World Power

[tooliscrowned]

I was just wondering what anyone thinks about who is going to be in power in about ten years...Obviously the United States is on top of the list for "most developed" and they at least think they're in charge, but who do you think will be in power next? I mean, the USA can't stay on top forever...too many powerful forces have fallen already (rome, germany, europe, etc etc), so for me its just a quesiton of "when?" i'm not really that educated on all of this (im only 15), but i'd like to know what anyone thinks about the future of the world...

[jccc]

I would have to say China will be the next "Superpower"

The Americans would take them easily in the Air & WMD department, but I am sure the Chinese would win on the ground. They have the #s & they are a fierce & very well disciplined soldier. I don't think you'll see it in our lifetime, but ya never know...???

Jim

[NDP Newbie]

That would suck. China, USA, and Saudi Arabia all suck.

[jccc]

NDP Newfie

They all suck?? US, China, & SA suck?? WOW. That is intelligent. How did you come up with such a brilliant reply?

Jim

[FastNed]

Hello, Tool, welcome to the Forum. You pose a very thought provoking question!

I believe the answer to your question is America and the reason for my belief is "Freedom". Individual freedom, I believe is the key to this question.

No other system to date has provided individuals with the personal freedom to be the best they can - to make of themselves and their talents whatever they can achieve and to keep the most of that achievement for themselves and family.

Individual success can make a country great and I believe that is America's secret!

[KrustyKidd]

A good drywall man will tell you that the secret of a sucessful project is the cullmination of detail. The better the small parts in total the better the whole. If each part is dependant on the total work to suceed on their own, then the total will be weak. If each is strong then the total will be better. Each part polished, sanded, replastered until all imperfections are removed, each part trying on their own ......to become the best they can be.

[August1991]

Individual success can make a country great and I believe that is America's secret!

Taken to the limit, individual success means "tooth for tooth", "nail for nail", "screw the other guy before he screws you". Is that America's secret?

A good drywall man will tell you that the secret of a sucessful project is the cullmination of detail.

KK, I gotta tell you this story. It was Soviet times, I was in Moscow, in a room of the Metropole (know the Bessborough or Chateau Frontenac) and I was taking a crap. I looked at the floor and noticed the little ceramic tiles were all crooked, ending at the wall in a mess. In Canada, I thought, the sub-contractor would have been forced to redo the job. Then I wondered, how does that happen?

Hello, Tool, welcome to the Forum. You pose a very thought provoking question!

Tool, FastNed, I say the same.

[KrustyKidd]

Taken to the limit, individual success means "tooth for tooth", "nail for nail", "screw the other guy before he screws you". Is that America's secret?

I am not sure, just know that it works better than any other system. Ours is pretty close, we are better off than most others, I think they are on the right track anyhow. We just notice them more because there are more of them than us. They move, we react, we move, they don't even wonder what moved.

[cyberblatt]

If US does not change its act and attitude very soon I have to tell you frankly...It is getting in a huge trouble.

Their foreign policy sucks to the level of danger. Never mind if they create trouble for themselves only.

If they create danger for others, like neighbors that is my point here. In politics you have to understand competition and enemies. Bush is blind for that. If a foreign power would bomb US Capital cities the way US did to Iraq.

Would any normal American take that as an ok?

Well I don't think so. Nor does anyone in Iraq. US is not different in this case as Hitlers Germany. Logically Bush is a Hitler of USA. It is just a matter of time untill the whole world turns against such an agressor.Does the WW2 ring the bell? Bush is in Hitlers footsteps. Who the hell likes agressors. Well I do not. Do you? If you support him, it is your freedom to do so. You can bet on a loosing card as well it is your choice. BUT to endanger someone else in the process is a different issue. Then it becomes International issue. Are you with me ?

If Bushes concvistadorial adventures trigger a revenge of the opressed that leaks over to me. Then I have to be concerned about my neighbor endangering my very basics of living or dying with his foreign policy actions.

To cut it shorter. Here is the danger.

How to curb US back to real Democracy VS being an International state sponsored terrorist. (world opinion)

Here is what is going to come to.

To get the material for a radioactive dirty bomb you do not have to be a scientist. You can buy it or rob it in order to get it. A one foot radioctive stick detonated within a slight breese of wind could make New York uninhabitable for decades. Imagine that action times 12. No rocket attacks or anything similar. This can be smuggled into the country with ease. Listen up. Being rich is not equal to being smart! In todays technology any single person could kick a states butt. It is high time that US leaders are briefed on this facts.

Aware and logical citizen with eyes wide open in Canada.

"If you kick someone for too long ...accept a kick back as well"

Logic=Action/Reaction

I am afraid of being a victim of Bushes stupidity and your destiny as well my fellow neighbors= US citizens.

