So yeah, the United States is both an economic and military superpower. (And actually it's also a cultural superpower too. Most of the world copies popular music styles created by African-Americans: R&B, Rap, etc. eg-- Korea has Bi, Jinusean, etc.)

Do you think China can do it? It's modernizing it's military, and it possesses a nuclear arsenal, although not nearly as large and potent as the USA's.

I think it's really based on opinion rather than technical fact, and I know all the China-lovers are going to hate me. While China's military and economy is booming, it still relies heavily on USA, as USA relies on China. Not to mention, you have to take in different factors and situations, technology, military, economic stability, and general country stability.

While China's military is booming, it still lags in key areas of military power, such as Air power and naval power. While yes they are making advancements, it's not fast enough to deal with a capable air power, such as the United States or other industrious nations. The same goes with their capacity with the Navy. It is also questionable about the extent of equipment in use by the Chinese military land forces: i.e., their tanks and infantry equipment. Given the extent of modernization, can they catch up with the USA? What is the cost, both financial and human for such a modernization? What about learning curve, R&D? This applies to not just infantry and armour, but all levels of the military.

The economy of China relies just as much on the USA as the USA relies on China. China buys bonds in USA (alleviating USA debt), but the value of these bonds depends on the economy of the USA. USA has China listed as a favorable nation (last I checked, which I'll admit was awhile ago), which opens up trade and other incentives. If the USA was to fall, so will China and most of the modern world. It's not just a national economy you have to take into consideration, but it's a global economy. So global conditions and events effect not just a certain country, but all of it's trading partners as well.

China is making small steps to gradual democracy, while not feasible now could come eventually. I forget which article it was and who said it, but the person stated that he see's the government eventually becoming a democracy if it wishes to stay in power. China is already a capitalistic nation which is in contrast to the ideals of socialism/communism.

A point to bring up is, while China is enjoying this boom, the instability of the region (I.e., North Korea) can cause significant clout to China. While North Korea is an ally of China, if China where to enforce that relationship it might be at a cost. It used to be rare that you'd see China lash out at it's communist partner, but because of the recent nuclear tests, China realizes that North Korea is creating problems for China. If a war where to come (which it won't, since there is very little for the USA to gain financial wise) which side does China stand on? Does it hold it's alliance with it's communist partner or does it side with the Americans and basically allow North Korea to be "re-assembled"? This is based really on the needs of China and the threat of an overthrown nation so close to Chinese mainland.

Also, if North Korea does indeed become a nuclear power, there is speculation that it will ignite an arms race, albleit a small one. Will Japan and South Korea in turn, build a nuclear arms stock to counter the North Korean threat? That's how the Soviet-USA arms race turned out; each trying to out do the other in Nuclear power. How will China react to all of it's neighbors having nuclear power? This can effect the global economy because of the increased instability in the region and fears of a nuclear war.

Giving the extent of China's modernization, what about the USA? It's almost ignorant to believe that the USA will stand idle as other nations attempt to overpower it. You have to take into account all of the strides that the USA will accomplish in the future if you count the strides China or any other country will make. What are the difference in levels?

Economic wise, if China and the rest of the world enjoys an economic boom or even a fall, the USA in comparison does as well. You also have to take into account different levels of science and technology which affects the economy (example: The techboom in the 90's which brought the USA economy up and down). Medical advances, science and technology advances that the USA could achieve will greatly benefit the USA first and eventually the rest of the world.

Military wise, the USA might see an overall drop in troop numbers but that doesn't take into account the technological superiority in higher numbers, which becomes an advantage in 3rd generation warfare (4th being insurgency/guerrilla warfare where technology is less of a factor). While China has an advantage in overall numbers, that doesn't take into account the level of destruction or competance of the American military might, as well as different emphasis on military tactics. How would China fare in a well-planned air campaign against a competant US Air force? Coupled with an intense Naval blockade and bombardment, the 3 million manpower really becomes moot until the land invasion begins. However, how many would be left? A single well placed missile can take out more than just 1 person. Also, how long can either nation hold out in a conventional war?

Throughout history American citizens are very impatient; Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq. Each is a result of poor planning and a poor PR campaign backhome. Look at in comparisson the WWI and WWII PR campaigns, heroe's are lauded when they get home, songs are sung, much pride is taken in going and serving in war, the soldiers come back home and use the money and experience and place it back into the economy through business and venture gains. So how will the USA fare in a war with a somewhat competetant enemy, China? How will China fare in a war against the USA? Each also has their allies, the USA, the British, Canadians, NATO, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwain, maybe France and Germany. China, maybe Russia(MAYBE), North Korea, maybe Iran, Syria, maybe Pakistan. Allies are tricky because it really depends on what those countries have to gain or lose.

So there are many factors that you have to take into account. Anything else otherwise is purely speculation fueled by nationalism and egos.

Well I believe that with china's developing economy it will eventually surpass our own. I think that it is possible even probable that china with continue to grow in the future. There are factors that can help alleviate china into another superpower such as the bountiful capital.

unfortunately no..I don't even think the world enough resources like oil left for a country like China to get up to that level...our grandchildren aren't even going to know what icebergs are if more countries go through an industrial revolution similar to what America and most of Europe did

China certainly is rising, but thats what Developing countries do, they have higher gdp growth because they are still developing. China's military industries are also making progress but all the key areas are still reliant on foreign technology. The new Type98-99 tanks? they use German engines. Their new J-10 uses Russian Engines, and is claimed to rely on American (via Pakistan) and Israeli technology in its early development phase. Their new ships? alot of French assistance there.

It's also important to note that the US has two things very few countries have.
1. influence over most of the world's oil producing state. With out steady access to energy, your economy can't grow. China is becoming more energy reliant and has frantically going about the world securing new oil deals, usually in the countries where the US has weaker influence (i.e Iran). People fail to realize that all those vehicles you need to move your products, and the plastics used to create your products, require oil. Much of the US, Japan and Western Europe developed at a time when everyone thought energy was cheap and abundant. That is not the case today.
2. The US has a coastline on both the Atlantic and Pacific and is easily able to project its power to Europe, Asia, Latin America, and Africa. The Soviet Union was another one able to project its influence in both the western and eastern hemisphere.

furthermore, once living standards rise in China.. investors looking for cheap labor will move elsewhere. The trend is already happening as the per capita income is rising and the central government re-exerting control over how businesses operate. When combined with Hu's initiatives to develop the central regions of China.. living standards there will rise. A good thing of course for the Chinese people, but not something big businesses want as they will start seeking others willing to work for lower wages.

Also Evi is right that threads like these are very very prone to nationalistic sentiments, especially when placed in a forum where most of the viewers are teenagers (when they are most prime towards such feelings).

Why do I have a feeling this thread is going to get ugly
and people are gonna start bashing other countries just like in the "Will America Fall?" thread??

I say.. not anytime soon, no one can match us
we have too much influence on the world.

and music wise, the United States is not dropping that title anytime soon, we lead the world in entertainment
I can bet all my money on that.

It doesn't really matter about countries anymore.

Nukes change everything. Small terrorist groups are stronger and can topple countries.

It's more about ideologies than land boundaries.

In America , behind every blade of grass.. there will be a man with a rifle..

The future will be multipolar.

China as well as India and Perhaps a Latin American union and even Russia will someday challenge American dominance.

america currently is a country thats ran by people of symbolic analysis

while china is still a country of routine production services.

until one of those change, things will remain the same/similar as they are

They say soon, China wil be able to beat the United States. Since nearly everywhere we go, products are made in China, it is developing in power and strength and it is a big country with a large population, they say it will be possible.

Without physicist Klaus Fuchs handing over secrets to the Soviet Union, there wouldn't have been much of an arms race.

der. australia.

jk . . . obviously.

Very true. And you need oil/fuel for your military. One reason that Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941 was to attempt to gain access to the Baku oil fields. Later on, towards the end of World War 2, the Wehrmacht was hampered by dwindling fuel supplies. Some German tanks were abandoned not because they were damaged or destroyed, but simply because there was no fuel. An army/air force/navy is effective only if it is adequately supplied with fuel and ammo.
By the way, one reason that operation barbarossa (invasion of the Soviet Union) failed is because there was not enough fuel to permit the German army to reach their objectives (one of them was to capture Moscow--they were close though). And this was huge, because really, Hitler lost World War 2 because of the failure of operation barbarossa, NOT because of D-day or the battle of Stalingrad, battle of Kursk, etc.

