Poll

1 vote (14.28%)
1 vote (14.28%)
4 votes (57.14%)
1 vote (14.28%)

7 members have voted

steeldco
steeldco
Joined: Nov 30, 2011
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 4914
March 30th, 2014 at 12:53:21 PM permalink
I believe that the future global economic leaders, and therefore probably also leaders militarily, will be China and India. Populace nations that although not entirely free, are trending in the right direction. It's inevitable.

So I would posit that the death of communism also has meant the death of US global leadership.
DO NOT blindly accept what has been spoken. DO NOT blindly accept what has been written. Think. Assess. Lead. DO NOT blindly follow.
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
March 30th, 2014 at 1:07:50 PM permalink
Last time I checked, China was still a communist country exhibiting state capitalism. more than 50% of the country's population still practices agriculture, and profits are kept between very few people and not passed down to the masses. The communist leaders want to keep the general population very poor (and obidient) and recognize the few loyal 'capitalists' who bring $USD and capital into the country.

I wouldn't go forward and say that the US has lost global leadership either. It really only had global leadership for 25 years between the time when the Soviet Union broke up and a few years ago. In the post WW2 era, global leadership was sharply divided between the Soviets and the Americans. I would say it lost its moral authority when it invaded Iraq, and is feeling the effects of it now because America is no longer influencial in either Iraq or Afghanistan.

But this discussion belongs on DT.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
steeldco
steeldco
Joined: Nov 30, 2011
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 4914
March 30th, 2014 at 1:24:19 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Last time I checked, China was still a communist country exhibiting state capitalism. more than 50% of the country's population still practices agriculture, and profits are kept between very few people and not passed down to the masses. The communist leaders want to keep the general population very poor (and obidient) and recognize the few loyal 'capitalists' who bring $USD and capital into the country.


I believe that I did say "the future" and that they are "trending in the right direction".

Quote: boymimbo

I wouldn't go forward and say that the US has lost global leadership either. It really only had global leadership for 25 years between the time when the Soviet Union broke up and a few years ago. In the post WW2 era, global leadership was sharply divided between the Soviets and the Americans. I would say it lost its moral authority when it invaded Iraq, and is feeling the effects of it now because America is no longer influencial in either Iraq or Afghanistan.



It's not yet lost, but it will be. It can't be stopped.......unless we can somehow see communism return to those countries. Maybe the CIA can do something about that...... :-)
DO NOT blindly accept what has been spoken. DO NOT blindly accept what has been written. Think. Assess. Lead. DO NOT blindly follow.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 11769
March 30th, 2014 at 2:39:19 PM permalink
The USA has not lost global leadership no matter how much the current POTUS is trying to do it for us.

The USA controls the world's oceans. No other nation in history has done that. Both China and India have limited coastlines that limit they ultimate naval power they can have. Without naval power you cannot project power around the world. The USA can deny any nation that it wants to the ability to operate on the oceans. The USA cannot be approached in a naval sense right now, the only way it might is if India or China gets a base in Central America. OTOH, the USA has bases in Japan, S Korea, and Diego Garcia to approach India and China.

Economically it isn't going to happen soon, either. Without the USA, China has a barely positive balance of trade. The USA is already trying to encourage some of this offshoring to Mexico. China has wealthy coasts but a poor interior. It must keep transferring wealth to the interior to maintain peace. And China is really a potemkin village of an economy. All that junk you buy at Harbor Freight is minimally profitable. They have good cash flow, but it all flows to debt service internally. We have all heard the stories of the beand new ghost towns they are building.

India is nearly the same situation. She is full of klans and castes that hate each other. Lots and lots of poverty. India has a population that will not age like China's as they still are beyond replacement birth levels. But it is already overcrowded. This makes even basic living super expensive for the masses--think as if everyone in the USA had to pay NYC rent rates.

"Miracle" economies then to have a crash or two along the way. I can see one coming over the next 10 years in either or both places.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
steeldco
steeldco
Joined: Nov 30, 2011
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 4914
March 30th, 2014 at 3:17:48 PM permalink
The USA has not YET lost its global leadership. However, it has been slowly losing it over the past couple of decades and the deterioration will continue. It will not matter who, or which party, governs this nation.

My crystal balls say that in the future, naval power will have little value relative to today. Air power and associated technologies will rule. It will be expensive and the most populace free market countries will be able to fund it. As China and India continue to evolve, they will become exactly that.

The USA will not be the leader. Nor will Russia.
DO NOT blindly accept what has been spoken. DO NOT blindly accept what has been written. Think. Assess. Lead. DO NOT blindly follow.
bigfoot66
bigfoot66
Joined: Feb 5, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 1577
March 30th, 2014 at 4:30:37 PM permalink
Your title suggests that you think the people who live in Asia and Eastern Europe should have retained their shackles under the backwards system of communism so that the USA would look better by comparison. This is a morally troubling idea. The lives of Russians and Chinese people should not be radically impared just to retain political power in the west.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 99
  • Posts: 14229
March 30th, 2014 at 8:39:02 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman


The USA controls the world's oceans. No other nation in history has done that...



I would have to disagree with this statement.

America, Canada, Hong Kong, India, Australia, New Zealand, numerous Caribbean Islands, Malta, South Africa, others. The British Empire ruled the seas, and the world, absolutely for over 100 years, and partially for at least another 100. They won virtually all wars against other strong sea powers during most of that time. "The sun never sets on the Empire" etc.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
Tomspur
Tomspur
Joined: Jul 12, 2013
  • Threads: 28
  • Posts: 2019
March 30th, 2014 at 9:20:30 PM permalink
I would answer as follows. I know the OP said "losing" and not "lost" but even though the US it outgunned numbers wise, you really have to look at the overall socio economic climate of each person and indeed family unit compared on a 1 for 1 basis. Both India and China have catastrophic poverty, especially India due to its crazy over population. China still cowers behind its very unique ruling system that isn't quite communist but it isn't "not" quite communist either.

The US still has some of the best quality of life (comparatively speaking), good middle class (MUCH stronger than both China and India) and strong earnings potential. For both India and China the power rests with a few individuals who control the export markets.

Until both India and China figure out how to improve the quality of life of their people and give them something to work towards and live for, there is no chance that they overtake the US as a true global superpower.

As for who controls the seas.....nobody. The oceans are simply too vast to control as is clearly in evidence with the MH370 mystery. The US I'm sure does have the ability to launch the most nukes from the seas, if that is what you mean?
“There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man.” - Winston Churchill
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14434
March 30th, 2014 at 9:22:23 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

I would have to disagree with this statement.

I too would disagree with USA control of the oceans. What sort of control do we have? Its like putting a fist into a large pillow. When we remove the fist the pillow springs back. We can send a fleet to stand offshore of a trouble spot, but we can't really do much and those sailors get awfully tired on 24 hour alert status. How much control did that USA destroyer have when it entered Yemen for fuel and was attacked. Japan controls the worlds fisheries and the Japanese navy is going to be a tough nut for the US Navy to crack.

How vulnerable was the Royal Navy during the Falklands War when Exocet autonomous standoff weapons make it One Exocet, One Ship? How powerful were the Scotch Guards when one two Argentinian fighters put all the troops on a troop carrier on Dead or Dying status in less than two minutes? And remember, the "professional" British troops were facing unwilling, untrained conscripts who were poorly clothed, poorly fed and poorly motivated. Yet the Argentinians acquitted themselves quite well.

Quote: beachbumbabs

America, Canada, Hong Kong, India, Australia, New Zealand, numerous Caribbean Islands, Malta, South Africa, others. The British Empire ruled the seas, and the world, absolutely for over 100 years, and partially for at least another 100. They won virtually all wars against other strong sea powers during most of that time. "The sun never sets on the Empire" etc.

Britain was seen as the Bully of the seas and in 1878 the Caltalpa crew including cook and cabin boy lined the rails armed with wooden harpoons and marlinspikes faced down fifty muskets of the Territorial Guard and a recently installed canon appropriated from a parade ground. They pointed to the American flag and stated that they were legally on the High Seas and that the bully boy tactics of the Royal Navy would cost them dearly. So much for the might of the Royal Navy.

By the way, I agree: Belongs at DT.
AxiomOfChoice
AxiomOfChoice
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 5761
March 30th, 2014 at 11:15:41 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

I would have to disagree with this statement.

America, Canada, Hong Kong, India, Australia, New Zealand, numerous Caribbean Islands, Malta, South Africa, others. The British Empire ruled the seas, and the world, absolutely for over 100 years, and partially for at least another 100. They won virtually all wars against other strong sea powers during most of that time. "The sun never sets on the Empire" etc.



Interesting factoid: http://what-if.xkcd.com/48/

  • Jump to: