NationStates Jolt Archive

Why will it be thought and between which countries.


My belief is that when i become p.m of britain, (no seriously, vote I.S.P 2016 and 2020.) i will unify europe and invade america.

Either that or i'll just invade ireland and kill all the seperatists.
Bastards.
(No im not racist, i myself am irish so HAH)
What do you reckon will start it?

I reckon someone will die of laughter from reading your ambitions and it will start an international incident. :p

Why will it be thought and between which countries.


My belief is that when i become p.m of britain, (no seriously, vote I.S.P 2016 and 2020.) i will unify europe and invade america.

Either that or i'll just invade ireland and kill all the seperatists.
Bastards.
(No im not racist, i myself am irish so HAH)
What do you reckon will start it?
Well, you, by the sound of it.

I don't think there will be another world war in the 'traditional' sense, just small battles in different arenas around the world. It is hard to imagine the big powers ever being stupid enough to attack each other when in such a war the costs would by far out way any advantages gained. Who wants to conquer a country that's just a nuclear waste land?

Why will it be thought and between which countries.



Because you thought of it...?

What do you reckon will start it?

us invades iraq...

I reckon someone will die of laughter from reading your ambitions and it will start an international incident. :p

The world conquest is a joke.
But i AM running for parliament and i would like a European UNION. not this half-way crap.

I think, that if WW3 happens, it won't last long enough to be in the history books. A few months of tension, maybe between the US and Iran, maybe the EU and North Korea, than one day you wake up and your the last survivor of a nuclear apocalspe.

The world conquest is a joke.
But i AM running for parliament and i would like a European UNION. not this half-way crap.

I thought it might be a joke.

There won't be another World War, simply because the countries most capable of fighting it:

1. Possibly no longer exist, and those that do lack the societal environment and government necessary to garner public support.

2. Are way too economically interdependent and integrated to even possibly fight a war with another powerful nation without being forced to stop in a short time due to economic collapse.

3. Realize that peace has brought them more prosperity, technological development, international cooperation, and opportunity than any of the wars of the past.

There won't be another World War, simply because the countries most capable of fighting it:

1. Possibly no longer exist, and those that do lack the societal environment and government necessary to garner public support.

2. Are way too economically interdependent and integrated to even possibly fight a war with another powerful nation without being forced to stop in a short time due to economic collapse.

3. Realize that peace has brought them more prosperity, technological development, international cooperation, and opportunity than any of the wars of the past.

Bullshit, the 3rd one at least.
British Empire was like "YYYYEEEHHAAWW we kickass" and since we've demilitarised we're like "Shit!...er... tally ho dont mind us haha no superpower HERE!"

Italy is like "Yes we have no glory other than the roman empire and they werent militaristic at all.... OH NO WAIT.

France possibly an exception.

Spain, Colonial days "Yuhu we kickass."
Now "...tourists please... we need you"

So NO we arnt more prosperous

Bullshit, the 3rd one at least.
British Empire was like "YYYYEEEHHAAWW we kickass" and since we've demilitarised we're like "Shit!...er... tally ho dont mind us haha no superpower HERE!"

Italy is like "Yes we have no glory other than the roman empire and they werent militaristic at all.... OH NO WAIT.

France possibly an exception.

Spain, Colonial days "Yuhu we kickass."
Now "...tourists please... we need you"

So NO we arnt more prosperous
Well that depends entirely on how you define 'prosperous.' If it is nothing more than how much of a map of the world is in your colours then yes, we are less 'prosperous.' If you take a more rational definition, however, you would see that co-operation has left us better off, more secure, technologically advanced... I don't think blowing up everything peace has achieved is 'prosperous.'

Bullshit, the 3rd one at least.
British Empire was like "YYYYEEEHHAAWW we kickass" and since we've demilitarised we're like "Shit!...er... tally ho dont mind us haha no superpower HERE!"

Italy is like "Yes we have no glory other than the roman empire and they werent militaristic at all.... OH NO WAIT.

France possibly an exception.