Hong Kong's nearly defeated us in economic power. Everything is made in China and everything's so simple to make in China.

Although the US could be considered number one, there are many factors that could change our position. =___=;

Other than that, I think China is CLOSE to matching the United STates.

making it is one thing but the ones who control the sales have the most power. This what we call a core - periphery relationship, where the periphery is the source of supplies/resources and even assemble/make them but ultmately, the core country is the one that profits the most out of it. In the old days, you had countries like Sri Lanka that grew alot of tea leaves, but the one who benefitted the most was the British who bought the tea leaves then resold the product elsewhere. Likewise, today, the ones who benefit most are the giant corporations. In China's case, it's actually not a periphery but a semi-periphery.

What??
That's not true

anyways..what's the big deal about who is on top???
geez I know this is gunna get ugly

^ U ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT ? ... omg =.=" plz do some sort of research

that was an excuse used by the president of the time....because US at the time, boasted itself as a technological, military power, it said no one else has an atomic bomb, then Soviet does the very FIRST hydrogen bomb test....

to re-boost the morale to fight against communism in US they had to show somehow they were still at the top, so they needed an excuse... and this was it..

the cold war is all about propaganda



well u cant say the oil fuel issues totally affected the Germany army......Hitler's main problem wasnt in fact fuel, (even though he did need it) ... it was in fact, that his supply lines were way too long, he needed to transport things from Berlin to russia, AND he had a war on 3 fronts.

He rejected his general's suggestion to take moscow and not stalingrad...he miscalculated, that winter would come so soon, and his tanks started malfunctioning, troops got cold.. lots of issues, not just fuel

id like to add on.. his troops were stretched very thin.. if he concentrated in one area , he could of won some

Where are you getting your faulty information from? The Soviet Union did NOT conduct the very first hydrogen bomb test. The United States did. Ivy Mike was the very first hydrogen bomb test. It was detonated on November 1, 1952 with a yield of 10 megatons. The Soviet Union tested their first thermonuclear device the following year.

I said it was just ONE reason. Yes, there were many other factors. Hitler started operation barbarossa late in June, a month later than orginally planned. He thought that he would be finished before the Russian winter set in, and that's why German troops were still in their summer uniforms when they got to the outskirts of Moscow in early December in the freezing cold. And yes, his supply lines were severely overstretched.
Then there was Hitler's mindset. He believed that the Slavic people were subhuman (he called them "mongrels") and would succumb easily to the German offensive. He believed that the Soviet Union had inferior technology. But the Germans were in for a rude awakening against the Russian T-34 tank, which was the best tank for much of World War 2 (until some of the later German tanks). I thought it was rather amusing when the Germans first came across the Russian T-34 tank, and the Germans were surprised when their anti-tank weapons would just bounce off the armor of the T-34 tank. The German soldiers would complain to their officers and say "How come the mongrels have super tanks?" Well, apparently, the Russians were NOT sub-human like the Nazis thought. They had some good technology just like the Germans did.

I think Mexico has a great chance to overthrow America.

And they're practically doing it without a military to speak of.

Just look at California. They've practically taken over half of that state (if not more) already behind our backs.

Ironically, speaking of China, the US almost has to pick up on their lead and build a Great Wall of their own to withstand the Mexican invaders.

china is just itching to go to war.
they have more than 20 million reserve foot soldiers ready for battle..if all those guys died then the population between males and females would balance out lol..
but the u.s. would rather have china as an ally than an enemy that's why it doesn't interfere when china threatens taiwan

U.S trying ot make it seem like [i]their[/b] ideology is right and correct and shoving it down other nations throat is annoying me.

