European countries have the power to blow North America way. Twice.

Discussing tanks, planes, and other military miscellany really matters more in smaller wars -- not between superpowers. There's a reason that the US and the USSR fought by proxy through podunk countries rather than out in the open after all...

Furthermore, the advances in transportation and communication have made this world truly global, with 24 hour markets across the world's major economies, and economies so dependent on imports and exports that a loss to one of the major economies would be disasterous. The US economy is growing at a healthy rate, despite all the nay-saying about the world, and doesn't look to be in danger of collapsing. After all, the rest of the world isn't dumb enough not to buy incredibly reliable bonds to keep them afloat.

The EU is a lost cause. While it has a strong economy, the economy is incredibly dependent on the various countries inside the EU, the currency is still new and not a staple of the international community like the dollar, not to mention the serious problems with having a 'united' conglomeration of languages, cultures, and ethnicities. There's also the problem of Britain not swapping to the Euro, considering that the British economy is one of the strongest, if not the strongest in Europe.

Not the strongest. In fact, GDP wise, Britain is relatively on par compared to most other large EU countries. But you're right, yes. I don't agree that the EU is a lost cause, but the barriers definetly make things harder.

China on the other hand has huge political problems, and is currently riding a wave of economic growth on the back of early industrial growth. Their currency is unreliable because they don't let it valuate itself (using economic protections to assure cheaper exports, much like Japan did to bring itself into the world market), and their government is unreliable (because it is unresponsive to the people, and refers to the capitalist-friendly policies as an experiment of sort, despite its success, and the fact that any idiot can see how beneficial it's been).

As far as I know, you're right.

China is a long way off from being a superpower, but they definitely are an important piece of the international economy, along with the EU and Japan, but doesn't look to be able to rise to the level of the US in our lifetimes. Anything is possible, of course, but the only recent economic example of an exploding economy of that sort was Japan's bubble which burst violently in the 80's due to the fact that they didn't open their markets up early enough to allow the market to adjust to changing practices.

According to a friend who really researches this, the Chinese aren't too fussed about becoming a global power anyway, as long as they hold a large amount of territorial influence.

China seems to be doing better, but it also means that they are going to be suffering from a slower growth rate than Japan did with their periodic changes of their protectionist policies. They're still going to be in for a shock when/if they open their markets up for real, and we don't know how strong that will be because of their government, but it probably will prevent them from kicking unholy arse as we all thought the Japanese were doing 20 years ago.

Russia was a superpower because we had the abilities to blow each other up, and nobody else had the ability to destroy either of our countries. That allowed for MAD (mutually assured destruction) which was the foundation of the Cold War being Cold. We are alone now, with a ton of nukes, and control of the world economy (as unreasonable economic policies such as huge inflation to reduce the debt would sink the world economy in a real hurry, while doing the same to the Euro wouldn't have anywhere near as powerful an effect on global markets). The US isn't going to leave the superpower stage any time in our lifetimes without taking the world down with it.

The Euro is one of the world's strongest currencies at the moment, and many countries are switching from the dollar to the Euro slowly but steadily

And everyone knows that.

And everyone knows that.

My text is in bold.


To quote a friend;

Drusilla: They dont seem to realise that superpowers "fall" because of bankruptcy, not major wars.
Drusilla: Rome fell because it couldnt pay for a good enough military, British empire ended when it became bankrupt, same for Spain.
Drusilla: WW1 destroyed the german and austro hungarian empires because they were bankrupted.
Drusilla: Bankruptcy isnt a dead economy either, its debt.
Drusilla: And the US has 3 trillion usd in debt.
Drusilla: Most of that to europe and china, what happens to the USA if we decide we want our money, if the US annoys us too much.

