Here are the rules to this thread: Firstly, you have to answer the first 3 questions. Then your free to comment and discuss on the topic. PS: for each question you can choose up to two answers Additionally, for each answer if you could briefly answer the question: why?, this would make the whole thread more transparent to all. Question 1 Who is more dangerous to global peace, and thus a threat to all sovereigns and their citizens? (a threat in philosophy, policy and ambition) A: CHINA B: RUSSIA C: GERMANY D: USA E: ISIS (including other minor terrorist organizations) F: OTHER (state) Question 2 Which country is both greedy in its political (power) and economic (wealth) ambitions? (which country poses the biggest threat to the global political and economic structures?) A: CHINA B: RUSSIA C: USA D: GERMANY E: OTHER Last Question How do you believe the world should be structured? (In a changing world, with what structure would you be comfortable?) A: USA leading the way, fighting all non-allies who oppose the generalized western views (hybrid warfare: sanctioning, directly intervening or sponsoring 'moderate' opposition) meanwhile creating increasingly tense relationships under a more coercive global system, by forcing their will, beliefs, speculations (as a fact) to the rest of the world. B: CHINA dominating financially, economically and politically. This means China influencing western societies and institutions. How? A few examples: further increase its gold reserves, further build new trade links and partnerships, create world banks (AIIB, BRICS banks), operate world banks (in 2016 - one of first projects 'Silk Road' initative), ask USA for some of its money upfront making all the banks who borrowed systematically, systematically ask for the borrowed, creating a bubble, bubble transpiring to US and possibly EU. C: Or, do you want a structure, where each continent, country and region has its own sphere of power. This would mean primarily CHINA, USA, RUSSIA, GERMANY, BRAZIL, (IRAN-SAUDI ARABIA, ISRAEL?) acting as global players, and in their proximity weaker (economically, politically) countries act as their allies, adhering generally to all beliefs and policies, not forced beliefs and policies, but accepted at own will. This would create an arguably more balanced global structure, and would mean that all head countries respect each others beliefs and opinions. Ultimately though each sovereign decision is based primarily on "rationality and logic" - arguably just like Russia and Crimea. - separate discussion. D: Or, worst of all, through fake labeling and political correctness manifest an evil in the form of terror. Terror used to scare into protecting and arming, creating a highly militarized world with direct tensions between all major countries (China, USA, Germany(EU), Russia). This specific scenario though is less likely now as Russia has been arguably successful in its Syrian operations. But, still, even if terror is erased in the Middle-East, it will manifest somewhere else, somewhere where the non-allies can lose economically or politically (arguably Ukraine, and the threat to world security Russia) Thanks for reading thus far. I really hope regardless of where we are in the world we keep this thread as transparent and unbiased as possible, discussing truths, rationals and logic behind the changing structure of the world. There are hundreds more cases that affect this change daily, like the rise of fascism in Europe and the reason for that rise (2001-2015 wars and occupations in Middle-East) its a fact, the whole effort was a failure, because at the end of the day, on a purely human level there is alot of suffering, alot of pain and a lot of hate as people flee crying for their lives in a sinking ship. PS: not all those people are good... at least 1 person at least 1, it only takes 1 to topple structures...
Q1 B,E Q2 A,C 3 C I think the continents will naturally drift into supranational entities as has already happened to a certain extent.
I understand your fear in Russia Gaius but you will see over time that Russia is not aggressive, as a matter of fact Russia's policies are more defensive in comparison to certain Western countries. The aggression was only recent and in high volume, but that is another talk on geopolitics, logic and reasoning of actions... I think you are right about continents naturally merging. This is my question to you friend, if a significant % of us sees this phenomenon and we all consciously understand that for this to transition we need stability and peace, why is it then our governments (most) pursue aggressive behavior? Maybe its the slow acceptance of past mistakes that push countries to dominate? (In the case of the US its the 18tr in debt and the overprinted dollar - which can slowly lose share (not all) to the yuan, which in effect will render the cracks in the economy...just saying. We need to start thinking collectively to reach common goals - stop making a few people in government make all decisions for us. (will never happen without a global revolution)
1. D 2. C 3. C I think that's the present situation and I don't see it changing much. The USA sees itself as beleaguered even though it's not, hence they are going to be trying to pursue option A above. However, we simply don't have the resources anymore, nor do all of us agree with our paranoids, so we will mainly practice option C by default. America has become schizophrenic. I look for the next century to be a long period of decline for the US, with the struggle between our sane and insane halves to be the main feature. Hopefully, we will not destroy the world before somebody steps in and locks us away once our insanity has drained us of our strength.
You might be right about Russia. I think post-Putin will show us what direction we can expect long term. I do not see Europe as aggressive. Not in recent history at least. The USA is of course quite aggressive and has shown it in recent history. We do need to think collectively on a broad number of issues but the UN seems to have lost its role. At least for the time being. So supranational agreements with large continental actors are our best hope short term.
Some have said that with the changing demographics in America that the United States will look more like the narco state of Columbia, where the ruleing class live on the hill looking down on the other 90 % living in the slums. But it's more likely that by 2040 America will look more like South Africa, a basket case where the middle class live behind walled communities with mercenaries protecting their neighborhoods.
1. E and F(modern communism, Marxism, socialism, liberal, progressive, whatever you choose to call is a bigger internal threat to the western world) 2. A, B in that order, easy one. 3. Of those options, A.
I think the only things we have to fear are silly wild-arsed Republican fears and imaginations running amok. Just because they are insane doesn't mean they are harmless.
Absolutely, a predatory/aggresive beast is more dangerous in its death throes than at any other time. I've been trying to say this for years. I couldn't even watch the last debates. This is the party of Eisenhower, and they sound like an echain from my crazy aunt.
No longer a party Ike would be welcomed in. They have turned into the party, of what Ike warned us about. The military industrial complex party. The party that dismantled the FDR middle class creating model, which allowed the rise of the oligarchy. And they were aided, from Clinton onward, by the corporate democratic party, who like the GOP has played their voters for fools, and which they actually turned out to be fools, by using social issues as the distinquishing difference. Quite clever really, the way they have pulled this off. You target the emotions of the voters, you appeal to those emotions, and pretty soon you got yourself a heated ballgame, with cheering crowds.
Questions #1 & 2 ........ CHINA (overpopulation + greed is driving the China-man) Question #3.........C Seeing the changes in this world in the last 15-20 I do NOT want to think about what it will be like in another 15-20 years! But, my thoughts are........ that gays will be the majority, whites will NOT be a majority, there will be more NOT working than working, children will be as big as elephants, Mom's will be too, Dad's not far behind (no pun intended) Mom, guns will be ONLY for LEO's who steal and strong arm the unarmed population, the government will demand pay from the LEO's....... Damn, let's just shoot ourselves.............
Just one crazy, baseless, rant after another. We shoulda known something was amiss when Rumsfeld said "we make our own reality", and started rounding 'em up on the spot. There just ain't a place to put people who have jettisoned reason.
Question 1: E. ISIS They're going to crash and burn civilization. Question 2: E. Other I'm going with South Africa here. Last Question: C. We need to have all sorts of countries and regional influences for reasons related to back-door unethicalness.