Spain, Colonial days "Yuhu we kickass."
Now "...tourists please... we need you"

So NO we arnt more prosperous

Power doesn't equal prosperity; the Europe of today is far better off economically than it was during the pre-WWII era, or even a few decades ago...the difference between the two times for the well being of the average citizen and not the wealthy or powerful is extremely clear.

World War Three will be fought between USA and China. It will end in a Stalemate. Reasoning?

USA has not perfected STI, and is still vulnerable. China has the worlds largest military and is extremely secretive. Eventually America, because it feels it has to impose itself on global politics, will want to find out what's going on. These two will stand off in a Cold War 2 style conflict with China encouraging places like North Korea and Iran to cause mayhem by starting wars with neighbouring countries. USA will have lost all support during its Middle Eastern Conquest and will only have Britain for support. Britain will probably get a PM with a Spine for the first time since Churchill and say we are staying out of it. US forces which are incredibly overated will be stretched to their limits. China will be able to resist any US advances on it's allies, while the US mainland is still unreachable. Both will realise this war can't be won and it will just come to an uneasy end. In this time Europe, not the EU will have regained some prosperity, and then will try to sort the problem out with diplomacy, because they fear the former superpower of the USA and the new superpower of China.

World War III will be started by the Chinese-Soviet Coalition in 2031. They will begin by disabling major military bases of enemies. Major Western Forces bases will be established in Japan, the Middle East, The Indian Ocean and Eastern Europe. A massive aerial assault will cripple many major cities in Asia. The remaining members of The Chinese-Soviet coalition will fire nuclear arms at major fault lines on Earth's surface, destroying it.

Beat that.

Beat That?

WW3 will not have conutries launching Nukes as everyone says. No government can justify it upon a defeat, and who wants to have to fix the problem of a mass nuclear strike. And no government would deliberately target fault lines to destroy the planet, no matter how grave the situation.

Beat That?

WW3 will not have conutries launching Nukes as everyone says. No government can justify it upon a defeat, and who wants to have to fix the problem of a mass nuclear strike. And no government would deliberately target fault lines to destroy the planet, no matter how grave the situation.

i agree with no nukes. it wouldnt matter who wins a nuclear war, they would die from radiation anyway...

Well, you, by the sound of it.

I don't think there will be another world war in the 'traditional' sense, just small battles in different arenas around the world. It is hard to imagine the big powers ever being stupid enough to attack each other when in such a war the costs would by far out way any advantages gained. Who wants to conquer a country that's just a nuclear waste land?
That's what they said after WWI, just without the nuclear wasteland part.

If anything, money is going to stop people from WWIII.

That's what they said after WWI, just without the nuclear wasteland part.
True, but it is that nuclear waste land that is the important difference now.

I reckon someone will die of laughter from reading your ambitions and it will start an international incident. :p

I second that.

I think WWIII will be started by Lichtenstein. Think about it.

I'm not sure if anyone brought this up, as I'm too lazy to even read 20 posts, but some historians consider the Cold War as WWIII. Officially, it's not obviously, but I think if there ever is a WWIII like we know I and II, it will somehow involve China and/or Andorra . That little country wedged in between Spain and France have something up their sleeves. I just know it!

World War Three will be fought between USA and China. It will end in a Stalemate. Reasoning?

USA has not perfected STI, and is still vulnerable. China has the worlds largest military and is extremely secretive. Eventually America, because it feels it has to impose itself on global politics, will want to find out what's going on. These two will stand off in a Cold War 2 style conflict with China encouraging places like North Korea and Iran to cause mayhem by starting wars with neighbouring countries. USA will have lost all support during its Middle Eastern Conquest and will only have Britain for support. Britain will probably get a PM with a Spine for the first time since Churchill and say we are staying out of it. US forces which are incredibly overated will be stretched to their limits. China will be able to resist any US advances on it's allies, while the US mainland is still unreachable. Both will realise this war can't be won and it will just come to an uneasy end. In this time Europe, not the EU will have regained some prosperity, and then will try to sort the problem out with diplomacy, because they fear the former superpower of the USA and the new superpower of China.


