NationStates Jolt Archive

Im writing an essay on this tommorrow and was just wondering what most of you thought about who would be the next hegemonic rival of the U.S. China? India? EU bloc? Russian degradation into communism/dictatorship? Islamic Alliances? Chad?

Just lookin to see what the general feel is out there concerning recent events.

Canada

i reckon either a united EU, or China

Canada
:rolleyes:

i reckon either a united EU, or China

So China then cos the EU will never be United cos Britain is full of idiots who believe anything they read. (I am British btw)

So China then cos the EU will never be United cos Britain is full of idiots. (I am british btw)

The EU could still eventually rival the US without Briton's help.

China and the EU, but it will be at least 15-20 years.

The EU could still eventually rival the US without Briton's help.

I don't think so. Britain will take others along with it leaving France and Germany to go off to bed.

Why are people ignoring India?

Switzerland :D

It seems to me as if the world is becoming too economically interdependent for any of the major players to risk disrupting it. Any future conflicts will either be economic in nature, or of the relatively "third world/unconventional war" variety.

It seems to me as if the world is becoming too economically interdependent for any of the major players to risk disrupting it. Any future conflicts will either be economic in nature, or of the relatively "third world/unconventional war" variety.

I agree.

I don't think so. Britain will take others along with it leaving France and Germany to go off to bed.


I don't know about that. I can't honestly think of a single country in the EU that has closer ties to Britain than any other European country, and that would so follow our lead if we left.

New Zealand :D

New Zealand :D
Mauritania! :rolleyes:

I don't know about that. I can't honestly think of a single country in the EU that has closer ties to Britain than any other European country, and that would so follow our lead if we left.

I think the closeness of Europe is exagerrated. There are huge gaps. The Italians look to us and the US as did Spain which is now looking owards Poland and the new countries. Meanwhile France and Germany carry the low countries (apart from the Netehrlands) with them. True, Britain is the most fervently hostile towards intergration in that Britain still believes in the Churchillian view of Britain being an 'atlantic bridge' to the USA, but that is a bridge that was only ever temporary and Britons have a huge choice to make in the next few years, EU or the USA. Not necessarily about fighting the one they don't choice but of intergrating more fully with one of the two bodies.

Why are people ignoring India?

What could India do? Intercontinental Ballistic Curry MIssle? Hell, if we got into it with India, we'd shut down all the computer help lines and nearly cripple the Inida economy. Then the influx of Doctors, cab drivers and party store operators would swamp the rest of the Indian economy as those refuges headed home...

Iran or Syria, in either case we don't have enough soldiers to do much, unless theres a draft.

Switzerland :D

I await the day when the rest of the world tells Switzerland where to go. They aren't a member of the EU, they only joined the UN 3 years ago and yet they have the highest GNP per capita in the world. They are living off everyone else's hard work!

I'd say China or North Korea.

I think the closeness of Europe is exagerrated. There are huge gaps. The Italians look to us and the US as did Spain which is now looking owards Poland and the new countries. Meanwhile France and Germany carry the low countries (apart from the Netehrlands) with them. True, Britain is the most fervently hostile towards intergration in that Britain still believes in the Churchillian view of Britain being an 'atlantic bridge' to the USA, but that is a bridge that was only ever temporary and Britons have a huge choice to make in the next few years, EU or the USA. Not necessarily about fighting the one they don't choice but of intergrating more fully with one of the two bodies.

I agree with you that we will have to choose between the EU and the USA. Myself, I'm all for the EU but I don't know whether everyone else will feel that way.

I await the day when the rest of the world tells Switzerland where to go. They aren't a member of the EU, they only joined the UN 3 years ago and yet they have the highest GNP per capita in the world. They are living off everyone else's hard work!
I love Switzerland.

I'd say China or North Korea.

North Korea? Well they get the prize for effort but I don't think they will ever be able to rival the US, because they aren't very receptive to the idea of making alliances. They seem to think the rest of the world is all against them.

I love Switzerland.

Why?

Why?
Their economic superiority.

I agree.
Thanks! I seem to be largely talking to myself today for some reason. :headbang:

North Korea? Well they get the prize for effort but I don't think they will ever be able to rival the US, because they aren't very receptive to the idea of making alliances. They seem to think the rest of the world is all against them.
Not to mention an economic basket case.

Not to mention an economic basket case.
The only thing they do have is a large army and nukes, but the army couldn't hold out for very long.

I say Vatican City.

Their economic superiority.

Their economic superiority is because they manage to avoid contributing to the world economy more than anyone else. As I said, they are not members of the EU, so they don't have to contribute anything to the EU, but they still are happy to receive the occassional help from the EU.

I agree with you that we will have to choose between the EU and the USA. Myself, I'm all for the EU but I don't know whether everyone else will feel that way.

Well I do so, we can try convince them.

I say Vatican City.
Yeah that pope is an evil menace.

Why are people ignoring India?
Because China will rival the US sooner.
They have a weak highly over-regulated economy that is just now getting to where China was 10-15 years ago. (China's GDP is in the neighborhood of twice that of India, and China has had a longeer period of high growth rates.)
India also has trouble supressing it's severe regional conflicts. The PRC has it's own regional conflicts, as well, but Beijing's autocrats supress them much more effectively.
India will need at least 10-15 years to catch up to China.

China and the EU, but it will be at least 15-20 years.

China has a very good chance of surpassing the United States economic trading power. Although, the EU has the better chance of doing it faster than China because of their alliances already obtained. The timeline of 15-20 years is a very conservative estimate, I think, based on my studies, the timeline would be more around 8-12 years.

Their economic superiority is because they manage to avoid contributing to the world economy more than anyone else. As I said, they are not members of the EU, so they don't have to contribute anything to the EU, but they still are happy to receive the occassional help from the EU.
well...looks like they made the right decision

Im writing an essay on this tommorrow and was just wondering what most of you thought about who would be the next hegemonic rival of the U.S. China? India? EU bloc? Russian degradation into communism/dictatorship? Islamic Alliances? Chad?

Just lookin to see what the general feel is out there concerning recent events.

Rivals/ "Cold War Potentials" - First China, then the EU. Russia if it begins to gain influence I.E. reverting other countries to communism if it goes. While I think Islamic Alliances will remain more of a target than a rival.

What could India do? Intercontinental Ballistic Curry MIssle? Hell, if we got into it with India, we'd shut down all the computer help lines and nearly cripple the Inida economy. Then the influx of Doctors, cab drivers and party store operators would swamp the rest of the Indian economy as those refuges headed home...

India is one of the up and coming countries.
http://www.newscientist.com/contents.ns?articleQuery.queryString=issue:2487
look at some of the links to the items about India there and you will see that amoung other things, they plan to send a mission to the moon in 2007. Hardly a country with nothing but refugees.

Well I do so, we can try convince them.

And the first step is to find and 'deal with' *cracks knuckles* all members of UKIP.

well...looks like they made the right decision

For them the selfish bastards. (these comments directed at the Swiss government not Swiss civilians)

India. India was receantly and still is trying to forge with many South American nations and other unaligned nations, if this were to continue and all unaligned nations band together under India we would have a new considerable force on the worldscape.

And the first step is to find and 'deal with' *cracks knuckles* all members of UKIP.

I say aim for the balls. I want Kilroy-Silk!

For them the selfish bastards. (these comments directed at the Swiss government not Swiss civilians)
every country is selfish...its a governments job to do the best for the country

in this case, the best for Switzerland seems to be to do what it did

China has a very good chance of surpassing the United States economic trading power. Although, the EU has the better chance of doing it faster than China because of their alliances already obtained. The timeline of 15-20 years is a very conservative estimate, I think, based on my studies, the timeline would be more around 8-12 years.

