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.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:The United States is unquestionably a nation. It probably has a stronger national identity than most other nations including the UK -- The American Dream.

The reason it isn't the greatest nation is because it hasn't been around long enough and hasn't had the opportunity to so as much stuff as the UK. If the era of nations persists, then perhaps the USA will be able to overtake the UK in terms of achievements, however we are considering the current situation.

China has been around for a long time, but for much of that time it hasn't been a nation, and its achievements more or less ran out in the middle ages.

Obviously I am classing achievements as progress in art, literature, technology, and social and political life as "good" things.

I'm sorry? What? The US was the first nation to harness and weaponize the power of the atom. The US was the first (and only) nation to put a man on the moon. The US was the first (and only) nation to send a probe out beyond the solar system. The US has a larger Navy than the next ten navies combined (and lets not even mention the rest of the US military, the Marine Corps alone is larger and more capable than most nations entire military forces), an achievement that Great Britain/the UK, at the height of its power, could only dream of. Americans are responsible for manned powered flight, the telephone, usable electricity, radios, automobiles, microwave ovens, nuclear energy, satellite communications, gps, and a host of other technologies that are necessary for luxurious modern day lifestyles. US music, television, and films have dominated the world scene for the last half century. Hollywood produces films that have global appeal and in many nations outstrips the popularity of their own domestic movie industry. American culture and history has influenced and inspired foreign writers and filmmakers, resulting in works of literature such as Winnetou, massively beloved by German and other European populations, as well as Spaghetti Western films that have defined that genre. American culture has permeated the world scene, I can go to almost any nation in the world and find at least one native of that country wearing a Yankees cap or some other article clothing relating to American sports, culture, or entertainment. In some parts of the world, especially in the western hemisphere, this is the norm, rather than the exception. The US still has 'colonies' all around the globe: Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, American Samoa, Wake Island, Midway, etc. not to mention a global network of military bases, the sun truly never does set on the United States. At one time or another, the US controlled or occupied the Panama Canal, the Phillippines, Cuba, Nicaragua, Veracruz, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, Greenland, Iceland, Austria, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan. I can find a McDonalds in almost any corner of our spherical globe. What exactly has Great Britain done in terms of achievement that could possibly hope to outclass the US? You had a global empire, this is true and a powerful navy (that in relative terms was never nearly as powerful as the current US Navy), and during the British Invasion period you threw some pretty great bands our way, but chances are you'll hear people listening to just as many (if not more) American bands being listened to on the world scene as you would British.

I'm sure if i could be bothered i could make a block of text far larger than that one but i really can't be...
Also @Dajobe please stop saying England and not the UK. They are not the same things and everytime you say it the Welsh, Scottish and Irish get very irate.

pruplefood, that was just 5 minutes off the top of my head, I could make an even bigger block of text than that, I just chose to highlight the important bits, and even now I'm realizing I missed stuff, like wall street, the fact that global trading is done using the US Dollar, the worlds economy is more or less slave-rigged to the US, etc. etc. etc.

purplefood wrote:
Also @Dajobe please stop saying England and not the UK. They are not the same things and everytime you say it the Welsh, Scottish and Irish get very irate.

Yeah but let's be honest, they don't count

Take into account the relative sizes of each nation and then weigh them on their achievements...
It's easy to do things when you're big.
Making one of the biggest empires in the history of mankind starting from a country that is pretty damn small when you get down to it is fairly impressive.
Incidentally i found out that my home city is almost a thousand years old today... you learn something new everyday.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

filbert wrote:

purplefood wrote:
Also @Dajobe please stop saying England and not the UK. They are not the same things and everytime you say it the Welsh, Scottish and Irish get very irate.

Yeah but let's be honest, they don't count

Shush...
If they hear you it'll be braveheart all over again and we don't have the option to execute them any more...

Ahtman wrote:

Flashman wrote:

Ahtman wrote:This must be where the USA gets its overinflated sense of self worth from. We often confuse having a history with being great as well.

You need castles to have a history

*Looks disappointingly at pot-belly*

I've set siege to that castle a couple times too many...

purplefood wrote:Take into account the relative sizes of each nation and then weigh them on their achievements...
It's easy to do things when you're big.
Making one of the biggest empires in the history of mankind starting from a country that is pretty damn small when you get down to it is fairly impressive.
Incidentally i found out that my home city is almost a thousand years old today... you learn something new everyday.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

filbert wrote:

purplefood wrote:
Also @Dajobe please stop saying England and not the UK. They are not the same things and everytime you say it the Welsh, Scottish and Irish get very irate.

Yeah but let's be honest, they don't count

Shush...
If they hear you it'll be braveheart all over again and we don't have the option to execute them any more...

Making one of the biggest empires in the history of mankind starting from a country that is pretty damn small when you get down to it is fairly impressive.
Incidentally i found out that my home city is almost a thousand years old today... you learn something new everyday.

Thats the thing, the US started out as a very small little sliver of territory with a smaller population than even jolly ole england had, whats more it was in fact 13 separate countries, each one of which was individually smaller, that united for a common purpose. Just throwing it out there because its a little known fact in my own country,so I can only imagine that its totally unknown outside of it, but the US is in fact 50 separate nations that share sovereignty with the federal government. Thats why its the United STATES and not United STATE. This is not so much the case any longer due to the rise of federal power around the time period of the Great Depression and WW2, but the early United States was very much different than it is today, with the States being considerably more powerful and relatively independent.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:The United States is unquestionably a nation. It probably has a stronger national identity than most other nations including the UK -- The American Dream.

The reason it isn't the greatest nation is because it hasn't been around long enough and hasn't had the opportunity to so as much stuff as the UK. If the era of nations persists, then perhaps the USA will be able to overtake the UK in terms of achievements, however we are considering the current situation.

China has been around for a long time, but for much of that time it hasn't been a nation, and its achievements more or less ran out in the middle ages.

Obviously I am classing achievements as progress in art, literature, technology, and social and political life as "good" things.

I'm sorry? What? The US was the first nation to harness and weaponize the power of the atom. The US was the first (and only) nation to put a man on the moon. The US was the first (and only) nation to send a probe out beyond the solar system. The US has a larger Navy than the next ten navies combined (and lets not even mention the rest of the US military, the Marine Corps alone is larger and more capable than most nations entire military forces), an achievement that Great Britain/the UK, at the height of its power, could only dream of. Americans are responsible for manned powered flight, the telephone, usable electricity, radios, automobiles, microwave ovens, nuclear energy, satellite communications, gps, and a host of other technologies that are necessary for luxurious modern day lifestyles. US music, television, and films have dominated the world scene for the last half century. Hollywood produces films that have global appeal and in many nations outstrips the popularity of their own domestic movie industry. American culture and history has influenced and inspired foreign writers and filmmakers, resulting in works of literature such as Winnetou, massively beloved by German and other European populations, as well as Spaghetti Western films that have defined that genre. American culture has permeated the world scene, I can go to almost any nation in the world and find at least one native of that country wearing a Yankees cap or some other article clothing relating to American sports, culture, or entertainment. In some parts of the world, especially in the western hemisphere, this is the norm, rather than the exception. The US still has 'colonies' all around the globe: Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, American Samoa, Wake Island, Midway, etc. not to mention a global network of military bases, the sun truly never does set on the United States. At one time or another, the US controlled or occupied the Panama Canal, the Phillippines, Cuba, Nicaragua, Veracruz, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, Greenland, Iceland, Austria, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan. I can find a McDonalds in almost any corner of our spherical globe. What exactly has Great Britain done in terms of achievement that could possibly hope to outclass the US? You had a global empire, this is true and a powerful navy (that in relative terms was never nearly as powerful as the current US Navy), and during the British Invasion period you threw some pretty great bands our way, but chances are you'll hear people listening to just as many (if not more) American bands being listened to on the world scene as you would British.

