View Full Version : the most powerfull nation on earth... ever


weimar_republic
Sep 29, 2001, 11:38 AM
I would have to place my vote for Rome, I am Italian, and I take great pride in the fact that we were once the 'rulers of the world'

DaEezT
Sep 29, 2001, 11:53 AM
I go for USA but just because it's the only modern(1900+) in the poll. Maybe u should have added the CSSR.
All the old empires had often problems with their size and the time it took for troops/messages to get from one end to the other.

weimar_republic
Sep 29, 2001, 12:01 PM
I was thinkin to add the USSR, but it only beat the USA for a short time, between 1957-1969. during this time, Sputnick to Appolo 11, the cuban missle crisis occured. also note, Khruschev was leader of the USSR, and time, and that the USSR only achived ANYTHING under the non-dictator leaders {Lenin, Khruschev, Gorbachev} and nothing under the dictators {Stalin, Brezhnev}

also, the point of the poll was in thier own time, Rome would loose a war to 1 guy with a gun, but Rome in the year 70, was, other then China, THE world.

DaEezT
Sep 29, 2001, 12:19 PM
also, the point of the poll was in thier own time

I know, and still i go for USA. They still exist, after.. how many hundret years? While all of the other empires broke apart.
And they had some hard times. Fighting for their independance and the Civil War, but still here they are!

Mikoyan
Sep 29, 2001, 01:12 PM
I would have voted for the USSR

shadowdale
Sep 29, 2001, 01:40 PM
Yes DaEezT your right - the US still exists after some 200+ years and the Roman Empire broke apart after only 1200 years - I really see the point in your argument!!!

Do you believe that the US will still be there in 1000 years?? I don't think any of the current countries or alliances will be here in 1000 years.

:sniper:

Matrix
Sep 29, 2001, 01:50 PM
I think this is an impossible poll to answer: the world in these different eras are so different! You can't compare them.

But w_r, why didn't you include the Weimar-Republic? ;)

spycatcher34
Sep 29, 2001, 01:55 PM
The only way you can answer this q is to look at the superiority of the nation over all the earth during their time.

And in useing this method I would have to choose Rome. They modernized the world lasted for sooo long.

ComradeDavo
Sep 29, 2001, 01:58 PM
hmmm.....**votes for own country**. Well come on, we Brits did pratically rule a quater of the world!

Kefka
Sep 29, 2001, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by Matrix

But w_r, why didn't you include the Weimar-Republic? ;) Because that was not a world power and he is being a realist ;)


Originally posted by DaEezT
And they had some hard times. Fighting for their independance and the Civil War, but still here they are!
can you name my more than 5 countrys that did NOT fight for there independace in the begining ;)
and the US would still prob. still be here if we lost the Civil War, it would just be MUCH smaller and I bet not a world power.


Origanlly posted by weimar_republic
, Rome would loose a war to 1 guy with a gun,
They would not just lose they would bow down and call him god because he can harness the power of black magic. I mean he points his wand and one guy is dead!
but really I think he would lose because he only would have so many bullets ;)

shadowdale
Sep 29, 2001, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Kefka
can you name my more than 5 countrys that did NOT fight for there independace in the begining ;)


Hmm I think that depends on how youd define, fight for their independance - the French have never really been anything but French ever since the Roman Empire disintegrated, they have had wars and stuff but it has always been Franch - but they had a revolution against their king!!!

Denmark, Iceland Norway and probably England didn't fight for their independance - England is a bit special because they did in a way fight during 1066 but it wasn't England at that time.

:sniper:

Graeme the mad
Sep 29, 2001, 02:24 PM
The problem with this is how you define powerful: ive taken powerfulk as meaning sheer land are and pop under control: because of this it has to go to my own fair land

RULE BRITANNIA RULE BRITANNIA

Mikoyan
Sep 29, 2001, 02:28 PM
Sweden was pretty mighty in its days too. The entire baltic region including Norway, Denmark, Finland, Poland and Estonia

shadowdale
Sep 29, 2001, 02:30 PM
Hey Sweden has never had Denmark - you might have occupied Denmark for a very short periode of time but you never conquered us!!!!!!

But back in the old days of the Vikings or later under the Calmar union........... Aha it was good to be a Dane...

:sniper:

Mikoyan
Sep 29, 2001, 02:33 PM
King Karl XII was at war with the Turks, need i say more?

G-Man
Sep 29, 2001, 03:10 PM
I voted for Israel (although I considered it when we were stronger - during Solomon's era)... But not because of military power - Because of cultural effect. All kinds of things you take for obvious and I know where they came from... Things like the ABC (developed from early Hebrew), Monotheism, ICQ (It was invented in Israel...) and the idea of equal treatment to people of all religions.

goodyhut
Sep 29, 2001, 03:20 PM
USA was definitely most powerful. Until...