Economically, yes 8-12 years. Power-wise, no.
Political and military power is built on economic power, but it certainly lags behind.
The US has at least a 10 year lead on just military tech alone, and is expanding that lead. 15-20 years for China to catch the US is actually a pretty optimistic timeline. Look at missile technology or space technology for example.
Also, there are the organizational and training factors to consider. China's still years behind the US in this, while the US is, again, expanding it's lead.

Most likely China. Them and N. Korea have only only military that can beat us. Plus China's economy will surpass us soon.

Most likely China. Them and N. Korea have only only military that can beat us. Plus China's economy will surpass us soon.
No way we could be China in a war.

I agree, China will be the next threat, but they could never beat us. They may have more people, but then again, just look at the US's involvement in Somalia, specifically Mogadishu. 18 dead versus some 500 enemy casualties. If it escalates into nuclear war, well, then there's a problem. It'd end up in a "you glassed us so we'll glass you" sorta thing, but we could take them in a normal war.

I will say China has the most chance of being US's new rival, they are rising really fast in military might and economic might as well. US only has a technological advantage over the PLA but the PLA has shit loads more weaponry and troops than the US Army.

India and EU can also be US's new rivals but the EU needs to set aside their own differences and unite together while India needs to stablises their highly fragmented economy and settle all their bloody border disputes and also make some peace with Pakistan first.

Switzerland is the greatest.
Great econimy and i like there political system. If some one has a probelm we vote on it.

Canada is great too. not so politically smart but a nice counrty love living here XD

Either Switzerland is gona go un neutral not likely
Or us canadians gona smarten up and wipe ouy the americans XD
(no offence amricans dont wana actualyl kill you all, I like your gun laws)

Canada is a great nation! I love that place when i stayed there for 1 month but can it rival US? I seriously doubt it..... :(

I agree, China will be the next threat, but they could never beat us. They may have more people, but then again, just look at the US's involvement in Somalia, specifically Mogadishu. 18 dead versus some 500 enemy casualties. If it escalates into nuclear war, well, then there's a problem. It'd end up in a "you glassed us so we'll glass you" sorta thing, but we could take them in a normal war.


It will completely depend on the scenario. Even a cross-straits war would be up in the air. A "straight up" nuclear war (only US vs PRC) would depend on who hits first. If the US hit first, and managed to take out the PRC's missiles (SLBMs included) the US would "win". If they didn't take them all out, it'd be a Pyrrhic victory as the PRC would cripple the US (they simply do not have the capacity to "glass" the US.) The US would be able to "stone age" China, however, even in the event of a second strike.
However, that all assumes no-one else is involved - a very weak assumption.

In an all out Nuclear Exchange between the PRC and US it usually depends who strikes first. I heard some of China's nukes are mobile sites or hidden deep inside their deserts, anyway their people are a hardy lot and would proberly find a way to rebuild everything.


Oh yeah, i saw in the newspapers here in Singapore, there was an article about 'China Preparing for Eventual Conflict With USA" Something about the PLA trying to upgrade their weaponry to be on par with the USA and stuff like that. Considering that USA is protecting Taiwan and PRC wants Taiwan back......

The EU could still eventually rival the US without Briton's help.

They could if they ever get the political cohesion needed to do it, but that is doubtful.

Im have to say either China or i could see the Russian Federation getting back on their feet and become another ememy like they used to be.

Here is a list.

Soon.

North Korea
Iran
Syria
Lebanon
Jordan
Pakistan
Lybia


In the far future.

Europe (A united force of European nations). - Like hell you guys in the U.S. will win that one.

i dont really see why europe would ever want to get in another war with the US. the US is a major contributer to the european economy, there is no country in europe that could conceivably beat the US on the battle field except the UK and i doubt they could. I really believe if every country in europe joined together and ganged up on the US, the US would still win. Also to put some factual info to my arguement the United States spent $466.0 billion on the military last year and the Rest-of-World [all but USA] spent $500 billion and to even break it down furthur
United Kingdom $31.7 billion
Italy $20.2 billion
Germany $38.8 billion
France $46.5 billion
China $65 billion
Russia $50 billion
Spain $8.6 billion
Sweden $4,395.1 million
Ireland $700 million
Luxembourg $147.8 million
need i go on...

i dont really see why europe would ever want to get in another war with the US. the US is a major contributer to the european economy, there is no country in europe that could conceivably beat the US on the battle field except the UK and i doubt they could. I really believe if every country in europe joined together and ganged up on the US, the US would still win. Also to put some factual info to my arguement the United States spent $466.0 billion on the military last year and the Rest-of-World [all but USA] spent $500 billion and to even break it down furthur
United Kingdom $31.7 billion
Italy $20.2 billion
Germany $38.8 billion
France $46.5 billion
China $65 billion
Russia $50 billion
Spain $8.6 billion
Sweden $4,395.1 million
Ireland $700 million
Luxembourg $147.8 million
need i go on...


It was a joke because of the not so good realtions between the U.S. and Europe.
But I doubt the U.S. could win such a war.

I honestly don't think there would *be* a winner in an all out war between Europe and the US.

yeah i bet we all would die in a war like that, all it would take is one country to denentonate a nuke and that would probably be the end of the world.

Then again, we must all acknowledge the fact that war as a diplomatic option is obsolete. The next war will either be Earth versus some space people, or it will be the last battle, Armaggedon. Face it, no matter who attacks who, we know that the US will intervene. the next actual war will have the power of almost, or completely, decimate humanity. Why bother talking about who will rival who when the answer is in our faces. The moment there is any conflict, we can all kiss our butts goodbye. Sad outlook, that it is, but it is the truth. Just look at the middle east. It's already beginning.

India is one of the up and coming countries.
http://www.newscientist.com/contents.ns?articleQuery.queryString=issue:2487
look at some of the links to the items about India there and you will see that amoung other things, they plan to send a mission to the moon in 2007. Hardly a country with nothing but refugees.

So? Japan and China are making Moon noises too. Hell, give me the budget they have for their Moon flight and I'll do it inside the year. What is new about their economy? New resources? Manufacturing? Or are they getting a terrific boost from service industry jobs? Just as when the McDonalds based economy of the US collapses, thus will India's. And India won't have the wealth that the US does to buffer it's fall.

I thought China's economy was already bigger than the US's. They're bigger consumers, they have more consumers, their deficit isn't as spirallingly out of control, etc. etc.

As for a rival, it could only be the EU or China. Targets, anyone...

Here is a list.

Soon.

North Korea
Iran
Syria
Lebanon
Jordan
Pakistan
Lybia


In the far future.

Europe (A united force of European nations). - Like hell you guys in the U.S. will win that one.
Would you bet your life on it?

I agree, China will be the next threat, but they could never beat us. They may have more people, but then again, just look at the US's involvement in Somalia, specifically Mogadishu. 18 dead versus some 500 enemy casualties. If it escalates into nuclear war, well, then there's a problem. It'd end up in a "you glassed us so we'll glass you" sorta thing, but we could take them in a normal war.

You think so? I bet there are still lots of American vets who would doubt your reasoning. Pussan, Chosin Resevoir, 48th parallel...

Or us canadians gona smarten up and wipe ouy the americans XD
(no offence amricans dont wana actualyl kill you all, I like your gun laws)

Bwahaha! Two Boy Scout troops led by a retired Drill Sergeant could take over Canada in a week! You guys don't have any guns, remember? And military hard ware? Wecould lob missles at you all day and you wouldn't be able to do anything about it; the West Edmonton Mall has a better submarine fleet than the Canadian Navy (they don't catch on fire as often) and American planes don't have big bullseyes painted on the sides...