Proud American is proud.

*Offers high-five*

chaos0xomega wrote:

purplefood wrote:Take into account the relative sizes of each nation and then weigh them on their achievements...
It's easy to do things when you're big.
Making one of the biggest empires in the history of mankind starting from a country that is pretty damn small when you get down to it is fairly impressive.
Incidentally i found out that my home city is almost a thousand years old today... you learn something new everyday.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

filbert wrote:

purplefood wrote:
Also @Dajobe please stop saying England and not the UK. They are not the same things and everytime you say it the Welsh, Scottish and Irish get very irate.

Yeah but let's be honest, they don't count

Shush...
If they hear you it'll be braveheart all over again and we don't have the option to execute them any more...

Making one of the biggest empires in the history of mankind starting from a country that is pretty damn small when you get down to it is fairly impressive.
Incidentally i found out that my home city is almost a thousand years old today... you learn something new everyday.

Thats the thing, the US started out as a very small little sliver of territory with a smaller population than even jolly ole england had, whats more it was in fact 13 separate countries, each one of which was individually smaller, that united for a common purpose. Just throwing it out there because its a little known fact in my own country,so I can only imagine that its totally unknown outside of it, but the US is in fact 50 separate nations that share sovereignty with the federal government. Thats why its the United STATES and not United STATE. This is not so much the case any longer due to the rise of federal power around the time period of the Great Depression and WW2, but the early United States was very much different than it is today, with the States being considerably more powerful and relatively independent.

You know that explains a lot...

Hooboy. Breaking it down into readable texts and responses...

chaos0xomega wrote:[
I'm sorry? What? The US was the first nation to harness and weaponize the power of the atom.

With the aid of a considerable amount of British research, and scientists from other nations, such as good old Albert Einstein. That little project could have been based in Wales and achieved the same result, its hardly something the US can claim sole credit for.

The US was the first (and only) nation to put a man on the moon. The US was the first (and only) nation to send a probe out beyond the solar system.

Accomplishments, true. However, the Russians were the first to put a man in space. And to be frank, if any other first world nation was prepared to throw the necessary money at it, they could do it as well. They've just got better things to spend their money on.

The US has a larger Navy than the next ten navies combined (and lets not even mention the rest of the US military, the Marine Corps alone is larger and more capable than most nations entire military forces)

And the Chinese have a bigger army. Your point? The US has the force to conduct a war to wipe out any third, or even second world nation they choose. But to be honest again, any first world nation would be capable of building a force to do that if they wanted to divert the amount of necessary money. You guys spend a ridiculous amount on your forces. Like the space department, building a crapload of carriers isn't something that would be impossible for the British. They just spend it on things like the NHS instead.

Americans are responsible for....the telephone,

A controversial claim of late.

....usable electricity, radios, automobiles, microwave ovens, nuclear energy, satellite communications, gps, and a host of other technologies that are necessary for luxurious modern day lifestyles.

Sure. And Fact is, technologies have been invented by other people. I could go from the Italian Camera Obscura, to drugs devised under the British Empire. This is hardly something America has a monopoly on.

US music, television, and films have dominated the world scene for the last half century.

Well. They've dominated areas in US influence. I doubt you'd find so many fans in Archangelsk.

But I quibble on that one, the fact is America does dominate the cinema department.

Hollywood produces films that have global appeal and in many nations outstrips the popularity of their own domestic movie industry.

I would question the global appeal part. I must admit that I personally, tend to find 95% of American films a dreadful bore. Most of what Hollywood churns out is pure junk, just the same action films and romcoms rehashed over and again. It's got to the point now where you expect the latest crappy comedy film with Will Farell/Adam Sandler/whoever in, as they're made seasonally. When it comes down to what I would consider to be cinematic greats, many other nations can contest it. Quantity of culture is not quality of culture, I would think, in this case.

American culture has permeated the world scene, I can go to almost any nation in the world and find at least one native of that country wearing a Yankees cap or some other article clothing relating to American sports, culture, or entertainment. In some parts of the world, especially in the western hemisphere, this is the norm, rather than the exception.

I can go to many places and find they drink tea and play cricket. I can go to many previously spanish places and find they consume spanish style cuisine. Again, not exclusive to America. And a tremendous amount of it is down to pure and simple financial colonialism, and attempting to continuously expand. Something which it could be argued, has already reached breaking point, there's nowhere left for American culture to go where it would be considered welcome.

The US still has 'colonies' all around the globe: Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, American Samoa, Wake Island, Midway, etc. not to mention a global network of military bases, the sun truly never does set on the United States.

To be frank, if you're going for the amount of geography controlled card, you're not even in the same league as the British Empire on this one.

At one time or another, the US controlled or occupied the Panama Canal, the Phillippines, Cuba, Nicaragua, Veracruz, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, Greenland, Iceland, Austria, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

See above comment.

I can find a McDonalds in almost any corner of our spherical globe.

Mcdonalds counts as a cultural achievement?

What exactly has Great Britain done in terms of achievement that could possibly hope to outclass the US?

To be honest, I'm wondering here what the US has done specifically to eclipse us, the Romans, or a dozen other nations throughout history. Military power is only ever relevant for the time necessary (more people on the globe will naturally equal more people in the various armies for example), there have been more invtentions made in the rest of the world if only by the fact the US is quite young, they don't even compete on a geographical scale, and as for cultural influence...well, what language are you speaking again?

The US is a powerful and influential nation, but no more powerful than Britain was during Pax Britannica, or the Romans during their ascension, relatively speaking. Not only that America cultural influence is very new and short lived. All these cultural influences you mention came along within the last 60 years or so. I'm sure if you reverted to the period of the British Empire, you'd find they had considerably more cultural influence on a greater proportion of the world during their time, then the Americans have now.

This is not so much the case any longer due to the rise of federal power around the time period of the Great Depression and WW2, but the early United States was very much different than it is today, with the States being considerably more powerful and relatively independent.

