The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - August 29, 2008

Advertisement


Advertisement



New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies

Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: U.S.A. How much longer on top?
Republican    2/25/2008 4:15:17 AM
The United States of America has the best, most tech. advanced, smartest, and 2 largest military on the planet. No other military can even compete. In 30 years, the US Military is going to be even far more advanced. No other Army can defeat the U.S. Army, and the same goes for the Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. So, what I'm wondering is, when do you think another nation will pass the USA, and which nation would it be?
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
xylene       2/25/2008 9:06:18 AM
Will US have strongest offensive military in 20 years? Most likely. Will there be a flattening of the range of capabilities among top nations , where no one nation is clearly dominant? Very likely. Unless inflation is tackled and the value of the dollar bolstered, the USA's outspending of every other nation will start to simply be a crutch to prop up declining purchasing power of the dollar and what that dollar buys our military.
 
Every time interest rates are cut , it basically devalues the US dollar. Everytime you hear of a new free trade deal, some American tax payer is being put out of work. One less tax payer for the system and that shortage is made up for in more borrowing, which increases the money supply , cause exacerbating inflation, and devaluing the dollar.
 
Quote    Reply

kensohaski       2/25/2008 9:37:59 AM
Interest rate cuts are simply a sign that economic growth is slowing...  All in context...
 
Quote    Reply

buzzard       2/25/2008 10:56:55 AM

Interest rate cuts are simply a sign that economic growth is slowing...  All in context...


No, at this point the rate cuts are merely a way of debasing the currency. They are going about zero to increase the amount of credit out there, and the dollar is already too weak. When interest rates have been up to quell inflation, then you can cut them and get some economic boost. However cutting them when already low is useless for boosting the economy and actually will cause appreciably harm as you incite inflation. About the only tool available right now to help the economy is marginal and business tax cuts. The idiotic tax rebate they are handing out isn't going to do a damn bit of good.

buzzard
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       2/25/2008 5:22:58 PM
The United States of America has the best, most tech. advanced, smartest, and 2 largest military on the planet.
 
Dead set, eh?
 
Are your infantry troops smarter than everybody elses?
 
Are your Abrams tanks more advanced than our Abrams tanks?
 
Are your Humvees better at protecting occupants from IEDs than our Bushmasters?
 
Will your Super Hornets be better than our Super Hornets?
 
Is your collective ego bigger, more advanced and technologically smarter than our collective egos?
 
You have a larger tax base and population than most countries of the world, but that doesn't simply equate to most advanced, best, prettiest etc.
 
Curious.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

xylene       2/25/2008 6:02:56 PM
A nation's military strength is only a reflection of the attitudes of the civilian sector and the strength of the economy at a moment in time. At one time tiny Holland had the best fighting ships in the world and was able to carve out an empire and have global influence.  In the 1970's national moral was low and the economy in the doldrums. Would we have been able to invade Afghanistan and Iraq in 1977 ? Also depends on how our military evolves in next 30 years. In some ways we have lost capability ,primarily manpower. Would Iraq War been different had we invaded with 1991 version of VII Corps, XVIII airborne, and 1st Marine Division? We have nice new technology and weaponry, but we no longer have ability to field 500,000 men.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       2/25/2008 7:56:55 PM
We have nice new technology and weaponry, but we no longer have ability to field 500,000 men.

 

 


"God isn't on the side of the biggest battalions, but of the best shots."
 
Quote    Reply

xylene       2/25/2008 8:16:27 PM


We have nice new technology and weaponry, but we no longer have ability to field 500,000 men.



 



 




"God isn't on the side of the biggest battalions, but of the best shots."


Having enough manpower is still important. For example if you intend on overthrowing the government of a nation , you need to have enough troops to occupy and control the area.
 
Quote    Reply

longrifle       2/25/2008 9:11:03 PM
How much longer on top?  I don't know.

But tell me this: has there ever been a major power - influence, empire, or anything else you want to call it - that didn't eventually decline?  And usually not because of some massive military defeat.  It was usually because they over extended themselves, right?

Why would we think the US could or would be the exception?

 
Quote    Reply

prometheus       2/26/2008 9:10:46 AM
America in it's way is an empire. We are conditioned into thinking an empire is merely the subjugation of large bodies of people into one cause. This is merely the route 1 to imperialism.

Simply put an empire is about influence. The empire is there to protect the populace of the imperial power and make them richer. In ancient times this was acheived through the literal annexation of land and peoples, religious conversion and slavery in order to increase the coffers of powers such as Rome and to prevent harm coming to the Roman people.

By the time American history starts in the late 1700s imperialism is most closely associated with the colonial empires of western Europe. As Admiral King put it, the British were capitalists first, conquerers second. Unlike the empires of Constantine, Charlmagne and Ivan the colonial empires were themselves useless for providing extra warm bodies for the defence of the realm - indian troops up until the 20C were forbidden to serve abroad - simply put, the colonialist period was about money and new markets (sound familiar yet?).

To say that britain went to india to conquer it is misleading, the East India comany did not have such a mandate, it was there to trade. However, each time a hostile prince attempted to end this trade, the British fought and invariably won - this brought a new border and new hostile princes. It ended up as a domino progression. remember also that Britain 'conquered' India witha largely native army, not pressed or subjugated but simply by offering the Indian troops better living conditions and full religious freedom which they didn't get under the native princes.