Do really think that you start a war to gather intel? You are so ignorant it is funny. Yes china has the largest military in terms of manpower, but in firepower they are arguably below even russia. And since when were we conquering the middle east? Trust me, we are not overrated. However, any war with china will not involve ground forces but will involve air and sea power which the united states has an overpowering advantage. The best china has at sea are diesel subs like those that our navy has defeated numerous times in excercises. Our aviation assets have the ability to penetrate any air defense and acheive air superiority with ease due to greater pilot training, weapons and aircraft. I have seen some estimates that a corps of chinese has about the same firepower capabilities as those as an iraqi corps which we have obviously shown our superiority to. Any war with china will be because of an attack by them against japan or taiwan and will not be initiated by the united states because there are no acheivable goals that we would take the initiative to complete.

I'd say something involving China will be a flashpoint, mixed in with a huge increase of terrorism in the US and the middle east. Europe will stay out of (or at least try) and the US will be without allies.

If that doesn't happen, Israel will spark it. And unless they get nuked, they will win. I have a ton of confidence in the Israeli army, they could probably hold their own against even the US (who is rather overrated, I'll agree.)

Why will it be thought and between which countries.


My belief is that when i become p.m of britain, (no seriously, vote I.S.P 2016 and 2020.) i will unify europe and invade america.

Either that or i'll just invade ireland and kill all the seperatists.
Bastards.
(No im not racist, i myself am irish so HAH)
What do you reckon will start it?

WWIII will start tonight when your Mum comes home early and finds you wearing her pantyhose again.

I don't know who will fight WWIII but WWIV will be between the ants and the cockroaches.

... Israel will spark it. And unless they get nuked, they will win. I have a ton of confidence in the Israeli army, they could probably hold their own against even the US (who is rather overrated, I'll agree.)In a war against Israel.. We (US) would Nuke Israel before they get a chance to use their Nukes.

I doubt WWIII would be US V. Israel.

I doubt WWIII would be US V. Israel.tell that to the Hand (Hamo)
Anyhow.. If Israel ever dares to attack Americans.. we will barbecue them.

George W Bush will be so doubled over in laughter from your pathetic post that he will hit the big red button by accident

tell that to the Hand (Hamo)

:rolleyes: Run kids, the Jewish/mason/illuminati/black/catholic/hispanic/insert group you have irrational hatred of here Conspiracy is coming!

tell that to the Hand (Hamo)
Anyhow.. If Israel ever dares to attack Americans.. we will barbecue them.


Why would Israel attack their only friend in the world? Your post makes no sense.

A "World War" does not necessairly have to be a way between superpowers - only warfare that pits diverse global regimes against one or more aggressive ideologies.

Currently, we are in a World War - and that war is against Arabic/Sharia Political Islamisim (notIslam).

All one has to do is look at the number of countries attacked by TheoPolitical Islamisim to see that there is a World Wide war going on.

It's just that (fortunately) the casualties have not yet attained the levels one usually associates with "war"... unless you consider them in the aggragate... :headbang:

Why would Israel attack their only friend in the world? Your post makes no sense.Like I said..
tell that to the Hand (Ham-o)

...and thank you for that well-thought out, and mature post.

...and thank you for that well-thought out, and mature post.not my fault if you are not smart enough to take a hint.

Here's a hint :upyours: You either have no grasp of geopolitics, or you deliberately make stuff up to get a response.

:upyours:What was your last post again?? "...and thank you for that well-thought out, and mature post."

:D :D ;) :D

Well, you, by the sound of it.

I don't think there will be another world war in the 'traditional' sense, just small battles in different arenas around the world. It is hard to imagine the big powers ever being stupid enough to attack each other when in such a war the costs would by far out way any advantages gained. Who wants to conquer a country that's just a nuclear waste land?

*raises hand*

Here's a hint :upyours: You either have no grasp of geopolitics, or you deliberately make stuff up to get a response.
It's OD2, and it's called Trolling. Get used to it from him/her. :rolleyes:

:upyours: Here's a hint :upyours: You either have no grasp of geopolitics, or you deliberately make stuff up to get a response.
haha.. you edited your post to make it more mature...AFTER I sent you back your own "I-am-holier-than-thou" childish garbage...

