News Is the United States truly in control of the world?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andy_81
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rules Usa
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the perception of U.S. power and influence globally, with participants debating the extent to which the U.S. can control or destabilize other nations. One viewpoint suggests that while the U.S. has significant military capabilities, its restraint in using them is noteworthy. There is a recognition that other countries, particularly China, are aware of the U.S.'s power and may eventually surpass it economically due to demographic advantages and the adoption of free trade and capitalism. The conversation also touches on the implications of resource scarcity and the potential consequences of allowing other nations to grow economically, which could threaten the U.S.'s current standard of living. Additionally, the discussion includes a critique of spelling and grammar errors, highlighting a tendency to nitpick rather than engage with the substantive points being made. Overall, the thread reveals a mix of serious geopolitical analysis and light-hearted banter, illustrating the complexities of international relations and national identity.
Andy_81
On the outside the government of the United States let's the countries of the would think they are in control. But in fact the United States could crumble any goverment, destroy any army, or cut of supplies to anyone whenever they want. Anyone who thinks different is lieing to themself.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
And, with typical American flair, you misspell "Southern." And "world." And "lying." Oh, well. At least Americans don't control the world's supply of literacy, eh?

- Warren
 
He also thinks "of" and "off" have the same spelling. And doesn't know that he should capitalize "California" and "United States".

Ignorance is Strength!
 
Oh, and "themself" isn't a word. And I missed "goverment" too. Pity.

- Warren
 
Now here's the scary part ... Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao are very well aware of the US' power. However, from their rich cultural heritage, they tend to think in terms of centuries rather than the next election. They realize that in a world which implements much that the US avows (free trade, capitalism, entrepreneurship, science & technology, ...), it's only a matter of time before China's sheer demographics result in China being the #1 economic power (assuming that they institute free trade policies, allow capitalism to rise in China, give entrepreneurs a boost, foster S&T, ...). Once you're #1 economically, the rest is easy.

There's plenty of evidence to suggest that wise Indians, Brazilians, and Russians are as aware of this as the Chinese leaders. Too, many a French and German leader may hope their grandchildren will live in an EU which has an economy far surpassing the US's.

Perhaps you should worry that Singaporean school kids do better at English than those from the US (on average), and that Indians and Chinese win a great many of the international maths and science high school contests?
 
An excellent point Nereid. I have no doubt that the US won't be able to remain a superpower out of sheer willpower. You sure you ain't just lieing to yourselve though? :wink:

- Warren
 
I’m at a loss as to why wealthy, powerful but democratic trading partners would be considered a bad thing for the US. Capitalism and free trade are the means for all the world’s citizens to escape deprivation and enjoy the fruits of their labors.
 
Originally posted by GENIERE
I’m at a loss as to why wealthy, powerful but democratic trading partners would be considered a bad thing for the US. Capitalism and free trade are the means for all the world’s citizens to escape deprivation and enjoy the fruits of their labors.

Well, there is the problem of the Earth only having a finite amount of resources. There isn't enough resources to sustain the current standard of living in the US for everyone in the world, at least not for any significant amount of time.

So by allowing the rest of the world to grow richer, the US (and other developed nations) are shortening the length of time they can sustain their current standard of living.
 
Isn't this sort of 'schoolyard bully' attitude better suited for 5th grade?
 
  • #10
Hmmm, all the things i was going to say have been said.

ooh ooh, i got one

'there's only one Andy around here'
 
  • #11
I'm just going to jump in here and be "benefit of the doubt" guy. Andy 18 never said the US should bully other countries, only that it could. And when he says that "anyone who says different is lieing to themslf",he is factually correct, even if not gramatically. BTW; I thought we had established here in the Forums that nit-picking someone's spelling errors was bad form (or bad Forum, or something).

This seems to me to be a point worth noting. When the Somalians crowed about how they defeated the U.S. military in Mogadishu, they were lying to themselves. The US was not incapable of leveling their city; we chose not to.

Similarly, after the attacks of 911, the U.S. could have carpet bombed all the major population centers in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The fact that we could have lends significance to the fact that we didn't. If the Afghans or Pakistanis had similar military might, can anyone imagine them exercising similar restraint?

If Saddam Hussein had acquired nuclear capability, does anyone think he would've gone to the trouble and risk and expense that the USA sacrificed in our attempt to disarm the military and unseat the dictator without killing the general population? Where other nations may lack the capability to commit genocide but continue to do the best they can with what they've got, we possesses truly devastating military potential, and exercise great restraint in its use.

I hope that is what Andy18 meant. Something worth pondering, anyway.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Originally posted by Andy
'there's only one Andy around here'
The temptation to respond as "Mrs Andy" is, well, not really for me...lucky you Andy!
 
  • #13
You could try changing one word, 'country' and make it countries, then the US is no longer in control, plus the simplicity that control requires that you have it, not the potential to take it... as for the rest...better I be silent.
 
  • #14
Originally posted by LURCH
I'm just going to jump in here and be "benefit of the doubt" guy.

Please. I wouldn't grossly misinterpret someone to make them look stupid, but I wouldn't do it to make the look not stupid either.

Even your generous interpretation of his post is hardly thought provoking. The US is not unique in its ability to wreck the world.

Also, the way his post is stated it makes it sound as if the US could care out all these actions with impunity. But that's hardly so. If the US used it's power to destroy the more powerful nations of the world, those nations would in turn destroy the US.


As for bad form...you've taken an obvious troll, and posted something serious in reply. Forcing me to make a serious reply. Very bad form.
 
  • #15
Ha! I suspect that this posting is a form of a "sucker punching" the profile tells of a 22 year old Lawyer who supposedly wrote y"all (me included) this question...
 
  • #16
well, look at the romans, the babylonians, the mongols...all these 'great empires' (yes i know US isn't an empire!) always fall. Anyway despite what "y'all" say, most of you americans are descended from the brits, as are the australians and a lot of great nations. In fact, most nations need the UK whether they like it or not, so without us, you are nothing Andy 81
 
  • #17
And without the Dutch the world would be flowerless!
Ha! Think about that!
 
  • #18
Originally posted by Monique
And without the Dutch the world would be flowerless!
Ha! Think about that!
And without America, the world would be...what? McDonald's-less? Wait. Let me think this one over...
 
  • #19
lol, that one is priceless
 
  • #20
hey, its a knock-on effect, if there were no mcdonalds there would be no grossly obese people...take it away someone else, let's keep this one going!
 
  • #21
Originally posted by jimmy p
hey, its a knock-on effect, if there were no mcdonalds there would be no grossly obese people...take it away someone else, let's keep this one going!
Sorry, Chopnik. I think this is one of those H. Mobius Loop thingys... If there were no grossly obese people there would be no...MCDONALDS!?
 
Last edited:
  • #22
...i was thinking there would be less heart disease, but there you go.
 
Last edited:
  • #23
Originally posted by jimmy p
...i was thinking there would be less heart disease, but there you go.
Not necessarily. You ever see the amount of grease on your typical pizza? Now if there were no *McDonalds*, we would have less lawsuits from clutzy people who can't hang on their own coffee cups... :wink:
 
  • #24
and if there were less clutzy sueing people we would have less (bloody annoying) lawyers who may instead get REAL jobs...looking good so far america!
 
  • #25
Well, I think that ended this one. Lawyers getting REAL jobs...
Yeah, right... Some of them can't even spell government.
 
  • #26
Origionally posted By Mr Robin Parsons
The temptation to respond as "Mrs Andy" is, well, not really for me...lucky you Andy!

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Origionally posted by Tsunami
Not necessarily. You ever see the amount of grease on your typical pizza?

And i have a comeback for that, the traditional way of cooking a pizza (thats the Italian way) is on a clay pan which soaks up all of the fat and grease to leave you with a nice crisp pizza. The Traditional Italian pizza is far healthier than anything from Pizza Hut or Domino's. Which I do believe are both American companies.
 
  • #27
Originally posted by (Andy) AKA Ms Robin Parsons
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Uhmmm neither do I...tee-heeheeheeheeheeheehee
 
  • #28
This is disgraceful Mr Robin Parsons for you to accuse me of such childish behaviour, i am really disapointed with you.
 
  • #29
Originally posted by Andy
This is disgraceful Mr Robin Parsons for you to accuse me of such childish behaviour, i am really disapointed with you.
Lets see Entropy is gone, so is CMDR Sponge, ergo process of elimination...Andy!...

P.S. I agree, Childish
 
  • #30
WOW! you came to that conclusion all by yourself, you should be a detective, cmdr sponge is actually i very good friend of mine and i happen to know that it was he that created Mrs Robin Parsons, the reason why he has gone is because he is away at University and only gets access to the Internet at the weekends.
 
  • #31
Originally posted by Andy
WOW! you came to that conclusion all by yourself, you should be a detective, cmdr sponge is actually i very good friend of mine and i happen to know that it was he that created Mrs Robin Parsons, the reason why he has gone is because he is away at University and only gets access to the Internet at the weekends.
Good dodge...Uhmmm NOT really...
 
  • #32
U really are pathetic, i had almost forgotten just how much so until i saw the link back to the thread 'Have you been wronged by the US governement'.
 
  • #33
The USA rules the world? I thought it was the Vril!
 
  • #34
spelling etc

LURCH wrote: *SNIP BTW; I thought we had established here in the Forums that nit-picking someone's spelling errors was bad form (or bad Forum, or something).
None of us are perfect, and every PF poster has surely made typos and spelling mistakes.

However, Andy81's are rather alarming, if he's a native speaker of English - ~7 separate errors in ~50 words! Among our members there may be some EFL/ESL teachers; perhaps they could tell us how they would feel about this level of error from one of their students?

[Edit: checked the numbers; worse than I'd imagined :frown: ]
 
Last edited:
  • #35
wow, america rules the world cos talking about it can reduce people to petty squabbling. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.
 
Back
Top