silver 2039
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,208
Obviously China, and India, with other powers being Japan, Brazil, perhpas Nigeria, and Indonesia also, Iran has great potential if it can get over some issues.
Superpowers of the next century!
- Thread starter Joe Harker
- Start date
Princeps
More bombs than God
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2004
- Messages
- 5,265
Like the fact that is being surrounded by a super aggressive super power.
silver 2039
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,208
Yeah thats the main one, it Iran can survive the next 20 years without getting bombed by the US, (a slim chance) then it has oppurtunities and options for greater economic growth and regional power.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
Well but all influental man made was in European part. Like when USA would lost all within Alaska and California
West 36
Can count up to 4
I hope another one rises, we Americans are spoiled here all alone, although I'd rather it not be China, not my choice and it seems inevitable, but they just make me uncomfortable, I like that they're trying to change, but they're still not that ideal country... not that the US is.. but their army could do alot, obviously, and thats not necessarily a good thing. I don't think India will do well unless they can overhaul reforms, how many people live in poverty there??
so, hey Europe! Rise again! eh? I know you wanna. And South America. Some of you may get a shot, go for it! Australia! keep it real, dont go overkill ok?
so, hey Europe! Rise again! eh? I know you wanna. And South America. Some of you may get a shot, go for it! Australia! keep it real, dont go overkill ok?
Much better income? They are essentially identical (and England is actually better in nominal values): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
The level of technology is basically equal as well.
Militarily, England is certainly stronger, since Germany is controlled.
I don't think either of such small countries will become a power on its own in the modern world, but neither is really stronger than the other.
Can you elaborate on that?
Thorgalaeg
Deity
Germany has more manpower and on industrial power UK is far behind.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Don't forget Poland
There will be no Superpowers, no China is not gonna be a Superpower and America is no longer a SuperPower anymore
they are replaced by a world Government, and which ever country has weapons capable of Destryoing the World they are Superpowers, wars will only be fought between countries that are poor and have no nuclear weapons
they are replaced by a world Government, and which ever country has weapons capable of Destryoing the World they are Superpowers, wars will only be fought between countries that are poor and have no nuclear weapons
West 36
Can count up to 4
brachy-pride
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2005
- Messages
- 123
Brazil has made spanish a mandatory language in their schools.
If they want to dominate south america, they will have to do it in spanish, because Argentines, Peruvians etc, are not going to learn portuguese.
If they want to dominate south america, they will have to do it in spanish, because Argentines, Peruvians etc, are not going to learn portuguese.
Idlenessss
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2007
- Messages
- 128
Personally, I think europe is looking like its doomed for a major downhill slide. The vitality of the US has always been, whatever its circumstances, state of our economy, military, etc. is its fascinating, out-of-nowhere capacity for innovation, whereby it has singlehandedly, practically, created the modern era, and owns all the patents...This trend does not actually appear to be changing. Production in the US always far outpaces avilible markets. CHina emerging is great, with almost infinate markets, and will probably wind up, liek it or not, the new best friend of the US.
Europe has never had that much production. What production there is in wurope, mainly germany, seems to magically have no profit. Mysterious. Anyway, while I hope i dont offend anyone, I think the economic strength of europe has often recently depended very much on the US. Now that the US has a new economic buddy to hang out with who is more hip than europe, maybe europe is gonna get in serious trouble? Well, this is my speculation.
I also think that many places which have been arrested in development because of fundamentally temporary problems, such as africa, must eventually get over them. Africa has amazing wealth in resources, and theres no reason that something in africa cant eventually get around this mess and shape itself to be a new world player. hard to say where right now, but something eventually. Nigeria?
Europe has never had that much production. What production there is in wurope, mainly germany, seems to magically have no profit. Mysterious. Anyway, while I hope i dont offend anyone, I think the economic strength of europe has often recently depended very much on the US. Now that the US has a new economic buddy to hang out with who is more hip than europe, maybe europe is gonna get in serious trouble? Well, this is my speculation.
I also think that many places which have been arrested in development because of fundamentally temporary problems, such as africa, must eventually get over them. Africa has amazing wealth in resources, and theres no reason that something in africa cant eventually get around this mess and shape itself to be a new world player. hard to say where right now, but something eventually. Nigeria?
Mirc
Not mIRC!!!
So Nigeria will soon be a world power, while Europe will go in serious trouble, right?
Sorry but I don't believe this.SomethingWicked
Chieftain
It's nice to see that Europe's financial markets begin some sort of small-scale emancipation from the United States. Once, they used to say, that when America coughs, Europe has a cold. While Europe and the United States are more dependent on each other than ever (Europe knows this, the US obviously doesn't), it there sure is movement.
However, the EU's problems are numerous. Economic woes and unemployment aside, the EU has a massive structural problem. Since the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, there are 27 commissioners on the Europe Commission, with posts for things that would merit only a sub-department in a national government: Multilingualism, or Information Society & Media.
Thanks to outgoing French President Chirac's political maneuvering, an obviously ill-informed electorate and institutional confusion, the EU 'constitution' treaty has been put on ice for the time being. However, the institutional changes envisioned in the treaty will have to be implemented. If an ever-enlarging EU (with Croatia due in 2009 and Turkey probably some time after 2015) does not find a way out of its current deadlock between national interests, an interventionist Commission and the waning confidence of its electorate, Europe sure is heading for trouble.
Militarily speaking, the EU is among the few powers in the world that have power-projection capabilities. While these capabilities are mainly due to the British and French military, as well as the Germany's army (by the way the largest in Europe, not counting Russia), they are there nonetheless.
Of course, the US is the sole superpower (some, indeed, say hyperpower) and it will remain that way if US military spending goes on increasing like this. The United States have true power projection capabilities, with bases and fleets around the world, a large force of carrier battle groups, a large carrier wing, and, most importantly, a head of state that may act without consulting Congress (which is questionable democracy- and checks and balances-wise).
Russia is re-arming as well. With its boundless resources in Siberia, it surely is an energy superpower that likes to strong-arm neighbours by cutting off the crude and natural gas supply (see Belarus, Ukraine).
Africa? No way. The African Union is far too disorganised to form a political and military heavyweight (sorry, Nigeria).
China surely is a rising star, with an exploding defence budget as well as an exploding self-confidence as Asia's major player - though it might perhaps have to make domestic concessions.
India, "the world's largest democracy". I've read somewhere that India may indeed surpass China in terms of GDP. They are at a geostrategically sensible position, armed with a fleet of carriers as well as some nuclear bombs - and modernizing fast.
In South America, I'd mostly put my money on Argentina or Brazil, though the left-wing populism of a large number of South American heads of state might jeopardize important trade agreements with Europe and the US (the resolution of the Doha Round problems, for instance).
Anyway, my take is that the US will continue to dominate the political landscape though they will have to make concessions to both Europe and Asia, probably to Latin America as well...
However, the EU's problems are numerous. Economic woes and unemployment aside, the EU has a massive structural problem. Since the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, there are 27 commissioners on the Europe Commission, with posts for things that would merit only a sub-department in a national government: Multilingualism, or Information Society & Media.
Thanks to outgoing French President Chirac's political maneuvering, an obviously ill-informed electorate and institutional confusion, the EU 'constitution' treaty has been put on ice for the time being. However, the institutional changes envisioned in the treaty will have to be implemented. If an ever-enlarging EU (with Croatia due in 2009 and Turkey probably some time after 2015) does not find a way out of its current deadlock between national interests, an interventionist Commission and the waning confidence of its electorate, Europe sure is heading for trouble.
Militarily speaking, the EU is among the few powers in the world that have power-projection capabilities. While these capabilities are mainly due to the British and French military, as well as the Germany's army (by the way the largest in Europe, not counting Russia), they are there nonetheless.
Of course, the US is the sole superpower (some, indeed, say hyperpower) and it will remain that way if US military spending goes on increasing like this. The United States have true power projection capabilities, with bases and fleets around the world, a large force of carrier battle groups, a large carrier wing, and, most importantly, a head of state that may act without consulting Congress (which is questionable democracy- and checks and balances-wise).
Russia is re-arming as well. With its boundless resources in Siberia, it surely is an energy superpower that likes to strong-arm neighbours by cutting off the crude and natural gas supply (see Belarus, Ukraine).
Africa? No way. The African Union is far too disorganised to form a political and military heavyweight (sorry, Nigeria
).China surely is a rising star, with an exploding defence budget as well as an exploding self-confidence as Asia's major player - though it might perhaps have to make domestic concessions.
India, "the world's largest democracy". I've read somewhere that India may indeed surpass China in terms of GDP. They are at a geostrategically sensible position, armed with a fleet of carriers as well as some nuclear bombs - and modernizing fast.
In South America, I'd mostly put my money on Argentina or Brazil, though the left-wing populism of a large number of South American heads of state might jeopardize important trade agreements with Europe and the US (the resolution of the Doha Round problems, for instance).
Anyway, my take is that the US will continue to dominate the political landscape though they will have to make concessions to both Europe and Asia, probably to Latin America as well...
He's not the only one. Most of the head of state can act without consulting the American Congress
More seriously, the French president also act without consulting the parliament. He has even more power (in term of right to do things, not about military power at his disposal) than the US president.
SomethingWicked
Chieftain
He's not the only one. Most of the head of state can act without consulting the American Congress
You're sure of that?
Anyway, there's Congress as an umbrella term for all presidential system legislatures. I agree; but France almost certainly would not act alone, without consulting at least the German government. While France wields some power - both politically and militarily - in its former African colonies, mostly, the French government seems to know the wisdom of consulting with allies concerning important geopolitical decisions. I don't think France would embark on a nearly unilateral adventure like the War in Iraq on its own.