The Progressive Era gets no love anymore. You're also forgetting the very important Civil War and Reconstruction amendments. Power doesn't drastically shift much in the 1930's and WWII for the US (most of the shifts attributed to that time period actually happened beforehand). The 50's is where it's at yo

Kilkrazy wrote:The thread isn't about countries, it's about nations, which is a different concept.

Great Britain isn't a nation.

That said, GB does contain the most durable polity in the history of the world: England.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:The US is the greatest nation in the history of known history, and you know why? We alone have accomplished what every other nation in the history of forever could only dream of doing: we put a man, a human being, on the moon, and planted our flag there. The Mongols, Romans, Brits, Chinese, etc. etc. etc. never even came close.

That is the absolute oddest criteria for national quality I have ever heard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I'm sorry? What? The US was the first nation to harness and weaponize the power of the atom.

Without the UK and Canada it is unlikely that would have occurred.

chaos0xomega wrote:
The US has a larger Navy than the next ten navies combined (and lets not even mention the rest of the US military, the Marine Corps alone is larger and more capable than most nations entire military forces), an achievement that Great Britain/the UK, at the height of its power, could only dream of.

Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Vietnam, South Korea, and India all have larger military forces. The list gets even longer if we look at per capita totals.

Your figure regarding the number of ships is also wrong. The US has 286 ships. Russia has 233, Britain has 99, and France has 86. Moreover, thinking in those terms, the Royal Navy at the height of its power dwarfed every other blue-water force in the world with over 500 ships. The British possessed the largest, and most powerful fleet in the world up until WWII.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Americans are responsible for manned powered flight...

There are a lot of claims competing with the one by the Wrights.

chaos0xomega wrote:
...usable electricity...

The list of people that contributed to the development of usable electricity is extremely long and spans many nations.

chaos0xomega wrote:
...automobiles...

Nope, that was the Germans.

chaos0xomega wrote:
...satellite communications...

Russia was first, followed by Canada.

chaos0xomega wrote:
US music, television, and films have dominated the world scene for the last half century.

If you believe that, then you haven't done much traveling.

chaos0xomega wrote:
In some parts of the world, especially in the western hemisphere, this is the norm, rather than the exception.

No, no it isn't.

chaos0xomega wrote:
...Midway, etc.

Midway isn't a colony. Its a wildlife preserve that is part of the Hawaiian Island Chain.

chaos0xomega wrote:
What exactly has Great Britain done in terms of achievement that could possibly hope to outclass the US? Y

Created economics, analytic philosophy, the novel, English literature, political science, and industry?

Ketara wrote:Hooboy. Breaking it down into readable texts and responses...

chaos0xomega wrote:[
I'm sorry? What? The US was the first nation to harness and weaponize the power of the atom.

With the aid of a considerable amount of British research, and scientists from other nations, such as good old Albert Einstein. That little project could have been based in Wales and achieved the same result, its hardly something the US can claim sole credit for.

The US was the first (and only) nation to put a man on the moon. The US was the first (and only) nation to send a probe out beyond the solar system.

Accomplishments, true. However, the Russians were the first to put a man in space. And to be frank, if any other first world nation was prepared to throw the necessary money at it, they could do it as well. They've just got better things to spend their money on.

The US has a larger Navy than the next ten navies combined (and lets not even mention the rest of the US military, the Marine Corps alone is larger and more capable than most nations entire military forces)

And the Chinese have a bigger army. Your point? The US has the force to conduct a war to wipe out any third, or even second world nation they choose. But to be honest again, any first world nation would be capable of building a force to do that if they wanted to divert the amount of necessary money. You guys spend a ridiculous amount on your forces. Like the space department, building a crapload of carriers isn't something that would be impossible for the British. They just spend it on things like the NHS instead.

Americans are responsible for....the telephone,

A controversial claim of late.

....usable electricity, radios, automobiles, microwave ovens, nuclear energy, satellite communications, gps, and a host of other technologies that are necessary for luxurious modern day lifestyles.

Sure. And Fact is, technologies have been invented by other people. I could go from the Italian Camera Obscura, to drugs devised under the British Empire. This is hardly something America has a monopoly on.

US music, television, and films have dominated the world scene for the last half century.

Well. They've dominated areas in US influence. I doubt you'd find so many fans in Archangelsk.

But I quibble on that one, the fact is America does dominate the cinema department.

Hollywood produces films that have global appeal and in many nations outstrips the popularity of their own domestic movie industry.

I would question the global appeal part. I must admit that I personally, tend to find 95% of American films a dreadful bore. Most of what Hollywood churns out is pure junk, just the same action films and romcoms rehashed over and again. It's got to the point now where you expect the latest crappy comedy film with Will Farell/Adam Sandler/whoever in, as they're made seasonally. When it comes down to what I would consider to be cinematic greats, many other nations can contest it. Quantity of culture is not quality of culture, I would think, in this case.

American culture has permeated the world scene, I can go to almost any nation in the world and find at least one native of that country wearing a Yankees cap or some other article clothing relating to American sports, culture, or entertainment. In some parts of the world, especially in the western hemisphere, this is the norm, rather than the exception.

I can go to many places and find they drink tea and play cricket. I can go to many previously spanish places and find they consume spanish style cuisine. Again, not exclusive to America. And a tremendous amount of it is down to pure and simple financial colonialism, and attempting to continuously expand. Something which it could be argued, has already reached breaking point, there's nowhere left for American culture to go where it would be considered welcome.

The US still has 'colonies' all around the globe: Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, American Samoa, Wake Island, Midway, etc. not to mention a global network of military bases, the sun truly never does set on the United States.

To be frank, if you're going for the amount of geography controlled card, you're not even in the same league as the British Empire on this one.

At one time or another, the US controlled or occupied the Panama Canal, the Phillippines, Cuba, Nicaragua, Veracruz, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, Greenland, Iceland, Austria, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

See above comment.

I can find a McDonalds in almost any corner of our spherical globe.

Mcdonalds counts as a cultural achievement?

What exactly has Great Britain done in terms of achievement that could possibly hope to outclass the US?

To be honest, I'm wondering here what the US has done specifically to eclipse us, the Romans, or a dozen other nations throughout history. Military power is only ever relevant for the time necessary (more people on the globe will naturally equal more people in the various armies for example), there have been more invtentions made in the rest of the world if only by the fact the US is quite young, they don't even compete on a geographical scale, and as for cultural influence...well, what language are you speaking again?

The US is a powerful and influential nation, but no more powerful than Britain was during Pax Britannica, or the Romans during their ascension, relatively speaking. Not only that America cultural influence is very new and short lived. All these cultural influences you mention came along within the last 60 years or so. I'm sure if you reverted to the period of the British Empire, you'd find they had considerably more cultural influence on a greater proportion of the world during their time, then the Americans have now.

Proud Brit is proud.

*Offers high-five*

Don't forget, this Brits gave us the joy of football (soccer), with the power to make or break wars.

Swordwind wrote:Don't forget, this Brits gave us the joy of football (soccer), with the power to make or break wars.

