[GreenTiger]

The definition of a world power is getting very complicated these days. It isn't just the size of the military or how many weapons or even money or oil, or superior moral position. Its is a complicated calculus of who who can use all of the above and more to project influence abroad. I still think of the US as a superpower, but less of a superpower in large part because of the moron who used to be in the white House, but also because unstable nations states have aquired some very dangerous weapons and our heavy reliance of foreign energy and the perception that Americans have abandoned the moral high ground that we
once had. It isn't a question that has asimple answer.

[Tman1]

Good post and I agree but I don't understand how Americans can claim a "moral high-ground" at all if any such thing can be attained.

[Bibbi]

The US has the technology but China holds most of the US previous debt. If China picks up the current American debt caused by the stimulus package as well, then China can end up "owning" the US without any military being involved at all.

[TheFoundersIntent]

The Japanese tried to own us once. The outcome was, shall we say, less then desireable.

[fifeboy]

TheFoundersIntent TheFoundersIntent:

The Japanese tried to own us once. The outcome was, shall we say, less then desireable.

For whom?

[Bacardi4206]

Considering the knowledge of today, The U.S. has the most powerful and advanced military in the world but the debate is if they have the economics to use it. Having a large and advanced military is extremly costly. Regarding the current wars and the low numbers of U.S. troops commited to them. It had cost a pretty penny and making it hard for the U.S. to continue to fund it.

China in a way would be a easier enemy as they won't be hiding as civilians and would be more easily identified but the Chinese have been advancing a lot as well since there economy started booming and face to face they won't be a though fire-cracker to silence.

In a 1 vs 1 the United States would have eventually easily taken down China but if China could drag out the war for as long as they can. Could the US continue to fight it?

With the lose of very expensive aircraft, navy vessles, tanks and vehicles that would most likely get destroyed in the havoc of the war. Expensive vehicles that would need replacing in the addition of the cost of the war + the troop wages, housing conditions and food supplies. Bullets, weapons, etc.

Very costly. Russia would also have a better chance than anybody to 1 vs 1 the U.S. but they would most likely get the shit kicked out of the them and they don't have the economics to last as long as China would.

The two super-powers are China and the States. Who is the better power is undecided. Personally I would rather it be the States. China IMO is unstable.

[llama66]

TheFoundersIntent TheFoundersIntent:

The Japanese tried to own us once. The outcome was, shall we say, less then desireable.

Japan didn't want to own you, they wanted your resources. They do own a large portion of the US GDP. Who do you think owns Sony, Panasonic, JVC, Toyota, Suzuki, Honda, and other major Electronic/Automotive Corporations that operate in the United States?

[llama66]

Bacardi4206 Bacardi4206:

Considering the knowledge of today, The U.S. has the most powerful and advanced military in the world but the debate is if they have the economics to use it. Having a large and advanced military is extremly costly. Regarding the current wars and the low numbers of U.S. troops commited to them. It had cost a pretty penny and making it hard for the U.S. to continue to fund it.

China in a way would be a easier enemy as they won't be hiding as civilians and would be more easily identified but the Chinese have been advancing a lot as well since there economy started booming and face to face they won't be a though fire-cracker to silence.

In a 1 vs 1 the United States would have eventually easily taken down China but if China could drag out the war for as long as they can. Could the US continue to fight it?

With the lose of very expensive aircraft, navy vessles, tanks and vehicles that would most likely get destroyed in the havoc of the war. Expensive vehicles that would need replacing in the addition of the cost of the war + the troop wages, housing conditions and food supplies. Bullets, weapons, etc.

Very costly. Russia would also have a better chance than anybody to 1 vs 1 the U.S. but they would most likely get the shit kicked out of the them and they don't have the economics to last as long as China would.

The two super-powers are China and the States. Who is the better power is undecided. Personally I would rather it be the States. China IMO is unstable.

I have to disagree, China has a very capable Army, the thing they are lacking is Sea and Air lift capabilities, China has 2.2 million people in uniform right now, with another 800,000 in the reserves, and they have 3 million paramilitary troops. China has superior numbers. the only way to defeat them would be to nuke them, and basically end life on earth.

[TheFoundersIntent]

Where are they going to take their army? Without sea and air lift capacity they aren't worth a crap. We don't need to use nukes against them. They couldn't even beat Japan.

[fifeboy]

TheFoundersIntent TheFoundersIntent:

Where are they going to take their army? Without sea and air lift capacity they aren't worth a crap. We don't need to use nukes against them. They couldn't even beat Japan.

OH YEAH, what about this:

[CommanderSock]

Guys, lets not get carried away here, China's military is lightyears behind that of the USA.

In terms of sheer military might, USA, closely (I say closely very loosely) followed by Russia. Russia, for all its backwards hogwash and economic instability still has a little edge on the US when it comes to sheer technical ability, (25% of all scientific journals in the world are published in Russian!)

China doesn't hold a candle to Russia in terms of military might. Just google up their military strength in terms of technical advancement. Russia can sell fighter jets to any nation that can easily tip the balance of power within a region. One of the few nations in the world that develops its own stealth fighters and bombers which can compete directly with American made ones that the US government has not purchased as of yet. Russia put a space station in earth's orbit and kept it there for 13 years.

Russia would mop the floor with China in every department other than manpower. The USA could easily beat them both ONLY if it shared a border with them. As things currently stand I don't beleive the USA can fight and win in wars against either China or Russia in their own countries.

Is the USA the most powerful country in the world, economically, YES, militaristically, maybe, only depending on some variables however.

[Psudo]

Schleihauf Schleihauf:

I don't follow the war in Iraq so its a mystery to me why they aren't winning.

As an American, I'm thinking the reason is because we're trying to use the military to hold things together instead of break them apart. It's an awkward military goal, so we don't get to bring the full effectiveness of our military to bare.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Technical military superiority don't mean shit. It's only as effective as the person or people that are applying it. Ask the Germans that were in Russia in WW2. Germany's materials of war were more advanced than most Russian equipment.
Their soldiers were far better trained and more professional than their Russian counterparts.
In Vietnam, the US technology was both an aid and useless. Against the NVA in large scale battles, the US kicked their asses every time. Against the Viet Cong, that technology did very little to help the American soldier. Overwhelming fire power is useless if you can't find the enemy.
The Russian incursion into Afghanistan is another fine example.
When it comes right down to it all, the only machine that makes the real difference in combat is the human brain.

As for who would win a war between China and the US or Russia, that's a fun game of what if. I don't think anyone attacking China would have a prayer. That country is almost custom made for defense, providing they have competent military commanders.
In a battle of attrition, the Chinese would win any war hands down.

The US would also be difficult to conquer because of the huge number of large industrial cities they have, spreadout through a vast territory.
Personally, I wouldn't feel too confident about invading any of them. The vast distances alone would make them hard to control.

[EyeBrock]

This necro thread stuff.....

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Hey, at least I'm not the one to revive one this time