It's OD2, and it's called Trolling. Get used to it from him/her. :rolleyes:Trolling its against Forum rules..
If you are sure I broke the rules you should report me.

haha.. you edited your post to make it more mature...AFTER I sent you back your own "I-am-holier-than-thou" childish garbage...

My post was less mature than either of yours. So you can both shut-up. In all honesty, my wife just informed me that WWIII will probably start in my pants if I really try to finish this ginormous burrito I am eating right now.

Provide me with one peice of evidence that suggests that the united states military is overrated. We have the only true blue water navy, we are the only military in the world capable of effective force projection against a comparably capable enemy. We have engaged in urban warfare which typically results in 30% casualties but we were able to keep it under 1%. We are the only military capable of penetrating any airspace in the world. We are capable of giving rise to an entire nations defensive forces. And believe it or not, we are winning in iraq.

Here's a hint :upyours: You either have no grasp of geopolitics, or you deliberately make stuff up to get a response.
Then again, this is speculative theories on WW 3, so anything goes. So maybe you should tone down the attitude.

There will never be a WWIII. The reason that WWI and WWII both had "World War" in thier name was because they were so closely intertwined that it could be argued that WWII was just a continuation of WWI. Yes, there may be anouther large international war but it would not be a "World War."

To be considered a "World War" the war would have to include:

Germany
Imperialism (The old fashioned type from the turn of the century, not the economic imperialism we have now)
Actual battles (in the traditional sense)
Unresolved issues from the Treaty of Versailles


However, in they way the world has changed in warfare, economics and polotics, we will probaly not have anouther war like the World Wars ever again.

My post was less mature than either of yours. So you can both shut-up. In all honesty, my wife just informed me that WWIII will probably start in my pants if I really try to finish this ginormous burrito I am eating right now.Your wife has just informed me that ....(never mind)

:D :D :p :D

Why will it be thought and between which countries.
It will be about oil.
Oil is getting rarer and rarer. And the US doesn't want to be dependend on the middle-east and Venezuela. So the prez figures why not get an ample supply a little closer to home? So he calls his advisors and generals into his office. He tells them he wants to invade Canada to get his hands on their oil. When his advisors ask how in gods name he wants to sell a war on Canada he answers that it will be retaliation for the war of 1812. The Canadians ransacked Washington and now it's time to get even. (Yeah, yeah I know. It was the British.)
And if thats not enough to convince the obeese public the reason will be that Canada realy is a communist white supremecy state. Just look at their flag. Red and white. In the war room strategy is discussed. By accident a clerk hang the map of N-America upside down. Without anyone noticing.
So now troops cross the Mexican border. When a CNN reporter during a White House press conference asks the prez why the people in Canada are so brownish? The answer is that those poor unfortunates are eskimos suffering the results of global warming. Caused by the rest of the world and it's 75% of polution. While the US only causes 25%. They caused the problem while the US tried all it could to turn the tide. The next day the White house recieves the dow's from the rest of latin America. And now from all sides variouse factions intervene on behalf of the Canadian resistence and the latin confederacy. And on rare occasions on behalf of the US. After they have been warmed up to their cause by the threat of nucleair annihillation.

What do you reckon will start it?

Commies will be responsible, as they have been for most 20th century wars.

Commies will be responsible, as they have been for most 20th century wars.

I don't believe that. The style of communism from the 20th century is dead. China can't be considered truely communist and I doubt North Korea is a large threat.

Why will it be thought and between which countries.


My belief is that when i become p.m of britain, (no seriously, vote I.S.P 2016 and 2020.) i will unify europe and invade america.

Either that or i'll just invade ireland and kill all the seperatists.
Bastards.
(No im not racist, i myself am irish so HAH)
What do you reckon will start it?

No ofense ment Europa Alpha, but it should be the other way around, The USA should invade Europe.

Make the European Nations into US states and rule through her people and thier US European cousins in the USA.

You have a great thread, with no Public Poll or no Poll at all.

Has anyone ever thought you might be discussing a point with a cousin in the US or Europe? Someone actually posted something like this along time ago, dont remember who?

US v. China will be a stalemate.
The Chinese have too many troops for the US to be able to launch a successful invasion. However, the Chinese navy won't stand a chance against the US Navy. US is more advanced and has better training.