[Drusilla]

Kind of been following this debate through Praetorian for a while, just thought I'd make a little post since my family have been dealing in politics and power for centuries.
On superpowers:
The US will not cease to be a superpower in the forseeable future. It will, however, cease to be the only superpower, and unless it reforms itself it will cease to be a major superpower. China will be a superpower, it has no interest in projecting its power globally, its interests lie in territorial integrity as they always have. Chinese have never, and will never, be expansionist.
Other superpowers will be India, Russia, to a lesser degree the EU and Iran. I say to a lesser degree as Europes strength lies in its unity and its economy, not in its military nor does it desire to project its power globally. Iran will be the dominant power in the Mideast and control massive revnues and population, and will likely project its power regionally, but not globally.
India will be a power purely through size, much like China. Another mostly dormant power.
Russia is recovering, and will regain its old strength eventually, it is also forging very close relations with China, Iran and the EU, leaving it with no enemies to constrain it.
Superpowers are not destroyed directly by war. Rome fell due to infrastructure degredation and financial problems resulting in them not being able to field highly skilled armies, and resulted in an inabiltiy to cope with natural disasters, as well as defend its borders.
Britain fell because WW2 bankrupted the empire, despite the empires strong economy the cost of the war created massive debt. The British empire controlled a quarter of the globe and was the most powerful human state since Rome
The Spanish empire and numerous other superpowers all fell through debt, not war. WW1 didnt destroy the German empire, nor the Austro Hungarian empire. the cost of the war and the cost of losing left them with massive debts, which took over 10 years to pay and left the countries ruined.
The notable differences are the First and Second French empires, which both fell militarily. And no cracks about French military prowess, the French have a military heritage which makes the US look like a second year bully, and their soldiers are extremely good.

On military matters:
The US has the largest military on earth. It is technologically advanced, though its equipment is often inferior to others. The Russians, Germans and Israelis all do better tanks, the Ukrainians make the best APCs followed by the Australians, French make the best aircraft and so on. Its soldiers are decent. It handles logistics and command and control better than anyone Unfortunately its track record is shameful. Gulf War I was its only strategic victory since 1945, its special forces operations have a success rate under 50% and it lets in vogue operational theories distract it from doing what is necessary to win a conflict.
This does not make a military superpower. the Spanish empire never lost a battle in one hundred years, Britain hasnt lost a war in 300, France dominated the european continent for 1100 years, Rome kept one quarter of the worlds population safe and prosperous for two centuries etc.
In a conventional war, the USA would win. Unfortunately, most other threats dont think conventionally.
In regards to equipment, the two most efficient weapons on earth are the AK-47 and the RPG-7. The RPG can damage and destroy any US armour and the AK is the equal to any US gun and the things just dont break or misfire, unlike US weapons. Incidentally these two weapons are cheap and favoured by discerning insurgents everywhere. Half the casualties (dead an injured) are the result of RPG attacks, which has incidentally meant a far larger proportion of limb loss and other horrific injuries than would be expected.
On countries:
The USA does not have the best standard of living in the world, it has the poorest. 12% of the population live below the povery line, a poverty line more lenient than that applied to other countries. the country is wealthy, teh people are not. 90% of the population believe they are in the top 5% wealth catagory.
Europe has the highest standard of living and the lowest poverty of any region in the world, and the wealth is far more evenly distributed.
These points all come from UN sources and are not disputed by the US government, just not publicised.
The US it not the most generous of all countries in regards to aid, as is often claimed. It ranks very poorly, not in the top 15.

On power:
The US has immense power, little control. An empire this does not make, the US "empire" is failing now because it is losing control, it has lost the respect of the world and never had enough control, only influence, to maintain itself otherwise. South America is beginning to go its own way, Iran openly flouts US demands, Europe ignores trade restrictions on China, the list goes on. Militarily the farce in Iraq has not only overstretched the US military it has shown even a (relatively) poorly organised guerilla campaign can derail the USAs plans. No one fears the USA anymore, few respect the USA, and there is nothing the USA can do about it, more and more countries switch export payments to the Euro, and more continune to go against what the USA wants.

As a final note, learn the difference between government and people, all these points apply to thecountry, not the population. Few hate Americans, they are kind, generous and friendly people for the most part. Most disagree with the government and the "empire". Happily that wont be a concern for more than a decade and a half or so. Maybe less.