The empire rose and fell however. While the colonials could claim that they had been primarily interseted in capital and markets they still rfequired the subjugation of people and land to maintain this cash flow, therefore nationalist feelings will always undo this work.

America, therefore, represents the next level of abstraction up in imperial history. The US can claim to be interested in Capital and markets without the need of actually conquering foreign lands. globalisation and the increasing economical interdependence of nations means that the US ends up the imperial leader on top of the pile without ever using direct means as earlier empires did. There is the pax Americana, it suceeded the pax Britannica in that both essentially said "war is bad for business, therefore, do not fight or we will kill you"

Thus historical trends continue, It is interesting to note that Empires always evolve from what contemporary 'civilisation' always thought of as barbarians. This is simply because the barbarians do not embrace the civilisationa s they find it but instead are catalysts for change, adapting quicker and altering the prevailing social paradigm, You only have to examine both British and US history to examine how iconoclasticboth nations were with respect to the status quo, how radical they were at the times of their ascent to world leader status.

It is more interesting to note that this driving force never lasts. As one generation passes on to the next the old ways are forgotten, the lessons learned fade and people start to assume that they have always been on top and always will be, it is usually at this point that conservatism rears it's head, in an attempt to stop civilisation and history and fossilise the world in a state which that power dominates. This has the tendency of making the imperial nation less able to adapt and more susceptable to outside interference and eventually to be overtaken by others.

Just a few thoughts I had, please feel free to critisize
 
Quote    Reply

kensohaski       2/26/2008 9:23:45 AM




Interest rate cuts are simply a sign that economic growth is slowing...  All in context...




No, at this point the rate cuts are merely a way of debasing the currency. They are going about zero to increase the amount of credit out there, and the dollar is already too weak. When interest rates have been up to quell inflation, then you can cut them and get some economic boost. However cutting them when already low is useless for boosting the economy and actually will cause appreciably harm as you incite inflation. About the only tool available right now to help the economy is marginal and business tax cuts. The idiotic tax rebate they are handing out isn't going to do a damn bit of good.

buzzard

Indeed, but the accelerated depreciation will....
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       2/26/2008 10:06:14 AM
""The United States of America has the best, most tech. advanced, smartest, and 2 largest military on the planet.""

"Best" and "Smartest" ... lol ! Republican is a funny person ...

Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

markrigh    china will surpass everyone   2/26/2008 12:16:24 PM
As the most populous country in the world and with its strong economic growth, in 50 years No doubt China will be number 1 in terms of GPD. China will also be number 1 in military spendings if its ratio hasn't changed. And that's scary, Japan knows it, that's why Japan has to respect more China (to recongnise that japanese soldiers slaughtered millions of chinese civilians during WW2) or something will happen...
 
Quote    Reply

FJV    Not much to do with armies.   2/26/2008 12:41:02 PM
The world operates on the phrase "what's in it for me?"

The US is number 1, because they give the best, or least worst depending on perspective, deal to the rest of the world. At the moment I cannot think of any other country that could become number 1 without everybody else being worse off than with the US being number 1. Without regarding how a nation treats it's own people (most of the world doesn't give a damn about that).
- When Europe was top dog it was worse for everyone else than it is now with the US being top dog. History has proven Europe as number 1 to be worse than the US.
- China and Russia*1) at their current level of power already start bullying other nations in the region. If they became number 1 this would increase to the point where they would be multiple times worse than the US.
- The Middle East finances homocidal maniacs to kill civilians of other nations that have nothing to do with anything. If they became they might even be be multiple times worse than China or Russia.
- There is no large African nation that is able to offer the world anything more than raw mineral ores, they are unable to offer a better deal than the US.

*1) For a while it seemed to some that communist Russia offered a better deal to everybody else than the US. After the ideal of communism became discredited to the point of being a bad joke Russia declined in power.


 
Quote    Reply

Ehran       2/26/2008 2:17:51 PM

The United States of America has the best, most tech. advanced, smartest, and 2 largest military on the planet.
 

Dead set, eh?

 

Are your infantry troops smarter than everybody elses?

 

Are your Abrams tanks more advanced than our Abrams tanks?

 

Are your Humvees better at protecting occupants from IEDs than our Bushmasters?

 

Will your Super Hornets be better than our Super Hornets?

 

Is your collective ego bigger, more advanced and technologically smarter than our collective egos?

 

You have a larger tax base and population than most countries of the world, but that doesn't simply equate to most advanced, best, prettiest etc.

 

Curious.

 

 



the americans find themselves sitting in a very nice place.  anyone that is competitive on quality they beat on quantity and anyone competitive on quantity they beat on quality. 
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran       2/26/2008 2:22:38 PM

As the most populous country in the world and with its strong economic growth, in 50 years No doubt China will be number 1 in terms of GPD. China will also be number 1 in military spendings if its ratio hasn't changed. And that's scary, Japan knows it, that's why Japan has to respect more China (to recongnise that japanese soldiers slaughtered millions of chinese civilians during WW2) or something will happen...


think you'll find the chinese are busy building a shaky edifice on foundation of sand.  it'll be more a case of what grows out of the ruins after the place comes apart.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy