Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: America!!!

  1. #1
    School Boy/Girl Captain Go_India's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    197

    America!!!

    Well guys, dont u think America is slowly losing its grip on being the most powerful nation in the world??? Looking at their current state they havent even got enough money in support for the disaster in katrina, spending (maybe unexpected) amount of money in Iraq and afghanistan, maybe this has led to alot of financial loss and now developing countries like bangladesh are giving them money for rebuilding. I seriously cant think of them being as wealthy as i thought, what do u think?
    Sachin Tendulkar: My favourite!!!!!!

  2. #2
    International Coach Pothas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Surbiton, UK
    Posts
    10,765
    Well they are still clearly the most powerfull nation in the world to suggest otherwise would be obsurd, Bushes tax cuts have meant less income for the federal governement it is still an obsurdly wealthy country. China are catching up especialy in economic terms but America are still the only super power but i dont know for how much longer

  3. #3
    Virat Kohli (c) Jono's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    53,753
    Well they're still clearly the most powerful nation, and they will be for a few more decades to come. However how powerful China get, and how large their economy grows is still fairly unknown. It really depends on how much they will continue to open up. With continous talk of bilateral FTAs (not that the potential Australian one will help them THAT much) and an increasingly productive and educated workforce... who knows?
    "I am very happy and it will allow me to have lot more rice."

    Eoin Morgan on being given a rice cooker for being Man of the Match in a Dhaka Premier Division game.

  4. #4
    School Boy/Girl Captain Go_India's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    197
    Yeah well u guys are right in saying they are the most powerful nation and will remain for some time, but the amount they are spending in Iraq and Afghanistan is enormous, and everyone knows it will take along time since those coutries are stabilized, they might have all the weapons in the world but my feeling is they havent got as much money as people think.


  5. #5
    Virat Kohli (c) Jono's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    53,753
    Well everyone knew they were spending plenty with the recent wars, however now that this excessive spending has consequentially resulted in flagrant harm to the American people, this has occurred.

    http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=4311

    The number of people who think the country is on the wrong track grew from 59 per cent last month to 65 per cent this month. Tumbling consumer confidence after Hurricane Katrina may be contributing to that sense of pessimism.

    Petrol prices too seem to have irritated many people.

    Edit: Seems the link is now a different story, centralised more to Bush's reaction than the criticisms. However its still there at the bottom of the article.
    Last edited by Jono; 10-09-2005 at 03:08 PM.

  6. #6
    PY
    PY is offline
    International Coach PY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Posts
    10,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Petrol prices too seem to have irritated many people.
    Well they can cry me a river to be honest.

    They pay the same for a gallon of 'gasoline' as we do for a litre here.

    IMO, it was bound to happen at some point and maybe a few cents added to tax would encourage people to look elsewhere.
    A True Champion - Bob. Rest in peace. 15/04/06
    "People today have too big a devil and too small a God"

    - Stephen Currie

    "The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?" Psalm 27:1

  7. #7
    Hall of Fame Member age_master's Avatar
    Plasmanaut on Fire Champion!
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    15,777
    China will be in 20 years or so just cause they have so many people, the US will still however no doubt have enough Neuclear weapons to blow up the world 4 times over or something stupid like that.
    Member of CW Green
    Kerry O'Keefe - Worlds funniest Commentator

  8. #8
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    Quote Originally Posted by age_master
    China will be in 20 years or so just cause they have so many people, the US will still however no doubt have enough Neuclear weapons to blow up the world 4 times over or something stupid like that.
    Well so does Russia, UK, France, Israel, India, Pakistan, China and possibly North Korea/Iran...........
    Nuke is a great leveller - it doesnt matter what size yer nation is or what strength the conventional armed forces are, if you got nukes and ICBM technology/exit and re-entry rocket technology, you are not gonna be bothered by any big shot military when you sabre-rattle your nuclear capabilities.

  9. #9
    Banned Shounak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,520
    Quote Originally Posted by C_C
    Well so does Russia, UK, France, Israel, India, Pakistan, China and possibly North Korea/Iran...........
    Nuke is a great leveller - it doesnt matter what size yer nation is or what strength the conventional armed forces are, if you got nukes and ICBM technology/exit and re-entry rocket technology, you are not gonna be bothered by any big shot military when you sabre-rattle your nuclear capabilities.
    You will if the country's dirt poor. If North Korea's technology were a little more advanced, they would still be bothered by the USA. IIRC, the DPRK have the capability to launch a nuke (if they had a proper one) into Japan.

    They know if they do anything like that, any assurances from China would go out the window at it would be a free-for-all. The world vs. DPRK..

    Plus the leader's a bloody nutjob. Doesn't giving a flying f*ck about the people. The DPRK's been trying to sabre rattle its nuclear programs. I doubt the situation would change very much if they actually made a proper nuke.

  10. #10
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    Quote Originally Posted by shounak
    You will if the country's dirt poor. If North Korea's technology were a little more advanced, they would still be bothered by the USA. IIRC, the DPRK have the capability to launch a nuke (if they had a proper one) into Japan.

    They know if they do anything like that, any assurances from China would go out the window at it would be a free-for-all. The world vs. DPRK..