The title of this topic is rather silly, there will never be a "the superpower" again, most likely, the last 15 years of US dominance is an historical anomaly, you should have said "The next superpowers". Because the world is returning to multilateralism.
Countess Drusilla Louise Stratiskovsky.

[Pierrot le Fou]

And the armchair economists among us seem to think that somehow having a huge deficit means the economy is weak. The deficit is there because the economy is strong. The US gov't owes $5 trillion to other countries (read: bonds). Our public debt is $8 trillion. Yet we are doing great in comparison to the second largest economy in the world -- Japan -- in regards to our debt to GDP ratio. And that tends to be a rather good sign. Those 5 trillion, while they look horrid on paper, are people investing in our economy. That tends to go counter to the concept that our economy is going to crash because of it, otherwise you'd take a wild shot in the dark that the people buying those bonds would be reluctant to keep buying them. Considering that the debt keeps increasing, it doesn't seem likely that they will stop anytime soon, which means they still think it's in their best interest.

Granted the largest owner of US bonds is Asia -- specifically Japan -- and that Japan uses those bonds to control the value of the yen rather than as a pure investment, but when the second largest economy in the world is willing to support our spending habits, and our GDP is still growing healthily, I fail to see where the impending doom of the deficit is.

Furthermore, if the US does fall out of being a superpower, because of that debt, then the world's #2 economy will collapse because of it, and they are a big source of fuel along with the US for China's economic boom, which will have a huge impact on the markets for European goods, and so on. We'd see a Greater-than-the-Great-Depression Depression. And that's saying something. So you can tell your friend Drusilla that we are $8 trillion in debt -- not 3 -- and that it isn't likely to cause the government to collapse because it would screw the world hardcore and in a hurry.

As for your comments, you seem to be missing my point. Just because France, Israel, India, Pakistan, China, and a potential few others have nukes doesn't mean that our nukes have no meaning. Any one of those countries that attacked us with a nuclear first strike would be wiped off the map in a heartbeat if the US felt like it. And none of those countries has enough to destroy the US capabilities for a retaliatory strike -- not even all of them together do. Russia had somewhere in the ballpark of 10,000 weapons, and wouldn't do a first strike, because despite that arsenal it would STILL be suicidal. So stating that other countries have nukes doesn't change the fact that the US has more, and any attempt to militarily destroy the US would be suicide in economic as well as military terms.

Europe GDPs:
UK - 1.782 trillion (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/uk.html), 3.2% growth rate, 29.78 million workers
France - 1.737 trillion (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/fr.html), 2.1% growth rate, 27.7 million workers
Germany - 2.362 trillion (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/gm.html), 1.7% growth rate, 42.63 million workers

Those are the only three economies in Europe with an GDP above one trillion dollars. According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union) the size of the entire EU's GDP is $11 trillion, which makes the UK a significant part, and with a growth rate over three times greater than the average EU growth rate (an anemic 1%), along with a greater growth rate than either of the other two major economies in Europe, I'd say their not joining currencies and whatnot is a pretty damned big deal.

UK is the only big economy in Europe with a healthy growth rate, and it's not tossing it's shit in with the rest of the EU. I wonder why?

And despite all the discussion about switching to the Euro as a reserve currency rather than the dollar, there are several reasons I can't see it happening any time in the near future. Firstly, to do so would tank the US economy as they would no longer be able to issue bonds at the same rate, and may run into problems paying bills (that's a bad thing for everyone). Secondly, buying a reserve currency from a region that has a growth rate of 1% makes little sense -- while I'm sure the change of currencies would provide a boost to the EU, I doubt it would compete with the 4.4% growth rate coming out of the US.

Economics are really complicated. I fell into the trap before of thinking in simplistic terms, such as checkbooks and whatnot. It ain't that simple. Things like reserve currencies, trade deficits, free trade and globalization have also entirely fucked the world's economy for layfolk for the most part, because there's just so much that's going on and intertwined.

Point is, don't listen to people predicting the doomsday while other folk are pouring trillions of dollars -- voluntarily -- into our government. There's something to that.

