The Unofficial and Independent Leyton Orient Message Board
https://lofcforum.com/forum1/phpBB3/
Perhaps we should take more notice of the Russian or Chinese elections then?
I watched an Antifa march on YouTube with them shouting “ Death to America “ if they ever got their wish we would be left with a Chinese or Russian lead world. That would be wonderful, wouldn’t it. Although I suspect we still wouldn’t be interested in their elections because we’d know the ballot would be riggedOrnchurch wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:01 amPerhaps we should take more notice of the Russian or Chinese elections then?
Oh, no point
Better for whom?RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 11:57 am My point is if America losses it’s number 1 spot on the world’s stage for whatever reason, who will likely fill the void. ? Russia is the next most powerful nation in the world so I suppose it would be them or maybe China. In such a scenario do these people on the far left honestly believe this world would be a better place to live because I don’t
Nobody will fill the void, because nobody can.RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 11:57 am My point is if America losses it’s number 1 spot on the world’s stage for whatever reason, who will likely fill the void. ? Russia is the next most powerful nation in the world so I suppose it would be them or maybe China. In such a scenario do these people on the far left honestly believe this world would be a better place to live because I don’t
Thanks Dunners. I thought that was a good answer and you’ve made some good varied pointsDunners wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 12:22 pmNobody will fill the void, because nobody can.RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 11:57 am My point is if America losses it’s number 1 spot on the world’s stage for whatever reason, who will likely fill the void. ? Russia is the next most powerful nation in the world so I suppose it would be them or maybe China. In such a scenario do these people on the far left honestly believe this world would be a better place to live because I don’t
No other nation on earth has the combination of economic clout, financial muscle, political influence and extensive military power to keep all the nations of the world in relative check and enable long-range global supply chains. No other nation on earth has a currency which can be used globally, without being too concerned about the effects domestically. The Chinese are not as powerful as people think. They have a bit of money, but their navy doesn't even have the capability of extending beyond their first island chain. And they are about to face a crisis brought about through a collapsing demographic profile in their own population.
America only ever had two reasons to be World Police. The first was to keep the Soviet Union in check. That's done. The second was to secure their energy needs. They've now solved that and are producing a surplus amount of energy from domestic sources. They are a nation with a continental sized economy which is largely self-sufficient. What foreign trade they do need can be done through a small handful of unilateral trade deals (i.e Mexico).
So if the Americans go home (which they are) we'll revert back to the way things were before the cold war consensus, with regional super powers replacing the global super power. And that may not be pretty. We can already see nations re-calibrating their alliances (i.e. Israel and the gulf states), and regional tensions increasing across the globe (see the War thread).
All those who have previously complained about US imperialism, and have wished they'd keep out of other people's business, are about to get their wish. And it may not be pleasant.
Out of curiosity, who would you say is now the second most powerful nation ?Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:01 pm Think that overlooks the 3rd incentive, which is to secure and expand markets for exports. Their willingness to get involved abroad predates the Soviets and oil scarcity for that reason. That'll still be a big motivation for them, even if they are undoubtedly becoming more insular.
Russia is nowhere near the second most powerful nation in the world. It's not even the most powerful in Europe or Asia.
They're just not going to be dependant on exports though, unlike most western democracies and China. Their birth rate is high enough to support a consumer driven economy.Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:01 pm Think that overlooks the 3rd incentive, which is to secure and expand markets for exports. Their willingness to get involved abroad predates the Soviets and oil scarcity for that reason. That'll still be a big motivation for them, even if they are undoubtedly becoming more insular.
Russia is nowhere near the second most powerful nation in the world. It's not even the most powerful in Europe or Asia.
Japan. But they're still a very distant second. Despite the post-war agreements, they've been very busy developing the deep water navy. They're also ahead of the game when it comes to planning for the end of consumer-led growth, and have been investing heavily in automation and AI.RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:07 pmOut of curiosity, who would you say is now the second most powerful nation ?Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:01 pm Think that overlooks the 3rd incentive, which is to secure and expand markets for exports. Their willingness to get involved abroad predates the Soviets and oil scarcity for that reason. That'll still be a big motivation for them, even if they are undoubtedly becoming more insular.
Russia is nowhere near the second most powerful nation in the world. It's not even the most powerful in Europe or Asia.