Mikoyan
Sep 29, 2001, 03:24 PM
Seen it many times before....*YAWN*!:rolleyes:

Eli
Sep 29, 2001, 03:50 PM
The Kingdom of Israel is in but Persia and Babylon are out? (With all do the respect to my subjectivity :))

Eli
Sep 29, 2001, 03:51 PM
oops. Babylon is in. :o Still, Persia was stronger.

starlifter
Sep 29, 2001, 04:35 PM
An ill defined survey, LOL... too similar to other surveys. Modern nations, esp. America, should not be listed, because the camparison is not really valid... America is still a work in Progress, and no one can argue its help/dominance/interference in every corner of the world, in almost every aspect, from movies to military to political to economic to humanitarian to religious. No nation has made such an impact.

In older times, the Roman empire was not the biggest, but it weilded similar power to America's for its era.

The Viking (Swedish/Norwegian) era 800 AD to 1100 AD influenced more peoples and conquered more land area than even Rome. The results and colonizations extended from North America to far eastern Russia. Russia is named for the Viking term, "Russ". Even the most powerful city in the world could not subdue the vikings (Constantinople)... the vikings did not conquer it, but they got tribute, LOL...

Germany, France, Japan, China... none even approached the power, area, and reach of the British empire. In fact, like the Viking Empire... the sun never set on the British empire. In the interests of civility and world peace, Britian has become more peaceful and returned many colonies. But they could still crush much of the world if they really decided to, including China. "nukes carbonize red hordes" ;).

http://www.civfanatics.com/uploads/america1s.jpg

JellyDonut
Sep 29, 2001, 05:37 PM
I voted for the British Empire. Not only was it geographically HUMONGOUS, it was extremely durable until after WW2. In another 65 years, England can officially claim to be the country which hasn't been invaded for an entire MILLENNIUM!

Originally posted by shadowdale
I don't think any of the current countries or alliances will be here in 1000 years.

:sniper:

Really? Not even San Marino? They've been around FOREVER!

Countries that will still be here in 1000 years unless the world ends:
China
Russia
Japan
India
Korea
England
Talossa (!)

TheDuckOfFlanders
Sep 29, 2001, 06:29 PM
I would definitly vote for the Mongols ,but then under the rule of Möngke Khan.it was the only time in history that one nation in terms of millitary might could easaly have taken the whole world. (if they had ships to cross the oceans of course)
After the dead of möngke the nation was never united again.
the mongels would have easely defeated the Mammeluks if the dead of môngke did just then occured.And IF they had taken it ,they could have defeated the european nations with ease too.

You can easely say that nobody could have defeated the mongels in that time.There was no match.
This you can not say of those other nations in the poll.They were the strongest at their time ,but they had pretty strong enemy's too.

In the Time of Möngke Khan ,the Mongols were unstoppable.

Magnus
Sep 29, 2001, 06:53 PM
How could you forget the Hellenes under Philip and Alexander?

Also, no Americnidian tribe? Incans, Mayans?

I voted Mongols - nobody had such hegemony anywhere at any time ever before or since as a percentage of the world's power.

However, USA 1946 - 1950 is pretty close but that also was not part of your poll, so I will stay with my beloved mongols.

PinkyGen
Sep 29, 2001, 07:53 PM
I went with USA, just because of its military and economic dominance.

If no USA, I would go Mongols (even though it didn't last long) and then the Romans, then Brits.

P.S. As great as the Aztec and Incan Empires were, I would not lable them as dominating the globe.

Knight-Dragon
Sep 29, 2001, 10:06 PM
I would have voted for China had it been in the poll. I mean it's a contemporary of Rome and has lasted till the present day. Thru out much of the Christian era, it has been pretty powerful but not really interested in foreign conquests cos there aren't really any comparable nation around it for it to conquer (except for Korea & Vietnam maybe). And China's being hyped around now as the next superpower after the USA (although I think that's highly unlikely considering the odds and present problems).

So I voted for none of the above. :o

scorch
Sep 29, 2001, 10:18 PM
rome was definatly more powerful.
Im not trying 2 offend anyone, but i know i will.

Rome had problems with barbarians and effectively took them out. They had no problems with anyone, but themselve, and eventually killed them self with their insest.
America, all powerful and the rest, let a few terrorists hurt them.

allan
Sep 29, 2001, 10:39 PM
I voted Victorian Britain, although I'll agree much of this poll is comparing apples and oranges.... I'm surprised they don't use Victoria (and not Elizabeth) as the English leader in the civ series, btw....

But the British at their height had colonies ALL OVER the world, on every continent (including both Americas), as well as lots of influence everywhere. The commonwealth of nations today still reflects this widespread influence....