[Drusilla]

Actually the figures on debt are rather complex because Europe and the US both calculate billions and trillions differently.
You are incorrect however, the US economy IS strong, and it will not collapse, it will merely be unable to sustain the global projection of US power. No one wants the US economy to collapse, they are merely willing to use their leverage on the economy to constrain American action on the global stage.

You also do not understand the nuclear situation. No one with nukes is ever going to attack the US, that would, as you say, be suicide. However, they can do whatever they like and the US cannot constrain them militarily, and could only stop them economically with the cooperation of the rest of the world. What happens is that the counties with nuclear weaponry will be able to do what they like, because if the US attacks them, they can devestate the US. You know the Chinese government is willing to accept the annhilation of every major city in Eastern China, if the US starts a war over Taiwan? In response they destroy ever major city in Western USA, is the US willing to accept that over Taiwan? The Chinese are patient, they will not start a war over Taiwan until the US is unable to respond.

You really misunderstand Americas situation. No country is going to attack you openly, they will merely flout your rules, trade with your enemies, and let you bleed yourself dry trying to prop up your "empire".

To sum it up, when you ower the rest of the worls 8 trillion dollars, you no longer control your own economy. This gives foreign governments massive leverage.

A great example of what is happening is Iran. Iran is reactivating its nuclear program in open defiance of the US. Why? Because they no longer fear military retaliation, as they are in a position of strength in areas vital to the USAs current strategic interests. They no longer fear economic sanctions if referred to the security council. Why? Because Iran is vital to the energy needs of both China and Russia, and the US wasted all its diplomatic capital on the Iraq farce. thus, Iran is doing whatever it wants to enable it to project its power accross the region, and the US is in no position to stop it, as on top of everything else, Iran can make the oil price soar even higher if they withold their supplies. A superpower isnt a superpower when no one does what it wants.

[Pierrot le Fou]

If China were truly willing to sacrifice every city in Eastern China to take Taiwan, then it could have and would have already. If it were to take Taiwan, even were the US not to use nukes, the rammifications of economic action against China would destroy it's growing economy, and any chance of becoming/maintain economic superpower status.

And the American 'Empire?' Been reading the Guardian a little too much?

[Praetorian]

And the American 'Empire?' Been reading the Guardian a little too much?

You'd be surprised how many Americans regard their country as an empire.

[Drusilla]

You show your misunderstanding again. China doesnt want Taiwan "now" it isnt as impatient as America. It is willing to wait until it can take it without serious consequence. You know the Taiwanese reunification movement is gaining in strength, they understand Taiwan is utterly dependant on the US for independance, if the USAs global power diminishes, which it is, they become increasingly vulnerable. Better to rejoin in a way similarto Hong Kong than be obliterated.
It is this "we want results now whatever teh cost" attitude which harms America greatly, as is the assumption everyone else thinks like that.

And I dont read the Guardian, they are innaccurate.

[Pierrot le Fou]

I'm absolutely baffled here. What criteria are you using to define a superpower? Because Praetorian here seems to be stating that if other countries won't do your bidding, then you aren't a superpower. I would argue that the ability to destroy the world and bring the world's economy to a grinding halt would constitute some superpower status. That's just me. The lack of a desire to eliminate ourselves to punish other people does not mean we aren't a superpower. We couldn't exactly nuke east germany or anywhere behind the iron curtain during WWII, does that mean we weren't a superpower?

[Praetorian]

I'm absolutely baffled here. What criteria are you using to define a superpower? Because Praetorian here seems to be stating that if other countries won't do your bidding, then you aren't a superpower. I would argue that the ability to destroy the world and bring the world's economy to a grinding halt would constitute some superpower status. That's just me. The lack of a desire to eliminate ourselves to punish other people does not mean we aren't a superpower. We couldn't exactly nuke east germany or anywhere behind the iron curtain during WWII, does that mean we weren't a superpower?

Perhaps I slipped somewhere, but where did I say that? You're mixing people up here. Although I do agree with Drusilla on many things (and even with you on some points, I have to hand it to you), whatever she says is still her opinion. I am not Drusilla.