Actually, the US might be able to win by organising a coup among anti-war Politburo members.

However, I am starting to think that there will be a World War III in the 21st century. If there is, and it is not a US v. China naval stalemate, I don't want to be anywhere nearby. And by "anywhere nearby" I mean "on the same planet", so I think I'll try and catch a colony ship to Mars.

Why will it be thought and between which countries.


My belief is that when i become p.m of britain, (no seriously, vote I.S.P 2016 and 2020.) i will unify europe and invade america.

Either that or i'll just invade ireland and kill all the seperatists.
Bastards.
(No im not racist, i myself am irish so HAH)
What do you reckon will start it?

Wasn't this exactly how "V For Vendetta" started? :D

Maybe it's already started. America and several other nations are in Iraq fighting the "war on terror". The terrorists are busy thumbing their collective nose at us, blowing things up and threatening to blow things up. No one feels safe. Maybe this is WWIII. A hit and miss job comprised of threats, a nation with no land and no borders holding the world to hostage, suicide bombings and fear.

Oh, this topic is FUNNY.

OP, even if you DO become PM of the UK, the UK can't unify Europe.

If I would have to guess right now I would say:

Iran invades Iraq to suport the Shia and fight the US who blockaded their ports.

Arabia and Syria respond by sending in troops to support the Sunni.

The Kurds of the various nations rebel and send the war into Turkey and southern borders of Russia.

N Korea sees an opening and invades the south. The US no longer has the power to stop it.

Japan, not having an effective army to stop the Korean advance appeals to China.

All of this leads to the overthrow of the moderate govenments in Pakistan and India. War breaks out with N-weapons.

China responds in order to stop war on the southern border and to control oil supplies.

Russia sees the move by China and the Kurd war on it's southern border. Russia moves south.

The Palistinians see an opening and begin a massive guerrilla war. Since Israel can't fight such a war they respond by using N-bombs on percieved suppliers. N Africa and SE Asia respond

SE Europe again explodes with conflict between religions. This pulls in the rest of Europe.

Without US support, the governments of Latin America fall.


Did I miss anyone???

Good Life's is probably the most accurate as only ME countries would use Nuclear Weapons. The point is you look at these nations and it all looks pretty dangerous. The old formula is still there but there are new factors

Old
UK-Strongest Military, but also one of the smallest (compared to things like the US)
US-Best supllied military and quickest to generate troops and vehicles
France-Surrenders on own soil
Germany-Has NO army, British forces are it's only proetction apart from the 10000 German troops under British control
Russia-Virtually uninvadable
China-Largest Air Force and compulsive military service

New
Very Anti-American Outlook by most of the World.
US forces stretched to breaking point throughout Iraq, Afghanistan wherever else they decide to go.
Israel will be ganged up on by every Arab state before they turn on each other
Muslim extremists everywhere.
Britain has less infulence, due to it's friendship with USA so influencial troops such as the SAS will not be deployed to key areas
US and China do not want to p**s of the other
Iran is the dominant force in the middle east with a population believing their leader's insane remarks, and the Revolutionary Guard is the most feared force in the Middle East

Oh and Kievan-Prussia, UK can defy Europe, we are a seperate entity, that is why we still have Sterling, rather than the Euro, Britain is trying to get more countries into the EU to negate the effect of France and Germany working together, if this fails Britain will break away like Greenland did. France and Germany are trying to work away Britain's strength with it's influence by making us seem seperated, as soon as it goes too far we will seperate, rather than be an outsider in the EU.

Oh and Kievan-Prussia, UK can defy Europe, we are a seperate entity, that is why we still have Sterling, rather than the Euro, Britain is trying to get more countries into the EU to negate the effect of France and Germany working together, if this fails Britain will break away like Greenland did. France and Germany are trying to work away Britain's strength with it's influence by making us seem seperated, as soon as it goes too far we will seperate, rather than be an outsider in the EU.
He said unify, not defy. If we 'defied' them they would almost certainly say "good riddance," as the UK has been a constant drag on the ambitions of many of those who want full integration. To think the UK would go "we are going to set up a new United States of Europe of which we're in charge" and everyone would reply "wonderful! Welcome, our new and mighty rulers" is absurd.