*G* ;)

At this time, almost all the countriesin the world hate (or at least doesn't aprove) the United States. China is an option, but by now, the most dangerous enemy of the American people is the Republican Party :D
I, as a world citizen, am just happy because the US will never invade my useless, insignificant country (Argentina)

From an economic stand point:

EU: Because there differential culture seems to cause conflict, they wont ever be as efficient as a real country with one gouvernement.

China: They will without a doubt rules the world economy in 10-15 years. There slow transition to capitalism is working good, and they show us they know what they did by nit ruining Honk Kong economy. But military wise, US stand no chance. It's a common knowledge that nuke is more persuasive than effective (attack me and I will destroye the entire earth). Now, US may have a big edge on military technologie but public opinion can't accept massive death. Just look at iraq, a lot of pressure is put on bush because of fallen soldier, but US lost about only 1500 man. Thats really small for a military action that evolve taking a country.

From a military stand point:

Iran: They have oil that US want and opinion US want to shut, and the fact they put them in a sandwich by taking afganistan and iraq make me say they will take iran before the end of bush mandate

North Korea: I think US won't ever attack north korea. There's no real natural ressource that could interest them, and mostly, North Korea is well armed. Why US would lose lives and money on a war they wont profit from?


Finally, where's the big problem with US military:

- They have without a doubt the most powerfull and technologie advanced army

- But, it's size and the individual culture in north america make it nearly impossible to lose a man

- While in country like China, a soldier would walk in front of a tank without an hesitation to take the mine at is place (would US be ready to lose 10 000-100 000 people to enslave 1 000 000 000)

- Top of the edge technologie cost A LOT of money. US can't afford losing to many F-14 and others thing...

- While any small country can afford AK-47 for guerilla

- US is really concerne about is international image, if they want to take a country they will first make (good or false) reason, and then engage a conventionnal war.

- The typical US enemy wont care about "how" he could win, using terrorisme on US ground to make gain, wich is really easy to do. Actually, with the quantity of drug and illegal immigrant passing the border every day, it's a total mystery for me how nobody made terrorisme act in the US since 9/11 considaring the invasion of 2 country. Terroriste obviously had a lot of opportunity the terrorise american people, but they chose to do nothing!

In an all out Nuclear Exchange between the PRC and US it usually depends who strikes first. I heard some of China's nukes are mobile sites or hidden deep inside their deserts, anyway their people are a hardy lot and would proberly find a way to rebuild everything.


Oh yeah, i saw in the newspapers here in Singapore, there was an article about 'China Preparing for Eventual Conflict With USA" Something about the PLA trying to upgrade their weaponry to be on par with the USA and stuff like that. Considering that USA is protecting Taiwan and PRC wants Taiwan back......

Now, if we can only get the American Presidents to stop giving China better missle technology...

Europe (A united force of European nations). - Like hell you guys in the U.S. will win that one.

Europe uber alles?

China

I really believe if every country in europe joined together and ganged up on the US, the US would still win.

Uh, it already happened once...

It was called the Third Reich...

I, as a world citizen, am just happy because the US will never invade my useless, insignificant country (Argentina)

Quit screwing around with the oil and you might escape our wrath... MUHAHAHA!!!

:gundge:

Uh, it already happened once...

It was called the Third Reich...


umm yeah im not sure you knew what happoned in WWII germany, itialy and Japan were agenst the US,UK,France and USSR. soo how do you get alll of Europe ganging up on the US out of that?????


And guess Who won THE USA

umm yeah im not sure you knew what happoned in WWII germany, itialy and Japan were agenst the US,UK,France and USSR. soo how do you get alll of Europe ganging up on the US out of that?????

Look at a map of Europe during the height of the Nazi Empire. Spain and Ireland were nuetral, with Britain being the only opposition but effectively everything else was Nazi up the borders of the USSR. If Hitler wouldn't have been an idiot, Russia would have sat back for a while and let UK/US hammer away at other for a while. See my point? Effectively, it was Europe versus the US/UK.

umm yeah im not sure you knew what happoned in WWII germany, itialy and Japan were agenst the US,UK,France and USSR. soo how do you get alll of Europe ganging up on the US out of that?????


And guess Who won THE USA

And as to France, they collapsed like a French Goal Keepe... Uh, never mind...

China!

America's nexts 10 wars:
1- CUBA (cause we hate Fidel)
2- Iran
3- Venezuela (cause the name is funny)
4- Singapore (cause we wanna do it, Ok?)
5- Paraguay ("It's full of terrrorists")
6- Mexico ("they have a very letal chemical weapon called ASPIRINA in veery larges doses")
7- Syria (cause it's the rigth thing to do)
8- Puerto rico ("What? It's really ours? Damn!)
9- Vietnam (Again?)
10- Palestine (cause we can't afford peace)

not really because the only country fighting was Germany and the countries you were talking about on the borders of the USSR didnt fight for the germans. beside the germans were too busy killing jews and russians to be able to win that war. i do agree that hitler was a good leader but made some very big mistakes, like overstreching his armies and not being able to supply them in the USSR. and if you consider itialy a great enemy of the US in WWII then you have no idea what your talking about. The itialins had a hard time fighting the Ethiopians let alone the US. As for Spain they didnt have the balls to do anything and Ireland being a enemy of the US must be a joke.

a united Europe is a fantasy, the US will always be able to detach a few countries from there to side with the US. Poland and Italy for example.

The EU will collapse under the weight of the welfare programmes in the Euro nations.

Would you bet your life on it?
No, but I do think some of the countries listed will be in a war with the U.S. in the next 100 years or so.

Europe uber alles?

No! But I do think that if Europe would unite in that way they would win the U.S. if they go to war some day in the far future.

The question is too broad. When considering rivals most people, unknowingly, whether they mean to or not, think militarily, and interpret the question almost to say "who will replace the soviet union as the US's next rival?" (this is proven by arguments over "the next war" and such. I also think there is confusion over rivalry, and the next enemy we fight a war against. The two are completely different. e.g. Iraq)

Other spheres of rivalry include economically, or politically (the amount of pull one particular nation has on the rest of the world.) As it is now, in my opinion the US stands, and will continue to stand unopposed militarily and politically in the world for at least the next half century. Economicially, a good argument can be made for any number of rivals, but mainly between China or the EU. Again, in my opinion, I think China has an advantage over the EU as the US's main economic rival. With its huge labor force and manufacturing capabilities, combined with a pinch of capitalism and an authoritarian government, China is fast becoming an economic powerhouse. The EU remains a group of nations collected under the ideal of a future united economy. Though the introduction of the Euro (to most EU nations) was a gigantic step towards that end, they still have a long long way to go before the EU can collectively compete with the US. Trouble in the EU isnt far beneath the surface either. Requirements placed on nations, e.g. unemployment %, meant to ensure a healthy union, have already been broken, most notably by France and Germany, arguably the main founders of the EU. (germany currently has something in the neighborhood of 11-13% unemployment, and France has similar problems, compared to the US's under 6%.)


Just as a side note, according to Dr. Thomas PM Barnett, who worked in the Pentagon's Office of Force Transformation between 2001-2003, and is currently a professor at the US Naval War College, (also author of the book "The Pentagon's New Map") the future war the Pentagon is preparing for, or at least was preparing for as of 2001, was a war with China in the Strait of Taiwan in 2025. (When Taiwan declares its independence and china attacks, the US will stand by and defend the out-gunned Taiwanese democracy.)

China,Canada,Florida,Russia and it goes on and on

any nation on this earth can be a rivel of The United States of America

I have to say the EU. If you want to know whay, read "The United States of Europe". It explains it beautifully

India or China.

They are both booming, they are the two largest(in terms of population) countries in the world, they are both militaristic, they both have many allies, and they both make alot of goods that are used in the U.S.