Regards

Cyberblatt

from Toronto,Ontario,Canada

[August1991]

I was just wondering what anyone thinks about who is going to be in power in about ten years

Ah yes. Geo-politics. A more sophisticated version of the NHL. Who is going to win the Stanley Cup this year? Who will win it in ten years? That's how you posed your question. Who is (will be) Top Dog!

This may surprise you, but the world today is NOT like a sports game. Since mathematics were invented some 6000 years ago or so, the world is different. Now, the world is more like a concert, or a movie.

What's better? An evening watching hockey, or an evening watching a movie?

Men are confused. Women have now the upper hand (!).

[willy]

Cyberblatt, you make ridiculous statements that are removed from reality.

It is outlandish to compare Bush to Hitler.

I can see what Bush is trying to accomplish and it is not taking over the world. He is not trying to commit genocide either. The goal is stability and security. How else would he achieve them. Would you like a summit with such groups like Hammas?

Hitler was an evil man, who spread hate and used this hate to rule with fear and murder.

If the terrorists went away, would the US stay in the Middle East? The answer is no. The Middle East is full of groups that whole purpose in life is to over through our way of life and kill us. (The infidels) Have no mistake they do not differentiate with Canadians and Americans.

Be clear if the US focused only domestically the dangers of the world would not go away. This is not just an economic problem; it is about power and religious fundamentalist’s control.

This is not to say the course the US government is plotting is not full of pit falls, dangers and suffering. But the US did not create this situation. It has existed for a lot longer than that.

I wish our American friends a quick and safe return from Iraq. If they are successful and can build a stable government we should all be thankful. This would change the region and the world.

Then we can always worry about North Korea.

I am glad I am not President.

Prime Minister would be much easier; you can criticize with no accountability or expectation to act.

[August1991]

Prime Minister would be much easier; you can criticize with no accountability or expectation to act.

Amen, Willy.

The great thing about being Canadian is that we have all of the benefits of being American but none of the responsibilities.

[RB]

Men are confused. Women have now the upper hand (!).

men are confuse because the unanswered question still lingers "what do women want?"

women aparently were not made to governed, but now we have taken keen interest in just that and have become chess players

[August1991]

women aparently were not made to governed, but now we have taken keen interest in just that and have become chess players

I meant that we live in a world where cooperation has the upper hand, not competition. By upper hand, I mean that it is possible for an individual to be more successful through cooperation than through competition.

For our species, this is a recent development and we're still coping with the change. One effect is how it changes the position of the so-called "weaker" sex.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

it is possible for an individual to be more successful through cooperation than through competition.

This is the tenet of 'socialism'.

This is also how man evolved. This statement regarding human mores also must date back at least 1,000,000 yrs.

[KrustyKidd]

Dear August1991,

it is possible for an individual to be more successful through cooperation than through competition.

This is the tenet of 'socialism'.

This is also how man evolved. This statement regarding human mores also must date back at least 1,000,000 yrs.

And capitalism coupled with democracy has proved far more effective as a reliable means of progressing for the good of all. It is the personal reward system that does it. Now, if there were a way to perfect it, that would be great. Then again, Socialism hasn't been that sucessful either. Personal gain must be mixed with the overall gain of co-operation, otherwise both sides miss out on the wheels of progress. I think that is what you too believe Lonius.

[August1991]

Dear August1991,

it is possible for an individual to be more successful through cooperation than through competition.

This is the tenet of 'socialism'.

It may be the tenet but cooperation is certainly not the result of socialism. Free markets, prices and clear property rights achieve wide scale, anonymous cooperation unsurpassed by any other method.

The socialist method of getting people to cooperate is bone-headed in comparison - put everyone in a room, hand out instruction books, assign people different tasks, tell them they are doing all this for a higher good. Such a method is generally a failure, increasing over time.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear KK,

Personal gain must be mixed with the overall gain of co-operation, otherwise both sides miss out on the wheels of progress.

Well said. It is indeed what I, for the most part, believe.

Competition is no cooperation, though, unless the end goal of 'free enterprise' was the extincting of species and the destruction of the environment.

[RB]

I meant that we live in a world where cooperation has the upper hand, not competition. By upper hand, I mean that it is possible for an individual to be more successful through cooperation than through competition.

Here is what I see

Competition is for surviving the climb to the very top and cooperation is that negotiated breathing strength to remain there.