In terms of commercial/cultural influence however, it would be today's US....

JellyDonut: "England can officially claim to be the country which hasn't been invaded for an entire MILLENNIUM"

Not entirely true--during WWII the Germans occupied the Channel Islands--aren't these considered part of England Proper?

allan
Sep 29, 2001, 10:47 PM
Surprised that Imperial Spain (circa 1600) wasn't included in the poll however. In terms of sheer land area, they'd definitely be a contender....

scorch
Sep 29, 2001, 10:51 PM
Hey....


I don't think New Zealand has been invaded ever.
Unless you call the british setling in NZ an Invasion, but I would, sure Maoris and Pakehas had fights, but they were more internal affais. Same with the Maori-Maori fights. Dunno, how do u define 'invasion'? Coz also, before the Maori were the Moriori, and the Maori ate them all. :lol:

starlifter
Sep 30, 2001, 02:38 AM
I don't think New Zealand has been invaded ever. Is New Zealand Still an British colony, or is it an Australian Province? And if NZ belongs to Australia now, when were they forced to take it?

:lol:

;)

:D

Simon Darkshade
Sep 30, 2001, 03:04 AM
Why would we want such a sheep ridden, mud sodden lump of rock in the middle of bloody nowhere as a province?;) We are very choosy who we oppress with our evil capitalist imperialist fascism:p , and it is bad enough that we have to look after Tasmania, let alone NZ......

Dell19
Sep 30, 2001, 03:24 AM
This is a biased poll! How dare you call the mogols uncoordinated!!! :crazyeyes

Anyway I went for the Mongols because they had the largest empire and they would have conquered all of europe (They destroyed the Polish and teutonic armies, or something like that) but then they had to go home...

scorch
Sep 30, 2001, 06:00 AM
Originally posted by Simon Darkshade
Why would we want such a sheep ridden, mud sodden lump of rock in the middle of bloody nowhere as a province?;) We are very choosy who we oppress with our evil capitalist imperialist fascism:p , and it is bad enough that we have to look after Tasmania, let alone NZ......

Shut up, just coz we're better at rugby than you....

No wait...

Cricket....

No...

:D


Ok, cool things about NZ.
Ummmmmm... give me a few minutes
I know!!! Lots of sheep = Lots of sex.... :lol:

PinkyGen
Sep 30, 2001, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by allan
.... I'm surprised they don't use Victoria (and not Elizabeth) as the English leader in the civ series, btw....



Victoria was really just figurehead, because by that time the Parliament and the various Prime Ministers (Disraeli) held most of the power.
She did have a little power though. However, Elizabeth ran the entire country.

stormerne
Sep 30, 2001, 04:19 PM
Two things weimar:[list=1]
Writing dates with apostrophes is incorrect. The dates don't own anything, and there's nothing missed out at that point. For example, to write "thirteen hundreds" you should write 1300s. Writing 1300's is wrong.
Queen Victoria reigned in the 1800s, not the 1700s.
[/list=1]

CornMaster
Sep 30, 2001, 04:52 PM
Moved to our new History forum.

Archbob
Sep 30, 2001, 08:58 PM
I voted for Ghenghis Khan, but only cause you left The greek empire under Alexander the Great.

weimar_republic
Oct 01, 2001, 07:09 PM
I left out some empires for specific reasons...

first off, I left out Spain cause I felt that, in europe, it was never really #1, but always had contendters, like France, England, and Portugal, plus the Germans and not to mention the Ottomans. I felt that Spain was only powerfull is a buncha useless, uninhabited land {also why Canada was not added:)}
I left out Greece, and other person-centered empires cause they did not last long enough. if so, Napoleon and Hitler would have had thier empires included.
I dident mean to offend anyone by it, but I just felt that these were the empires that deserved a mention. after like 50 votes, I will ask this poll closed, and start another one with the suggestions included.

willemvanoranje
Oct 02, 2001, 08:45 AM
I wanted to post 'Germany'.......

allan
Oct 02, 2001, 11:33 AM
"I felt that Spain was only powerfull is a buncha useless, uninhabited land"

Actually, that land had a lot of gold, silver, etc.... Enough to make Spain probably the wealthiest country in the world around the 1600s.

And it wasn't uninhabited, nor was it sparsely inhabited like most of North America was then. There were areas that were just as densely populated as Europe in some parts of Latin America, and the Spanish enslaved and intermarried with the locals more than they killed them, unlike in North America.

They were definitely more powerful worldwide than even Napoleonic France, let alone France in the 1600s.... One sixth of the world still speak their language to this day--that has to say SOMETHING....