However, I think that before one challenges the U.S., they will challange one another. Baisically, China and India will go to war(Economic, Military, Cold, or all three), and the victor will go on to challenge the U.S.

I don't think the E.U. because some of it's key members(Italy and Britain) are big U.S. allies, and so are some of it's more minor members(Poland, for example).

I think England, because of Prince William. :mp5: :headbang:

No one will EVER be a rival USA. We beat the Cold War, we tore down Communist Walls - we are Kings in Gods great Plan.

Evrey body is are jealoous of what are miltarily is capable of. They all say they hate us, but they really just want to BE us, its not goin happen because we are the ones with the power in this world and you all serve US whether you admit it or not

India, whatever China wahtever, they never will be Gods chosen. Jesus lights our path to glory.

I have to say China.

A large portion of people in this forum have mentioned India, China and the EU. For me this is hard to believe. The fact that India China and the EU are some of are closest allies this would not make sense for them to attack us politically economicaly or militarily. Take India booming ecomomy suffering from high end job lose there ecomomy is booming but their countrys most talented people move to the US to make more money leaveing less high end jobs in India. Chinas economy still relys on the US the sell there goods to us with out the US they have no real markets. The tawian issue is slowly dieing away with the fact that Tawian is considering join China again on the same condition as Hong Kong sepperate but included. On a military stand point both Russia and China have had to rethink there military after watching the US sweep through Iraq destroying Russian made tanks also used by china. and the fact that a local enemy helped by the US Air force can over come an enemy (Afganistan) The EU has also can up in these talk but there is no country in the EU right now that is not trying to buddy up to the US. France and Germany were hoping to not deal with Bush but now that he is in they quickly fall to his side see trip to Brussels. The fact is that there are no major rivals in the world right now either politicaly or militarily. the only fights the US with get in soon will be with small countries that do not conform with this idea that you have to be involved with the rest of the world IE through trade.

So China then cos the EU will never be United cos Britain is full of idiots who believe anything they read. (I am British btw)


It will either be China or India. The above guy is correct in saying EU wont ever be up to there full potential. As far as the Brits. If I were one I would stay out of it too.

Canada...never. It's America's b*tch in trade. Half of it's economy depends on the Us.

North Korea. Maybe. Depends on if they get missiles that can reach California.

Iran. Maybe. Depends on this adminstration, and on the next.

Europe. Doubtful. We have a military in their country. They don't really have a formidle military, plus there's no real reason.

China. Depends. If they attack Taiwan, then maybe. Any move by the US or China would be devasting...and could lead to world war or nukes in air. This must be prevent at all cost. I see this as the only real threat to America.

Russia. Doubtful, but one never knows. They tend to mind their own business. The leadership there isn't really up to taking any shit from anyone. So as long as we don't step on their feet, we'll be fine.

Russia, the U.S. has been encroaching on its sovereign rights as of late.

Economy:

China and India are catching up fast, China especially, but it's still a long way in the future. China's GDP is still far smaller than the USA's. I believe it's expected to overtake the UK this year, so the USA is still a very distant target.

The EU, some of you may be surprised to hear, currently has a larger economy than the USA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union. It does of course have a higher population. It is, however, growing more slowly so this may not last. It has higher tax rates and is overregulated, so don't expect the Euro to supercede the dollar as global currency just yet.


Military:

The USA is still the world's only superpower, and until other economies catch up it will stay that way. However, it would be good to ask yourselves whether the USA could now, with its commitments in Iraq and its long-stated policy of being able to fight a war in two theatres simultaneously, take on either Iran or Syria even if it wanted to. I'm sceptical.

Economy:

China and India are catching up fast, China especially, but it's still a long way in the future. China's GDP is still far smaller than the USA's. I believe it's expected to overtake the UK this year, so the USA is still a very distant target.

The EU, some of you may be surprised to hear, currently has a larger economy than the USA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union. It does of course have a higher population. It is, however, growing more slowly so this may not last. It has higher tax rates and is overregulated, so don't expect the Euro to supercede the dollar as global currency just yet.


Military:

The USA is still the world's only superpower, and until other economies catch up it will stay that way. However, it would be good to ask yourselves whether the USA could now, with its commitments in Iraq and its long-stated policy of being able to fight a war in two theatres simultaneously, take on either Iran or Syria even if it wanted to. I'm sceptical.

The problem with the E.U., however, is that it isn't a signle country. It's a bunch of tightly-interwoven countries, sure, but it's not like they have one ruler.

China and India only play nice with one another so long as no one mentions the words "Kashmir" or "Southeast Asia". They effectively cancel each other out. This is also the reason why Southeast Asia doesn't pose as great a threat of economic rivalry. The entirety of Asia, however, could turn into a grand-scale rival if the outsourcing thing goes too far.

Africa cannot afford to get anywhere. Too many people in an area that never will be able to support them. Same with the 'stans and Central America.

Russia cannot afford to get anywhere. It's going to be generations (plural) before they come to grips with the concepts of a popular consent representative government and a free market.

South America cannot afford to get anywhere. While they're in no danger as regards food or production, they are rather dependent on outside goods as far as the means to actually BE a rival go. If they start being unneighborly, trade stops and the continent grinds to a halt.

Europe seems to be a particularly resource-laden sector, and they seem to be coming together quite nicely. If they ever get over their pacifism, *whistles* Watch out.

Japan was, is, and will be a rival, simply because of the economic powerhouse factor. That really doesn't count.

The Middle East will, in fact, STOP being a rival once the oil runs out.

And North Korea? China may be their ally and in part their backer, but they'll also be Pyongyang's worst nightmare if Kim Jong-Il starts to make them look bad. And a little hint for the good guys: Stop with the invasions. Seriously. Green-beret some despot ass, and THEN come to the rescue with resources and voting machines and the like.

------------

And for whoever said that North Korea will finally see the force of America when they start threatening holdings on the Pacific: Knowing that they would be sacrificial lambs, and knowing that they are under-represented, over-resourced, and rather capable of taking care of their own, do you really think that the western states will sit there and get themselves nuked in Washington's name?

Really?

I know if I was about to be offered up because I had the same jersey on as those other guys, I'd be like vapor. And while refusing to fire first wouldn't save a secedent Western US from a war with the East Coast, it WOULD get enough of the world tipped in their favor to eventually make the prospect, in the eyes of Congress, worth less than its price.

Or if I were the US, I'd do the smart thing and get working on something that can take out a radioactive pair before they can be smushed together to form a critical mass. And then I'd do the REALLY smart thing and see that the technology was adopted worldwide.

I'd say China, simply because of the Chinese mindset. They KNOW it's just a matter of time until they rule the world.

The EU remembers Hitler too well - they won't embrace a Europe-wide version of nationalism. And without that kind of unity, they won't rival the U.S.

India? I may be wrong about this, but India doesn't seem to have the ambition that China or the U.S. have. I can imagine India as a very strong defensive power, but I can't imagine them projecting power, either politically or militarily, in a way that would rival the U.S.

The Islamic world doesn't have a chance, in my opinion. All they have is oil. When fuel cells or some other technology comes of age in another couple decades oil prices are going to plummet. There aren't any other resources to drive the economy.

So I'd say China. The Chinese have the will and the resources. The Indians and Europeans have the resources, but not the will. The Islamic nations have the will, but not the resources.

Economic rival? I'm not sure, don't know much about economics.

