Russia is not doing well. Give me proof. China's growth will soon end in the burst of a real estate bubble. 10 trillion USD. And have you even heard of globalization? Most countries will have lost 20% of their income. And the dollar is the main currency of globalization. The US, in fact, has the biggest global economy, and half of China's growth has been due to the US. Not only that, but China and India have very small globalized sections. This means that without the US, globalization will almost entirely die out. That is a fact.

Now that that's cleared up, I am confused why the US doesn't head on attack ISIS, and wipe them out in a week. It's not like we ever need to use our military.

Russia is doing well. The population has been growing since 2010 or so. Russia's economy grew 1% in 2014, it has been speeding down, but it's population and economy are growing, and doing well.

The US, in fact, has the biggest global economy

Depends how you measure it.

I would not say half. It is 4th in terms of where China imports things, and has been for a while. China doesn't need American goods as much as US needs Chinese goods (US's biggest imports are from China). A large part of Chinese economy does depend on exporting to the US, and should the US impose sanctions, that would hurt. But survivable. I'd say around 15-25% of Chinese growth has been due to US economy.

Don't say China has a small global section, China is the globe; a superpower. Most countries depend more heavily on China than the US. Even the EU on average depends more on China. I haven't read about India too much, but there's obvious population growth and somewhat high economy growth. A regional power, it's neighbours are pretty dependent on it (aside from China), and it also exports to the Middle East and Indian Coast Africa. Promising country, though if the US remained at the place it is currently, it would take a while for India to become more powerful.

You say that most countries would lose 20% of their income. I assume you mean exports. US is a big buyer of exports, that is true (and partially why the US is doomed). But to say 20%, that would be false for almost every country except North America and Central America. Look it up.

Remember the Iraqi war? How it was disastrous for one party and bad for another? US is a little bit hesitant this time.

Disastrous because it wasn't just a war, but a game of politics the like we had seen before. If the Us wants to solve the issues surrounding the Middle East, we must do what the Allies did to Germany at the end of the Second world War. Occupy, stay in force (yes that means with guns) and keep the country under military law for as long as it takes to eradicate the extremists. If we need to occupy all of the Middle East to stop it then so be it. But there is no way to end this without going in and killing every single Jihadist. The average Muslim hates them as well, and we have yet to utilize the average Iraqi civilian the way we should. We don't fight wars any more, we haven't declared on in decades, we need a Reagan, someone with a set of balls who will tell the world what it needs to hear, whether it wants to or not.

Je suis Charlie!

I thought it was obvious that it was disastrous for Iraq, just bad for the US. The US occupying Iraq is what is making extremists. Let me put in an American perspective (albeit an unrealistic scenario): If China successfully invaded and "stayed in force", don't you think there would be some American guerilla warfare? Even if it was better off than without Chinese rule (again, unrealistic, but try to imagine)? It would be a birthing ground for American terrorists, American suicide bombers would not be unfathomable. The same thing would happen to the US if it took over China. Or any other country completely "staying in force" in 100% of another country.

Extremism is born out of a lack of hope and/or convincing mufti. Most of the footsoldiers, I'm not talking about the top command, but most of the cannon fodder is born from having no job, starving, in poverty, bullied and no chances of anything getting better, and just deciding to go out with a bang or perhaps doing the long run and joining a terrorist organisation. The Arabic Spring was started because one man, in these very conditions, lighted himself on fire in a market in Tunisia.

The religious part comes from maintaining Islamic culture and keeping it away from external, Christian influence. And "staying in force" generally means that the country has been invaded, the most humiliating form of loss. If any Middle Eastern or majority Islamic country is invaded by a nonislamic majority country, you better watch out for the extremists.

The US, if they're smart at all, will not get heavily involved in the Middle East again. Russia's been keeping neutrality there for a while, just supplying a couple of governments with arms and making a bit of money off of that.

the problem with your theory is that they were doing that before we went over there.

The would is hard to heal, if you close it, it will burst again with even more blood.

I'm saying that the US had a small problem pre-September 11 attacks, and now the problem has only grown because of the very response that the US had. Also, it's possible that the US had some involvement in the September 11 attacks. I remember reading about something in which the US military had plans to stage a Cuban terrorist attack on US ground, then give that as a reason to invade Cuba.

LOL "China is a superpower"? I almost died. What a nationalist you are Xypapy XD.

But anyways, why should the US, occupy Iraq? They should make the extremists GTFO, and leave the Middle East until we run out of oil (20-30 years)

China is more powerful than the US, and has been since 2008 or so. China and US are the superpowers of the today world. It exports way more and has an arguably bigger economy, not to mention the debt weapon.我不是中国人。Also, US is already low on oil (though not empty).

Edited 1/10/2015 23:08:51

Mmm hmmm... yes i see youre mentally ill, but i will present you the facts anyway
China GDP: 10 trillion USD
US GDP: 18 trillion USD
US Global Firepower Rank: 1
China GFR: 3
US Aircraft: 13,683
China Aircraft: 2,788
US Aircraft Carriers: 10
US Nukes: 5,113
China Nukes: 250
and if economy and millitary doesnt count as power, then what does? Not to mention, the US is a decade or two ahead of china in millitary technology

US Population 360 mill
China pop 1 bill ++
(Disclaimer, Numbers are from Memory)

China also has Russia as a better friend then US

Population i must admit is a disadvantage for the US, but also for china. They have and will spend billions of dollars on food, shelter, and clean water, while we have exess amounts of those.
As for russia, its not like we have had a plan to attack them since the 60's amiright? Oh wait, we do, and we could wipe them out in a month

Russia is ally to china.....we wouldnt be able to fight both

USA should have stayed in the Middle east. But no the president decided to leave. RETARDED PRESIDENT.

Its not like the EU has an army that can take down Russia... oh wait..

Tsh...wipe out Russia in a month? You're the mentally ill. Russia has around 10000 atomic bombs, with that kind of firepower, 5% of the US could be destroyed in the heat wave and another 20% by the wastelands. US could do the same with around 1% of Russia's land and wasteland 5% of it (Assuming US has 8000 atomic bombs). It's more a question if Russia could wipe out US in a month. Also, looked up the USD conversion rate.

Noone has anywhere close to trillions in terms of USD. Do not confuse trillions with billions. Check the PPP GDP, China is higher. Also, let's subtract external debt from each one.

US: -1 billion USD
China: 6 billion USD

Also, nice estimating to every one of them. Are you sure China doesn't have 251 nukes? Are you sure US doesn't have 13,682 aircraft carriers? Don't trust your sources to every number; no source can be that specific. In fact, your source is horrible; what are you taking this from, americanpropoganda.us? northkoreanpropoganda.nk doesn't get as bad as this. China is second in terms of budget for military, and first in terms of number of troops and it's spending half the percentage of it's GDP as the US does. By active troops, China has more than the US population at any given time. US is better in some military aspects, others China is better. Also, both figures are most likely greater than what's seen or estimated since noone shows all the guns they have, especially when it comes to atomic weapons. I think it's more realistic that China has 1000 atomic bombs. Also, again, the best technologies are hidden, but let me give you an example of how fast China can develop things: China developed the fission bomb 1966. A year and a half later, the fusion bomb was made in 1967. 32 months. Compare that to the 5 years that it took US to develop a fusion bomb from a fission bomb. China's technology was growing fast then, albeit it was a bit stinted from the Japanese in World War 2. If Chinese technology was growing at that rate then, I think it's safe to say that China is now technologically ahead of the US, perhaps a decade or two. China also most likely has bombs that could ignite the entire atmosphere on fire buried in the mountains of Xizang or underground the deserts of Xinjiang. Scary stuff...

Number of tanks: China>US
Number of aircraft carriers: US>China
Number of frigates: China>US
Number of aircraft: US>China

Let's move on to intelligence.
CIA rivals the HI. (Possibly a reason as to why Hungary was unsuccessfully ostracised by US 6 months ago or so). MSS would rival...perhaps MID if they weren't friends.

Go back to school before you start thinking about insulting others for their brains. All your points are wrong, except maybe US being better militarily.

Edited 1/11/2015 01:06:15

It was a good choice for the US to leave the Middle East, it's better for both. US still has a presence in Saudi Arabia that will anger some people, but better than managing an entire Middle Eastern country.

Also, many countries in the EU would refuse to fight Russia, mainly because they are too welloff for this war nonsence. Even in NATO, some countries would chicken out.

Population is 323,934,829 as of this post.
So your suggestion for the US was to do nothing after 9/11? The US can call 145 million men and women to the field, while the Chinese can field about 450 million give or take a few mil. However, the Us is better equipped, trained, and prepared to take on a larger army. Also, the America has in place defenses on the West and Easy coasts for an invasion defense. China does as well, but it is based off of 1990's tech. The US could overpower a nation the size of china, but the logistics are a nightmare, to keep that many men and women away from the workforce, and in a country on the other side of the globe would be a strain on the economy to say the least. China has a large population meaning there's one soldier for ever few thousand civilians. and while we can stamp out a country the size of Iraq and Afghanistan with little problem if we tried, China is too large to occupy.

The Chinese aren't 20 years ahead jackass, we'd know. The CIA is the best in the business. However, you will obviously disagree, being so Anti-American. The US may be destroyed percentage wise more than Russia but the part of Russia we could wipe from the earth is where most of Russia lives. We can also be pretty sure how many damned ships a country has, seeing as you can see a naval ship from S P A C E. China developed their nukes so fast because they simply borrowed the tech from other Nuclear nations, they received information from the USSR before the Sino-Soviet split. So they were able to begin nuclear research ten years ahead of where they would have if they started from nothing.