The next superpower after USA?

[BraveLiver]

History repeats itself. The largest empires fall to rising ones. Rome and Britain are good examples.

So, when(or if) America falls, who will be numero uno?


I think China will rise. Smart people they are. They'll figure out a way...

[Kingcrazygenius]

I agree, China is probably next in line, assuming USA ever falls.

And because the government changes dramatically every ten years or so I don't think USA is going down anytime soon.

[DeadDez]

i say...i say....i say after the USA ... Fiji is the next superpower lol

[BraveLiver]

You can vote on the poll, instead of just posting it.

BLOODY 60 SECOND RULE!!!

[Kingcrazygenius]

True, but I don't know what to vote for yet.

[Gleban]

China is only people wise. Russia is the nuclear power. And why is USA the #1?(I know the answer to this I just want to hear some opinions).

[DukeOfChaos]

America will never fall because we kick ass. And without us no one would have any fun.

[Gleban]

America will never fall because we kick ass. And without us no one would have any fun.
Everyone would have fun, what are you talking about?

[Kingcrazygenius]

USA is number one because we happened to get ahold of one kickass piece of land (full or nice resources and wide open spaces), and had our constitution written by real intellectuals. That combined with our reletively open economy gave us the edge in the world.

[Dragolas77]

Hm, it's a shame you didn't put canada on there...

But like we'd get it anytime soon anyways... :D

[Kingcrazygenius]

Canada a superpower...

heh heh heh

[Dragolas77]

I wonder what the world would be like then...

[Gleban]

Hockey. Beer. Hell on earth.

[ArPharazon]

Netherlands all the way!!!! :bigclap:

[Kingcrazygenius]

Hell on earth.

I'm a fan.

[Flak]

The USA will never fall. Soon it's going to have perfected anti-matter technology, as if nukes weren't good enough. But say it does fall, Japan will go up, it controls the electronic world and has the best education system.

[TechnoHamster]

China will take over. Japan will stay second best, as it is now.

[Snide]

I'd say GB... they ruled the world once and most likely still got enough juice left in em to do it again.



And to the person who says Americas the best cuz of land and stuff, American didnt fight in world war one and lose 10 million men. Where were they then? Tsk... They only joined cuz one of their ships got pwned by Germany :bigclap: ... hmm... America has far to much patriotism.. well not exatly patriotism, but i guess their too full of themselves. SNOBS... GO GREAT BRITAIN/RUSSIA!

[PervertSama]

seems the everyone if forgeting the 10,000 nukes that russia currently has...

if the USA is ever to fall, russia will quickly take the throne. And make everyone else its slaves (having the only nukes left, no other country will dare do anything agiants russia).

[Flak]

Only nukes? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Iran...or was it Israel? Or China? One of those 3.

[ArPharazon]

And don't forget Korea! I've heard often they've got (a) nuke(s) as well.

[Gleban]

seems the everyone if forgeting the 10,000 nukes that russia currently has...

if the USA is ever to fall, russia will quickly take the throne. And make everyone else its slaves (having the only nukes left, no other country will dare do anything agiants russia).
Exactly. And Putin has something known as "The button"..

[Mark Romaneck]

well China is pretty much kicking ass

I mean 1 out of 10 products have the logo of made in china

WERE DOOMED!!

[DeadDez]

Exactly. And Putin has something known as "The button"..

yes..its supposedly around his pants area but as yet Secret Intelligence is unable to find it

[mojojojomo]

First of all, no single European power will ever be in a position to regain global hegemony. The very fact that California alone is ranked as the world's sixth largest economy pretty much proves this. The only way Europe will ever be the prime mover and shaker again is in the form of the European Union, which is currently too beauracratized to be truly effective. It also seems unwilling to invest in a potent military, which unfortunately remains one of the hallmarks of a superpower.

Seconly, nukes are not the most important thing when it comes to global domination. It's money that makes the world go round, and without vast sums at its disposal, no nation can truly make dent on the world scene. For this reason, Russia will not be able to claim ascendency until the political, social and economic upheval that so wracks the country is put to an end. The fact that the former USSR poisoned large tracts of its territory and that Russia's population is decreasing by something like 700 000 a year doesn't help this either.

Snide, do you know anything about history, or are you just making broadside assumptions, and hoping you might touch on something correct?

In World War I, Great Britain didn't lose anywhere near 10 million men. In fact, that's almost half the entire casualty rate. In reality, British losses were closer to 700 000. Even if you take the entire British Empire into consideration, it still doesn't even reach 1 million. Furthermore, it was the Second World War, not the First that ended British hegemony, and that was due mainly to an unwillingness to re-arm after WWI. If they had done so, it is likely they could have defeated Germany much quicker than they needed to.

[Gleban]

First of all, no single European power will ever be in a position to regain global hegemony. The very fact that California alone is ranked as the world's sixth largest economy pretty much proves this. The only way Europe will ever be the prime mover and shaker again is in the form of the European Union, which is currently too beauracratized to be truly effective. It also seems unwilling to invest in a potent military, which unfortunately remains one of the hallmarks of a superpower.

Seconly, nukes are not the most important thing when it comes to global domination. It's money that makes the world go round, and without vast sums at its disposal, no nation can truly make dent on the world scene. For this reason, Russia will not be able to claim ascendency until the political, social and economic upheval that so wracks the country is put to an end. The fact that the former USSR poisoned large tracts of its territory and that Russia's population is decreasing by something like 700 000 a year doesn't help this either.

Snide, do you know anything about history, or are you just making broadside assumptions, and hoping you might touch on something correct?

In World War I, Great Britain didn't lose anywhere near 10 million men. In fact, that's almost half the entire casualty rate. In reality, British losses were closer to 700 000. Even if you take the entire British Empire into consideration, it still doesn't even reach 1 million. Furthermore, it was the Second World War, not the First that ended British hegemony, and that was due mainly to an unwillingness to re-arm after WWI. If they had done so, it is likely they could have defeated Germany much quicker than they needed to.
700 000 a year?

DeadDez: Its actually a briefcase, I believe.

[mojojojomo]

Well, the last time i saw some birth rate figues for the former USSR, they were at -700 000 per annum. Granted, that was a couple of years ago but i doubt the trend has been reversed that quickly.

[PervertSama]

Only nukes? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Iran...or was it Israel? Or China? One of those 3.

Russia: 28,240 warheads (18,000 are awaiting dismantlement or in reserve). Missile range of 6,800 miles
United States: 12,070 warheads. Missile range of 8,100 miles.
Britain: 400 warheads. Missile range of 7,500 miles.
France: 510 warheads. Missile range of 3,300 miles.
China: 425 warheads. Missile range of 6,800 miles.
India: Between 60 to 250 warheads. Missile range is between 1,500 to 2,000 miles.
Pakistan: Between 10 and 15, but could be as many as 150. Missile range between 1,500 to 1,800 miles.
Israel: Estimated arsenal of 100 warheads. Missile range of 940 miles.

Suspected missiles:

North Korea: Suspected of developing a nuclear bomb, and might have two warheads. Activity at its Yongbyon nuclear research centre was frozen under 1994 agreement with the US. Its missile range is 600 to 900 miles.
Iran: Suspected of being within 5 to 10 years of producing a nuclear bomb. Seeking to recruit Russian nuclear scientists. Missile range 310 miles.
Iraq Before Gulf War: was two years from producing bomb. United Nations weapons inspectors have not visited Iraq since the UNSCOM withdrew in December 1998. Missile range up to 470 miles.
Libya: Despite numerous attempts to obtain nuclear weapons and technology, is thought to have made little progress. Missile range 190 miles.



Wow, good job on that one.

China: we gona rule world! step away ruskis! we have 425 missiles!!
Russia: well we have 28,240 bitch.
*russia blows up china*

and thus russia will rule the world.



nukes are not the most important thing when it comes to global domination.

wow, good one too.

The world: step down russia, your nukes dont scare us! your economy sucks ass!
Russia: really? *blows up china*, what now little bitches???
The world: oh ****... *become russia's slaves and all profits are sent into making russia a more powerfull superpower*


thus russia will become the next superpower after the US.

[DukeOfChaos]

In America its called the football, and I would so want to be the guy carrying that thing. To do that though I would have to get up the ranks in the military.

[Lejond]

Russia: 28,240 warheads (18,000 are awaiting dismantlement or in reserve). Missile range of 6,800 miles
United States: 12,070 warheads. Missile range of 8,100 miles.
Britain: 400 warheads. Missile range of 7,500 miles.
France: 510 warheads. Missile range of 3,300 miles.
China: 425 warheads. Missile range of 6,800 miles.
India: Between 60 to 250 warheads. Missile range is between 1,500 to 2,000 miles.
Pakistan: Between 10 and 15, but could be as many as 150. Missile range between 1,500 to 1,800 miles.
Israel: Estimated arsenal of 100 warheads. Missile range of 940 miles.

Suspected missiles:

North Korea: Suspected of developing a nuclear bomb, and might have two warheads. Activity at its Yongbyon nuclear research centre was frozen under 1994 agreement with the US. Its missile range is 600 to 900 miles.
Iran: Suspected of being within 5 to 10 years of producing a nuclear bomb. Seeking to recruit Russian nuclear scientists. Missile range 310 miles.
Iraq Before Gulf War: was two years from producing bomb. United Nations weapons inspectors have not visited Iraq since the UNSCOM withdrew in December 1998. Missile range up to 470 miles.
Libya: Despite numerous attempts to obtain nuclear weapons and technology, is thought to have made little progress. Missile range 190 miles.



Wow, good job on that one.

China: we gona rule world! step away ruskis! we have 425 missiles!!
Russia: well we have 28,240 bitch.
*russia blows up china*

and thus russia will rule the world.





wow, good one too.

The world: step down russia, your nukes dont scare us! your economy sucks ass!
Russia: really? *blows up china*, what now little bitches???
The world: oh ****... *become russia's slaves and all profits are sent into making russia a more powerfull superpower*


thus russia will become the next superpower after the US.

425 nukes is enough to turn Russia into more of a mudhole than it currently is. Are you more dead when the 50th nuke hits the same city than you were after the 10th?

I'm gonna say it will be France just for laughs.

[Gleban]

425 nukes is enough to turn Russia into more of a mudhole than it currently is. Are you more dead when the 50th nuke hits the same city than you were after the 10th?

I'm gonna say it will be France just for laughs.
Your an idiot.

[SuRReAL OrC]

The big Mutha Russsia will. It's the biggest, probably has the most nukes, and they were pretty damn strong before.

[PervertSama]

I agree with gleban. Thats the most ******ed thing I have ever heard.

[Kingcrazygenius]

Russia should sell its nukes to terrorists, then it would be rich again:)

[Gleban]

That's also stupid.

Have you not seen some live videos from Beslan?

[Kingcrazygenius]

No, and I don't care. Nor did I hope anyone would take my last post seriously :g-shake:

[Gleban]

I don't think anyone takes you seriously.

[Gleban]

Gleban- shut the hell up. KCGs posts aren't taken seriously because people know KCG and what he's like, most people barely know who you are apart from a little sissy who cried like a baby when his account was deleted.

Ok.

As for Lejonds comments, they are actually pretty true. Therefore, your the idiot- not him. So, shut the hell up.

Liking the shut up are we? Give me the facts.

As for the purpose of this thread, America has a pretty stable hold, by the time the States fall, there may be a completely knew rising nation. Therefore, prediciting the next world superpower is near impossible.

Not really, you never know what might happen, not only to the states but to any country, island, nation, or anything else for that matter.

BTW: Gleban, your going on my ignore list for being such a stupid sissy idiot.

Your the sissy, for not ignoring me last time you said you would, and I don't think you did this time.