Military rival? I see a lot of people saying China, but beating China wouldn't be too hard. Let me explain. As long as it stays conventionial (no nukes), China's weaknesses are many. And ths US's strengths are in those areas. Ground combat, it'd be bloody as China has quanity but the US has quality. But the US doesn't have to use ground combat. Its Air Force is a better quality and higher tech level than China's. Most Chinese planes are copies of older Soviet and European aircraft. Our Air Force trumps theirs. Naval combat is even more laughable as the Chinese navy would be obliterated by the USN. There is no comparision, its not even close. The fact that a US carrier is a massive force projecter, and no other nation has a carrier force like the US's means death for any navy that stands and fights. This leads to how the US can beat China. Once hte Chinese navy and air force are crippled, a blockade can be established preventing supplies from reaching China. Land and air transport are possible but aren't as efficient. Also US bombers and cruise missles could destroy railheads and airports fairly quickly.

Why are people ignoring India?

They popwank.

I agree with most, EU or China. I would prefer the EU but I just don't think they have it in them anymore. ( I don't mean that as an insult, just a depressed observation). China bores the hell out of me quite frankly. They have a cultural energy though and are not hampered by a lack of cultural confidence like most EU nations.

This leads to how the US can beat China. Once hte Chinese navy and air force are crippled, a blockade can be established preventing supplies from reaching China. Land and air transport are possible but aren't as efficient. Also US bombers and cruise missles could destroy railheads and airports fairly quickly.

So we "win" the war by blockading the Chinese coast and attempting to cut off all shipping into the worlds largest country that can almost, but not quite, feed itself? Yeah we're going to win by letting millions of Chinese starve to death and then cripple their economy via a blockade. Except, wait, that would take years and years and years. It would destroy our economy in the process.

Yep, thats winning a war alright... :rolleyes:

And what exactly goes on in South East Asia? Where their economics are starting to depend greatly on China? What happens back home when we don't get our trade with China and we don't get all those nice things that say "Made In China" on them? The US will not blockade China. Ever.

P.S. imposing the kind of blockade you are talking about would not be easy and would be almost as hard as actually fighting a ground war in China. You didn't address the economics because you don't know about economics. You shouldn't of addressed the military either for similar reasons.

Hmmm...seriously people the USAs biggest rival remains as always. Itself.

Hmmm...seriously people the USAs biggest rival remains as always. Itself.

Er, uh, no. Our biggest Rival currently is the nations of Europe as a whole. Next it will be China. What’s funny is this thread assumes the USA will always remain number one.

I think the real question we should be asking is "Who will China's next rival be after the USA?"

The US should next just eliminate all the idiot posters who spew out daily anti-american shit.

Europe = economic rival
China = economic rival

I don't think the U.S. will have a major militarisic rival.

Monaco!

Eu

You people just dont seem to realize the overwhelming power of the USA. I'm not saying this to be cocky, it's a fact. The world is no match for america. We could destroy the entire world tomorrow if we wanted to. Scary... yes but not likely. We enjoy our prosperity and we depend on the world for it. They also depend on our ingenuity, economic prowess and stabilizing military might. No nation on earth could ever single handedly take over the usa by military force. If america ever ceases to exist, then it's because it has willfully become a part of the one world government. Yes we could be bloodied, but it would not be in the interest of anyone to even try to destroy us and quite frankly, they are smart enough to know that they could never win. As for the islamofacists who are only a small band of criminals. They are absolutely no match. We are now propping up democracies as a social remedy to the terrorists. The war is only a side effect of this social remedy. The objective is to democratize the middle east and give them a taste of freedom and prosperity. Once they get on the right track, they will have hope, purpose and pride instead of the fear, anger and hopelessness that breeds terrorism. They wont need or want to "martyr" or sell their children to the mullahs anymore. I think most europeans are skeptical of the moral purpose that americans profess. It is true americans are dying to bring democracy to the middle east and it wont stop at Iraq. I just read an article about multi party elections being planned in egypt. This democratic revolution will eventually end terrorism and create greater wealth and prosperity for all involved. The war will more than pay for its self and all of the more short sighted doves will be left out in the cold.

You people just dont seem to realize the overwhelming power of the USA. I'm not saying this to be cocky, it's a fact. The world is no match for america. We could destroy the entire world tomorrow if we wanted to. Scary... yes but not likely. We enjoy our prosperity and we depend on the world for it. They also depend on our ingenuity, economic prowess and stabilizing military might. No nation on earth could ever single handedly take over the usa by military force. If america ever ceases to exist, then it's because it has willfully become a part of the one world government. Yes we could be bloodied, but it would not be in the interest of anyone to even try to destroy us and quite frankly, they are smart enough to know that they could never win. As for the islamofacists who are only a small band of criminals. They are absolutely no match. We are now propping up democracies as a social remedy to the terrorists. The war is only a side effect of this social remedy. The objective is to democratize the middle east and give them a taste of freedom and prosperity. Once they get on the right track, they will have hope, purpose and pride instead of the fear, anger and hopelessness that breeds terrorism. They wont need or want to "martyr" or sell their children to the mullahs anymore. I think most europeans are skeptical of the moral purpose that americans profess. It is true americans are dying to bring democracy to the middle east and it wont stop at Iraq. I just read an article about multi party elections being planned in egypt. This democratic revolution will eventually end terrorism and create greater wealth and prosperity for all involved. The war will more than pay for its self and all of the more short sighted doves will be left out in the cold.

This thread is not about when America will cease to exist (though I project that to be well before 2250AD) it is about whom will Rival/supercede the United States. That will happen fairly soon, probably within your lifetime.

Cheers.

Eu

The funny thing is I read that as portuguese. It means "I"
USA meet your next rival Dementedus_Yammus

You dont understand, America has only begun its rise to world dominance, yes china is rising but we are rising even faster. No one will ever come close, at least for several centuries. And, like I said before, by then there will be a one world government. A fully representative democracy including the whole world. Everyone knows the endgame is not the defeat of america, but the world wide embrace of democracy and a one world government.

Within 20 years, I believe the People's Republic of China will be the US's main rival. However, and this may be my patriotism speaking-Russia will rise again. Wait and see.

It won't be china, as we can see from history; a cold war between china and the united state will result in a cloaps of the chines government. The only real rival would be a society where a nation can truly act as one.A nation where the people approve of their government. The EU will never be able to act as one, because of the many cultures that vie for control ( an example of this would be frances constant exclusion of applicant nations, including the UK when it innitally applied.

What nation can act as one, and has a government as strong as the united states. None exist currently in my opinion. I'm sure the EU and China could rival the united states, but they would lose.

There will be no war between major powers (USA, EU, China, Japan, India, Russieland) just because that would mean a MAD case, but, as the name of the topic says, will be a rivalry. Irak's case showed the world that we need a power to counterbalance any crazy bstard that have the 'presidential suite' in the White House.

As Argentine, occidental, i hope that power will be Europe, they 'made' the occidental world thus, we share the same values. Democracy, freedom and above all, respect for laws.

USA is often stated as "the police of the world". Well, with Irak, its clear that the police needs a Internal Affairs department, Europe.

USA will not stand the test of time as long it will still having lunatics and stupid afraid people who vote them in the White House.

I think that 9/11 was the day that USA born, was a "Welcome to the Earth".

All major countries suffered in their territories. Europe, Japan, China. This was the time for USA. Its easy to say "yee, democracy, love, peace for all the world!" when there was no attack in USA, never was a single brick destroyed in its mainland, they did not have idea of the meaning of fighting for liberty like the Europeans had to do many times. That's why i admire Europe. They learned the lesson. They found that the only way to subsist is with union and peace. They had like, 4000 years of history. They learned it the hard way.

You dont understand, America has only begun its rise to world dominance, yes china is rising but we are rising even faster.

America is actually stumbling and China is rising much faster than we are.

No one will ever come close, at least for several centuries.

I'll take 2020AD, you can take 2400AD. We'll wager 1,000 dollars. I've got a feeling I will win that bet.

