Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Are you attempting to imply that there isn't a lot of killing in South America? Mexico and Venezuela would disagree.

Frazzled wrote:

How about a world dominated by no-one?

Killing, lots and lots of killing (Middle East) or not (South America).

You don't believe it's possible (someday) for the world to achieve balance? I'm not even gonna begin to think about how that might happen... but i'm an optimist!

Blackskullandy wrote:
Dogma, you are easily the single most cynical person it has ever been my pleasure to encounter... I mean that as a compliment, by the way

My personal anthem:

Amaya wrote:Are you attempting to imply that there isn't a lot of killing in South America? Mexico and Venezuela would disagree.

There have been almost no tank battles in the last fifty years in South America.

dogma wrote:

Blackskullandy wrote:
Dogma, you are easily the single most cynical person it has ever been my pleasure to encounter... I mean that as a compliment, by the way

My personal anthem:

That was pretty damn fine earcandy. Throughly approved... Although I now have a mental image of you running around in a black suit, tophat and cane, tying damsels up on railway tracks...

I'm sure that makes the 45,000+ dead from the Mexican Drug War feel spiffy.

Old article on Venezuela http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/world/americas/23venez.html?pagewanted=all

You don't need tanks for violence and deaths. I don't think tanks would perform well in most of South America anyways.

TLDR

I'm sure the same was said of Britain. Maybe Australasia will be the next superpower...

There is no reason why a dominant China would not make the world a fairly safe place. History tells us that empires like to maintain the status quo. Yes they have a terrible human rights record, but if you can overrun a country with cheap consumer goods, you don't need to send in the Panzer divisions (or chinese equivalent)

Amaya wrote:I'm sure that makes the 45,000+ dead from the Mexican Drug War feel spiffy.

Old article on Venezuela http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/world/americas/23venez.html?pagewanted=all

You don't need tanks for violence and deaths. I don't think tanks would perform well in most of South America anyways.

You're going off the rails on a crazy train. My point was that there are regions now where there is no dominant power. Sometimes that means endless wars, sometimes it doesn't.

Youy may now return to your regularly scheduled programming.

South America does suffer, to an extent, endless wars and is influenced more by a world power (America) than Africa is so comparing the two regions is a mistake.

I'm still confused as to how anyone could claim america has "made the world more free", how would you measure the contribution of america towards global freedom? for that matter how would you go about measuring global freedom at all?

Amaya wrote:South America does suffer, to an extent, endless wars and is influenced more by a world power (America) than Africa is so comparing the two regions is a mistake.

Really? Outside of that Falklands thing, what was the last major war in South America?

So the constant drug wars and powerful cartels are meaningless because South America doesn't routinely have massive, overt wars?

I guess the US maintains a constant SF presence down there for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

corpsesarefun wrote:I'm still confused as to how anyone could claim america has "made the world more free", how would you measure the contribution of america towards global freedom? for that matter how would you go about measuring global freedom at all?

it's not exactly something you can measure with a ruler, but there are plenty of metrics. How many people have access to free elections, free speech, religious or economic freedoms, etc.

By nearly any measure, the world is freer now than in 1939.

Polonius wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I'm still confused as to how anyone could claim america has "made the world more free", how would you measure the contribution of america towards global freedom? for that matter how would you go about measuring global freedom at all?

it's not exactly something you can measure with a ruler, but there are plenty of metrics. How many people have access to free elections, free speech, religious or economic freedoms, etc.

By nearly any measure, the world is freer now than in 1939.

And how can you accurately measure the impact of america on world freedom?

Amaya wrote:So the constant drug wars and powerful cartels are meaningless because South America doesn't routinely have massive, overt wars?

I guess the US maintains a constant SF presence down there for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

You're confusing "not nearly as bad" with "not bad at all."

That latin america suffers internal strife is undeniable. But it hasn't led to the true problems of war, such as economic collapse, food insecurity, etc.

I'd rather live through a drug war than an ethnic cleansing or a famine.

Frazzled wrote:

Amaya wrote:South America does suffer, to an extent, endless wars and is influenced more by a world power (America) than Africa is so comparing the two regions is a mistake.

Really? Outside of that Falklands thing, what was the last major war in South America?