(Although if Imperial Spain were in the poll, I'd still say that Victorian Britain was most powerful. I was just surprised it was left out, and 1600s France (and King David's Israel!) was included....)

addiv
Oct 12, 2001, 08:28 AM
The USA is the first and only country ever to be able to invade and take control of every country in the world when and where they want. Even the
British empire or the Roman empire couldn't do that.

Knight-Dragon
Oct 12, 2001, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by addiv
The USA is the first and only country ever to be able to invade and take control of every country in the world when and where they want. Even the
British empire or the Roman empire couldn't do that. Not anymore unless the Americans are really ready to take heavy casualties. Even Afghanistan is proving to be a problem. So I can't imagine the Americans ever invading and controlling the large states like China and Russia. Too much political and economic fallout.

.:KNAS:.
Oct 13, 2001, 02:33 PM
while the courageous swedish armies were fighting in the 30 year war, the danish cowardly attacked sweden from tha rear.
we did however, if im not mistaken, take köpenhamn and got norway in the peacetreaty. :) :) :)

Mikoyan
Oct 13, 2001, 03:46 PM
amen, swedish brother

VanOranje
Oct 18, 2001, 11:56 AM
Sure guys but dont forget "The Netherlands" we're discovered almost a quarter of this earth and then came England/portugal or spain and took it away from us :rolleyes: :D


For example take new york we bought it from the indians for some beads and build a large city their New A'dam and than came the english and kicked our buds again ARGHHHHHHH.
They gave us Suriname instead woepie f*cking doe.
Think about it if we beat the english that day, maby the americans were talking dutch today and was Holland bombing afhanistan today. WAUW WEIRD THOUGHTS ARE GOING THROUGH MY HEAD, Medication time ....... :D

If you think Holland think of Traders/Discoverers/conquerars we're the Ferengi's of the 16th/17th centurie.

Knight-Dragon
Oct 18, 2001, 10:13 PM
"Sure guys but dont forget "The Netherlands" we're discovered almost a quarter of this earth and then came England/portugal or spain and took it away from us"

Hate to have to shoot you down here but the Dutch did not "discover" 1/4 of the earth. The Spanish found the Americas in 1492 (Colombus) and the Portugese found the way to the East in 1498 (Vasco da Gama). The first Dutch settlement in the Americas was at least one century after the Spanish Conquest.
The Dutch were mainly interested in the trade with the East. Through the Dutch East Indies Co, they tried to monopolize the spice trade in the East Indies (which didn't need to be discovered; millions were already living here). The Dutch colonial govt at Jakarta even went to the extent of massacring whole islands in the Spice Isles to maintain their monopoly. Heck, they even killed off all the Englishmen in Ambon in 1623 (?) when these adventurers tried to sneak trade some spice with the locals. They also captured Malacca from the Portugese in 1641 to consolidate their stranglehold over the spice trade in the region.
The Dutch also tried to monopolize the China trade, occupying Formosa (Taiwan) as their base. Got kicked out by Koxinga, the Ming loyalist cum pirate though after a few battles. Aside from that, they were also the sole European nation the Tokugawa Shogunate of Japan would trade with. Though the trade was really worth little.

joespaniel
Oct 21, 2001, 11:09 AM
I would vote for the US in the late 1980s on sheer military might. Thats when it was at its peak. Thats a thing that fluctuates from time to time.
In the 1970s the USSR had the greatest military in the world.
After WWII, for a few years the US had the only atomic bombs.
Before WWII the US Army was ranked 17th in the world (tied with Portugal!).

Kublai-Khan
Oct 25, 2001, 09:47 PM
I want to vote Persia
WHERE IS PERSIA!!!!!

SINISTER1974
Oct 26, 2001, 06:48 AM
Im sorry but you did leave out the largest and most powerful civ of all time--THE MONGOLS-lead by Genghis Khan and after he died his sons and grandsons took over and hels ussr, china, korea, middle east, and some parts of europe for a very long time. His armies were feared warriors with perfect strategy and attack power. And even today ussr and china still hate this man. He and mongolia were the most powerful by far for years and held the most land by any other civ--thats if u realy have knowledge of this civ.And also was very smart and learned from people and let them have their own religion beliefs even after they were conquered. I would love to go into detail considering mongols and genghis khan are my favorite-but thats another story :) most of the civs you gave us to choose are a joke and werent powerful enough without allies--mongols did it on their own------MONGOLS:slay: ALL OTHER CIVS
SINISTER

SINISTER1974
Oct 26, 2001, 06:49 AM
Nevermind you did include mongols-i have to start reading more careful lol--but my vote is with them :)

Fayadi
Nov 05, 2001, 10:35 AM
Where is Tang Dynasty of China ??????????

"I would have to place my vote for Rome, I am Italian, and I take great pride in the fact that we were once the 'rulers of the world' " Weimar Republic

That was rubbish ,it is said during this time ,Han Dynasty of China has the most powerful military on Earth.During Ming Dynasty and Before that Chinese remained the WORLD ONLY SUPERPOWER!Their military is unbeatable!Although we are beaten by Mongols,thats only our bad period of military!


"The USA is the first and only country ever to be able to invade and take control of every country in the world when and where they want. Even the
British empire or the Roman empire couldn't do that."addiv

Not another self centered American?Rubbish again,USA performance during Vietnam wars are good example of horrondous performance of US military.USA and USSR are stupids ,they are materialistic in weapons but are too stupid to define strategy use brains for wars.USSR in afghanistan another example.They both lost to people who uses inferior weapons.There is nothing special about US military.One quote from SunTzu"War should not be prolonged" ,US are too stupid to delay the time(it could drain off country's financial if taken long")to finish off the terrorists in Afghanistan.Although not an easy job but daily bombings equals to nothing when they have bunkers underground.US dont have the power to deal with Russia alone!

kittenOFchaos
Nov 05, 2001, 12:43 PM
I think Americans do okay in war...in Korea they held of the advanced human wave tactics of the Chinese...

Knight-Dragon
Nov 05, 2001, 09:15 PM
Originally posted by Fayadi
That was rubbish ,it is said during this time ,Han Dynasty of China has the most powerful military on Earth.During Ming Dynasty and Before that Chinese remained the WORLD ONLY SUPERPOWER!Their military is unbeatable!Although we are beaten by Mongols,thats only our bad period of military!Yes, the Han did have a military that's at least as big as and as well-armed as the Romans. However the Roman legions were wholly professional and well-paid whereas the Han soldiery were conscripts mostly with some detachments of elite troops.

Fayadi, read your history more closely. Not only were we Chinese beaten by the Mongols; we were also beaten by the Jurchen Jin and the Khitan Liao prior to that and by the Manchu Qing long after that. And during the interregnum betw the end of the Han and the Sui, whole tribes of barbarians moved into N China, settled down and were Sinicized (i.e. like the Toba Wei).

The real strength of Chinese civilisation is not in military prowess but in culture where we could absorb all kinds of foreign invaders (except maybe for the Mongols). In Civ3 terms, it means the Chinese would have a very high cultural rating. ;)

sonorakitch
Nov 05, 2001, 11:28 PM
"Not another self centered American?Rubbish again,USA performance during Vietnam wars are good example of horrondous performance of US military.USA and USSR are stupids ,they are materialistic in weapons but are too stupid to define strategy use brains for wars.USSR in afghanistan another example.They both lost to people who uses inferior weapons.There is nothing special about US military.One quote from SunTzu"War should not be prolonged" ,US are too stupid to delay the time(it could drain off country's financial if taken long")to finish off the terrorists in Afghanistan.Although not an easy job but daily bombings equals to nothing when they have bunkers underground.US dont have the power to deal with Russia alone!"

Fayadi, the more that you post, the more your complete ignorance of the world (which is very common amongst Chinese, unforunately) shows through.

The U.S. performance during the Vietnam war was horrendous performance? Have you ever bothered to check the casualty statistics. More than 1,000,000 Vietcong died in that damn war, whereas only about 58,000 American soldiers died. And I think the casualty rating for the Vietcong maybe grossly under the real figure...I am just too lazy to look it up right now. We only left because of pressure back home.


Of course we couldn't ever successfully invade Russia. Far too big for current technology. But a war with China would be a walk in the park for the U.S. in comparison. Air and Sea power are overwhelmingly in the favor of the U.S. China could not launch any counteroffensive upn the U.S., and have inadequate methods of eliminating the bombardment of Tomohawks upon Chinese territory. With total air supremacy, possible in weeks, the U.S. could send a barrage of B-2s and B-52s to wreak havoc upon your nation and bring your industry to a halt. Of course, we couldn't invade successfully--you have far too many people to managably control. But China would be pushed back 200 years on the advancement totem pole in a few short months. And if this isn't true, I invite you to persuade Jiang Zhemin and Li Peng to "unite the motherland" and take back Taiwan. You can't, and thats why you don't .

Keep in mind, I am in no way advocating this. I think there are real possibilities for a stable, peaceful, and cooperative relationship between China and the U.S. As long as the communists keep you, Mr. Fayadi, out of power.