And, like I said before, by then there will be a one world government. A fully representative democracy including the whole world. Everyone knows the endgame is not the defeat of america, but the world wide embrace of democracy and a one world government.

If everyone is "me, myself and I" then you're right. Most of the world disagrees with you.

It won't be china, as we can see from history; a cold war between china and the united state will result in a cloaps of the chines government.

Really? What piece of history tells you that?

If everyone is "me, myself and I" then you're right. Most of the world disagrees with you.[/QUOTE]

OK everyone IS a bit strong here.

North Korea? They seem to think the rest of the world is all against them.
They're right.

Really? What piece of history tells you that?

I hope your sarcastic

The revolutions against monarchies
russia 1991
Facist Italy

A SINGLE PARTY STATE CANNOT FIGHT A MULTI PARTY

All america would have to do is to inject perfectly printed counterfiet money into the chines economy and they would have no way of dealing with it, (Reaganonmics make the united states invenerable to forign counterfieting)

Print off a trillion dollars of counterfiet chines money, and china would be done.

There is a difference between "rival" and "enemy". China will undoubtedly be the biggest economic power by the mid century. Will it be a rival of the US? yes. Enemy? nope.

The economic forces at work in China cannot be easily crushed. It would take a major disaster in China just to bring its economic growth rate down to the level of the US or other industralised nations. Why fight a economically powerful China? The quality of life of over a billion people will be greatly improved.

China is still a generation or 2 away from becoming a major global power. It is now facing horrible environmental problems, the government is having troubles with the influx of democratic ideas, and much of its economy is based on US companies outsourcing and US products. Not to mention overpopulation, so there it is.

My vote goes to the European Union. Europe and America have been going different routes for some time now, except Britian who won't make up her mind in who her loyalties are with.

It probably won't be a World War, more like a Cold War that the US and USSR fought in. One side would eventually collapse.

Then again, I'm one of those Americans who believe that America is the rightful heir to the Roman Empire (in terms of world dominance, not territory). Once we fall, I feel that Middle East and Islam taking over. And after this, I'm not sure.

Many of you say that China will become the next economic superpower. What are your sources and reasoning?

I know it has a large population and industrial base, but its technology is lagging behind. Although it is transitioning towards capitalism, it is not their yet. So why do you think it will outpace Japan and India?

America will never fall, other nations may become strong, but this won't cause America to completely collapse and become a third world nation. :D

I hope your sarcastic

The revolutions against monarchies
russia 1991
Facist Italy

A SINGLE PARTY STATE CANNOT FIGHT A MULTI PARTY

Vietnam vs America. Thanks.

Five simple reasons why China will supercede the US.

1) More People
2) Bigger Market
3) More Resources
4) No Emotional Baggage
5) Able to deal with everyone on a purely business level

1 party or 200 parties. China wins.

All america would have to do is to inject perfectly printed counterfiet money into the chines economy and they would have no way of dealing with it, (Reaganonmics make the united states invenerable to forign counterfieting)

You know what, I'll start taking you seriously when you can spell Chinese, invulnerable, foreign, counterfeit and all those nice words. Until then I have no reason to trust your economic reasoning ability.

Many of you say that China will become the next economic superpower. What are your sources and reasoning?

I know it has a large population and industrial base, but its technology is lagging behind. Although it is transitioning towards capitalism, it is not their yet. So why do you think it will outpace Japan and India?

You answered your own question.

You know what, I'll start taking you seriously when you can spell Chinese, invulnerable, foreign, counterfeit and all those nice words. Until then I have no reason to trust your economic reasoning ability.

Glad to see that, just because its the internet doesnt mean you should make yourself seem like you only got up to a second grade education.

Glad to see that, just because its the internet doesnt mean you should make yourself seem like you only got up to a second grade education.

Was that supposed to be sarcasm? :confused:

No. It was a suggestion that people act classier when posting in forums.

Did You Know?

China has the fastest growing economy in the world; at this rate, it will be richer than the U.S. within a generation or two. Their mix of a comunist work ethic and capatilist international trading is a potent one. Plus they seem unlikly to cause WW3 :D So if it will be anyone, it will be them.
By the way, has anyone noticed that the U.S. foreign policy closely resembles the classic empire pattern? (That pattern being becoming the economic and military superpower of the world, before being destroyed by it's own ignorance) Faliure to understand other peoples culture and ways of thinking mixed with a deep-rooted belif that they are superiour to their peers is what undid Empires like the Roman Empire, British Empire...

And while we are here, does the fact that America is all-powerfull actually mean anything? The standard of living for an average American in much lower than countries such as Sweden, Germany, and Switzerland even though you guys are supposed to be the rich and powerful world police force.

Did You Know?

Yes

And while we are here, does the fact that America is all-powerfull actually mean anything? The standard of living for an average American in much lower than countries such as Sweden, Germany, and Switzerland even though you guys are supposed to be the rich and powerful world police force.

Source? Come on, you've got one right? Cause I can believe Sweden. But Germany? Nah. When gas costs almost double and owning your own home is a rather rare thing I doubt it.

By the way, has anyone noticed that the U.S. foreign policy closely resembles the classic empire pattern? (That pattern being becoming the economic and military superpower of the world, before being destroyed by it's own ignorance) Faliure to understand other peoples culture and ways of thinking mixed with a deep-rooted belif that they are superiour to their peers is what undid Empires like the Roman Empire, British Empire...

Your history here seems to be a little off as to what cause the Roman and British Empires to collapse. It certainly was not cultural arrogance and close-mindedness.

The Roman Empire collapsed mainly due to semi-constant civil wars. Things like going through four emperors in one year, huge conflicts when 6 different people with armies are all claiming to be the legitimate emperor, problems like that. Then the Germans and Huns invaded the Empire after it had been weakening itself for so long. Without all the constant infighting Rome probably would have survived just fine, arrogance or not.

As for the British Empire, it was pretty much done in by the World Wars and economics. Britain picked up huge debts from the wars, and unlike everyone else paid them off instead of defaulting on them. Plus the way the world economy was developing empires were beginning to cost more money than they made anyway, so in the end Britain just let the Empire go because they could no longer really afford it.

A large portion of people in this forum have mentioned India, China and the EU. For me this is hard to believe. The fact that India China and the EU are some of are closest allies this would not make sense for them to attack us politically economicaly or militarily.

Since when are India and China allies?
You may have forgotten about the 1962 China-India Border War and the 1967 border skirmishes, but the Indians and Chinese have not. They've fixed up things a little, but they are by no means at all allies. China's nomial alliance with Pakistan should be a clue there.
And the EU allied with either? No.

Take India booming ecomomy suffering from high end job lose there ecomomy is booming but their countrys most talented people move to the US to make more money leaveing less high end jobs in India.

:confused: What? That made no sense whatsoever.

Chinas economy still relys on the US the sell there goods to us with out the US they have no real markets.

Not for long…

The tawian issue is slowly dieing away with the fact that Tawian is considering join China again on the same condition as Hong Kong sepperate but included.

Then why does this statement (http://houston.china-consulate.org/eng/gysg/t112501.htm) appear on the website of the Consulate General of the People's Republic of China in Houston?

At present, the relations across the Taiwan Straits are severely tested. To put a resolute check on the "Taiwan independence" activities aimed at dismembering China and safeguard peace and stability in the Taiwan Straits is the most pressing task before the compatriots on both sides of the Straits.

On a military stand point both Russia and China have had to rethink there military after watching the US sweep through Iraq destroying Russian made tanks also used by china.

True. But the Chinese are, as I have said, catching up.

and the fact that a local enemy helped by the US Air force can over come an enemy (Afganistan)

Afghanistan was a totally different situation. The only way we'd get local support like that in China would be if it collapsed into a warlordism situation like the early 20th century. That's unlikely in the extreme.