For our species, this is a recent development and we're still coping with the change. One effect is how it changes the position of the so-called "weaker" sex.

men like to portray themselves so silent, strong and tough going while women tend to see the inside of men being weak and fragile.

so i presume when we speak of the “weaker” sex it would mean MEN not women

but i think men are inherently competitive by nature and will compete even with a tiny white ball, putting it in many holes for some power.

here is the secret with women .... nothing ever changes.

and women are not reproach that they were actually molded and modeled by the efforts of cooperation and demands from men.

trouble is when you think you find an advanced solution such as cooperation to the problem, it changes the problem completely.

so salute to you when as i gleefully pronounce nowadays women can challenge men on their own terms using “cooperation”.

quite frankly if i were a man i might just prefer to stay just the way i am especially with women like these running around.

[playfullfellow]

The US will never be in complete control in 10 years. They will always be a major power and will probably always like to look at themselves as the moral big brother of the world. No matter what, the US will never be able to exert control over the EU, China or any other major nation. They can try and control countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan but they will never control the hearts of the people. As for Canada, well we are already being controlled to an extent through economic sanctions such as the beef ban, softwood lumber tariffs, wheat tariffs and so on. It seems like every time we piss off the US, then there is another economic penalty to pay. Look at Bush's "with us or against us" policy for the rebuilding contracts of countries the US has blown up. These policies will blow up in the US's face one day though when people around the world say enough is enough. Canada is no where near this point because of all the internal struggles we have at the moment and our reluctance to "take our business elsewhere".

[cgarrett]

tooliscrowned,

i can only suggest that you pick up a book by chomsky and read it. it will change you forever. be warned, he is not one to make statements without detailed justification or proof. not like lite reading like say 'tax me, i'm canadian'.

[KrustyKidd]

I wouldn't go that far. However, he is smart, entertaining and full of facts. It is the order and ommision of things that makes me not take him as serious as he should be taken. Every proposal, every story, every page is simply a step in building a pre determined stucture that will be anything but an unbiased look at the way things really are.

One uniform thing throughout the four books of his that I have read is that he shows us how the US should have looked at problems throughout history. Nevermind that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and that Hitlers and Stalins just do what they do because they can and foriegn policy is pretty much reactionary rather than geared with a timeframe further than the next election in mind. He shrugs off events and crimes perpetrated by genocidal villans like the above m in a pass, instead concentrating on the true evil, elected govenments of only one country - USA.

France, Germany, Britain, they all get a free pas even if mentioned adversely in his work. Obviously he is more concerned with America as he is American but to tune so many out by going over the same crap in new wrappings is garbage. No wonder he has mindless Leftists running around comparing Bush to Hitler, they know no history save what he has said and what he has wrote was for intelligent consumption, not for people trying to play 'catch up' with history.

Here's a treat for you all. It is Chomsky on football;

One of the functions that things like professional sports play in our society and others is to offer an area to deflect people's attention from things that matter, so that the people in power can do what matters without public interference

OK, bets are on, was he loaded when he wrote that or what? All you Lefties got your tin foil hats on here? Normally when there is a real government trying to control the people they just do what Saddam did, rape wives and daughters, kill husbands, gas towns, crush revolts with death, that kind of thing. Football. LOL.

[Black Dog]

One of the functions that things like professional sports play in our society and others is to offer an area to deflect people's attention from things that matter, so that the people in power can do what matters without public interference

OK, bets are on, was he loaded when he wrote that or what? All you Lefties got your tin foil hats on here? Normally when there is a real government trying to control the people they just do what Saddam did, rape wives and daughters, kill husbands, gas towns, crush revolts with death, that kind of thing. Football. LOL.

Chomsky's hardly breaking new ground on that one. Hell, Roman poet Juvenal was talking about "bread and circuses" two millenia ago. Hardly the stuff of conspiracy. The difference between then and now is that the circuses are bigger and flashier and the bread harder to come by.

I don't think any one can deny the role of popular culture in pacifying and stupifying the populace. I mean, how many people watch "American Idol" on a given week compared to, say, vote?

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear KK,

If I may quote BlackDog,

I don't think any one can deny the role of popular culture in pacifying and stupifying the populace. I mean, how many people watch "American Idol" on a given week compared to, say, vote?

Marx claimed 'Religion is the opiate of the masses'.

Now that the majority of N. Americans (and others) have ceased obeying the church, it is not too far a step to say "Popular Culture and Entertainment are the 'opiates' of the masses".

Hence Chomsky's statement. Leftish, to be sure, but correct. I agree with you, KK, that Noam is one sided, but is that not inevitable when one is correct? Sure he focuses on America's faults, but it is a little to late to blame radical Khans or Hitler.

America and it's wants are the largest factor in the world today. It's foriegn policy and actions are making the world a worse place. Chomsky merely points out how.

[August1991]

Since when does the US president organize professional football leagues and television singing contests?

The US federal administration is one part of federal government which in part is one part of US government which itself is one part of American society.

The masses choose freely their opiate, I believe.