~Chris

Fayadi
Nov 06, 2001, 06:20 AM
China is regarded to be next superpower ,and US considered China to be more powerful than Russia(Ask ur president if u dont believe!).Regarding Korean War KittenofChaos,Mao send chinese troops without proper equipments,supplies (I read that in the book"The March Of Communist") and they could provide quite a heavy resistance towards US troops!
You dont judge Chinese to be ignorant dont you sonora,You truly narrowminded ?If you say me Ignorant,I say nothing that offends,Many Americans are ignorant,self centered and boasts about US is being the best and yet dares to push these damn features to others.Who is more ignorant?The WHOLE WORLD KNOWS THAT US IS IGNORANT SPECIES(they can bomb wherever they like,insult the blacks with inhuman discrimination).We CHINESE DONT HAVE IGNORANT Features !Let the world judges!US is too weak to invade China I tell you ,your marines are newbies!They dont even dare to storm in Afghanistan!Even the stupid Special Force cant even step in to our territory!If u say China is weak,why US does apologise to China in the spy plane incident!Do you still remember the US-Russia spy plane shot down,Soviet demanded for an apology and US refused?US apology for China.Cowards!!Dont tell me in 1970's USSR is weak so US wont apologise?Finishing the job in Afghanistan takes too long,US military is so funny ,brainless whats the purpose of daily bombing??The defense department are too stupid to know what they are going to do next(walking with no direction)!Walking in the park,How convinient,there are plans we are going to shoot down US Spyplane during the Spyplane stand off do u know that!US are only materialistic in technology but are too stupid to use in strategy!

The vietnam troops could storm in and invade US embassy in vietnam despite the presence of US troops with far more better weapons.I have seen the reports and they all were puzzled of the fall of US embassy!It took so long for them to deal with the Vietnams.D-Day invasion looks much faster(both sides have superior weapons)!U dont count who dies more ,how u perform in war,how long it took,how u lost to people who use inferior weapons,lost to farmers...

Magnus
Nov 06, 2001, 11:07 AM
All your nationalistic hysteria is getting really old and really boring Fayadi. You hate America because you FEAR them and you try to hide your fear behind a wall of tough words. Do you really think all your words of hate are going bring sympathy to your side? All it is doing is serving to alienate you further and unfortunately is making your country look bad in the process.

You remind me of the poster 'Turk':rolleyes:, - who, thankfully, disappeared from the forums.

sonorakitch
Nov 06, 2001, 03:40 PM
I agree Magnus.

And Fayadi, you have yet again proven your ignorance by unleashing a horde of unsubstantiated claims, which are under no basis of fact. I know countless Chinese well, and they are generally very intelligent, but they lack worldly knowledge. It is understandable. I took a University class of foreign policy in Hong Kong, taught by a Chinese teacher, and it was essentially a tirad of "western bullying". You once again proved yourself wrong with your own words.

I think it might be more effective for me to hop off here and just watch you bury yourself. :D

~Chris

cataclysm
Nov 06, 2001, 06:59 PM
calm down everyone, please :p

remember, this is the internet, there is no right and wrong, win or loss.

And there are igorance people in every countries. Personally, as a Canadian I think American are more igoranct:p

About the so call "western bullying". Well, I would say it's just like civ3, the stronger bully the weaker. It's kind of unavoidable. :p

And Fayadi, please chill

Fayadi
Nov 06, 2001, 10:05 PM
"All your nationalistic hysteria is getting really old and really boring Fayadi. You hate America because you FEAR them and you try to hide your fear behind a wall of tough words. Do you really think all your words of hate are going bring sympathy to your side? All it is doing is serving to alienate you further and unfortunately is making your country look bad in the process. "
Magnus

It is boring I know,I was optionless but to say these words!If u can make it more interesting that should be great(u r no interesting than me either)!I AM NOT THE ONE WHO STARTED these flame war!Sonoro open criticise China ,as a citizen by right I must answer him in a "tough" words.Why should we fear America ,when America himself got tons of fear within himself,We dont have as much as fears as them,In fact we have little fears.It is funny when you say me fear the America!:lol:,When I am saying facts,u say I am hiding the truth with some tough words(thanks you are saying my english lang is good!)?I dont hate America!I used to love them!These "tough" words are to answer sonora!I never hated America(if u are narrowminded u will think i hate 'em)!Sonora as I told u before open criticise on my nation!I am telling him that dont criticise because his nation are no better than mine!So it is not about NATIONALISTIC,RACIST!What a narrowminded Misunderstand!


"And Fayadi, you have yet again proven your ignorance by unleashing a horde of unsubstantiated claims, which are under no basis of fact"
These facts are true if u bother to think sonoro!Well you know You have been offensive(indirectly),you are narrowminded(no offense ,facts) for saying me Ignorant!Yes I may be Ignorant but your judgement is too fast(you could lost business partner or customers with these atitude)!Regarding about "Western Bullying" ,u could find bullying case GLOBALLY!! Well I though US was the best for doing "Blacks bullying"??Slave trading?Inhuman?Although is a history ,they are still insulting them now!

Simon Darkshade
Nov 06, 2001, 10:15 PM
:lol:
"You remind me of the poster 'Turk', - who, thankfully, disappeared from the forums"
:lol:
Well, at least he hasn't got to the stage of basically threatening to beat his opponents..:)
Was Turk really just :king: TF in disguise? snigger, snigger...

But basically, this 'discussion' is naught but extreme amusement, for me, witnessing laughable international level games of "you started it. No you started it. Look, you imperialists started it when you invaded Vinland." and the old favourite ""Mine's bigger than yours" "We're not afraid of you. We're SO not afraid of you we'll just keep on talking about it. So there."

For goodness sake, you're sounding like a bunch of politicians;)

Giorgicus
Nov 14, 2001, 03:57 PM
In terms of overall worldwide power (military, economic, and political influence), my vote would be for the United States, but not as of 2000, but in retrospect, as of the early 1960s.

Militarily, at that time we were at our zenith in comparison to the other superpower and/or aspiring superpowers, especially in terms of nuclear power. As it turns out, there was no such thing as a missile gap, and Kennedy insured that the U.S. would far outpace the Soviets in production of nuclear weapons. We also had a decided advantage in the geographical placement and ability of nuclear weapons to strike at our enemies.

Economically, of course, we were still outproducing any other nation, and we were enjoying a period of prosperity.

Geopolitically and at home, we were untainted by the loss in Viet Nam and the Watergate scandals. Overall, there was a feeling that we could do anything we wanted, at home or abroad. Remember, this country was now being led by the generation that won World War II.

True, by the time of the Reagan buildup in the 1980s, we had more overall firepower; but relative to the Soviet Union, and after the above events (including a humiliating hostage crisis), our overall influence was weaker.

My .02

Sayounara
May 01, 2003, 04:15 PM
British were the strongest. USA isn't all too strong especially with so many other powers

willemvanoranje
May 01, 2003, 04:40 PM
speaking of reviving dead threads....

TedJackson
May 01, 2003, 05:08 PM
The British had a globe-spanning empire in the 1700's (including a large part of North America) gained (mainly) by conquest. The only other contender is modern US (aiming for global cultural victory :) ).

Ted

Sayounara
May 01, 2003, 10:41 PM
Originally posted by willemvanoranje
speaking of reviving dead threads....
I'll revive more Axis threads later

allhailIndia
May 02, 2003, 01:40 AM
It would have to be a toss up between Victorian Britain and Rome under Hadrian. It is very hard to decide between the two.:scan:

puglover
May 02, 2003, 09:41 PM
Clinton was the high point of the USA? Please! :rolleyes:

allhailIndia
May 03, 2003, 12:50 AM
Although the US enjoyed great economic strength under Bill Clinton, it was not exactly a great Empire like the Romans or Great Britain under Victoria:p

marshal zhukov
May 03, 2003, 02:03 AM
The US is powerful but as incredibly powerful as some of the past Empires.
And eventhough Russia is poor the US would have a horrible time beating Russia in a war for example, and even a worse time fighting the European Union ( unlikely of course).
That means that although the US is powerful is not powerful enough to face the world or whoever stands in their way.

Bifrost
May 03, 2003, 10:08 AM
The question was "the most powerful nation" , not a country.
But well, since all the posters have enumerated countries, I'd vote for Russian Empire of the second half of XVIII.

marshal zhukov
May 03, 2003, 06:46 PM
Russian Empire? in the second half of the XVIII?
Russia wasn't very industrialized in the second half. It is population was poor still struggling to end the the servitude of the peasantry.
Didn't Russia lose a war in the 1860's, and another one in 1905, that doesn't seem to be the record of powerful nation.

Mongoloid Cow
May 03, 2003, 07:00 PM
This poll seems to be comparing ancient orange pygmy monkeys with fire-breathing llamas, and then asking to pick out the one which eats the more termites.

They were from different times and different worlds and it is all relative to the world they knew of. You can't pick out the most powerful.

I'd rather keep my intelligence and not answer this one. :D

Bifrost
May 04, 2003, 10:43 AM
Russian Empire? in the second half of the XVIII?
Russia wasn't very industrialized in the second half. It is population was poor still struggling to end the the servitude of the peasantry.
Didn't Russia lose a war in the 1860's, and another one in 1905, that doesn't seem to be the record of powerful nation.


YES! Russian Empire in the late XVIII century!
Err.. You must have thought that "XVIII" was "19", unfortunately it's not. I was talking about eighteen sentury - around 1760-1790 in this period Russian army defeated Friedrich, captured Berlin, politically destroyed Prussia. Before that time - in the first half of eighteen sentury - Russian army defeated the mighty Swedes led by the brave Carl XII - the best army of Europe of that time. Besides in the beginning of nineteenth century Russian Empire had the largest territory in its history. Russian explorers built new settlements in Alaska and established colonies on the West coast of California and Canada. The second half of eighteen sentury was the dawn of science and culture in Russian empire, it reached the top of its might and power.