    Plus the leader's a bloody nutjob. Doesn't giving a flying f*ck about the people. The DPRK's been trying to sabre rattle its nuclear programs. I doubt the situation would change very much if they actually made a proper nuke.
    I am talking from a military perspective, not economic. If a country like Luxembourg has nukes plus ICBM technology and is willing to use them, America can do f*ck all against Luxembourg despite its overwhelming superiority in conventional forces- unless ofcourse, America deciedes that it can bear the cost of a few American cities being nuked.

    And yes, DPRK cannot touch mainland US-yet. Nor do they need to. A few nukes towards Japan and Soul and you'll see the Dow Jones launching a southward exodus of such magnitude that 9-11induced economic slump would look like a blip on the index.

    Ofcourse, using nukes first will lead to the certain annihilation of DPRK, which is why i dont think it is gonna use it at all - it is sabre rattling and warning America that it will use it IF attacked.
    And unless little Kim bolloxes up absolutely, you can count on China being in North Korea's corner in case of any confrontation. And despite its overall military superiority, US will be wise not to engage china-even if its only a garanteed conventional war- its attack forces will almost certainly get annihilated by the Chinese military.

  11. #11
    Banned Shounak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,520
    Quote Originally Posted by C_C
    Ofcourse, using nukes first will lead to the certain annihilation of DPRK, which is why i dont think it is gonna use it at all - it is sabre rattling and warning America that it will use it IF attacked.
    And unless little Kim bolloxes up absolutely, you can count on China being in North Korea's corner in case of any confrontation. And despite its overall military superiority, US will be wise not to engage china-even if its only a garanteed conventional war- its attack forces will almost certainly get annihilated by the Chinese military.
    China are only there to prevent a war from breaking out. They say they guarantee DPRK, but do they really? It is not in China's best interests for anything to happen to the DPRK. Should anything happen to the DPRK, everyone would go running straight into China. China would lose heaps of resouces as a result

    The only reason China are guaranteeing the DPRK is to stop the USA from taking any action.

    The flip side is if the DPRK disarm. Then the tens of thousands of US troops settled in ROK would naturally settle into the DPRK. What does this mean for China?

    US troops on their doorstep.

    China will fight as hard as they can to maintain the status quo. But if it comes down to supporting either DPRK or the US, they would support the US. Unconditionally I think. The only way China will engage the US in combat is if the US invade the DPRK of their own accord..

  12. #12
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend andyc's Avatar
    Yeti Sports 1.5 Champion!
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    23,827
    Quote Originally Posted by shounak
    The only way China will engage the US in combat is if the US invade the DPRK of their own accord..
    True, but Taiwan could conceivably start them fighting.
    Quote Originally Posted by flibbertyjibber View Post
    Only a bunch of convicts having been beaten 3-0 and gone 9 tests without a win and won just 1 in 11 against England could go into the home series saying they will win. England will win in Australia again this winter as they are a better side which they have shown this summer. 3-0 doesn't lie girls.

  13. #13
    Banned Shounak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,520
    Quote Originally Posted by andyc
    True, but Taiwan could conceivably start them fighting.
    Nahh. The USA say they support democracy. But if it came down to it, they wouldn't launch into a full scale war with China over Taiwan.

    All each party does is station aircraft carriers around Taiwan to scare the other party. Taiwan's too inconsequential for anything major to break out over it.

    China's not going to invade Taiwan anyway. It would be political stupidity to the max..

  14. #14
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    But if it comes down to supporting either DPRK or the US, they would support the US. Unconditionally I think. The only way China will engage the US in combat is if the US invade the DPRK of their own accord..
    I dont think the Chinese would support the US unconditionally at all and extremely unlikely to pick the US over North Korea, due to strategic power issues. Eveyrone would go running into China ? for what ? to die ? look at Iraq - America is struggling to control Iraq and forget America and its sidekick Britain/OZ, even a 100 nation coalition wont successfully occupy China. And as Andy said, i think they would come to blows over Taiwan first, which i fully expect to be incorporated into China in the next 20 years.
    I dont see how the US can successfully defend Taiwan without resorting to a full-scale nuclear war (which would be stupid, really) - China has massive advantage strategically in a battle over taiwan, it has the manpower to occupy taiwan and repulse the superior trained US marines/ground troops by their sheer numerical superiority and the much vaunted US aircraft carrier groups (Nimitz class- which is the central nexus for US attacking any overseas nation over the past 20 years or so) would most likely be absolutely catastrophic for the US - China has access to Russian built Onyx and SSN-22 Sunburn anti-ship missiles and the US have no counter to it ( the much vaunted AEGIS radar system and RAM missiles are utterly useless against Onyx and Sunburn), which in essence makes them just floating targets.
    Last edited by C_C; 10-09-2005 at 08:23 PM.

  15. #15
    C_C
    C_C is offline
    International Captain C_C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    World
    Posts
    6,990
    China's not going to invade Taiwan anyway. It would be political stupidity to the max..
    If China wants Taiwan badly enough, it will (unfortunately) take it.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Metric System for America?
    By masterblaster in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 15-06-2005, 11:21 AM
  2. India-Pakistan Series Viewers in North America
    By adharcric in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-03-2005, 03:02 AM
  3. Happy Thanksgiving America
    By Piper in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 25-11-2004, 02:18 AM
  4. Only in America
    By Craig in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 09-12-2003, 11:27 AM
  5. america
    By Kimbo in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 14-09-2002, 10:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •