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

If that's the case he's right, I contested the notion that the US is 20 years ahead technologically. That's ludicrous.

At present I'd say the EU military complex is just sad from an operational capacity pov.

Technologically the US is ahead in aviation (slightly) and in most things relating to fielding a blue water navy. On other fronts, not really.

Though I have to say that there are some impressive concepts on the drawing table / in prototype stage in the US in a variety of fields atm.

Last edited by Shocking (2012-09-14 14:50:41)

Cybargs wrote:

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

inb4 overheated Chinese economy disintegrates and hundreds of millions of suppressed minorities intensify separatist movements in a USSR break-up style.

How is china gonna rule the world when they can't event solve the Taiwan issue :p

the same way america managed being the world's superpower throughout the 20th century whilst having a cuba issue?

Well you sure are going on about that one aspect.

Shocking wrote:

Because that was what we were talking about.

what a glorious derail.

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

for all y'all including Mr. Shut-down-every-thread, Here's-your-AWM himself, i will post a picture of the USS San Diego.

not even KENNINGS could stop and frisk this fucker

Shocking wrote:

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.

Consider the scope.  One-off builds in Russia and China don't hold a candle to a fully developed, technologically advanced military the US has.  We have better ships, better planes, etc.  And more of them.  And the logistics to put them anywhere in the world.  No other nation can say that.  We've got partnerships (like NATO, you mentioned) that allows us to operate in every corner of the world - and we do.  NATO countries don't have this large capability if you remove the US resources - much of NATO relies on US resources to cover their ass.  And let's remember, we are talking about single countries, not multi-country alliances.  NATO is not a sovereign nation; NATO isn't in this discussion. 

We've developed strategies to cover the globe - not to say these are the best or most complete strategies, but there are blueprints.  The groundwork has been laid.  Can we realistically say China has the ability to move 'x' amount of troops with a full navy and air complement to any region of the world with a very short turnaround time?  The US can - and has.  You can't just build a technologically advanced armed forces and the logistical support systems in 20 years.  The US had the advantage(?) of getting into the cold war, which created a real motivation to do all these things.

Shocking wrote:

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.

Pretty good...No, they are still a ways off.  Look at western China as opposed to Eastern China.  There are huge degrees of separation between the industrialization of cities on the east coast and rural areas in western China.  They do have an advantage of centralized control within their government which allows them to manage huge projects that affect the whole country, but again, 20 years is not a lot of time, especially in a country that tries its best to stifle democratic progress.

Shocking wrote:

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.

Diplomacy and force wins.  We have the money and the muscles to force countries to do what we want.  Bearing a grudge is perception vs. reality.  African nations are more inclined towards China because China is focused on investing in industry there and giving them aid (not AIDS).  Money wins there.  That's the reality vs. your "have done no wrong unto them" perception.

Shocking wrote:

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.

And I believe the US is it's biggest customer - again, we are talking about nations, not companies or alliances.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like unipolarity.  I think having another nation there to challenge US supremacy is a good thing - I just don't see China filling that role in 20 years.

yeah, you mentioned being the sole superpower.  I was countering that argument.  You're the one that tried to steer it towards a technology 1-up discussion.

Nope, you're right, my comment about being 20 years ahead is really what started this back and forth

obama-nation

I think lowing's head would have exploded from the cognitive dissonance (ask Uzique) of simultaneously arguing that it was fine to stop and frisk anyone who looked like they could be an illegal, claiming benefits or brown (even if it was just the lighting or they'd recently been on a beach holiday) while white tax-payers should have the right to stand their ground and blow the head off any Police Officer who accosted them with a look in their eye which suggested they weren't 100% sure the person they were accosting was a paid up member of the Aryan Nation.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-11-05 01:21:04)

I want to compare the wall-of-text explanation with the wiki version.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-09-16 00:16:52)

-Sh1fty- wrote:

I had no clue aynrandroolz was Uzique.

He isn't. He was a protuberant uziqling growth who gestated on the left underarm of uzique's turtleneck sweater, fed a constant diet of high-cost deodorant and pretentious literature. Once mature, he broke off and landed on a random keyboard at an underground internet café. Over a period of four hours, he was absorbed by a Macintosh through osmosis and has recently emerged as a digital consciousness to once again post on BF2.

The real uzique is sitting on a comfy chair with his autographed Harry Potter books, watching Willow in between takes of his 48-hour lecture series on how to get into things before they're mainstream.

True story!