Xen
May 10, 2003, 09:29 PM
even a worse time fighting the European Union
-marshal zhukov, talking about A Euro-American war

Oh please!, the European Union's "rapid reaction force" isnt very rapid, or much of a force....

Kryten
May 10, 2003, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by Xen
Oh please!, the European Union's "rapid reaction force" isnt very rapid, or much of a force....

This is quite true.
The fact is that America in the early 21st century has without doubt the greatest military & technological might that this planet has ever seen.
But the question before us is, "The Most Powerful Nation On Earth....Ever".

We Civ players are dictators, every one of us.
We don't worry too much about the effect a war would have on the economy....
We don't have to worry about keeping our allies happy....
We don't have to worry about the United Nations....
We don't have to worry about public opinion....
We don't have to worry about re-election....
An American President does. :eek:

Also, like Mongoloid Cow stated, you have to look at each nation's relative power within their own time period, i.e. compaired to their historical contempories.

And as powerful as the modern American military machine is today, they have LESS military freedom to do what they want than say the Romans had.

In fact, even the Romans had some limitations.
You couldn't go to war with a neighbour without the Senate's approval, and every Roman Empereor had to worry about giving too many troops to a general in case he rebelled and marched on Rome!

Sooooo.....who was "The Most Powerful Nation On Earth....Ever"?
I would say it was.....the Mongols under Gengis Khan!
They had the ability to beat any of their contempories....
They didn't have to worry about public opinion.....
They didn't need a political excuse to attack their neighbours....
They didn't have an economy to worry about....
Whatever the Great Khan said, they did.
Even America today cannot do all this!

JonathanValjean
May 15, 2003, 12:29 AM
What an interesting, thought-provoking question! Since one of your qualifications was "in its time period," i.e. power in relation to its contemporaries, I chose Rome under Trajan. If the main criterion were to be the greatest overall economic might in history, I would vote for 1999 USA, before the economic downturn occurred.

John Wayne USA
May 22, 2003, 01:07 AM
2 big empires not in: Imperial Spain and Nazi Germany.

Spain - First Global empire in world history. Would not have voted for it, but surely it deserved a nomination

Nazi Germany - Sure it was real short, but after the conquest of France in 1940, Europe was for the taking, but Hitler blew it and we all know the rest...........

(Dont feel bad though, people always nitpick my polls, so I guess I should pass the favor :D )

And finally I voted for the Roman Empire. As much as I love the US, I really dont like considering it an Empire and you have to go with durability.

People say the US has been around for 200+ years vs. Romans' 1000+ years but thats deceiving........

The US has only been a true world power until about 100-120 years ago, and only undisputed #1 power since sometime around WWII............

You cant compare that with the thousand plus years of Rome or the centuries of Empire with English, Spanish, and even Mongols.......

Edit - Its crazy to suggest that Rome "conquered the world", even though I voted for them, lets be realistic here!

Rome never even conquered all of Europe at its greatest height much less Africa, Asia, or the Americas. The beauty of Rome was that it was able to control vast areas for so long while bringing relative peace and prosperity to her people.

polymath
May 22, 2003, 05:09 AM
I would say the British Empire, for sheer size. An absolute behemoth.

HAND
May 22, 2003, 06:04 PM
The British Empire - Its influence was world wide- its Empire was world wide.
The British Gun boat diplomacy was more effective than American cruise missile diplomacy is today!:)

~Corsair#01~
Oct 27, 2004, 04:21 AM
China should really be in that poll, round about 1420s they could have taken on just about anything. In terms of strength relative to the rest of the world, only Ghengis Khan came close during the Mongol golden age.

Vasileius
Oct 27, 2004, 07:31 AM
Israel ? :crazyeye:
Muaahahahahahahahaha :lol: :lol: ...
A bunch of shepherds , the most powerful nation ever ... Muhahahahahahah



... That really made my day ...


P.S. Seriously , Rome .

storealex
Oct 27, 2004, 08:11 AM
while the courageous swedish armies were fighting in the 30 year war, the danish cowardly attacked sweden from tha rear.
we did however, if im not mistaken, take köpenhamn and got norway in the peacetreaty. :) :) :)
Is that what they tell you in school? Yes, you laid siege to Copenhagen, but we broke it and send your behind home where it belonged. And you didn't get Norway till after it was given to you, as a present by the European Great Powers, because you supported them in the Napoleon wars. And then, after less than 100 years, Norway was independant...

Knight-Dragon
Oct 27, 2004, 10:58 AM
New discussion splited off here... Old thread will remained closed.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=103345