Also, cricket, rugby (and American football by extension), baseball, golf, and tennis.

The British did a lot too, but then again they got a lot from the Romans and the Norse who acted like bees with knowledge and goods being the pollen.

England itself owned a lot of land, which is cool especially when said lands revolt against you and win.'

United States defeat England in Revolutionary War to become a nation.

Then there was the War of 1812, both sides take land and all is reconciled with the Natives losing out on this one.

Then we have the Monroe Doctrine; the US effectively ends European imperialism in the Western Hemisphere(this is kind of a big deal).

The US opens up Japan to the rest of the world via Commodore Perry and a few cannonballs.

The US threatens Canada, Chile, and some other nations before engaging in the Spanish American War which kicked the Spanish out of the western hemisphere once and for all.

The US aided the allies in WW1 and then in WW2, with the Marshall Plan funds were given to Europe to rebuild it.

Put a man on the moon, sure Russia was first to put up a satellite and a man in space but we went for the whole enchilada. This feat hasn't been done since and sure you can say that 'any country with money could do that' but they didn't.

Became a global super power in under 300 years.

Our culture can be felt anywhere, even near European landmarks you can find McDonalds restaurants(which helped end Communism by the way ).

England never kicked an entire country out of a hemisphere. They fought a 70 something year war that didn't do anything, needed help to beat Napolean and relied on American exports of raw goods.

halonachos wrote:
Then we have the Monroe Doctrine; the US effectively ends European imperialism in the Western Hemisphere(this is kind of a big deal).

Not really, Latin American rebels did that. Well, they did that until Napoleon II conquered Mexico during the ACW, and then there's Canada. The Monroe Doctrine was basically just an excuse for American politicians to whine about the immoral nature of colonialism, no one really cared about it because America couldn't do anything more than whine.

halonachos wrote:
The US opens up Japan to the rest of the world via Commodore Perry and a few cannonballs.

The Japanese forces opposing Tokugawa of course did nothing.

halonachos wrote:
Put a man on the moon, sure Russia was first to put up a satellite and a man in space but we went for the whole enchilada. This feat hasn't been done since and sure you can say that 'any country with money could do that' but they didn't.

Perhaps because it isn't particularly important.

halonachos wrote:
Our culture can be felt anywhere, even near European landmarks you can find McDonalds restaurants(which helped end Communism by the way ).

You know that language you're speaking isn't called "American" right?

halonachos wrote:
England never kicked an entire country out of a hemisphere.

Neither did the US. Spain is in the Western hemisphere.

Actually Dogma, the British supported it(if they couldn't have a colony nobody would).

The English language steals bits and pieces from everywhere, we have german cognates and other fun bits of grammar from other language structures. Don't forget the the Phonecians developed the alphabet and the Romans were using one long before any country.

As far as the opening up of Japan goes, Japan was an isolationist country so we decided to send some ships over there to open up their ports. They told us no and we sent a couple of cannonballs their way and forced them to open up.

Putting a man on the moon wasn't important? You do realize the vast amount of calculations that had to go into doing it shows a bit of something important.

Again, our culture can be felt everywhere and we've added to the vocabulary as well. Jeans, T-Shirt and various other words are used just like that in other languages.

T-Shirt=T-Shirt in English, Spanish, German, and many other languages.

The Monroe Doctrine was a bit of balls in my opinion. We couldn't back it up but we said it was so anyways and it also set a precedence for US influence on this side of the globe. Its why we have a lot of territories and protectorates this side of the world.

I also hear about Einstein being from Germany and other such things trying to dampen the success of the American nation. The point of America is that its a melting pot and once a person enters this soil and we hire them to work for us in exchange for them living here they become part of that aggregate that makes up a nation. Einstein was a German, but the US bought him and many other scientists.

Again, I would cite the rise to power of the United States in that short time frame compared to the longer periods of time it took other nations. Except for maybe the ancient time period because walking is slow.

halonachos wrote:Actually Dogma, the British supported it(if they couldn't have a colony nobody would).

They had two large colonies in what is now Canada after the Monroe Doctrine was established. They only accepted the doctrine because they knew the US couldn't enforce ti against them, and it gave them pretense to combat Spain.

halonachos wrote:
The English language steals bits and pieces from everywhere, we have german cognates and other fun bits of grammar from other language structures. Don't forget the the Phonecians developed the alphabet and the Romans were using one long before any country.

The point is that other cultures have global significance, meaning that the US is far from unique in that sense.

halonachos wrote:
As far as the opening up of Japan goes, Japan was an isolationist country so we decided to send some ships over there to open up their ports. They told us no and we sent a couple of cannonballs their way and forced them to open up.

Uh, no, that's not what happened. Japanese isolationism was an internally contentious issue for almost a century before the US cared about it.

halonachos wrote:
Putting a man on the moon wasn't important? You do realize the vast amount of calculations that had to go into doing it shows a bit of something important.

No, not really. It was important during the Cold War for the United States, but it has never been so for any other nation, except perhaps Russia.

halonachos wrote:
Again, our culture can be felt everywhere and we've added to the vocabulary as well. Jeans, T-Shirt and various other words are used just like that in other languages.

So have many other cultures.

halonachos wrote:
T-Shirt=T-Shirt in English, Spanish, German, and many other languages.

In Spanish it translates to camiseta.

halonachos wrote:
The Monroe Doctrine was a bit of balls in my opinion. We couldn't back it up but we said it was so anyways and it also set a precedence for US influence on this side of the globe. Its why we have a lot of territories and protectorates this side of the world.

First, that isn't balls, its an inability to assess one's own capacity to do a thing, which is why the Doctrine was ignored by almost every nation in the world.

Also, we only have 3 territories in the Western Hemisphere.

halonachos wrote:
I also hear about Einstein being from Germany and other such things trying to dampen the success of the American nation. The point of America is that its a melting pot and once a person enters this soil and we hire them to work for us in exchange for them living here they become part of that aggregate that makes up a nation. Einstein was a German, but the US bought him and many other scientists.

What? The US didn't buy Einstein. He never worked on a US government project.

halonachos wrote:
Again, I would cite the rise to power of the United States in that short time frame compared to the longer periods of time it took other nations. Except for maybe the ancient time period because walking is slow.

The second British Empire rose to power over ~30 years.

I have no problem with nationalism when its based on accurate information, but US nationalism almost never is. US citizens often claim things as examples of US prominence which have nothing to do with the nation in order to overestimate their own importance. Its honestly sad because there are plenty of things that the US actually did which are worthy of pride. Its like a playground argument over whose dad is stronger, only this one is between adults.

Yes, the only Canadian in the thread. Nows my time to shine...



Muricles out!

With the aid of a considerable amount of British research, and scientists from other nations, such as good old Albert Einstein. That little project could have been based in Wales and achieved the same result, its hardly something the US can claim sole credit for.

