Who's the next world superpower?

[Spartan Bannana]

Chine will take over the world. Plain and simple, they have so many people and so many soldiers that they could easily make us all their bitches

 

[Saskwach]

Edit: black lincon, Shivari, how 'bout we stop this fussin' an' fightin', m'kay? Ya'll are de-railin' this here fine thread, so please stop, m'kay?

Edit Edit: Why do I have the feeling that I'm gonna get ignored? That's right, 'cos no one pays attention to poor ol' Stompy...

That's not true! I wuv yoo stompyyyyyyy!!

 

[OverlordSteve]

Albany.

 

[Unknower]

As a European, I'd like it to be EU. Economically... well, it's friggin' Europe, damnit. Militarily EU would have more men than China.

But EU is so divided that I don't think EU will be a superpower for a long time.

 

[ElephantGuts]

Well apparently everyone here has forgotten about the Crab People, but once they attack none of this is going to matter.

 

[Sib]

Well apparently everyone here has forgotten about the Crab People, but once they attack none of this is going to matter.

I've already boarded up with enough hot butter to repel an army, I'm offering sanctuary to anyone able to wield their butter

 

[Zeke109]

The crab people have been attacking for a while and the only way for us to stop them--stop having sex.
DUNDUN DUNNNNN

 

[Shivari]

honestly I would like to stop this now i think were both a little wrong during that research session I did find evidence that said Russians had 1.1-3.3 mgs per battalion and that Germans had .65-1.95 mgs per

Either way, machine guns didn't affect Russia's departure from the war.

And it seems like all of the numbers about machine guns are total bullshit. I'd like to see where those sources got their information. Because they all seem to be just making up numbers.

 

[werepossum]

Black Lincon and Shivari are arguing at cross-purposes. First, the examples Black Lincon gave are all submachine guns, in German parlance machine pistols. They fire reduced power (usually pistol) cartridges and are quite, quite different from machine guns. Second, the number of machine guns per battalion varied as the war progressed, but the Germans began the war slightly under-equipped in machine guns, having but one or sometimes two small machine gun companies per battalion. As the war progressed, they added light machine guns to their rifle companies, but other nations also added machine guns. Rommel's detachment for example received their light machine guns in the latter half of 1917. So whether the Germans had more or less machine guns per battalion depended on the time of the battle and which specific forces were involved.

However, as Shivari pointed out the cause of the Russians pulling out was completely due to the revolution. The Russians were doing just fine in the Great War until then, and in fact had earlier taken a large part of Finland in spite of some of the most outstanding defense ever.

Stompy, that's an interesting take adding Brazil. They have also found very significant reserves of petroleum and natural gas. If they could straighten out their government and its corruption, they could indeed become an economic powerhouse. As it is, they are by far the most powerful nation on their continent, and look to remain so for the foreseeable future.

 

[black lincon]

However, as Shivari pointed out the cause of the Russians pulling out was completely due to the revolution. The Russians were doing just fine in the Great War until then, and in fact had earlier taken a large part of Finland in spite of some of the most outstanding defense ever.

Let me say this one more time I'm fully aware that the reason Russia pulled out of the war was a combo of factors the main one was the revolution. when saying why they lost I meant why they lost battles based on the statistic I had heard which you pointed out was sub machine guns meaning we were comparing something different the whole time. I'd like to repeat myself please stop mentioning this. we've established that we were both arguing for no good reason.

 

[Apocalypse Tank]

sorry about the double post

 

[Apocalypse Tank]

Right now the world?s superpower is the US before that it was Brittan before that Rome. Given the shape the US is in now with our economic crisis and the fact that a good portion of the world hates us for one reason or another. Unless the next president does something in the next four years, the US will stop being the superpower of the world. So if that happens who do you think the next superpower will be? My votes on China or maybe the power will actually be in the hands of multiple nations.

1. Britain
2. Britain was considered to be ONE (I consider it a second or third in the list of powerful nations during the Age of Colonization) of the superpowers at the time, when Europe emerged out of the Renaissance.
3. In between Rome and Britain, there was yet to be globalization. Empires and nations were powerful in their own ways.

On topic:
China, India and Poland/Eastern Europe

 

[Melaisis]

Right now the world's superpower is the US before that it was Brittan before that Rome.

Is it just me, or did you skip 1.5k years between examples?

 

[black lincon]

Right now the world's superpower is the US before that it was Brittan before that Rome.

Is it just me, or did you skip 1.5k years between examples?

So sorry for not going year by year, I will make sure to do that in any further historical tread. but wait this isn't historical this is hypothetical.

 

[LewsTherin]

Canada. Our bears have LAZARS.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

China has the potential, however, there is a problem. If the United States does enter a Depression, we will be dragging China down with us. China's current rise to power is a direct result of American business and industry. Take that away and China's economy will decline as well. Forget that, it won't decline, it will drop like an elephant that was pushed out of an airplane.

The Chinese economy is going nowhere but up, but it is just too dependent on America. If the United States were to suddenly fall overnight, China will revert back to where they were during much of the early stages of the Cold War.

In terms of military might, China can't project their power that well. This is because their navy is little more than a glorified coast guard. Remember, being able to make your military power felt all across the globe is another key part of being a superpower in the modern world. China can't do this. The Chinese navy has no aircraft carriers, and they can't even take Taiwan in their current state. The Chinese may have a good army and decent air force, but their navy is an absolute joke. Russia has a better navy than China, and the Russian Navy was THE hardest hit branch of the military after the Soviet Union fell.

China has a green-water/frigate navy. That means that it consists of nothing but light to medium combat ships with extremely limited range, capable of doing little more than protecting the coast. The Chinese navy is still DECADES away from being able to make it to Australia. Simply put, China can't project their power beyond the countries they border.

So, while China could become an economic superpower within the coming decades, they still need to become independent of the US. Without the US, the Chinese economy would plummet. Likewise, China has a long ways to go to become a military superpower because their navy is so weak.

Doesn't China hace ICBMs though? i kinda assumed that they did, although, this opens up a whole discussion, so forget i said anything

 

[bluemarsman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_superpower

 

[stompy]

Stompy, that's an interesting take adding Brazil. They have also found very significant reserves of petroleum and natural gas. If they could straighten out their government and its corruption, they could indeed become an economic powerhouse. As it is, they are by far the most powerful nation on their continent, and look to remain so for the foreseeable future.

True, they have to work on their government, but so do many of the other nations proposed. India, China and Russia have issue of corruption, poverty, lack of ethics, sustainability, environmental issues, etc, plaguing their government, so, once that's out of the way, there's a very good chance of those countries (or, if I get my way, all of them), take the mantle of superpower from the US.

Doesn't China hace ICBMs though? i kinda assumed that they did, although, this opens up a whole discussion, so forget i said anything

Nah, it's on topic. Yes, China have ICBMs, and I suppose they could use them. Of course, it opens up the question, Why would China nuke its biggest customer?

That's not true! I wuv yoo stompyyyyyyy!!

Aww, thanks Sackwach. **hug**

 

[Shivari]

we've established that we were both arguing for no good reason.

No, we were arguing about something that you were misinformed on. You should have mentioned they were submachine guns a while ago. We were arguing about different things not even knowing it.

But yeah it's over, werepossum was just clearing it up.

 

[werepossum]

Canada. Our bears have LAZARS.

Yeah, well, the USA has lots of bears as well AND we have the constitutional right to arm them - our right to bear arms shall not be infringed, thus guaranteeing our bears the best arms American ingenuity can produce.