Nope!

Gorden?

The historians that say imperialism wasn't based on economics don't take into account the economics of the time.

Yes, the colonies were probably inefficient in terms of what was gained for the price paid by the greater nation, if economics was the only goal.  However, the European colonial powers put an economic value on sheer power.  That was mercantilism: an extremely zero-sum economic system.  If I have X, France doesn't, which makes me better off.

It was inefficient, but that's what they thought worked.

> avogadro wrote:

> just because the US has a strong base doesnt mean it will last long. in today's world all it takes is a nuke or two getting in the wrong hands, and the American empire is destroyed. The US is also the most hated country and the most likely to get nuked. As nukes get into more and more people's hands, the number of governments the US can push around with its sizable millitary and economy will shrink and shrink.

Remind me tomorrow.  I want to make a new thread about this, okay?

> avogadro wrote:

> the past 100 years have far from sucked. the past 100 years have been the greatest in human history. no other century did we make such huge strides forward.

Stop taking my shit out of context!  I was only inferring that there have been a particularly high number of wars during the 20th century.  Jeez...

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that 1944 is a terrible time to compare global influence, considering a certain war taking place at the time?

> Neuch wrote:

> The issue being in more than just the middle east has nothing to do with the topic. The issue being more widespread, and Islam being the World's cancer, are not mutually exclusive. But hey, not all people are intelligent.

I've given you empirical examples of Islamic nations that don't fit your classification.  But hey, not all people are intelligent.

Oh, and slap Turkey onto that list as well!

> sKoE )= wrote:

> And you think...China would be unable to switch its production during the times of war?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_of_China

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_united_states#Manufacturing

USA is a leading manufacturing power in the world with a yearly industrial output 2,696,880 millions of US Dollars (data for January 2008). The US manufacturing is highly diversified and technologically advanced. Main industries are petroleum, steel, motor vehicles, aerospace, telecommunications, chemicals, electronics, food processing, consumer goods, lumber, mining.

Most likely, both could convert their industries to military production.  Electronics become logistical equipment, cars become tanks, etc.

HOWEVER... the US has one key industry which China noticably lacks: aerospace.  Not saying China couldn't convert automobile manufacturing into fighter construction, but that's a much bigger industry transformation.  The US industries require less steps to make the conversion, and air power is a necessity for superiority in modern warfare.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerospace_manufacturer

Industry is primarily in the US, the EU, and other nations... but noticably not holding an impressive place in China.

> Red_Rooster wrote:

> yes but most factories are not located in the US anyway... the us economy is based mostly on services (i.e. restaurants, hair salon, transportation) I dont think we can outproduce anyone but we can produce the highest quality of war materials. The US has a lot ofprivate companies like lockheed martin that produce the military weapons for the US military. These weapons can only be produced in the US.

Right and wrong at the same time.

We are service-based.  However, the government has established trade barriers that protect key industries from going overseas, such as the automobile industry (important in making tanks, jeeps, etc.), and the airline industry (planes!).

The industries that have been outsourced aren't of extreme consequence to a military conversion.  Seriously, how jeopardized will the US be if we can't produce military-grade bras?

> [RPA] Zulu wrote:

> ok... his father Is African . Africa was part of the Roman empire as a conquerd land.

1: Northern Africa was.  I believe his father was from Kenya.  No dice.

2: Obama has to have been born there!  That's the issue in question, not where his parents were from.

> [RPA] Zulu wrote:

> Remeber he is ofspring from a white mother whos descendents could be of Roman heratige. There were Black Romans

No, he's supposed to be born in part of the Roman Empire.

I'm not interested on bodies, but if you later decide you don't want your soul, give me a hollar in the community thread.