But i AM running for parliament and i would like a European UNION. not this half-way crap.
good for you :)

If I would have to guess right now I would say:

Iran invades Iraq to suport the Shia and fight the US who blockaded their ports.

Arabia and Syria respond by sending in troops to support the Sunni.

The Kurds of the various nations rebel and send the war into Turkey and southern borders of Russia.

N Korea sees an opening and invades the south. The US no longer has the power to stop it.

Japan, not having an effective army to stop the Korean advance appeals to China.

All of this leads to the overthrow of the moderate govenments in Pakistan and India. War breaks out with N-weapons.

China responds in order to stop war on the southern border and to control oil supplies.

Russia sees the move by China and the Kurd war on it's southern border. Russia moves south.

The Palistinians see an opening and begin a massive guerrilla war. Since Israel can't fight such a war they respond by using N-bombs on percieved suppliers. N Africa and SE Asia respond

SE Europe again explodes with conflict between religions. This pulls in the rest of Europe.

Without US support, the governments of Latin America fall.


Did I miss anyone???


leaving the ANZAC's to inherit the earth

leaving the ANZAC's to inherit the earth
Or maybe the South Africans.

But i AM running for parliament and i would like a European UNION. not this half-way crap.
Oh agree, Europe must unite. Just not in its current form. It is becoming too centralised. A confederal union would be far preferrable in my view.

[B]
Oh agree, Europe must unite. Just not in its current form. It is becoming too centralised. A confederal union would be far preferrable in my view.
And with a bigger participation of the people. During big events like Turkey or the constitution. I mean referendums.

And with a bigger participation of the people. During big events like Turkey or the constitution. I mean referendums.
Absolutely. Whenever such events affect the Community (or Confederation as I would call it) as a whole, they should be subjected to popular opinion, as you say.

I'd have to agree. A Confederation would be the only way that this thing will work in the end - let's be honest, French, German and British people don't just speak different languages, they have different cultures, attitudes and standards. Nor is there anything wrong with that. But trying to shoehorn everyone in together in a Union is never going to work. Heck, the US wouldn't be able to manage that - the United states is technically a Federation, not a Union.

By allowing each nation it's own government and internal legal system, everyone can get along. Eliminating nationalities - which, frankly, seems to be the agenda - will only cause anarchy.

I'd have to agree. A Confederation would be the only way that this thing will work in the end - let's be honest, French, German and British people don't just speak different languages, they have different cultures, attitudes and standards. Nor is there anything wrong with that. But trying to shoehorn everyone in together in a Union is never going to work. Heck, the US wouldn't be able to manage that - the United states is technically a Federation, not a Union.

By allowing each nation it's own government and internal legal system, everyone can get along. Eliminating nationalities - which, frankly, seems to be the agenda - will only cause anarchy.
Not just anarchy, but internal collapse. So I am hoping the EU bureaucrats wake up to reality and amend the Constitution along these lines, forming a minarchist Confederation. Studying Switzerland and it's economy would be the way to go.

One day perhaps it will be a contractual union of European anarcho-capitalist/syndicalist territories, but that is in the distant future.

Bullshit, the 3rd one at least.
British Empire was like "YYYYEEEHHAAWW we kickass" and since we've demilitarised we're like "Shit!...er... tally ho dont mind us haha no superpower HERE!"

Italy is like "Yes we have no glory other than the roman empire and they werent militaristic at all.... OH NO WAIT.

France possibly an exception.

Spain, Colonial days "Yuhu we kickass."
Now "...tourists please... we need you"

So NO we arnt more prosperous

There's nothing wrong with the European countries, especially Britain, changing their ways of thinking. I think the most fair and free country to live in in the world is Britain. We are no where near perfect but compared to other '3rd World' countries you have to conclude that Britain is the fairest. That's just a bloody fact and undisputable.