Sour Grapes. I suggest you read "The Uneasy Alliance: Roosevelt, Churchill, and the Atomic Bomb, 1940–1945". The vast majority of the funding was paid for by the US and conducted by US citizens (or at least immigrants to the US, another one of our many great national assets btw). Britain wasn't formally involved with the Manhattan Project until around December '43/January '44, and that was only because the British government was finally forced to acknowledge that it was incapable of pursuing the bomb on its own by the senior researchers of its own project, due to a lack of resources, etc. and the fact that what little info the US was willing to share with them proved that the US had well and away outpaced British efforts.

Accomplishments, true. However, the Russians were the first to put a man in space. And to be frank, if any other first world nation was prepared to throw the necessary money at it, they could do it as well. They've just got better things to spend their money on.

More sour grapes. The fact of the matter is that the US could afford to throw the necessary money at it, and had the (captured German scientists (again immigrants, a strong national asset) with their associated) scientific expertise for it. The only other nation that was willing to do the same thus far were, as you said, the Russkies, but half of their attempted missions were total failures.

And the Chinese have a bigger army. Your point? The US has the force to conduct a war to wipe out any third, or even second world nation they choose. But to be honest again, any first world nation would be capable of building a force to do that if they wanted to divert the amount of necessary money. You guys spend a ridiculous amount on your forces. Like the space department, building a crapload of carriers isn't something that would be impossible for the British. They just spend it on things like the NHS instead.

Sour grapes again. The real fact of the matter is that the space program and defense spending is a very small amount of the American GDP, and only 20% of the annual budget (compared to 43% for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, yeah, we spend more on public welfare and social programs than we do on defense). As for China, yes, they have more personnel, but they are actually cutting manpower and I don't really see them as a realistic threat. They would put up more of a fight than Iraq did, I'm more affraid of the insurgency that would result after the likely occupation than the PLA. Speaking of Iraq: "Iraq went from being the fourth largest army in the world to the second largest army in Iraq in 24 hours." Size =/= capability (and need I remind everyone that the Gulf War era Iraqi army had a decade of combat experience against Iran).

Americans are responsible for....the telephone,

A controversial claim of late.

Not really. Most of the other 'likely inventors' of the telephone were inventors, and in any case Bell's patent was the basis for the modern telephone, not Reis, Bourseul, or Manzetti.

Sure. And Fact is, technologies have been invented by other people. I could go from the Italian Camera Obscura, to drugs devised under the British Empire. This is hardly something America has a monopoly on.

No, but America has developed a lot of the technologies we take for granted today, most likely including the technologies that you are using to view and reply to this post.

Well. They've dominated areas in US influence. I doubt you'd find so many fans in Archangelsk.

No, but I'm sure I'd find plenty of ladies who would love to marry an American man and get the hell out of there

I would question the global appeal part. I must admit that I personally, tend to find 95% of American films a dreadful bore. Most of what Hollywood churns out is pure junk, just the same action films and romcoms rehashed over and again. It's got to the point now where you expect the latest crappy comedy film with Will Farell/Adam Sandler/whoever in, as they're made seasonally. When it comes down to what I would consider to be cinematic greats, many other nations can contest it. Quantity of culture is not quality of culture, I would think, in this case.

Yes, but you and I represent the educated minority in this world who realize how lame Hollywood is. The fact is that Hollywood has income streams coming in from all over the place, which means that someone out there likes this stuff (hell, even Kim Jong Il is into American cinema). Oh, and while we're arguing this point, I have to say I find Monty Python and most british comedy in general to be a dreadful bore. How is that stuff at all funny? I've heard the "its more intellectual, etc. " arguments before, stow it, explain to me how this is at all more intellectual and sophisticated comedy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhJQp-q1Y1s (I will admit I do find it slightly amusing, but really!!?)... and don't even get me started on Da Ali G Show.

I can go to many places and find they drink tea and play cricket. I can go to many previously spanish places and find they consume spanish style cuisine. Again, not exclusive to America. And a tremendous amount of it is down to pure and simple financial colonialism, and attempting to continuously expand. Something which it could be argued, has already reached breaking point, there's nowhere left for American culture to go where it would be considered welcome.

Disagreed. There are still plenty of places on the globe where Americans are very much greeted with open arms (I've traveled a bit recently, as well as met travelers from elsewhere, and know this to be true, either that or I'm very easy to lead on). Granted, thats probably because they assume we're all filthy stinkin rich and will blow thousands of dollars a second, but still.

To be frank, if you're going for the amount of geography controlled card, you're not even in the same league as the British Empire on this one.

That wasn't the point, it was the fact that the US has a global empire just as much as Britain once did. If you do want to compare the total amount of landmass controlled at their respective heights, there isn't that large a difference between the two, really it comes down to Canada basically making up the difference, but considering their basically the 51st state

Mcdonalds counts as a cultural achievement?

No, but its evidence of the American influence on the globe. I don't know of any foreign fast food chains (unless you want to surprise me with something I didn't know), I think Arthur Treachers Fish and Chips is as close as I can get to a British fast food chain, and I've not only never eaten there, but its not even British, its an American chain with a British name(and from what I understand a sad imitation of the real thing).

The US is a powerful and influential nation, but no more powerful than Britain was during Pax Britannica, or the Romans during their ascension, relatively speaking. Not only that America cultural influence is very new and short lived. All these cultural influences you mention came along within the last 60 years or so. I'm sure if you reverted to the period of the British Empire, you'd find they had considerably more cultural influence on a greater proportion of the world during their time, then the Americans have now.

Very much doubt that. First let me say that I feel the US has accomplished more, relatively speaking, in its short existence than Great Britain did in its much longer existence as a global power. As for influence there are nations all over the world that are frequently referred to as 'the 51st state' by its own populations to express the amount of influence the US has over its own domestic politics, including: Canada, Mexico, the UK, Australia, New Zealand (hell, they even have a political party that seeks to make this a reality), Iraq, Israel, Japan, Taiwan (in polls conducted in that country, something like 55% of residents actually favored becoming a US state as opposed to something like 30% wanting to reunite with China), Albania, and Poland... and those are only the ones that I know of (I'm very much an expansionistic, imperialistic bastard... and entertain myself by creating my own what-if? scenarios that could plausibly occur). Thats not to mention all the other nations or foreign territories that have at one point or another sought US statehood such as the Dominican Republic and Sicily.
When Great Britain was at its height, the areas that weren't under British rule, colonial or otherwise, feared conquest or actively fought against such a thing occurring. Hell, the areas of the world that WERE under colonial rule for the most part wanted to not be. Compare this to the modern US where Puerto Rico, the only US territory that could reasonably be expected to form a state (tiny islands are too tiny) is expected to have a referendum sometime in the next year or so (and I'll just throw out that the pro statehood New Progressive Party is the party of the sitting governor, about 3/4 of the sitting mayors, and about 2/3 of the territories legislative branch).