Other countries need to think once or twice before obtaining help from U.S.

exactly how is US shoving its ideology down other nations? are u pertaining to the war that is going on the ME? would u prefer a leader that is dictatorial, starving and killing its own people? or would u prefer how other people shoved their beliefs to other nation? i dont know about other countries thinking twice about helping the US but i think US should think twice before helping and cleaning their problems,ehh since no other country is capable of doing that.
US is just tolerant of China not because US wants it to be its ally. China's economy could get hurt if US stop buying their products since majority of their trades are with US businesses so USA holds the card not china. about taiwan, USA will defend that country if its threaten and CHina knows it cannot match america's military and hurt itself at the same time.
the only nation that can compete with the US in terms of military would be Japan because of what Japan did during WWII... so please stop being unreasonable about the US since we all know that everyone wants to come and live here..

Oy, I didn't literally mean 'everything'. =___=;

OK. So all countries are different and will be in the top in a million different ways. We can't choose who's number one and who isn't.

If bush takes military intiative in North Korea, China will definitely do something about it and it won't be pretty.

I hope Americans get a taste of their own medicine, they deserve it tenfold.

not at this stage,
but if they keep up their rate of double digit gdp growth, then i dont see why they wouldnt in the future, and also i dont see why the growth rate would slow down.

as been said earlier
-China is still a developing countries. Most developing countries have high gdp growth rates because they are developing. Most developed countries, i.e US, Japan, Western Europe, etc tend to have somewhere between 1-3% growth.
-Once China becomes more developed, the percentage will drop. when living standards and wages are raised (which is happening), many investors may pull out in order to look for other cheap places (starting to happen)
-China also runs the risk of overheating, which is why Hu Jintao has issued reforms to slow down growth, much against the wishes of provincial leaders (i.e those from Shanghai, Guangdong, etc) in order to shift attention to the rural areas. It is good for the people in the country side, but will anger those who are fiscally conservative, you can't please both.
-growth requires energy and resources, something that there's limited supply of. the US, Japan and Western Europe developed at a time when energy was cheap and thought to be abundant. Now every country other than the US is struggling to secure new deals.

as said, its still developing, and still has a long way to go. and think about it when china eventually becomes a developed nation, it will form a VERY big market, alot of potential for money to be made.
more money = bigger military budget.


and thats just a generalistion your 1st point, take a look at Singapores growth, but thats a rarity i know =P


edit: 200th post,
and im talkin about economics -.- lol

potential yes, but I'm talking about what's already established, which can be used to better predict how current trends will affect the near future.. rather than relying on sheer optomism. Most of the world's oil producers have either went past peak production or will reach it soon, including those in the middle east. The US went past peak oil production in the 70s. It doesn't mean there's no oil, but it means that production has declined tremendously, and new "finds" are never near the same level as what there once was.

As some one who has actually published energy related articles, China, along with India, Japan and Korea are struggling to secure new sources for energy.. oil, natural gas, etc because you know and I know that because of their growing economies, they will have to consume more, especially if they want to maintain their growth. China has found some success with Kazakhstan although the Kazakh government has placed a number of limitations on what they can do. They've had a number of failures in securing contracts with Russia, which have opted to build pipelines to Japan. They are also and currently importing in the few areas where the US has limited influence (i.e Iran and Venezuela).. however the way things are going between the west and Iran, it would disadvantage China heavily should there be a regime change there.. one of the reasons why they have been adamant in their support of Tehran.

As for Singapore, yes its a rarity, although its growth has slowed down last year and and so far this year as well. However the vast majority of developed nations rarely exceed 4%. The major European economies, UK, France and Germany don't even reach 2%. the US is at 3.5 and Japan is at 2.7 (these are 2005 estimates from CIA worldfactbook). Azerbaijan has a double digit 26%, but it doesn't mean it will maintain it for a long time. But as for China, the point I was simply trying to make is that people seem to think it can maintain its current growth rate forever, but the reality is that there are many difficult obstacles for China in the long run. The stuff I've stated are already facts. Hu JinTao has already fired a number of people who went against his plans to slow down the overheated growth in the coastline and those who went against the development of the country side. There are already a number of companies pulling out of China due to rising wages and investing in other places where labor is cheaper. China continues to be a semi-periphery state seeking to be a core economy, but does not wield the same influence or have the same access to resources to become one anytime soon.

The USA's policy is to keep the status quo in regards to Taiwan.

Ouch man!

U shouldnt say things like that because then everyone who has nothing to do with this mess has to suffer.

and Bush is not going to mess with North Korea I can tell u that much.