Europe cannot and will not unite because of one reason. the EU is controlled by three powerful countries, each with it's own reason for being powerful:

Britain (Military)
France (Agriculture)
Germany (Industry)

Now Britain and France are at odds, because we (The UK) want to cut down the CAP, which France gets way too much from. France doesn't like this and Tony Blair has no balls or sense, so is not trying to either trade this for our rebate, or simply take the rebate. Germany is trying to make itself strong again, it wants it's army back (blocked by the UK) and so it sides with France. These two are trying to minimise the UK's influence is Europe, that's why the UK is pushing for more members, if we get Turkey in, Turkey will support us in votes. Sooner or later the UK will get a Prime Minister with backbone, who will simply withdraw from the EU, like Greenland did, if it is of no benefit to us. Uk has sterling so a breakaway is quite easily achieveable. Britain's strength has always been withdrawing into it's fortress, and if it we an get nothing from the EU, we will not bother with it.

It is France trying to do what America does, force itself into other country's politics, whereas America knows when to stay out France doesn't. And that is why US/UK ties are as strong as ever, and I think a fall out with Europe would benefit the UK a lot more than a Union, simply because the US doesn't get on with Europe anyway. Two outsiders, both strong in their own respect, and together will have far greater influence on the Global Politics than a USE situation, where nobody speaks a common language, and would spiral into a position where richer countries would get richer and richer, and the poorer would get poorer and poorer. You don't think states like the Czech Republic or Turkey would ever get respect in a Union, because they wouldn't.

Europe cannot and will not unite because of one reason. the EU is controlled by three powerful countries, each with it's own reason for being powerful:

Britain (Military)
France (Agriculture)
Germany (Industry)

Now Britain and France are at odds, because we (The UK) want to cut down the CAP, which France gets way too much from. France doesn't like this and Tony Blair has no balls or sense, so is not trying to either trade this for our rebate, or simply take the rebate. Germany is trying to make itself strong again, it wants it's army back (blocked by the UK) and so it sides with France. These two are trying to minimise the UK's influence is Europe, that's why the UK is pushing for more members, if we get Turkey in, Turkey will support us in votes. Sooner or later the UK will get a Prime Minister with backbone, who will simply withdraw from the EU, like Greenland did, if it is of no benefit to us. Uk has sterling so a breakaway is quite easily achieveable. Britain's strength has always been withdrawing into it's fortress, and if it we an get nothing from the EU, we will not bother with it.

It is France trying to do what America does, force itself into other country's politics, whereas America knows when to stay out France doesn't. And that is why US/UK ties are as strong as ever, and I think a fall out with Europe would benefit the UK a lot more than a Union, simply because the US doesn't get on with Europe anyway. Two outsiders, both strong in their own respect, and together will have far greater influence on the Global Politics than a USE situation, where nobody speaks a common language, and would spiral into a position where richer countries would get richer and richer, and the poorer would get poorer and poorer. You don't think states like the Czech Republic or Turkey would ever get respect in a Union, because they wouldn't.
*laughs*
Thats funny.

Or maybe the South Africans.

Dont you mean Seth Efricans.

It'll be the United States and the People's Republic of China. Taiwan will declare independence, the Chinese military will launch a combined air/sea operation against the island, with a heavy emphasis on land based missiles fired against positions on Taiwan. The US will move several Carrier Battle Groups into the area. And stuff will happen. Most likely a US victory at sea and in the air. Doubtful that a US invasion of the mainland would occur. Likely participants include the ROK, Japan, India, the Phillipines, Great Britain and possibly Russia. Although Russia is doubtful. I cannot tell whether the other major European states will do, specifically France and Germany. France has something resembling the reach, but Germany doesn't, and would most likely sit it out.

I'm really quite amused by the talk of a US-EU war.

It won't happen. We may have our differences, but those differences aren't so great as some people think.

So I am hoping the EU bureaucrats wake up to reality and amend the Constitution along these lines, forming a minarchist Confederation. Studying Switzerland and it's economy would be the way to go.
Switzerland? Minarchist?

You have got to be kidding, right?

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

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Switzerland
as opposed to the oh so free...
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Germany
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Canada
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/country.cfm?id=Ireland

There would be no US-EU war, because a disagreement over something as small as Iraq isn't likely to launch a Nuclear War. If it emerged that France was supplying the Iranians with Nuclear Weapons (isn't happening, just using an example) that might cause trouble, still probably not a War.