Well I'm sure that WE may not consider it "major" but the last real war in south America was around 1995. There were some military incursions into Ecuador by Columbia in the 2000's: 2007 or 08 IIRC.

corpsesarefun wrote:

Polonius wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I'm still confused as to how anyone could claim america has "made the world more free", how would you measure the contribution of america towards global freedom? for that matter how would you go about measuring global freedom at all?

it's not exactly something you can measure with a ruler, but there are plenty of metrics. How many people have access to free elections, free speech, religious or economic freedoms, etc.

By nearly any measure, the world is freer now than in 1939.

And how can you accurately measure the impact of america on world freedom?

You can't. Which is why the article was listed as opinion, not the result of sociological study.

You can make the argument. America has been a world superpower for 65 years, and the world is much better off now than previously. Maybe the US had nothing to with it. Maybe the US directly or indirectly caused nearly all of it. It's probably somewhere in the middle.

You could also look for the actions of various world actors, and try to track the consequences.

Amaya wrote:So the constant drug wars and powerful cartels are meaningless because South America doesn't routinely have massive, overt wars?

I guess the US maintains a constant SF presence down there for absolutely no reason whatsoever.

Here's something I've never done before. Why don't you put me on your "ignore" list. It will save us both a lot of trouble.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

corpsesarefun wrote:

Polonius wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I'm still confused as to how anyone could claim america has "made the world more free", how would you measure the contribution of america towards global freedom? for that matter how would you go about measuring global freedom at all?

it's not exactly something you can measure with a ruler, but there are plenty of metrics. How many people have access to free elections, free speech, religious or economic freedoms, etc.

By nearly any measure, the world is freer now than in 1939.

And how can you accurately measure the impact of america on world freedom?

Germany and Japan both are no longer dictatorships, make excellent cars, and are generally polite.

Or maybe you shouldn't compare two dissimilar regions in an attempt to prove that stability is not a product of a world power?

Amaya wrote:Or maybe you shouldn't compare two dissimilar regions in an attempt to prove that stability is not a product of a world power?

I didn't. You invented that argument in your head. HellloooooooMcFlyyyyy!!!
I used it as an example of an area where there isn't one dominant power.

Ah, yes, a world where Aldous Huxley and George Orwell can both be venerated as the prophets they are. I'm so proud...

Frazzled wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

corpsesarefun wrote:

Polonius wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I'm still confused as to how anyone could claim america has "made the world more free", how would you measure the contribution of america towards global freedom? for that matter how would you go about measuring global freedom at all?

it's not exactly something you can measure with a ruler, but there are plenty of metrics. How many people have access to free elections, free speech, religious or economic freedoms, etc.

By nearly any measure, the world is freer now than in 1939.

And how can you accurately measure the impact of america on world freedom?

Germany and Japan both are no longer dictatorships, make excellent cars, and are generally polite.

They weren't dictatorships before the US came into existence either

corpsesarefun wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

corpsesarefun wrote:

Polonius wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I'm still confused as to how anyone could claim america has "made the world more free", how would you measure the contribution of america towards global freedom? for that matter how would you go about measuring global freedom at all?

it's not exactly something you can measure with a ruler, but there are plenty of metrics. How many people have access to free elections, free speech, religious or economic freedoms, etc.

By nearly any measure, the world is freer now than in 1939.

And how can you accurately measure the impact of america on world freedom?

Germany and Japan both are no longer dictatorships, make excellent cars, and are generally polite.

Well actually...Japan was.
They weren't dictatorships before the US came into existence either

Frazzled wrote:

How about a world dominated by no-one?

Killing, lots and lots of killing (Middle East) or not (South America).

So apparently South America doesn't have a lot of killing because they don't have 'major' wars involving tanks.

Even though crime and drug wars are rampant.

Are you a troll or just ignorant?

Amaya wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

How about a world dominated by no-one?

Killing, lots and lots of killing (Middle East) or not (South America).

So apparently South America doesn't have a lot of killing because they don't have 'major' wars involving tanks.

Even though crime and drug wars are rampant.

Are you a troll or just ignorant?

Taken a look in the mirror lately?

I have some great real estate to sell you in Venezuela.

I like the US. They let me rule my own little island however I like so long as I don't piss them off too much. VIVA TROPICO!

Amaya wrote:I have some great real estate to sell you in Venezuela.

You're fixated on Venezuela. That is wrong. You should be fixated on Brazil. In the game of who can party like a rock star, Brazil is a world power. Venezuela is merely second tier.

Amaya wrote:I have some great real estate to sell you in Venezuela.

Is there oil underneath it?