[Drusilla]

A super power is a country which has the military and economic might to enforce its will around the world to create an environment conductive to its own development and contiues preservation of its power.
Interestingly enough, Russia's new nuclear warheads are many times powerful than Americas, if the USA did decide to wipe out the world Russia could turn every inch of the US into molten glass before the US could launch enough of its missiles to do the same to most of the rest of the world.
And now you are talking about US agression, funny that. Apt though, the latest round of US aggression in the past few years has been a wild lash out in an attempt to preserve Americas shaky grasp on being the only superpower.
And you still misunderstand. The USA is not going to cease to be a superpower, it is going to cease to be the only superpower, and will no longer be able to project its power, and culture, around the world. The economy isnt going to collapse, and no country is going to attack the USA to reduce its power. Ironically USA is doing that it self. A collapse of the US economy isnt likely, nor is it wanted.

[Pierrot le Fou]

My bad, it was an edit after I had posted a reply and I attributed it to you because I thought it was a post you had posted after her but before my reply rather than a late edit.

[Pierrot le Fou]

Protect its culture? What pray tell is US culture? And it will lose the ability to project its power? Are you predicting the loss of McDonalds? Starbucks? Microsoft?

There is a lot more power in the US than just the government. If we were only talking about the government, the US would possibly be a super-power of sorts, but only because everyone else is crippled too. The power of the US comes from its economy, which is a result of private enterprise. Nothing will cause their power to stop projecting unless Hell turn upside down and the world starts hating fast food and coffee.

[Drusilla]

Project, not protect, my mistake.

You are incorrect, though the US economy is private enterprise based, so were the economies of Rome and Britain, and ironically the US still employs many subsidies, tariffs and safeguards in its domestic economy which it critiscses other countties for having, particularly Europe. Unfortunately the US economy no longer sustains itself, thanks to that large foreign debt. If the power of the USA comes from its economy, and the economy belongs to foreign powers, where does that leave you?

[Trump]

Well, I think we are all agreed that military might has less and less importance. It is more about missles and missle defence and satellites than tanks and planes and troops. You won't see battles any more, aerial dogfights or naval exchanges. It just won't happen! One side will launch missles at the other, and the other will try to shoot them down and fire back. I mean even Iraq tanks and vehicles are really only being used to protect the people sent in to help fix things. And there is no way to win a guerilla war no matter how advanced your military is without resorting to completely inhumane tactics.

And if I had to come up with a plan for military dominance, it would go something like this. Basically, hunt down every satellite in the skies, even commercial ones and replace them with your own. If you control the satellites, if you control the enemies communications network, you would always have the upper hand.

So it does all come down to economics and politics which you all have been discussing.

[Thespis]

China. (I'd have just said "China." but it was too short of a post ;))

[Praetorian]

Those are the only three economies in Europe with an GDP above one trillion dollars. According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union) the size of the entire EU's GDP is $11 trillion, which makes the UK a significant part, and with a growth rate over three times greater than the average EU growth rate (an anemic 1%), along with a greater growth rate than either of the other two major economies in Europe, I'd say their not joining currencies and whatnot is a pretty damned big deal.



Also I wanted to point out the average EU growth rate is 2.7%, not the 1% you were talking about.

[farstrider]

Whats to say that the US won't stay a super-power?

History. America may endure at it's current level of power for hundreds of years (unlikely), but history shows that they will eventually fail and be replaced by somebody else.

[Praetorian]

Like Drusilla said, I don't think the US will stop being a superpower soon, it's just that other superpowers will coexist next to it. The last 20 or so years have been an historical anomaly. Superpowers have *always* coexisted.

[Jai]

China's problem is their navy consists of a leaking old 1970s russian submarine and some blow up rubber row boats that they use to float close to Taiwan and throw rocks at the shore.

The EU will never be a superpower as they will never stop being France, England and Germany long enough to be the EU.

TBH I think Russia is the smokey.

[p1c4z0]

The next superpower will be...The Galapagos Islands.

[setrict]

The next superpower will be...The Galapagos Islands.

Agreed. Modern turtle warfare will completely redifine the term 'shelling'.