BF2S Forums Is stop and frisk a necessary police tool or an abomination?

Shocking wrote:

Let me clear a few things up; first, dilbert is (ab)using my statement on the top of the previous page to push his "amerikanskis are incompetent at everything" stance. Second, the term 'superpower' has only been used to describe post WW2 US and SU. Before this there were great powers, of which there were multiple. Up until WW2 the US still wasn't really acknowledged by the rest of the world as being a legitimate great power (even though it was), neither did the US aspire to the position. It was isolationist and cared little for (directly) exerting power and playing the global political games.

My statement on the top is still true though. Because every former great power got pretty much destroyed during WW2 it put the US in a unique position to exert influence and establish itself as a superpower. It now also had the political will to achieve this.

america's time is done. it didn't even last as long as old europe, the motherland.

say hello to your new chinese overlords.

aynrandroolz wrote:

Shocking wrote:

Let me clear a few things up; first, dilbert is (ab)using my statement on the top of the previous page to push his "amerikanskis are incompetent at everything" stance. Second, the term 'superpower' has only been used to describe post WW2 US and SU. Before this there were great powers, of which there were multiple. Up until WW2 the US still wasn't really acknowledged by the rest of the world as being a legitimate great power (even though it was), neither did the US aspire to the position. It was isolationist and cared little for (directly) exerting power and playing the global political games.

My statement on the top is still true though. Because every former great power got pretty much destroyed during WW2 it put the US in a unique position to exert influence and establish itself as a superpower. It now also had the political will to achieve this.

america's time is done. it didn't even last as long as old europe, the motherland.

say hello to your new chinese overlords.

i'm still not entirely convinced this is true tbh

Spark wrote:

aynrandroolz wrote:

Shocking wrote:

Let me clear a few things up; first, dilbert is (ab)using my statement on the top of the previous page to push his "amerikanskis are incompetent at everything" stance. Second, the term 'superpower' has only been used to describe post WW2 US and SU. Before this there were great powers, of which there were multiple. Up until WW2 the US still wasn't really acknowledged by the rest of the world as being a legitimate great power (even though it was), neither did the US aspire to the position. It was isolationist and cared little for (directly) exerting power and playing the global political games.

My statement on the top is still true though. Because every former great power got pretty much destroyed during WW2 it put the US in a unique position to exert influence and establish itself as a superpower. It now also had the political will to achieve this.

america's time is done. it didn't even last as long as old europe, the motherland.

say hello to your new chinese overlords.

i'm still not entirely convinced this is true tbh

China ha almost 0 soft power besides economics. English is still the dominant global language and American culture is still way more dominant. The chinese Lready had a taste of American apple pie and they do enjoy it

Their country is over 90% ethnically Chinese. Assuming the whole other 10% decide to work together they would still get nowhere.

Macbeth wrote:

Their country is over 90% ethnically Chinese. Assuming the whole other 10% decide to work together they would still get nowhere.

Better tell that to the Tibetans and Uyghurs who might see a collapsing Han China as an opportunity.

I could be wrong though.

No it's not.  Which one of your professors told you that?

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

No it's not.  Which one of your professors told you that?

In terms of them replacing American hegemony yea it is

Spark wrote:

surely south china sea is more important in those terms

Short term yes long term Taiwan is still pretty important since technically it's an unsolved civil war issue. But I seriously doubt china even wants to replace us hegemony as historically they didn't care much about the outside world

Spark wrote:

how much regional trade goes through the south china sea? it's a while since i saw the figures, but it's a lot, isn't it? surely that would be more significant long term than some provincial issues on some island

It's more political than economic. And quite a lot of trade does pass through the strait. It's an issue of "face" if you will

I'll have to look up the 20 years ahead statement for some clarity.  I read it in Foreign Policy magazine I think 2 years ago or so.  I'll have to find the exact issue when I get home. 

Why will China have an economic advantage?  Sure, economically they are setting themselves up for the future in regards to securing resources and geopolitically developing their string of pearls to ensure they have spheres of influence extending through to the African and European markets - so what?  They still need to build their internal infrastructure. Their military is light years behind the USA in terms of size and scope.  The US has a considerable technological advantage militarily and strategic advantage geopolitically - we've been beefing up our military and cultivating our spheres of influence for far longer than the Chinese - and that is an important piece to consider.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I'll have to look up the 20 years ahead statement for some clarity.  I read it in Foreign Policy magazine I think 2 years ago or so.  I'll have to find the exact issue when I get home.

Personally I think the statement is absolute bull. Unless ofcourse they discounted all NATO partners - though Russia still (ocassionaly) develops pretty high quality stuff. As does China as of late.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Why will China have an economic advantage?  Sure, economically they are setting themselves up for the future in regards to securing resources and geopolitically developing their string of pearls to ensure they have spheres of influence extending through to the African and European markets - so what?  They still need to build their internal infrastructure.

As I said, 20 years. By then their infrastructure should be pretty good.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

The US has a considerable technological advantage militarily and strategic advantage geopolitically - we've been beefing up our military and cultivating our spheres of influence for far longer than the Chinese - and that is an important piece to consider.

It could work against you. As of yet, barely anyone on the global political scene bears a grudge against China. The African nations are much more inclined towards the Chinese as they 'have done no wrong unto them', surely many nations might follow as China expands its influence and power.

Fatherted wrote:

the BAE-EADS merger is going to create one fucking powerful company

The largest defense corporation in the world probably. Twice as large as LH.