The Progressive Era gets no love anymore. You're also forgetting the very important Civil War and Reconstruction amendments. Power doesn't drastically shift much in the 1930's and WWII for the US (most of the shifts attributed to that time period actually happened beforehand). The 50's is where it's at yo

While you are right that reconstruction era and the progressive era saw the rise of a stronger federal government, the balance of power didn't really tip into the federal governments favor for good until the 30s. Hell, the US forces mustered for WW1 were still in large part state militias (in the form of the increasingly federalized National Guard).

That is the absolute oddest criteria for national quality I have ever heard.

I was trying to be humorous, why so serious?

Without the UK and Canada it is unlikely that would have occurred.

Again, I direct you to "The Uneasy Alliance: Roosevelt, Churchill, and the Atomic Bomb, 1940–1945".

Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Vietnam, South Korea, and India all have larger military forces. The list gets even longer if we look at per capita totals.

Your figure regarding the number of ships is also wrong. The US has 286 ships. Russia has 233, Britain has 99, and France has 86. Moreover, thinking in those terms, the Royal Navy at the height of its power dwarfed every other blue-water force in the world with over 500 ships. The British possessed the largest, and most powerful fleet in the world up until WWII.

Number of ships means nothing when a majority of Russia and Britains ships are smaller destroyers and corvettes. In terms of tonnage, which is the generally accepted way in military circles to compare the size of navies to one another, the US is larger than the next 13 combined (http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1467). At the height of its power, the Royal Navy only maintained a force larger than the next two combined (although they measured in a combination of number of ships and relative tonnage). As for having the largest military, I never claimed that, just that the US had a larger military than most other nations, and that this was evident in the fact that the Marines active strength was larger than most countries entire militaries (in fact the active strength of the Marines is only about 20,000 personnel less than the entire active strength of the British Armed Forces...). As for those countries you've listed, in terms of numbers, the US ranks second for active strength, behind China only. India ranks 3rd, N. Korea ranks 4th, Russia 5th, the rest all rank lower than that. Its only if you include reserve and paramilitary components that things get turned around, but reserve and paramilitary components are largely meaningless, as every nation has different policies regarding that, in some nations they are nothing more than conscripts who might have received basic rifle operation training, and nothing more, in others the reserve/paramilitary component is the equivalent of the regular army. In any case, I'm not really phased, as the two Gulf Wars have shown us, even the most fanatical and elite paramilitary forces break in the face of Western military power (in large part provided by the US), as witnessed when Republican Guard units crumbled just as quickly, if not more quickly than regular Iraqi army units.

There are a lot of claims competing with the one by the Wrights.

No,not really. The Wrights had the first successful flight of a powered heavier-than-air aircraft, PERIOD. There is a claim that some guy in Connecticut (part of the US, so its a moot point anyway) successfully flew a powered aircraft the years prior, but from what I understand there is zero evidence to support such a claim aside from a newspaper article. The French have a claim on the first flight of a powered lighter-than-air aircraft (balloons), which isn't quite so impressive given that balloons aren't really used for anything truly significant these days (regrettably so, viva le dirigible!). Everyone else only managed, at best controlled flight in a glider, or uncontrolled flight (resulting in a crash). A couple claim 'hops' which isn't flight, its unsustainable lift.

The list of people that contributed to the development of usable electricity is extremely long and spans many nations.

Fair enough, there were many contributions made globally.

Nope, that was the Germans.

I was under the impression that the Germans only managed what was in effect an over-glorified tricycle rather than an actual four wheeled car. Perhaps I am wrong on this one?

Russia was first, followed by Canada.

No, Russia put satellites with radio transmitters into orbit. The US was the first to put something in orbit capable of actually relaying a message, thus communications. Sputnik just made beeping noises (not even a morse code pattern...), to my knowledge Alouette (the first Canadian satellite) was a research probe, it didn't communicate anything. Telstar (developed by AT&T or Bell IIRC) is internationally accepted as the first communication satellite capable of receiving and relaying signals.

If you believe that, then you haven't done much traveling.

Yeah, I have actually. American artists frequently conduct world tours and draw massive crowds, just a few that have done so in recent memory: Michael Jackson, Lady Gaga, Foo Fighters, Linkin Park, and those are only the ones I remember reading about recently on my fb news feed (barring Michael Jackson who I know for a fact played to sell-out crowds wherever he went). Star Wars, Titanic, Avatar, Pirates of the Carribean, and the Lord of the Rings are all American Films and also have the highest worldwide grosses in the history of film. In fact, I'm not sure if there is a single non-American film in the top 50 highest worldwide gross list. Shows like Star Trek, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, House, Law and Order, CSI, South Park, Family Guy, the Simpsons, and Futurama are watched globally, and all happen to be American shows as well.

No, no it isn't.

Yes, yes it is. I just got back visiting my family in the Dominican Republic. It was impossible to go anywhere where someone wasn't wearing an article of clothing featuring the Yankees, Red Sox, or Mets.

Midway isn't a colony. Its a wildlife preserve that is part of the Hawaiian Island Chain.

Colony was in quotes, call it what you want, territory, wildlife preserve, whatever, its property of the US of A.

Created economics, analytic philosophy, the novel, English literature, political science, and industry?

Nobody created economics, political science, and industry. All of those things predate Britain by a very long time. I will accept that they developed leading (in some cases dominant) theories in those areas, but create them they did not.
I'm not sure they can claim the novel either, perhaps you will humor me by enlightening me to the situation, but it seems the novel was a gradual evolution to its current form from works of epic literature such as Illiad and the Odyssey.
I will give you analytic philosophy, but English Literature. Yes they invented that, and the American literature. Okay, so we don't have anything quite as great as Shakespeare,but we do have some truly great and monumental works of literature which are read globally, perhaps not quite as ubiquitous as the bards works, but Moby Dick is just as well known as Romeo and Juliet.

As for your later comment that the moon thing isn't important, then why have China, India (IIRC), and the European Space Agency all announced manned missions and the rest of the developed world all plan for unmanned exploration?

The Doctrine wasn't ignored by the british who at the time had a navy to back us up.

England as a nation has been around for quite some time, before America was just a glint in England's eye.

Jeans is still Jeans in most languages, and hamburger is well known as hamberguesa in spanish. Tea=Te, so yes we borrow a lot from other languages that in turn borrow from earlier languages. Medical terminology tends to be Latin while mathematics tends to be Greek which is why we have sextuplets and hexagons instead of hextuplets and hexagons or sextuplets and sexagons.

Days of the week are also surprisingly close as are months.

halonachos wrote:
As far as the opening up of Japan goes, Japan was an isolationist country so we decided to send some ships over there to open up their ports. They told us no and we sent a couple of cannonballs their way and forced them to open up.

I think you may be confusing that with the Opium Wars between Britain and China, because that's basically what happened to us. I don't recall the US doing this to any Asian country.

daaaanng, this thread got active once i left work.

Swordwind wrote:

halonachos wrote:
As far as the opening up of Japan goes, Japan was an isolationist country so we decided to send some ships over there to open up their ports. They told us no and we sent a couple of cannonballs their way and forced them to open up.

I think you may be confusing that with the Opium Wars between Britain and China, because that's basically what happened to us. I don't recall the US doing this to any Asian country.

We did it to Japan in 1853. It was one of the major events that sparked of the Bakumatsu (Demise of the Tokugawa Shogunate) and the Meji Restoration. Arguably the event sparked the series of events that gave birth to modern Japan... who we went to war with in 1941... Life's a

For More Info

It's the only instance I know of of the US using gunboat diplomacy.

nope, thats how the US ended japanese isolationism. look up commodore perry.

*shrug* I never was very interested in Japanese-American history, so thanks for that tidbit of knowledge.

The Brits still did it first though.

purplefood wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:The United States is unquestionably a nation. It probably has a stronger national identity than most other nations including the UK -- The American Dream.

The reason it isn't the greatest nation is because it hasn't been around long enough and hasn't had the opportunity to so as much stuff as the UK. If the era of nations persists, then perhaps the USA will be able to overtake the UK in terms of achievements, however we are considering the current situation.

China has been around for a long time, but for much of that time it hasn't been a nation, and its achievements more or less ran out in the middle ages.

Obviously I am classing achievements as progress in art, literature, technology, and social and political life as "good" things.

I'm sorry? What? The US was the first nation to harness and weaponize the power of the atom. The US was the first (and only) nation to put a man on the moon. The US was the first (and only) nation to send a probe out beyond the solar system. The US has a larger Navy than the next ten navies combined (and lets not even mention the rest of the US military, the Marine Corps alone is larger and more capable than most nations entire military forces), an achievement that Great Britain/the UK, at the height of its power, could only dream of. Americans are responsible for manned powered flight, the telephone, usable electricity, radios, automobiles, microwave ovens, nuclear energy, satellite communications, gps, and a host of other technologies that are necessary for luxurious modern day lifestyles. US music, television, and films have dominated the world scene for the last half century. Hollywood produces films that have global appeal and in many nations outstrips the popularity of their own domestic movie industry. American culture and history has influenced and inspired foreign writers and filmmakers, resulting in works of literature such as Winnetou, massively beloved by German and other European populations, as well as Spaghetti Western films that have defined that genre. American culture has permeated the world scene, I can go to almost any nation in the world and find at least one native of that country wearing a Yankees cap or some other article clothing relating to American sports, culture, or entertainment. In some parts of the world, especially in the western hemisphere, this is the norm, rather than the exception. The US still has 'colonies' all around the globe: Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, American Samoa, Wake Island, Midway, etc. not to mention a global network of military bases, the sun truly never does set on the United States. At one time or another, the US controlled or occupied the Panama Canal, the Phillippines, Cuba, Nicaragua, Veracruz, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, Greenland, Iceland, Austria, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan. I can find a McDonalds in almost any corner of our spherical globe. What exactly has Great Britain done in terms of achievement that could possibly hope to outclass the US? You had a global empire, this is true and a powerful navy (that in relative terms was never nearly as powerful as the current US Navy), and during the British Invasion period you threw some pretty great bands our way, but chances are you'll hear people listening to just as many (if not more) American bands being listened to on the world scene as you would British.

I'm sure if i could be bothered i could make a block of text far larger than that one but i really can't be...
Also @Dajobe please stop saying England and not the UK. They are not the same things and everytime you say it the Welsh, Scottish and Irish get very irate.

And Cornish!

chaos0xomega wrote:
Sour Grapes. I suggest you read "The Uneasy Alliance: Roosevelt, Churchill, and the Atomic Bomb, 1940–1945". The vast majority of the funding was paid for by the US and conducted by US citizens (or at least immigrants to the US, another one of our many great national assets btw). Britain wasn't formally involved with the Manhattan Project until around December '43/January '44, and that was only because the British government was finally forced to acknowledge that it was incapable of pursuing the bomb on its own by the senior researchers of its own project, due to a lack of resources, etc. and the fact that what little info the US was willing to share with them proved that the US had well and away outpaced British efforts.

Its not sour grapes, its accurate.

Britain was part of the Manhattan Project following the Qubec Agreement in August '43. Prior to that they shared information with the US.

Anyway, that article doesn't make an argument about cost, or relay any of the information you're using here. Honestly, based on your summary, I doubt you read it.

chaos0xomega wrote:
More sour grapes. The fact of the matter is that the US could afford to throw the necessary money at it, and had the (captured German scientists (again immigrants, a strong national asset) with their associated) scientific expertise for it. The only other nation that was willing to do the same thus far were, as you said, the Russkies, but half of their attempted missions were total failures.

Nasa's body count is larger by percentage and gross total than the that of the Soviet Space Program.

But hey, maybe Challenger and Colombia were supposed to explode in flight.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Sour grapes again. The real fact of the matter is that the space program and defense spending is a very small amount of the American GDP, and only 20% of the annual budget (compared to 43% for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, yeah, we spend more on public welfare and social programs than we do on defense).

So does every other developed nation in the world. The US, uniquely, spends a larger percentage of its GDP on defense than any other developed nation.

chaos0xomega wrote:
As for China, yes, they have more personnel, but they are actually cutting manpower and I don't really see them as a realistic threat.

You're the only person in the world holding that perspective.

chaos0xomega wrote:
They would put up more of a fight than Iraq did, I'm more affraid of the insurgency that would result after the likely occupation than the PLA. Speaking of Iraq: "Iraq went from being the fourth largest army in the world to the second largest army in Iraq in 24 hours." Size =/= capability (and need I remind everyone that the Gulf War era Iraqi army had a decade of combat experience against Iran).

The Chinese military police force is larger than the entire US military, and of rough technical equivalence. If the US tried to invade China it would lose badly.

Veterancy doesn't mean anything by necessity, just ask the British, French, or even the US.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Not really. Most of the other 'likely inventors' of the telephone were inventors, and in any case Bell's patent was the basis for the modern telephone, not Reis, Bourseul, or Manzetti.

Wrong. The invention of the telephone is one of the single most disputed topics in the history of technology.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Yes, but you and I represent the educated minority in this world who realize how lame Hollywood is. The fact is that Hollywood has income streams coming in from all over the place, which means that someone out there likes this stuff (hell, even Kim Jong Il is into American cinema).

So does every other major cinema "organization" in the world.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Disagreed. There are still plenty of places on the globe where Americans are very much greeted with open arms (I've traveled a bit recently, as well as met travelers from elsewhere, and know this to be true, either that or I'm very easy to lead on). Granted, thats probably because they assume we're all filthy stinkin rich and will blow thousands of dollars a second, but still.

There are places in which everyone from the developed world are greeted with open arms.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Very much doubt that. First let me say that I feel the US has accomplished more, relatively speaking, in its short existence than Great Britain did in its much longer existence as a global power.