The EU has also can up in these talk but there is no country in the EU right now that is not trying to buddy up to the US. France and Germany were hoping to not deal with Bush but now that he is in they quickly fall to his side see trip to Brussels.

:confused: What? What evidence do you have of that.

The fact is that there are no major rivals in the world right now either politicaly or militarily. the only fights the US with get in soon will be with small countries that do not conform with this idea that you have to be involved with the rest of the world IE through trade.

The question wasn't who is the US' rival now, but who will be the next rival.

North Korea. Maybe. Depends on if they get missiles that can reach California.

Problem yes, rival no,

Iran. Maybe. Depends on this adminstration, and on the next.

Again, problem yes, rival no,

Europe. Doubtful. We have a military in their country. They don't really have a formidle military, plus there's no real reason.

They have a pretty strong military in combination. But, yes, at the moment no cause for a real rivalry. They aren't sucking up to the US, that's for sure.

China. Depends. If they attack Taiwan, then maybe. Any move by the US or China would be devasting...and could lead to world war or nukes in air. This must be prevent at all cost. I see this as the only real threat to America.

Agreed.

Russia. Doubtful, but one never knows. They tend to mind their own business. The leadership there isn't really up to taking any shit from anyone. So as long as we don't step on their feet, we'll be fine.

Again, agreed.


Economy:

China and India are catching up fast, China especially, but it's still a long way in the future. China's GDP is still far smaller than the USA's. I believe it's expected to overtake the UK this year, so the USA is still a very distant target.

The EU, some of you may be surprised to hear, currently has a larger economy than the USA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union. It does of course have a higher population. It is, however, growing more slowly so this may not last. It has higher tax rates and is overregulated, so don't expect the Euro to supercede the dollar as global currency just yet.


Military:

The USA is still the world's only superpower, and until other economies catch up it will stay that way. However, it would be good to ask yourselves whether the USA could now, with its commitments in Iraq and its long-stated policy of being able to fight a war in two theatres simultaneously, take on either Iran or Syria even if it wanted to. I'm sceptical.

Bingo.


Economic rival? I'm not sure, don't know much about economics.

Military rival? I see a lot of people saying China, but beating China wouldn't be too hard. Let me explain. As long as it stays conventionial (no nukes), China's weaknesses are many. And ths US's strengths are in those areas. Ground combat, it'd be bloody as China has quanity but the US has quality. But the US doesn't have to use ground combat. Its Air Force is a better quality and higher tech level than China's. Most Chinese planes are copies of older Soviet and European aircraft. Our Air Force trumps theirs. Naval combat is even more laughable as the Chinese navy would be obliterated by the USN. There is no comparision, its not even close. The fact that a US carrier is a massive force projecter, and no other nation has a carrier force like the US's means death for any navy that stands and fights. This leads to how the US can beat China. Once hte Chinese navy and air force are crippled, a blockade can be established preventing supplies from reaching China. Land and air transport are possible but aren't as efficient. Also US bombers and cruise missles could destroy railheads and airports fairly quickly.

As I said above, this all depends on the situation. But the scenario you lay out just won't work.

China
EU
India
Russia (Putin's doctrine, IMO)
Japan (Although probably curtailed by threat of China)
United Korea

Economic threat, China and the EU could be comparative threats due to economies of scale, military though, the US would wipe anyone off the map easily, no questions asked. not even the current EU comes close, it just acts like a large political juggernaut but together they are just held together by tiny little threads :p, the military isn't integrated like the US nor do the EU have a military big enough. China just has an inferior military with just about everything inferior :p

if i had to make a choice though, i's say that the EU could, and i really stress could, be more of a comparable threat then china will ever be, for the next 50 - 100 yrs at least. i say this because china is full or corruption, china also have large social problems they have to deal with. they clearly cannot compete with the US any time soon at all. lets not even get started with the one child policy and how that will completely skew the population in the future years to come.

Sorry, but Japan and Korea are both big nos. Japan's been trapped in a cycle of recessions since the bubble burst more than a decade ago. And a united Korea is going to have a much harder time reintegrating the north's economy than Germany did with the east. It would be a couple of decades, absolute minimum , to bring it up to ROK standards.

I believe the greatest threat to US hegemony is the American population itself, if only because the staggering cost of empire building and maintenance means they have to sacrifice their own social and economic well-being for a somewhat vague and dubious 'spiritual mission'. If American citizens don't reclaim their democracy pronto, then they're in for full-blown totalitarianism and/or civil war.

In geostrategic terms, however, I tend to think that a Eurasian alliance could make perfect realpolitikal sense. The EU, the former USSR, China and Japan would make up a coherent and viable economic space combining high and low-end production and consumption powerhouses, colossal monetary and financial leverage, enormous natural resources, enough military might to keep any sane power in check...

It should also be said that the present US dominance is probably a lot more fragile than it seems, for two reasons: the first is that their consumption-driven economy depends entirely on foreign capital to pay for the next year's abyssal trade deficit. If that lifeline is cut or even reduced (and there are increasingly good reasons for that to happen), US economic power goes out in a puff of household economics. The second is that their military apparel is structurally incapable of withstanding a prolonged asymmetrical conflict with distributed guerrilla networks. Simply put, they need to mobilize mindboggling resources for meagre results, when a sucker with a plastic butter-knife can take out the WTC.

I think that for the U.S. to "beat" it's next rival, we're going to have to seriously change our system.

We're gonna need to become more self-supplying(whatever we don't have now we can get from Canada).

We're gonna have to make the military more powerful.

We're gonna have to strengthen our alliances so that they don't ally with the other party.

We're gonna have to fix the economy.

We're gonna have to fix the political system. That does not mean that we have to fix democracy, although that is an option. A benevolent dictatorship would also work.

We're going to have to raise nationalism and patriotism. If we don't, people won't want us to win, thus undermining our abilities.

We're going to have to create a "Department of Information"(I.E. Also known as the Department of Propaganda).

We're going to have to lessen the power of religious groups and create a society where everyone is treated fairly(except for enemies of the state). If they aren't treated fairly, they are classified as enemies of the state and thrown in prison.



Of course, there are a few things that would help(but aren't needed):

Assimilate Canada into the United States.

Claim the Gulf of Mexico for our own, and claim Atlantic-Coastal Mexico.

Re-take the Panama Canal Zone(It's not that hard. Seeing how I live here, we could just send 1 cruiser and 300 marines and Panama would fall).

Once we have acomplished that, we can take on any opponent.

I think that for the U.S. to "beat" it's next rival, we're going to have to seriously change our system.

We're gonna need to become more self-supplying(whatever we don't have now we can get from Canada).


Assimilate Canada into the United States.



Actually, Canada is designated as a Dominion of the UK as is Australia and New Zealand, so attacking Canada would be a declaration of war on the UK as well.

America's nexts 10 wars:
1- CUBA (cause we hate Fidel)
2- Iran
3- Venezuela (cause the name is funny)
4- Singapore (cause we wanna do it, Ok?)
5- Paraguay ("It's full of terrrorists")
6- Mexico ("they have a very letal chemical weapon called ASPIRINA in veery larges doses")
7- Syria (cause it's the rigth thing to do)
8- Puerto rico ("What? It's really ours? Damn!)
9- Vietnam (Again?)
10- Palestine (cause we can't afford peace)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hilarious! Seriously, I think the next rival will probably be China, at least, economically. Down the line I can see a war between China and the US; why? Because of the Taiwan issue (which, I think, deserves to be a nation, so there! :D Any questions? :sniper: ). America will say they can be a nation, China will obviously say otherwise, then we're kicking each others asses! As to who I think would win, being an American who sees patriotism/nationalism of any kind as foolish, (after all, you didn't CHOOSE to be here) I feel both countries have equal potentional to win. America has a well equiped, well trained army; not to mention a bit too much gung-ho. China has 2 million enlisted, lots of weapons, and blind loyalty to the regime. So things should be interesting.

Probably a united EU or China.

Actually, Canada is designated as a Dominion of the UK as is Australia and New Zealand, so attacking Canada would be a declaration of war on the UK as well.

I never said "Invade" did I? No. I said "assimilated".

And if Canada is a Dominion of the UK, then why isn't it at war with Iraq? So if Canada goes to war, the UK has to help, while if the UK goes to war, the Canadians don't have to do anything?

Dude, the Dominion system sucks.

China deff
turning into an economic POWERHOUSE and they can screw that whole human rights issue that holds back the US economy. The EU will never united Europe (hopefully) and the French are leading it ,, they are not up in da free market thing the whole world is doin,... pussy.

I never said "Invade" did I? No. I said "assimilated".


The Borg word for invasion...


And if Canada is a Dominion of the UK, then why isn't it at war with Iraq?


Because Canada is a Dominion, not a colony, of the UK. A Dominion has a lot of autonomy to the extent it is more or less it's own country, which Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are.


So if Canada goes to war, the UK has to help,


If Canada was attacked, the betting is yes. If Canada was the aggressor in a war, than no, because Canada was not attacked first, and is acting by it's own initiative in war.


while if the UK goes to war, the Canadians don't have to do anything?


That's right, because again, a Dominion has greater freedoms than a colony, to the extent it is more or less it's own country, which again, Canada is.



Dude, the Dominion system sucks.

I never said I liked it. But I have to say, I think the idea of having Canada "assimilated", invaded, whatever you want to call it sucks too.

The Borg word for invasion...

But the Borg kick ass :).

Because Canada is a Dominion, not a colony, of the UK. A Dominion has a lot of autonomy to the extent it is more or less it's own country, which Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are.

More or less it's own country? Jeez! It must suck when your country is only "more or less" a country.


If Canada was attacked, the betting is yes. If Canada was the aggressor in a war, than no, because Canada was not attacked first, and is acting by it's own initiative in war.

So even though it is "more or less" a country, it can act all high and mighty when it want's too, but if it gets attacked it goes crying for Dominion support? That's a good deal. Of course, they are only "more or less" a country...


That's right, because again, a Dominion has greater freedoms than a colony, to the extent it is more or less it's own country, which again, Canada is.

That raises an off-topic issue...why didn't the British make the 13 colonies into a Dominion? :confused:


I never said I liked it. But I have to say, I think the idea of having Canada "assimilated", invaded, whatever you want to call it sucks too.

It would be that Canada would "willingly"(A.K.A. American spies will infiltrate Canadian Society and convince them that an Anchsluss(sp?) with the U.S.) vote for a unision.

Besides, at least then Canada won't be "more or less" a country. It will be part of a country.

But the Borg kick ass :).


If you're a Trekkie, I'm sure... :)




More or less it's own country? Jeez! It must suck when your country is only "more or less" a country.


Stop it. lol I was referring to the country being a proper functioning, free country....as a country free from outside rule. Canada is a country, but still has connections to the UK, that is what I meant, so it has a Dominion status, meaning it's not entirely independent in theory of it's status, but is in practice.




So even though it is "more or less" a country, it can act all high and mighty when it want's too, but if it gets attacked it goes crying for Dominion support? That's a good deal. Of course, they are only "more or less" a country...


Again, I never said I supported the idea of Dominions, colonies etc, so don't expect me to defend it.






That raises an off-topic issue...why didn't the British make the 13 colonies into a Dominion? :confused:


Do you mean the 13 colonies that became America? Probably because it was too many colonies to conceive giving that amount of freedom too, in British eyes, and at the time, America was still being fought over by British and French influence, so the British Empire wanted to keep a 'base' there of those who swore alliegiance to the British, and not the sworn enemy the French in America. That meant wanting to keep alot of control to keep loyalty, thus, colonies, not dominions.

Of course, it did not work out like that... :)






It would be that Canada would "willingly"(A.K.A. American spies will infiltrate Canadian Society and convince them that an Anchsluss(sp?) with the U.S.) vote for a unision.


LOL let me guess. Living space, right? That's what that Austrian geezer said.


Besides, at least then Canada won't be "more or less" a country. It will be part of a country.

Canada is an indepenent functioning country with Dominion status! Being assimilated means it won't.

Bomb Canada.

If you're a Trekkie, I'm sure... :)

I'm not a trekkie. But the Borg still kick ass.





Stop it. lol I was referring to the country being a proper functioning, free country....as a country free from outside rule. Canada is a country, but still has connections to the UK, that is what I meant, so it has a Dominion status, meaning it's not entirely independent in theory of it's status, but is in practice.

Ah, ok.





Again, I never said I supported the idea of Dominions, colonies etc, so don't expect me to defend it.

'Kay.







Do you mean the 13 colonies that became America? Probably because it was too many colonies to conceive giving that amount of freedom too, in British eyes, and at the time, America was still being fought over by British and French influence, so the British Empire wanted to keep a 'base' there of those who swore alliegiance to the British, and not the sworn enemy the French in America. That meant wanting to keep alot of control to keep loyalty, thus, colonies, not dominions.

Of course, it did not work out like that... :) [/qute]

If only they had given us Dominion, though. Then the Brits would have vast areas of land and material.





[quote]LOL let me guess. Living space, right? That's what that Austrian geezer said.

No, not Living Space. Anchluss means a unision. So Canada and the U.S. would become the United States of Canada or something like that...



Canada is an indepenent functioning country with Dominion status! Being assimilated means it won't.

I know. But if it is assimilated, it will have so much power it wil be unimaginable! If the U.S. and Canada combined, our technological and industrial expertise mixed with Canadian resources would make us the most powerful nation in the history of the world.

And, of course, I would be it's leader :D.

I'm not a trekkie. But the Borg still kick ass.


Yes, dear. Of course you're not a trekkie. :)



If only they had given us Dominion, though. Then the Brits would have vast areas of land and material.


And it would have been a British living space!






No, not Living Space. Anchluss means a unision. So Canada and the U.S. would become the United States of Canada or something like that...


Anchluss. A nice German word. Living space I tell you! :)





I know. But if it is assimilated, it will have so much power it wil be unimaginable! If the U.S. and Canada combined, our technological and industrial expertise mixed with Canadian resources would make us the most powerful nation in the history of the world.


I doubt Canada would see it that way, and besides, you already are the most powerful nation.



And, of course, I would be it's leader :D.


Yes, dear. :D

The British Commonwealth will be the next super power ....seriously watch out, the nations of the old British Empire are making a federal re-unification, woohahahahahahha!

United States of Africa !!!

Can you imagine the destruction and shear overwhelming power that the united armies of Malawi, Lesotho and Namibia will have...

The world will tremble before our armies and the banana industry will be monopolised by us aswell !

Kill Whitey Kill Whitey Kill Whitey

I think the closeness of Europe is exagerrated. There are huge gaps. The Italians look to us and the US as did Spain which is now looking owards Poland and the new countries. Meanwhile France and Germany carry the low countries (apart from the Netehrlands) with them. True, Britain is the most fervently hostile towards intergration in that Britain still believes in the Churchillian view of Britain being an 'atlantic bridge' to the USA, but that is a bridge that was only ever temporary and Britons have a huge choice to make in the next few years, EU or the USA. Not necessarily about fighting the one they don't choice but of intergrating more fully with one of the two bodies.
Or the Commonwealth, if the UK re-unites with it's british cousins to control the world!

China, India or Brazil. Never the EU, they will never cooperate properly.