Think you're underestimating the influence that lobbyists have in Washington. Corporate America is still massively concerned with IP, export tariffs, cheap imports etc. And the rivalry with China is now bi-partisan, so there'll be a lot of manoeuvring to sew up America's position in Asia. I think it's possible that the realisation of waning influence in the developing world as Chinas grows will reengage the US, the reaction to the reforms in HK is indicative of that.Dunners wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:15 pmThey're just not going to be dependant on exports though, unlike most western democracies and China. Their birth rate is high enough to support a consumer driven economy.Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:01 pm Think that overlooks the 3rd incentive, which is to secure and expand markets for exports. Their willingness to get involved abroad predates the Soviets and oil scarcity for that reason. That'll still be a big motivation for them, even if they are undoubtedly becoming more insular.
Russia is nowhere near the second most powerful nation in the world. It's not even the most powerful in Europe or Asia.
Sure, there will still be some need for international trade, but they've spent the last couple of years negotiating unilateral trade deals to wrap that up; Mexico, Canada, Japan, S Korea, Australia, the UK (if we sign it) and maybe one or two more. But that's it.
Insularity has been the trend for some time now, and there's no sign that it's going to be reversed. This isn't even a Trump thing; it would be happening whomever was president. Should a US president ever wish to revert back to a more internationalist agenda, they'd have a hard time convincing voters of the benefits.
Also, agree that Russia is a basket case. However it is still enough of a concern to keep the Baltic states awake at night, and for Poland and Germany to be glancing nervously over their shoulders. It will be interesting to see if either of those start to increase their military budgets in the next few years.
Maybe - we'll see.Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:53 pmThink you're underestimating the influence that lobbyists have in Washington. Corporate America is still massively concerned with IP, export tariffs, cheap imports etc. And the rivalry with China is now bi-partisan, so there'll be a lot of manoeuvring to sew up America's position in Asia. I think it's possible that the realisation of waning influence in the developing world as Chinas grows will reengage the US, the reaction to the reforms in HK is indicative of that.Dunners wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:15 pmThey're just not going to be dependant on exports though, unlike most western democracies and China. Their birth rate is high enough to support a consumer driven economy.Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:01 pm Think that overlooks the 3rd incentive, which is to secure and expand markets for exports. Their willingness to get involved abroad predates the Soviets and oil scarcity for that reason. That'll still be a big motivation for them, even if they are undoubtedly becoming more insular.
Russia is nowhere near the second most powerful nation in the world. It's not even the most powerful in Europe or Asia.
Sure, there will still be some need for international trade, but they've spent the last couple of years negotiating unilateral trade deals to wrap that up; Mexico, Canada, Japan, S Korea, Australia, the UK (if we sign it) and maybe one or two more. But that's it.
Insularity has been the trend for some time now, and there's no sign that it's going to be reversed. This isn't even a Trump thing; it would be happening whomever was president. Should a US president ever wish to revert back to a more internationalist agenda, they'd have a hard time convincing voters of the benefits.
Also, agree that Russia is a basket case. However it is still enough of a concern to keep the Baltic states awake at night, and for Poland and Germany to be glancing nervously over their shoulders. It will be interesting to see if either of those start to increase their military budgets in the next few years.
Japan certainly has very capable armed forces and a large navy but their doctrine is entirely defensive with little ability and even less political will to project power. They’ve been under pressure from the USA to become more assertive due to Chinese expansion.Dunners wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:18 pmJapan. But they're still a very distant second. Despite the post-war agreements, they've been very busy developing the deep water navy. They're also ahead of the game when it comes to planning for the end of consumer-led growth, and have been investing heavily in automation and AI.RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:07 pmOut of curiosity, who would you say is now the second most powerful nation ?Mistadobalina wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:01 pm Think that overlooks the 3rd incentive, which is to secure and expand markets for exports. Their willingness to get involved abroad predates the Soviets and oil scarcity for that reason. That'll still be a big motivation for them, even if they are undoubtedly becoming more insular.
Russia is nowhere near the second most powerful nation in the world. It's not even the most powerful in Europe or Asia.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.brooki ... jects/amp/
Henry Jackson society is a neo con Anglosphere think-tank based in London, wouldn't place too much stock in what it has to say.StockholmO wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 3:10 pmJapan certainly has very capable armed forces and a large navy but their doctrine is entirely defensive with little ability and even less political will to project power. They’ve been under pressure from the USA to become more assertive due to Chinese expansion.Dunners wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:18 pmJapan. But they're still a very distant second. Despite the post-war agreements, they've been very busy developing the deep water navy. They're also ahead of the game when it comes to planning for the end of consumer-led growth, and have been investing heavily in automation and AI.RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:07 pm
Out of curiosity, who would you say is now the second most powerful nation ?
Incredibly the U.K. has been ranked as the second most powerful nation.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-rank ... or-powers/