^ Why do you want China to defend the Korean penninsula in this way?

Amen and Hallujah to that one
Jesus people get on my nerves, always dissing the US, but I bet they live here.

hhaha this is a crzie thread

but personally i dun think america is all that great comparing to many other countries out there..

the's no PERFECT Gov't or form....
some part of japan's style is good, some part of Denmark's healthcare system is sooo wonderful everything is freee! even surgeries....and if u ever need a surgery that Denmark cannot do for you, they will plane u to a diff country to ge tthe procedure done..for FREE!

--- i mean....no country is perfect. USA has its good sides...but its much muhc bad sides.too..overall it is INDEED a more well--rounded country than many...but USA still has alot to learn and change.....and becoming better..they should take the good stuffs or learn the good things from other countries..and try that system.

hhaha this is a crzie thread

but personally i dun think america is all that great comparing to many other countries out there..

the's no PERFECT Gov't or form....
some part of japan's style is good, some part of Denmark's healthcare system is sooo wonderful everything is freee! even surgeries....and if u ever need a surgery that Denmark cannot do for you, they will plane u to a diff country to ge tthe procedure done..for FREE!

--- i mean....no country is perfect. USA has its good sides...but its much muhc bad sides.too..overall it is INDEED a more well--rounded country than many...but USA still has alot to learn and change.....and becoming better..they should take the good stuffs or learn the good things from other countries..and try that system.

That's the truth, isn't it? People crossing over the border to get here. Risking their lives in boats from Cuba to try to get to the U.S.

Yeh that's so true.

It really urkes me when people be like "Oh such and such country is so much better and rabarabarabah"
Yet they live here.

china cant do it yet i dont think, considering its not really that rich yet.

a contender could be the uk but seeing as it is a really small country compared to the us, maybe not.

sigh. i miss stalin.

To answer this thread, I say obviously. USA as a superpower can't even stabilize weak Iraq and this is proof that their military/economy sucks.

no i don't think china's power will match u.s.a, not in the near future anyways.

coz the diff structure - government nd society, historic/culture background etc.

buh things like that...cant really predict.

however..the copying music genre thing...i dunno, i guess it is a kind of 'copying' but i don't know -,-;; i don't quite think so either? no doubt it is originated from u.s and it is a great influence in the asian entertainment circle but i think kor/japanese/chinese singers has then transformed into something of their own, even though the music still falls into the catagory of 'hip-hop' and 'r&b' etc... it is like design, one person can take someone elses idea and recycle it into something completely new.

I can only say that about Japan's music.
Well IMO, because alot of Chinese songs sound like wannabe hip hop, perfect example is that new
Coco Lee and Vaness song "Hip Hop tonight" sounds like freakin kids bop.

and K-pop, alot of the songs sound exactly like american songs
I can name so many.

i have no idea, but chinas economy is growing pretty quickly and i think their military is not as strong but they have more men because their population is bigger

That doesn't prove that the US military sucks. That's not were the military strength of the USA is. The US military is not primarily designed to stabilize governments. That's not it's mission.

as others have said here, a bomb can take out more than one man, and the US has cutting edge precision weapons, China is still updating their military

wow im so not good at debating on THIS topic.
but i think NO ONE can match up with USA. (sorry i have no reasons for it)

people keep criticizing the US, but at the same time, most people still want to live here, people coming over the border, risking drowning coming from Cuba, immigrants from Korea....

people criticize us, but people still listen to our music because we have the most vibrant music scene in the world--jazz, blues, r&b, rap, country, cajun, bluegrass, rock, all of these are genres that americans created. Bebop jazz is the pinnacle of western music (and I could go into great technical detail, I'm a jazz composer). so that's being a bit hypocritical.

when you think about it, US is quite amazing as an economic/military/cultural superpower

military power?

anyone who has nuclear weapons can match with the United States.

I don't know. No country can stay on top forever.. I mean, Britain used to own like, half the world. And now they... don't. I'm not sure if it will necessarily be China, but someone is bound to surpass us eventually.

n_n ...I'm patriotic. No. Really. ....-cough-

just give China 5-10 more years then we'll see how's top dog.