Don't use quality as a euphemism for quantity.

chaos0xomega wrote:
As for influence there are nations all over the world that are frequently referred to as 'the 51st state' by its own populations to express the amount of influence the US has over its own domestic politics, including: Canada, Mexico, the UK, Australia, New Zealand (hell, they even have a political party that seeks to make this a reality), Iraq, Israel, Japan, Taiwan (in polls conducted in that country, something like 55% of residents actually favored becoming a US state as opposed to something like 30% wanting to reunite with China), Albania, and Poland.

And many US citizens often refer to it as a UN subject. Clearly then the UN is the foremost global power.

chaos0xomega wrote:
When Great Britain was at its height, the areas that weren't under British rule, colonial or otherwise, feared conquest or actively fought against such a thing occurring.

Uh, dude, "The 51st state." is a pejorative, not a loving expression.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Hell, the areas of the world that WERE under colonial rule for the most part wanted to not be. Compare this to the modern US where Puerto Rico, the only US territory that could reasonably be expected to form a state (tiny islands are too tiny) is expected to have a referendum sometime in the next year or so (and I'll just throw out that the pro statehood New Progressive Party is the party of the sitting governor, about 3/4 of the sitting mayors, and about 2/3 of the territories legislative branch).

You're comparing an island too small to have an independent economy to a place like India?

chaos0xomega wrote:
I was trying to be humorous, why so serious?

I find American nationalists to be deeply obnoxious.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Again, I direct you to "The Uneasy Alliance: Roosevelt, Churchill, and the Atomic Bomb, 1940–1945".

As I said, I already read it, it has nothing to do with the relative role of any of the nations involved. It deals with politics, not finance.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Number of ships means nothing when a majority of Russia and Britains ships are smaller destroyers and corvettes.

The majority of US ships are also smaller craft, so what?

chaos0xomega wrote:
In terms of tonnage, which is the generally accepted way in military circles to compare the size of navies to one another, the US is larger than the next 13 combined (http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1467).

That article doesn't mention naval tonnage. I've hearad 13x, 17x, 5x, and not a multiple of any of the top 10 at all.

chaos0xomega wrote:
At the height of its power, the Royal Navy only maintained a force larger than the next two combined (although they measured in a combination of number of ships and relative tonnage).

There were only two significant, non-English, imperial powers during the Victorian period.

chaos0xomega wrote:
As for those countries you've listed, in terms of numbers, the US ranks second for active strength, behind China only.

No, that's wrong, no one would ever classify Indian, Iranian, or North Korean military reserves/paramilitary as inactive. Well, wikipedia does, but wikipedia is not a worthwhile source. Hell, even wikipedia's source doesn't do that.

chaos0xomega wrote:
No,not really.

Uh, yes, really. Evidently you don't bother to actually read history, because this is the same issue you had with the telephone.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I was under the impression that the Germans only managed what was in effect an over-glorified tricycle rather than an actual four wheeled car. Perhaps I am wrong on this one?

Since when do cars have four wheels, and only four wheels?

Look up the name Benz, though.

chaos0xomega wrote:
No, Russia put satellites with radio transmitters into orbit

What do you think radio transmitters are for?

chaos0xomega wrote:
Yeah, I have actually. American artists frequently conduct world tours and draw massive crowds, just a few that have done so in recent memory: Michael Jackson, Lady Gaga, Foo Fighters, Linkin Park, and those are only the ones I remember reading about recently on my fb news feed (barring Michael Jackson who I know for a fact played to sell-out crowds wherever he went). Star Wars, Titanic, Avatar, Pirates of the Carribean, and the Lord of the Rings are all American Films and also have the highest worldwide grosses in the history of film. In fact, I'm not sure if there is a single non-American film in the top 50 highest worldwide gross list. Shows like Star Trek, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, House, Law and Order, CSI, South Park, Family Guy, the Simpsons, and Futurama are watched globally, and all happen to be American shows as well.

I'm wondering how this has anything to do with domination.

I guess the Chinese must have dominated the US culinary scene due to the prevalence of ethnic Chinese restaurants.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Yes, yes it is. I just got back visiting my family in the Dominican Republic. It was impossible to go anywhere where someone wasn't wearing an article of clothing featuring the Yankees, Red Sox, or Mets.

Right, the single largest producer of professional baseball players, per capita, would never be an outlier regarding the prevalence of attire related to professional baseball teams; especially if it happens to be a quasi-US territory.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Colony was in quotes, call it what you want, territory, wildlife preserve, whatever, its property of the US of A.

So is Wyoming.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Nobody created economics, political science, and industry. All of those things predate Britain by a very long time.

Uh, no, they don't. Economics began with Jeremy Bentham and Utilitarianism, Hobbes created what we call political science (as distinct from political philosophy), and industry as a process didn't exist until the industrial revolution.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I will accept that they developed leading (in some cases dominant) theories in those areas, but create them they did not.

Yeah, they did. The English refined what had been previously called "philosophy" into the social sciences.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I'm not sure they can claim the novel either, perhaps you will humor me by enlightening me to the situation, but it seems the novel was a gradual evolution to its current form from works of epic literature such as Illiad and the Odyssey.

The novel, in its current form, is almost entirely the result of Robinson Crusoe. Fiction existed before that, but not in the form represented by Defoe.

chaos0xomega wrote:
...but Moby Dick is just as well known as Romeo and Juliet.

I don't know about that. And, even if it is, Herman Melville isn't read publicly in China.

chaos0xomega wrote:
As for your later comment that the moon thing isn't important, then why have China, India (IIRC), and the European Space Agency all announced manned missions and the rest of the developed world all plan for unmanned exploration?

Because only the three organizations you listed did?

As I said, it was important to the US during the Cold War, but there isn't much support to send US citizens back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

halonachos wrote:The Doctrine wasn't ignored by the british who at the time had a navy to back us up.

Canada.

The novel, in its current form, is almost entirely the result of Robinson Crusoe. Fiction existed before that, but not in the form represented by Defoe.

I thought Hemingway was credited with the novel? Or is he just the modern novel?

LordofHats wrote:
We did it to Japan in 1853. It was one of the major events that sparked of the Bakumatsu (Demise of the Tokugawa Shogunate) and the Meji Restoration. Arguably the event sparked the series of events that gave birth to modern Japan... who we went to war with in 1941... Life's a

For More Info

That article cites internal dissent as the dominant force leading to the end of Tokugawa.

LordofHats wrote:
It's the only instance I know of of the US using gunboat diplomacy.

Really?

The 2nd Barbary War.
Great White Fleet.
Panama v. Colombia.
Everything related to Taiwan.
India v. Pakistan.
Vietnam.
Korea.
Kosovo.
Iraq.
Afghanistan.
Nicaragua.
Many, many others.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LordofHats wrote:
I thought Hemingway was credited with the novel? Or is he just the modern novel?

I've heard him given the American novel, but not the novel in general. Personally, I give him the masculine novel. He was the first author to de-feminize it.