China the next power?

China has recently overtaken Japan as the world's second biggest economy and ironically china is the biggest financier of the debts of the world's biggest economy. So no need to think twice.

PeteEU said:

It aint? Okay show me an empire/powerful nation that did not base its power on military power...

Click to expand...

I agree with the statement, but times have changed. In the past Nations had to go to the colonies to exert influence. Now, it is fiber-optic communications moving investments and capital to areas of opportunity. The Chinese have the money because of hard work, good planning, good fortune, and huge corruption in the outside world's banking community. They are building a strong Navy and will be able to establish a presence wherever they have investments for protection, etc. Our military props up dictatorships wherever we need that Nations resources and spouts buzzwords like "democracy," "justice," liberty." "freedom," while actually propping up anything but the definition of those words. I think we will suffer a serious fall because of our arrogance and protection of our predatory Corporations overseas, but then "helping USA Corporations overseas" is the CIA charter. That's not helping John Q. Smith. As a matter of fact the CIA says, "Who the hell is John Smith?" That'd be you and me, bubba.

Not to mention that WE, the U.S. taxpayers, entirely fund the Chinese military, thruough our interest payments to China on our national debt.

The U.S. military is indeed capable of nearly any MILITARY mission, but that does NOT include nation building, acting as a foreign police force or in a long term 'peace keeping' capacity. If the most powerful military on the planet can not get beyond a stalemate, against an enemy in Afghanistan that has no navy, no air force and a 'rag tag', at best, army then we have a very bad battle plan. The U.S. military has not "won" a conflict or war since the liberation of Kuwait, prior to that WWII - not exactly a great record considering the number of other "missions" that they have been sent on or the billions (trillions?) that have been wasted trying to do so.

ttwtt78640 said:

The U.S. military is indeed capable of nearly any MILITARY mission, but that does NOT include nation building, acting as a foreign police force or in a long term 'peace keeping' capacity. If the most powerful military on the planet can not get beyond a stalemate, against an enemy in Afghanistan that has no navy, no air force and a 'rag tag', at best, army then we have a very bad battle plan. The U.S. military has not "won" a conflict or war since the liberation of Kuwait, prior to that WWII - not exactly a great record considering the number of other "missions" that they have been sent on or the billions (trillions?) that have been wasted trying to do so.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, the huge Corporations that build, supply, and outfit our Militry always profit handsomely, especially if the "war" can become a quagmire or a stalemate. Resources and energy, especially energy (Exxon/Mobil, BP, Total, etc.), are purchased and used up at enormous rates and profit is exponential. If you have influence from K Street to Congress, perhaps you can ginup and keep continuing some very profitable, from the Corporate viewpoint, skirmishes. Also, Corporate may add protection to indefensible resources (Iraq). Attempt to ginup new resources (Iran). Sell lots of Corporate military to existing resources (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Yemen, etc.). Expand markets to third world areas with new wars (Somalia, Sudan, Nigeria, Afghanistan, etc.). "Jus' Bidness" as they say in the OIL swamp and presidential suites.

PeteEU said:

It aint? Okay show me an empire/powerful nation that did not base its power on military power...

Click to expand...

Please reread the statement again...SOLELY based...I never said military power wasn't a factor. Read a bit more carefully next time. And to answer your questions lets examine some current power players who do not exert unilateral, interest-based, military force...Japan, India, Brazil etc. Should I go on? Ain't is not a word by the way... just saying.

Lightning said:

Many people, due to the U.S. economy and status declining in global politics believe that China will be the next great hegemonic power. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Great? no. Regional? Quite possible - too much depends on the next 36-48 months.


For about 30ish years. Max. Assuming they retain stability.

Lightning said:

But throughout the history of the world, there have been many hegemonic powers, i.e. state actors that exert enormous -whether political or economic- influence on the rest of the world. This is where the long cycles theory of hegemonic power comes from. Whats to say that there will not be another hegemonic power after the U.S. is removed from its position for whatever reason? If not, why?

Click to expand...

I agree with Morality Games...we're heading to a multi-polar world. The US,EU,China...eventually India and Brazil along with Russia.

The good thing is that in a multi-polar world everything isn't a zero sum game and can't remember where I read it...but multi-polar worlds are generally peaceful.