Rich nations ignoring power shift

[Perfection]

Terrorists can't destroy a nation.

 

[George2816]

Terrorists can't destroy a nation.

Sure they can if their is enough of them! (I'm saying that if we bomb all the countries if the world their would be terror attacks every hour non-stop)

 

[Perfection]

Yeah, but that's nowhere near close to happening.

Terrorists aren't going to defeat America.

 

[mrt144]

Yes i am. Without gas in the freezing winter people will die. (I'm saying that europe will bend more to russia than to the USA.)

expert economic analysis! im sure you have a career in the financial sector.

 

[George2816]

Yeah, but that's nowhere near close to happening.

Terrorists aren't going to defeat America.

If we attack every nation in the world terrorists will should defeat america (Like the one post claimed we could)

 

[Perfection]

We're not going to, we just can. America has a whole lot of cards in global politics. Yes, the world doesn't care for the Bush admin. Yes, Iraq is a nasty situation. Yes, we have some internal economic problems. However, we still are a giant economy, a tech powerhouse, a military giant and have good relationships with pretty much every other developed country.

 

[George2816]

We're not going to, we just can. America has a whole lot of cards in global politics. Yes, the world doesn't care for the Bush admin. Yes, Iraq is a nasty situation. Yes, we have some internal economic problems. However, we still are a giant economy, a tech powerhouse, a military giant and have good relationships with pretty much every other developed country.

Wasn't the roman empire like that during their peak?? Sooner or later the american empire will fall from grace!

 

[mrt144]

sooner or later. so what? it's not like america will go from first world super power to backwater herb town overnight. I think americans are overly concerned with being #1, we have just become used to it. it seems like this big shock that we could lose that. I say so what?

 

[Godwynn]

You seem to to realize that if we do bomb all the countries no amount of GDP or miltary spending will save the US. And last time i checked "Terrorists" are harder to kill then an invasion force! (of course if we do bomb all countries on the planet normal people are going to be "Terrorists") BTW don't you think bombed people will back their gov't more then a than bombed gov't? (I'm talking about if we bomb iran[case and point saddam thought the minority would back him when he invaded in 1980's but he was dead wrong and the people backed the iran gov't more])

Do you even read your posts before you hit the 'submit' button?

You said:

Last i checked the military was already too thin to invade another country

True, we cannot invade another nation (thankfully). However, we can still throw our weight around, not on land, but through the air.

 

[skadistic]

Do you even read your posts before you hit the 'submit' button?

You said:



True, we cannot invade another nation (thankfully). However, we can still throw our weight around, not on land, but through the air.

We have plenty of troops to invade another country or two. Only 10% is holed up in Iraq.

 

[willemvanoranje]

Russia and Brazil seem ignored by everyone. Brazil in particular have good prospects, if they manage themselves well.

Managing has been the problem since September 7th 1822. Brazil will get there, I do not doubt that. If you only take a look at the progress that has been made since the 1930ies when Getúlio Vargas took over, you see that the country is going in the right direction, even with all the clientilism and corruption. Brazil has evolved from periferal status producing nothing but sugar and basic agricultural good to a way more versatile economy, which therefore is stronger as well. Brazil is not only producing a lot of soy, representing the agricultural part, but also f.e. exports aeroplanes and automobiles. Industrialisation has been quite succesful in Brazil.

It's a matter of time. In the long run, Brazil might prove to be more stable than China and India. But that really is in the looooong run, talking about a century or so. What's needed is a positive attitude too. The attitude luiz displays, sadly enough, is shared by a great part of middle-class Brazilians. It's not helping. Then again, with so many scandals and corruption in politics and economy, there is no one in the world that would not get skeptical at some point.

 

[George2816]

We have plenty of troops to invade another country or two. Only 10% is holed up in Iraq.

Why are troops already on their 3rd or 4th terms?? SO you are saying the troops don't deserve rest and should be always fighting if that is thee case no1 would reenlist

 

[Integral]

Why are troops already on their 3rd or 4th terms?? SO you are saying the troops don't deserve rest and should be always fighting if that is thee case no1 would reenlist

Invading a country and occupying a country are wholly different propositions.

 

[George2816]

Invading a country and occupying a country are wholly different propositions.

Sure lets invade a country or attack it but have no plans for occupying a country!

 

[skadistic]

Why are troops already on their 3rd or 4th terms?? SO you are saying the troops don't deserve rest and should be always fighting if that is thee case no1 would reenlist

Like everything you else you post you have no idea what you're talking about. I'm still waiting for the proof that SA is supplying 50% of the arms in Iraq.

 

[Integral]

Sure lets invade a country or attack it but have no plans for occupying a country!

Kosovo in the late 1990's, anyone? Significant airstrikes, but no significant deployment of US ground troops (yes, there is a significant NATO presence on the ground, but that's not the same as a US presence, is it?)

-Integral