[mojojojomo]

Pervet Sama, you realize of course that the moment anyone ever uses a nuclear weapon, there won't be a world left for someone to rule over? If the Russians attempted to use one of those failing, corroded and highly unpredictable missiles of theirs, the country would be reduced to a pile of nuclear ashes within hours.

I have to point out that former strength is no indication of what it will be like in the future. There was a time when Rome was the unquestioned power of the world, but i don't see anyone claiming that it'll be back up there anytime soon.

[Lejond]

Gleban how is Russia a superpower after it's hit by 400+ nukes especially since it has a pathetic backwards economy?

Not to mention Japan wont be happy with Russia after that big nuclear cloud over top of China blows across the water and settles over Tokyo

[Gun50000]

Hmmm... I'd have to say other.

I will certainly be the next big power. Now Hiring Henchmen.

Henchmen signups below.

[Slay]

I think China. But not for long: it's too bureaucratic for it to have any real power in the world. After China, who knows. I'd probably go with India.
-Slay

[Kingcrazygenius]

And then after India Canada might have a chance, assuming it doesn't melt.

[Raistlin Majere]

425 nukes is enough to turn Russia into more of a mudhole than it currently is. Are you more dead when the 50th nuke hits the same city than you were after the 10th?
You think that Russia is gonna sit around while the missles are homing in?

Russia would detect the missiles, launch theirs, and both would be a radioactive slushie.

[Kingcrazygenius]

Meanwhile the UN will condemn the actions of both parties.

[GreatDarkKnight]

I think it will be that dude with the 666 on his head.

[Gleban]

Gleban how is Russia a superpower after it's hit by 400+ nukes especially since it has a pathetic backwards economy?

Not to mention Japan wont be happy with Russia after that big nuclear cloud over top of China blows across the water and settles over Tokyo
Seriously Raistlin Majere already pointed some of it out.
If you think Russia has only nukes your wrong, it has anti-nuke technologies.


@ Ralf: I'm telling Hiro you impersonated me.

[Lejond]

Seriously Raistlin Majere already pointed some of it out.
If you think Russia has only nukes your wrong, it has anti-nuke technologies.


@ Ralf: I'm telling Hiro you impersonated me.


Considering the USA cant even reliably shoot down nukes yet what makes you think ass backwards Russia can? Not to mention Russia and China are practically beside each other

Raistlin Majere pointed out that both countries would launch nukes at each other turning both countries into wastelands not that Russia has special anti nuclear missiles.

[Kingcrazygenius]

Note that Master Satan and Martha Steward both start with M and S.

Glorious Armageddon is upon us

[Archkender]

Are you sure the ballistic range and #s are correct? Not too sure, but i think China's missles can hit further than that. Once you can launch things into space, it means u have a long range missle. (hence USA and USSR were competing to get to space).

heh... Nukes won't work anymore. The world has too many. Its the whole MAD principle.

[TMRiddle]

As long as the US maintains the flexible and fluid style of government it has, I don't see any troubles in the future. The danger lies in the ease with which mass opinion can spread in our ever-shrinking world. It is my fervent hope that social changes will result in British Columbia becoming the world's newest superpower. The first order of business will be to liberate Alberta and steal their oil.

[MrProAmerica]

I'd say Germany is always a good bet for "who's gonna rule the world soon". Then again, they always failed. Ah, I still vote Germany, three time's the charm :y-thumbsu

[armis]

I voted China, but I think Russia might have a stab at it in the long run. Not because of nukes (seriously, who's going to become a superpower through an exchange of weapons that can and will level all a country's vital infrastructure in a few blows ?) but because of space. They have loads of unexploited land, and when they get their **** together, they might become a real agricultural power - and if they can starve countries to death by holding back food, they sure as hell are going to be VIPs.
Also, they have room to build power plants, production facilities, research labs, you name it (sure, other countries have space left too - for the time being).
Finally, with the increasing concern about natural ressources, Russia may have one big advantage : they have enormous reserves of freshwater. Like, lake Baïkal alone represents 20% of the world's freshwater reserves, see ?.

Now granted, today it's not so hot, but Russia has serious ways of negociating. For one, if China becomes a superpower with its 1.5 billion people living in urban spaces, it's going to need all the food and water it can get. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if in a few decades China went to war with Russia to seize just that.

[BornIn1142]

Aren't there already talks that China is likely to seize Siberia? Heard something about that in radio...

There's gonna be some real competition between Russia and China, maybe even escalating in a war. That would suck.
But Russia really has some problems. It has hosts of unused space and resources, yet it's economy still sucks.

[BraveLiver]

Canada a superpower...

heh heh heh

This is exactly why it's not on the list. Canada's not a militay country. Canada's just one big island to house your terrorists, refugees, and emmigrants.

[Canadian Tire Money]

walmart. every one is worrying about an asian or european superpower forming, when we should be worrying about walmart.
maybe coca cola?

my god, some people are slow. ledge and was saying that it doesn't matter if you have 500 or 50000 nukes. as long as you have enough to blow up the country that attacks you then they are not going to benefit from it. why people can't figure out the basics of MAD, i don't know. russia doesn't have an advantage over china due to more missles.

some people might want to remember that it is a lot cheaper and easier to build offensive missles then it is to build defensive missles.

[ArPharazon]

walmart. every one is worrying about an asian or european superpower forming, when we should be worrying about walmart.

Walmart, eh?
http://www.bobandgeorge.com/Fancomics/Karnak/Karnak.html?7

Anyway, I still say we Dutch people will rule the world some time or another. We already were, once, among the best colonizers in the world, and our colonies were so much huger than our own country. So, I think, due to some reason we have the power to control the odds, and we can reign over a much bigger area and population than we have ourselves. Besides, nobody's expecting us, so we can strike whenever we want :y-evil:

I'm not aware of any nukes we would possess, but I have no doubt we've got the technology to build them...

[HiroHito]

I voted china, period.

[Lejond]

I voted china, period.

I voted france, semicolon. underscore_

[mojojojomo]

I'd say Germany is always a good bet for "who's gonna rule the world soon". Then again, they always failed. Ah, I still vote Germany, three time's the charm

Now, i could be wrong, but wasn't the Third Reich Germany's third attempt at supremacy?

I voted China, but I think Russia might have a stab at it in the long run. Not because of nukes (seriously, who's going to become a superpower through an exchange of weapons that can and will level all a country's vital infrastructure in a few blows ?) but because of space. They have loads of unexploited land, and when they get their **** together, they might become a real agricultural power - and if they can starve countries to death by holding back food, they sure as hell are going to be VIPs.
Also, they have room to build power plants, production facilities, research labs, you name it (sure, other countries have space left too - for the time being).
Finally, with the increasing concern about natural ressources, Russia may have one big advantage : they have enormous reserves of freshwater. Like, lake Baïkal alone represents 20% of the world's freshwater reserves, see ?.

You might be correct, but remember that the USSR totally ruined its terrritory through over exploitation. Vast tracts of Khazakstan have been left radioactive puddles, much of Russia's vaunted water ways have been reduced to a fraction of their former selves (ie, the Aral Sea is a saline puddle 1/3 its orginal size or something) and the population almost universally suffers from some form of heavy metal poisoning. In all, pretty much all the land is shot for agriculture.

ArPharzon, Holland wasn't the only power that managed to extend its power over regions far larger than itself. Most European colonial powers did that, and by the end of the 1800s, Britain and France had done it far better than the Dutch ever did. Thing is, they did so by conquering people's who were far less technologically developed than themselves, and in an age when it was accepted that Europeans could go out and directly conquer 'primatives'. The world is a very different place today.

[BraveLiver]

I voted france, semicolon. underscore_

You mean: "I voted France, semicolon; underscore_

[Lejond]

ArPharzon, Holland wasn't the only power that managed to extend its power over regions far larger than itself. Most European colonial powers did that, and by the end of the 1800s, Britain and France had done it far better than the Dutch ever did. Thing is, they did so by conquering people's who were far less technologically developed than themselves, and in an age when it was accepted that Europeans could go out and directly conquer 'primatives'. The world is a very different place today.

But at one point Holland did control alot of territory and was the most economically powerful European country

[mojojojomo]

So did Greece, Rome, England, France, the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, Russia, Poland, Britain (as a distinct enity from simply England), Prussia, the German Empire and Turkey. What does it have to do with being a super power in the future?

[Lejond]

So did Greece, Rome, England, France, the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, Russia, Poland, Britain (as a distinct enity from simply England), Prussia, the German Empire and Turkey. What does it have to do with being a super power in the future?

When were Russia Poland and Prussia ever undisputed economic powers of the world?

[Desert_Eagle25]

China without a doubt.

[mojojojomo]

When were Russia Poland and Prussia ever undisputed economic powers of the world?


Ok, maybe not of the world for, but of their respective areas of influence at least.

I see i mentioned Prussia and the German Empire as two things. That was a mistake, sorry.

[Val'Navatthe1st]

Well I think that some third world countries will become uber-imperialist factions. Just by seeing that those terrorists have taken Spain, I think it's likely.

Otherwise, **** USA WILL NEVER FAIL! :angry:



Unless they make stuff like Mobile Suits.

[mojojojomo]

Since when have terrorists taken over Spain?

[Kingcrazygenius]

Obviously democracy=fanatical terrorism

[Lejond]

Ok, maybe not of the world for, but of their respective areas of influence at least.

I see i mentioned Prussia and the German Empire as two things. That was a mistake, sorry.


Yeah but I had been trying to say Holland was once so powerful economically in its ability to control world prices and commodities that only GB or the USA ever surpassed its influence.

[mojojojomo]

I'll grant you that, but it doesnt really matter. It's power was built off the exploitation of weaker peoples, goods which were exotic and expensive for European markets and resource rich land. Unless Holland is willing to conquer much of the Third World and attempt to starve Europe of commodities which are so common they are virtually essential, it's not going to be in that position again anytime soon.

[KrAzY WaRRiOr]

China is probably going to be the next superpower. They have the most men, and their military is powerful. Their economy is good too, considering most of the things in the US have "Made in China" on them.

[Gleban]

China is probably going to be the next superpower. They have the most men, and their military is powerful. Their economy is good too, considering most of the things in the US have "Made in China" on them.
Their economy isn't good, their laboring force however is very very cheap.

From a song: "There are 2 billion people there, all of them want to fricken' eat".

[mojojojomo]

Actually, China's economy is very good. It grew at around 10% last year, and seems set to maintain a healthy growth rate of at least 5% this year. However, i would say that its military isn't really on a super power level. While it does have a very large number of troops, in an age where even conventional weapons can wipe out thousands at a time, that alone doesn't matter. It has been estimated that itll take around 50 years before China is on a comparable level, militarily, with the United States.

[Laff]

china. without a doubt.

[Lejond]

Their economy isn't good, their laboring force however is very very cheap.

From a song: "There are 2 billion people there, all of them want to fricken' eat".

They have the second largest economy in the world in terms of raw GDP.

[Canadian Tire Money]

China is probably going to be the next superpower. They have the most men, and their military is powerful. Their economy is good too, considering most of the things in the US have "Made in China" on them.

it's not the number of people you have, it's how you use them.

[Raistlin Majere]

china. without a doubt.
China has so many internal problems from adopting capitalistic ideas in order to survive that if they did, it would not last long.

[Canadian Tire Money]

george orwell was right?

[HolyCreep]

I have voted for other. Canada is my choice.

1) No country will ever defeat the US. But the US will eventually fall, due to a weak link in leadership and increased racial conflicts --- a.k.a. civil war on a grand scale. This isn't coming soon, but it will get there.

2) China will not prevail. A country's potential is limited by its natural resources and human resources. China simply don't have enough fresh water (let along other things) to support 1.4 billion people to a better living standard. Also, China is essentially a combo of Japan+Cuba/2. The social structure is restrictive and primitive and not self-evoluting. Unless a violent revolution takes place, it's not getting any better. Thus, China do not have the needed human resource.

3) Canada is the 2nd largest in terms of size and thus natural resources. It has far superior social structure than Russia and China. It does not have the external (Muslims) and internal (racial) problem of the US. Right now people just overlook Canada because of the puny 30 million population. But hey, when Canada reaches 60 million in 50 years, it's a force to be reckoned with.

[SuRReAL OrC]

No social problems in Canada? You should come to B.C. The Chinese here are so much in numbers that white people are now a minority here. Seriously, today I was just told by some guy in art class that the Asians own my school. I just don't find it fair that they overrun their country and then come over here and treat the place like it's theirs'. I'm sorry if I offend anyone.

[Kingcrazygenius]

Canada is only doing as well as it is because they have a barebones military.

[HolyCreep]

Actually, China's economy is very good. It grew at around 10% last year, and seems set to maintain a healthy growth rate of at least 5% this year. However, i would say that its military isn't really on a super power level. While it does have a very large number of troops, in an age where even conventional weapons can wipe out thousands at a time, that alone doesn't matter. It has been estimated that itll take around 50 years before China is on a comparable level, militarily, with the United States.

Don't be fooled by state propaganda of China. The economy is cyclical and it's bad now. Ever since P.R.China established in 1949, the annual growth is always in the 8%-20% range. So, the Chinese economy should have already suppassed the US, right? What happened?

That is because the Chinese Yuan is never an exchangable currency. You can NEVER change Yuan to Dollar in any bank in the world, including Chinese banks. The government just claims their Yuan worth this many US Dollars. Every few years, they are forced to depriciate their Yuan. In early 1980's, 1USD=2Yuan and now 1USD=8Yuan. Lots of so called % growth went poof overnight. If you count the depriciation of USD against Euro and the constant 1USD=8.3Yuan claimed by the Chinese, the Chinese economy is shrinking fast in Euro value.

[HolyCreep]

No social problems in Canada? You should come to B.C. The Chinese here are so much in numbers that white people are now a minority here. Seriously, today I was just told by some guy in art class that the Asians own my school. I just don't find it fair that they overrun their country and then come over here and treat the place like it's theirs'. I'm sorry if I offend anyone.


Chinese still don't count as a large % in Canada. There are far more immigrants from Europe. Your impression is due to the fact that Chinese are more visible. As for racial differences, the gap between Caucasian Canadian and Chinese Canadian is far narrower than that between Caucasian American and African American (don't count Will Smith or M.Jordan, try to look at the those jobless and futureless young men who play basketball all day and looking for a fight).

Canada is only doing as well as it is because they have a barebones military.

US is doing bad because of its military frenzy.

[Kingcrazygenius]

If that is the case than Canada would end up in the state Russia is now if they tried to become a superpower, assuming they're lucky. They could end up even worse.

[Lejond]

Don't be fooled by state propaganda of China. The economy is cyclical and it's bad now. Ever since P.R.China established in 1949, the annual growth is always in the 8%-20% range. So, the Chinese economy should have already suppassed the US, right? What happened?

That is because the Chinese Yuan is never an exchangable currency. You can NEVER change Yuan to Dollar in any bank in the world, including Chinese banks. The government just claims their Yuan worth this many US Dollars. Every few years, they are forced to depriciate their Yuan. In early 1980's, 1USD=2Yuan and now 1USD=8Yuan. Lots of so called % growth went poof overnight. If you count the depriciation of USD against Euro and the constant 1USD=8.3Yuan claimed by the Chinese, the Chinese economy is shrinking fast in Euro value.

GDP growth is measured in USD. Exchange rates have to do w/ the supply and demand of your currency which can be artificially inflated or deflated by the govt reducing or increasing the supply of your currency. A currency losing value doesnt mean the economic growth disappeared. These growth figures arent just propaganda made up by communist leaders they are measurable by other countries just looking how stuff the rest of the world is buying from China.

[HolyCreep]

If that is the case than Canada would end up in the state Russia is now if they tried to become a superpower, assuming they're lucky. They could end up even worse.

Canada will get nukes someday to deter Russia and US. Even coutries as weak as India and Pakistain can get nukes, I don't see any reason why Canada cannot.

[Lejond]

No social problems in Canada? You should come to B.C. The Chinese here are so much in numbers that white people are now a minority here. Seriously, today I was just told by some guy in art class that the Asians own my school. I just don't find it fair that they overrun their country and then come over here and treat the place like it's theirs'. I'm sorry if I offend anyone.

We're not a majority we just tend to group together so in certain areas like in Richmond it looks like we are the overrall majority. If you go to UBC you notice that the majority of the students that you see everyday are Chinese or Indian but if you look at the actual enrollment stats there are tonnes of white ppl it just doesnt show.

[Kingcrazygenius]

Canada won't get nukes until after the U.S. is gone, and when that happens it will be in the best intrest of the nuclear nations to keep Canada under wraps.

Of course I'm hoping your saying canada was just a joke.

[Lejond]

Canada will get nukes someday to deter Russia and US. Even coutries as weak as India and Pakistain can get nukes, I don't see any reason why Canada cannot.

Canada has made a conscious choice not to have them. Countries like Canada and Japan have the ability to make nuclear weapons just no desire. Who are we gonna threaten? Quebec separatists?

[HolyCreep]

GDP growth is measured in USD. Exchange rates have to do w/ the supply and demand of your currency which can be artificially inflated or deflated by the govt reducing or increasing the supply of your currency. A currency losing value doesnt mean the economic growth disappeared. These growth figures arent just propaganda made up by communist leaders they are measurable by other countries just looking how stuff the rest of the world is buying from China.

China's economy is Enron-style. The government (management) just manipulate numbers to look good and attract more investors. What's manipulated will not last long; it will poof eventually.

Do you still remember the TianAnMen massacre in 1989? The uprising of students and workers was caused by a typical Chinese poof. And at those times, there are only 2 ways out:
1) The government uses tanks against civilians and dispreciate Yuan dramatically again.
2) The government lost control and got thrown. People just pray that the new one is slightly better.

[Lejond]

China's economy is Enron-style. The government (management) just manipulate numbers to look good and attract more investors. What's manipulated will not last long; it will poof eventually.

Do you still remember the TianAnMen massacre in 1989? The uprising of students and workers was caused by a typical Chinese poof. And at those times, there are only 2 ways out:
1) The government uses tanks against civilians and dispreciate Yuan dramatically again.
2) The government lost control and got thrown. People just pray that the new one is slightly better.

Ppl are investing in China because they are making money. They are investing money because they are losing. If they stop making money the investment will stop.

I dont see how they are manipulating numbers to somehow make up a fake GDP since every other country knows how much is coming out of China and how much is going in.

[Nio the Namless]

I voted China because of its massive potential. Its huge population and resources are just waiting to be properly used. Japan is stuck on an island, though powerful, it tends to limit there power.

I don't think USA will sudenly fall off the charts either. I do think that its global influence may wane as other powers grow. Though I doubt a (soon) return to a hegemony and in fact the USA's hegemony is only slight in the world as it is.

[Bullroarer]

You are all wrong, the muslims nations shall one day unite and then we shall be the next superpower nation. It may be in a 100 years, it may be in 500 years, it may be in a 1000 years, but we shall unite as one.

[Kingcrazygenius]

Perhaps, but maybe China will become a super power first, and then the big nation of Islam?

[Firefascist]

You are all wrong, the muslims nations shall one day unite and then we shall be the next superpower nation. It may be in a 100 years, it may be in 500 years, it may be in a 1000 years, but we shall unite as one.

I can't imagine all of the Muslim nations uniting as one because of tensions. For example, there is some bad blood between Turkey and Iran.

Even if they did unite, how would they become a superpower? Most of them happen to be backwards.

[Canadian Tire Money]

this guy talking about Canada being the next super power is on some crack. 2004 was the year that Canada got invaded by denmark, and all we could come up with is writting a nasty letter.

Mandrin is the 3rd most popular langauge in Canada, and is growing faster then French. soon enough there will be more chinese speakers then french speakers.

[Kingcrazygenius]

A war between Denmark and Canada would own.

[Bullroarer]

We maybe backwards today, but that does not mean we will be backwards tomorrow. After all the mongols were nothing before they were united by Genghis.

[Canadian Tire Money]

A war between Denmark and Canada would own.

it would have been a great policy. stupid liberal cowards.

[Kingcrazygenius]

Eh, you and me can take 'em. I'm Texan after all, indiscriminate killing is in my blood.

[mulratt]

I'd say China since their economy has so much potential. Even if it bursts soon, it can recover and boom again considering mostly the labour and culture they have.
Natural resources may be a problem, but recall that stronger economies operate on services: they make higher margins and use that money to import and exploit other lower economies.
My business textbooks are much more pessimistic. They claim that since the Yuan is pegged to the US to boost investments, the Chinese economy has been supporting the US one in the latest recession. The Americans are spending more than they need, and their borrowing rate is insane. Some books say once the Chinese take off on their own, their economy will go crazy at the expense of the US. Crazy stuff. I'll have to move :(

But you never know about these things. India could be up next too. They're very disciplined. Whoever has the work ethic and the education will succeed, and unfortunately we in the west are just too lazy. They'll send their boyz to our top schools and will take the knowledge back there.

But whoever will rise will be whoever has least ethics concerns too. Whoever researches without constraints, say in genetic engineering, stem cells, biotechnology, has insane potential. If you can say make your people smarter and fitter, then you have insane productivity, your economy and sciences will go thru the roof, and it will be too late to catch up.

[HolyCreep]

Ppl are investing in China because they are making money. They are investing money because they are losing. If they stop making money the investment will stop.

I dont see how they are manipulating numbers to somehow make up a fake GDP since every other country knows how much is coming out of China and how much is going in.

People invest in China because they thought they can make money. Some actually do and some don't. A number of US firms predict 1/4 to 1/3 foreign firms will move out of China in the next couple years. Andy Xie of Morgan Stanley, who got lots of fame in predicting the late 1990s crisis in Asia, wrote a long acticle about China just recently (which I fully agree). I don't intend to convert you to my view. But I think Xie explained the matter much better than I did. If you are interested, you can just google the keywords to find it. (Note: he wrote lots of articles, that one is about Sept-Oct 2004.)

[Lejond]

People invest in China because they thought they can make money. Some actually do and some don't. A number of US firms predict 1/4 to 1/3 foreign firms will move out of China in the next couple years. Andy Xie of Morgan Stanley, who got lots of fame in predicting the late 1990s crisis in Asia, wrote a long acticle about China just recently (which I fully agree). I don't intend to convert you to my view. But I think Xie explained the matter much better than I did. If you are interested, you can just google the keywords to find it. (Note: he wrote lots of articles, that one is about Sept-Oct 2004.)

I've read a couple papers/articles by him and I think I remember the one you're talking about where he said the Chinese economy will slow down but I dont remember him or anyone else predicting a catastrophic collapse.

[mulratt]

Can you really predict such things though?
It's like when the USA was growing prior to WW1, Europe still didnt think much of it because it was just some economy that could blow up anytime. But then the war happened and the USA benefitted greatly from selling stuff to Europe.

How about China and USA goes into a war, and the winner is the neutral party that sells stuff for reconstruction??

[Laff]

i think if either side were losing substatially it would be time to carpet nuke the other country, which in turn is going to destroy both.

the usa will not fall within any of our lifetimes, but china would be next.

[zigaritzi]

i think the world might colapse, or the human race killing itself/making life almost impossible for humans. Resulting in we going back to an earlier stage of evolution again...(we run out of things/nuclear power to support our current wealth)

that is before any mayor change in todays order of superpowers will come...

anyways, I dont think china will stand a chans, they got to many and huge social problems, ppl starving and going around unemployed...in short, they aint got the wealth that the US has got. and with that many ppl, china will only be crushed under itself.
and i think weath is a pretty big part of beeing a superower...nukes doesnt count anymore, as the most of u seem to have realised. In a nuclear war u will only destroy ur ememy and urself. and the rest of the world would be very pissed at u taking us 1 step closer to armagedon.

I think russia is having the same kind of problems as china, maby not as big thou.
sure, they got all the nukes and stuff but seriously...that aint gonna make a diffrence!
only thing that might lead to is the first thing i said in this post.

europe is not anything to count with anymore, all jobs are going to cheap asian countries, and everything is stopping off...even the technology evolution that ppl thought would stay in europe has moved...

of cuz, europe might get together again, with the european union and all... and if they do, they might join the US, that would create the one superstate with the wealth, army and political power to control the earth...
the thing is, would the US wanna join EU, or would EU wanna join US, they got pretty political diffrences and so on...

for the end i wanna say that right now it seems like "terrorists" might as well be in control, maby not as a superstate/superpower, but controling with contriversial methodes all over the world. and after kidnappings and bombings i think even the US would have to lay down and give after to the "terrorists"...

guess i will just vote other and go for "nothing can break USA" or "USA together with EU" or "terrorist"...

damn, cant belive u ppl posting long posts all the time!

[HolyCreep]

I've read a couple papers/articles by him and I think I remember the one you're talking about where he said the Chinese economy will slow down but I dont remember him or anyone else predicting a catastrophic collapse.

He did not say the entire nation would collapse. But he said the economy is a bubble---which implied an Enron-style growth.

[mulratt]

Perhaps the next power is not political or religious, but businesses. Under peace, corporations flourish and fat cats tend to acquire everything (though it's bad in investment terms) because they have all this money and nothing to do. Expanding is their way of "conquering" and boosting ego. Wow look at my corporate empire.

Lots of sci-movies/books have these already: big companies controlling everything in the future. And dont tell me that your democracy is gonna keep them under grasp. If they control everyone's paycheck, then you have no power.

[Kingcrazygenius]

Corporation control pisses me off. I either hope to see all that stuff collapse, or I die before business takes over.

[Lejond]

He did not say the entire nation would collapse. But he said the economy is a bubble---which implied an Enron-style growth.

When the bubble bursts there is definately short term trouble but that doesnt mean you cant recover or it destroy all the previous growth.



Perhaps the next power is not political or religious, but businesses. Under peace, corporations flourish and fat cats tend to acquire everything (though it's bad in investment terms) because they have all this money and nothing to do. Expanding is their way of "conquering" and boosting ego. Wow look at my corporate empire.

Lots of sci-movies/books have these already: big companies controlling everything in the future. And dont tell me that your democracy is gonna keep them under grasp. If they control everyone's paycheck, then you have no power.

And then maybe once capital becomes more and more concentrated we can have our Marxist revolution.

[HolyCreep]

When the bubble bursts there is definately short term trouble but that doesnt mean you cant recover or it destroy all the previous growth.

The "short term" thing only apply to well established social structure, such as the US. For China, the implication is much more profound. Since you are a Chinese Canadian, you should know China was about the most powerful around 2000 years ago. What happens then? It was a big loop of boom-and-bust. In a big bust, all the previous Enron-growth was gone. If it were indeed "short-term," China would still be the world's strongest---2000 years and still running.

[Lejond]

The "short term" thing only apply to well established social structure, such as the US. For China, the implication is much more profound. Since you are a Chinese Canadian, you should know China was about the most powerful around 2000 years ago. What happens then? It was a big loop of boom-and-bust. In a big bust, all the previous Enron-growth was gone. If it were indeed "short-term," China would still be the world's strongest---2000 years and still running.

You dont even need to go back that far. China was the most powerful nation even 400-500 yrs ago too. The difference is that 2000 or however many years ago you wanna go back economic growth wasnt capital growth. You know Maltusian economies blah blah this time its industrial modern growth.

[zigaritzi]

hey...am i on some kind of ignore-list here...i mean...no1 ever replies to what i say... :g shake:

[HolyCreep]

You dont even need to go back that far. China was the most powerful nation even 400-500 yrs ago too. The difference is that 2000 or however many years ago you wanna go back economic growth wasnt capital growth. You know Maltusian economies blah blah this time its industrial modern growth.

Nope. At about 400-500 years ago, China was WEAK, period. It is about the start of Ming Dynasty, if I remember correctly. China may had the most total GDP in the world. However, in terms of per-capta GDP, China is already behind.

What's more important is at that time China is far far behind in terms of science (their four major inventions are all 1000 years or older) and social structure (the French revolution would just take place soon, and the Ming is no better or even worse than the Han Dynasty).

[Lejond]

Nope. At about 400-500 years ago, China was WEAK, period. It is about the start of Ming Dynasty, if I remember correctly. China may had the most total GDP in the world. However, in terms of per-capta GDP, China is already behind.

What's more important is at that time China is far far behind in terms of science (their four major inventions are all 1000 years or older) and social structure (the French revolution would just take place soon, and the Ming is no better or even worse than the Han Dynasty).

The French revolution was in 1793 wasnt it? Or is there a different one I'm talking about. The beginning of the Ming era is one the biggest commercial expansions in China since the Song(?) not sure how it's said in English. 1500 the biggest income gap between rich and poor countries is barely 2.5:1. China is actually one of the richer countries and is ahead of most of Europe. PPP SoL is I think second or third highest in the world surpassed only by some parts of Southern Europe like those Italian places.

edit: Anyways I got away from my main point that this time is different because it is sustained modern economic growth. In other previous booms in China the growth was due to population growth, agricultural improvements, and trade.

[HolyCreep]

...my main point that this time is different ...

That is the fundamental difference between us. IMO, history always repeat itself. The "this time is different" clause has been used in many places, such as the NASDAQ boom, and was proven false every single time. Since we have such major differences and I can see strong nationalism in you, further debate between us would be pointless. I will stop here.

[Canadian Tire Money]

Perhaps the next power is not political or religious, but businesses. Under peace, corporations flourish and fat cats tend to acquire everything (though it's bad in investment terms) because they have all this money and nothing to do. Expanding is their way of "conquering" and boosting ego. Wow look at my corporate empire.

Lots of sci-movies/books have these already: big companies controlling everything in the future. And dont tell me that your democracy is gonna keep them under grasp. If they control everyone's paycheck, then you have no power.

i already beat you to that conclusion.

i also want to re ask holycrap how a country that get invaded by denmark is going to be the next world power?

[TurinTurambar35]

This the most interesting thread I've seen in a while, kudos to the poster. :bigclap:

My two cents would be to say that I can't ever see the US losing its grip as the dominant superpower, however it may lose it's position as the ONLY superpower, which is the case at the moment.

As for Russia, no way will that shambles of a country ever be as powerful as it was during the cold war again. Most of its nukes are incapable of launching now and the ones that can still have 40 year old guidance systems, they'd probably hit Moscow ahead of Washington or anywhere else.

China are the only country I can realistically see catching the US.

And on the matter of a war deciding the new superpower - never going to happen. As people have already pointed out the MAD principle means there will quite probably never be a war between major countries ever again, at least not until people start conflicts over things like the colonisation of space etc, far in the future at the moment. Even a conventional war would be utterly crippling in terms of the resources needed to win. America's military isn't quite as powerful as it appears, the US airforce recently got beaten (badly) in a series of wargames with the Indian airforce... The Indians were using new Russian SU-30's which outperformed the F-15's and F-16's literally every time. Apparently the US has ordered another 36 Raptors in order to speed up their modernisation process as a result of this exercise.

And finally, otherpeople have already made he point that we'll probably find some giant multi-national corporation ends up dominating the world in 100 years or something... :y-sad:

Sorry for the long post guys

[ScrubHuman2]

I think that China will be the next superpower, if the current global social trends I'm familiar with goes on. World Wars have become passe. With the introduction of nuclear devices, powerful countries can hardline their borders and resist invasion from practically anything. The only way you can become the sole superpower then is to dominate the world economically or eat up small countries and tie their economies to your own.

China in history occassionally asserts its influences militarily, but speaking in terms of success as an Empire, it's most stunning victories have been cultural and economic, not military. Chinese traders have been known throughout the Asian and European continents for centuries, delivering their goods and their culture in distinct and powerful forms. When the Mongols took over the Empire, China did not subsequently become the Mongol Empire for very long. The Mongols who stayed got assimilated en masse into the Chinese, which is somewhat strange considering that they were the ones doing the conquering.

China has maintained a good portion of its cultural influence in the region and has extended this influence throughout the world. What nation doesn't have some form of Chinese cooking within its borders? It's expats are loyal, and Chinese continue to identify themselves as Chinese even though they reside and are citizens of other countries. The cultural ties and identification is very strong.

If China ever becomes a superpower, it will not be a superpower in the way the US is now: surprisingly monolithic and militarily oriented. Americans like to think of rival nations as being monolithic, but I suppose this is not merely due to ignorance but moreso the result of America being monolithic itself. No State would ever think of seceding the nation like Taiwan and Russian states have done and frankly, Americans I know of have a startling uniformity in terms of thinking and base assumptions. They may disagree on many things, but the very way in which they can identify common grounds on which to disagree on is something most Americans probably can't understand.

Chinese are a different matter. For the most part, even the forced unification policies of Empire did not wholly erase the cultural and tribal distinctions between the components of the Chinese nation. To this day, you will find Chinese who swear that Fukien is better than Mandarin, is better than Cantonese. If the Chinese people ever rule the world, they'll probably do so as a competing and mutually antagonistic group of nations.

[zigaritzi]

seriously, beeing the new superpower aint about what u have acomplished before...or how great u were...it's about how great u can be, starting at the point u are today.

and i dont think it would be so easy to eat up small countries today...the other big countries would be so against it..

hey, am i invisable? :y-candle:

[armis]

The French revolution was in 1793 wasnt it?
Close, 1789.
With the introduction of nuclear devices, powerful countries can hardline their borders and resist invasion from practically anything.
Au contraire. Nukes are good for anything but resisting an invasion, since once the enemy is on your territory, nuking him means you're nuking your own land. Tactical nukes (if there's anything like a tactical nuke) could reduce the impact of this, but it'd still be a rather desperate "if we're going down we're taking you with us" move. Also, tactical nukes require to be under the direct authority of military field commanders, and politicians would understandably wary of handing control over.

But I tend to agree that being a superpower is no longer only about military might. When you can force a country into bankruptcy by simply pulling out all your assets, people are going to think twice before hitting you.

[mojojojomo]

Holy Creep, i don't think you can really base China's present and future preformance on the past. It's simply an entirely different situation now. Since 1989 (with the whole Tianamen thing), China has made leaps and bounds, both economically and socially. The east coast of the PRC has experienced a phenomonal level growth, seen quite obviously in the Special Economic Zones of Shanghai and similar cities. There are reasons that China is the world's fastest growing market for automobiles (including really expensive ones like BMWs and Mercedes), and that the it is seeing the growth of a western style middle class. This is a totally new occurence for the PRC, and could well result in a Chinese super power. I don't no if it will for sure, but its a distinct possibility.

Likewise, you can't predict what will happen to the Chinese economy based on the preformance of the Ming Dynasty. For starters, the global economy is no longer under-pinned on luxury goods for Europeans. Secondly, the Chinese economy is far more open (particuarly since 1989) than it ever was as an Empire. Now that it has gained the technology to match the west in the production of 'cheap' goods, its vast manpower allows it to exceed it.

Finally, you should die a horrible horrible death for ever suggesting Canada could assume global hegemony.

[HolyCreep]

Again, it comes down to me saying, "History will repeat itself."
And those saying, "This time is different."

[zigaritzi]

why would history repeat itself...there is no reson for doing so in this case!

ps. am i invisable? :y-candle:

[BraveLiver]

Some guy spelled 'invisible' wrong. Couldn't see him, though.