I'm so sick of this illegal bullshit. I'll do d/l whatever I please and feel no moral wrongdoing for it. There is no such thing as intellectual property period. No one has any right to claim as their own any idea I don't care how unique or convoluted. Copying =! Stealing.
I think a caveat should be made to your Roman Way point "don't destroy, rather modify (for example: don't change customs, religion, just add yours)". This was only the outcome Romans preferred when conquering new lands. If the locals didn't go along they had no problem exterminating the entire population which worked quite well. You mention the so-called incredible resistance of the Jews which is false at least insofar if you judge resistance by its success. The jews were completely and utterly crushed by the Roman nation where all the males were slaughtered and all females sold into slavery. I have no idea why you marked Roman rule over that area as a failure. I would agree that a big mistake was by the Romans in taking Germania which was mostly due to the incompetence of the varus who led 3 legions to their complete destruction in the teutoberg forest.
What do you mean our training and their training are classified? Maybe in the sense that the military doesn't reveal in detail the directions on how to fire a stinger missle or whatever but there has been plenty of coverage of the training that goes into becoming a marine, or military officer etc. Surely we can also judge the training by the results. Look at Top Gun which was an air-to-air combat school that began during the Vietnam War that resulted in huge improvement of kill to loss ratio from something around (approximating) 3 to 1 to 10 or 15 to 1. Let me make this clear that this huge improvement in kills wasn't the result of some new technology (they were still using the same fighter aircraft) which is one example that renders false your statement that advanced training is a result of advanced technology. Again I'm not a military expert so I can't specify what exactly enabled those who were in top gun to so greatly improve their kill ratio but it's clear that it had nothing to do with a step in the level of technology those pilots flew. It's true that most of our modern day warriors do train with advanced technology and that it does play a role in how we conduct war but one cannot forgot the essential human element and culture in all this. Just because a country can produce advanced military weapons does not mean necessarily that they will or can produce a good military. As an institution our military has far more experience both in terms of years it has been in existence as well as the number of wars it has been part of. After bad experiences in Vietnam our military adapted and now it is an all volunteer professional army which performs much better than an army filled with draftees who don't necessarily want to fight. I don't know much about the Chinese army but China being communist and all I doubt their army is volunteer based. It's true given we don't have recent examples how China's army performs it's hard to really know their true strength and ability but I don't believe a military can be that effective unless it has been engaged in at least a couple of wars to see how it's strategies and tactics hold up in reality. China hasn't been engaged in any major conflict since the Korean war and that army is from a different time in history and not of much use to guage the effectivness of their current military. The U.S. on the other hand has the experience of Vietnam, Kosovo, Gulf war 1, and 2. Another interesting fact about China is given it's one child policy it's inevitable that as the main population now ages and becomes old they will have a hard time continuing to grow as they are now which might also be said of the U.S. but to lesser extent I think.
All said, it's highly unlikely the U.S. and China will ever engage in a conventional war since both are nuclear powers.
"Iraq isn't large enough to qualify as a war, it never was, it was a joke when we violated UN Orders and invaded iraq the first time (he did have permission to invade kuwait by why on earth should he have to ask permission?) --- WTF are you talking about, we didn't violate any UN orders in Gulf War 1 or 2. Gulf War 1 never technically ended it was just suspended with a ceasfire just like between South Korea and North Korea.
and it was a joke when we did it this time. Us fighting any nation in the middle east is simply bullying those who are two week to defend. It doesn't matter if it's us, russia, or china, they would fall in a week or less if the fight were taken seriously." ------ Well let's just say that if Russia or China invaded Iraq there would be a hell of a lot more casulties especially civilians and that no it would very likely take them longer then two weeks to take all of Iraq. You also shouldn't discount the amount of organization and planning required to conduct any war and considering how smoothly this one ran the U.S. military deserves plenty of praise for the invasion part of the war.
From my understanding the whole point is when China and everyone signed into the WTO with trade agreements they also agreed not to artificially hold low their currencies or anything else that goes against free trade. For example the U.S. imposed tariffs on foreign steel not too long ago to protect our home industry but other countries brought this to the WTO legal court or something along those lines and they indeed found that that action wasn't acceptable. The U.S. I heard was in the process of appealing the decision but that should go to show you that WTO has some major clout. What China goes against what they agreed to when entering the WTO. The WTO is essential for China's economic growth so the WTO does hold enough power to force China to play by the rules. China technically just as any other sovereign nation can do what it wants with it's currency but this whole idea of free trade they signed onto when they became a member of the WTO prohibits this because it goes against the idea of free trade because by undervaluing your currency industries in China gain an unfair and unnatural advantage over their foreign competitors.
Ok it's not simply technology that makes U.S. better militarily then China at this point in time. It's also training which I mentioned but you seem to have wholly forgotten in your response. I'm not saying China have sticks for weapons but nevertheless they're still very much outgunned by the U.S. We have complete air superiority, naval superiority, and land superiority. This last invasion of Iraq I wouldn't call a joke but it was obviously extremely one sided. Nevertheless the one sideness wasn't due to just Iraq's military weakness but also to the U.S. strength. This war would have had far more military & civilian casulties and would have lasted far longer had another country other then U.S. invaded Iraq such as China. The fact is the U.S. military accomplished unprecedented military achievements in the invasion of Iraq this past march and in 1991 in terms of speed, organization, and professionalism. Now I'm not saying that the U.S. military will always be able to maintain this military edge over everyone else but it seems pretty clear to me that no other military force can take us on and win right now. I'm not claiming to be a military expert but I think I've learned enough not to judge a military force simply by it's level of technology and the number of troops it has. Judging by how smoothly the invasion in Iraq went it's clear the U.S. military is not lacking in any of the essentials I've listed above including experience. I can't say the same for China.
Just you wait. As soon as we get over this North Korea Crisis where we need China's assistance expect that in some time in the not so distant future the U.S. will pressure the World Trade Center to get China to change it illegal ways of artificially holding low it's foreign currency.
Another point, right now the U.S. holds complete military supremacy over every country including China. If we engaged in a conventional war with China let there be no doubt that we would defeat them quite quickly. There numerical superiority is clearly offset today by the superior training and technology of our military which makes every one of our soldiers more then likely worth more then 10 or 100 of theirs. Things can change but I really think this China is going to be the World's next overlord mentality rather foolish. They'll become more influential in the world but then so will India in the future.
E-voting could make it possible for the implementation of a true democratic system akin to the one of ancient Athens where every citizen partook in all of the state decisions. There's still the question of whether this would be better for the security and prosperity of a state then our current system of employing a small group of people known as politicians to handle all governmental affairs. Nevertheless at the very least one could allow the people to decide for themselves what laws they want implemented in the state.
Slashdot Mirror
Wonderful idea also considering that if the US has enough coal to power our country for over 100 hunders.
I'm so sick of this illegal bullshit. I'll do d/l whatever I please and feel no moral wrongdoing for it. There is no such thing as intellectual property period. No one has any right to claim as their own any idea I don't care how unique or convoluted. Copying =! Stealing.
That's what being the world super power is all about. The U.S. calls the shots.
I think a caveat should be made to your Roman Way point "don't destroy, rather modify (for example: don't change customs, religion, just add yours)". This was only the outcome Romans preferred when conquering new lands. If the locals didn't go along they had no problem exterminating the entire population which worked quite well. You mention the so-called incredible resistance of the Jews which is false at least insofar if you judge resistance by its success. The jews were completely and utterly crushed by the Roman nation where all the males were slaughtered and all females sold into slavery. I have no idea why you marked Roman rule over that area as a failure. I would agree that a big mistake was by the Romans in taking Germania which was mostly due to the incompetence of the varus who led 3 legions to their complete destruction in the teutoberg forest.
What do you mean our training and their training are classified? Maybe in the sense that the military doesn't reveal in detail the directions on how to fire a stinger missle or whatever but there has been plenty of coverage of the training that goes into becoming a marine, or military officer etc. Surely we can also judge the training by the results. Look at Top Gun which was an air-to-air combat school that began during the Vietnam War that resulted in huge improvement of kill to loss ratio from something around (approximating) 3 to 1 to 10 or 15 to 1. Let me make this clear that this huge improvement in kills wasn't the result of some new technology (they were still using the same fighter aircraft) which is one example that renders false your statement that advanced training is a result of advanced technology. Again I'm not a military expert so I can't specify what exactly enabled those who were in top gun to so greatly improve their kill ratio but it's clear that it had nothing to do with a step in the level of technology those pilots flew. It's true that most of our modern day warriors do train with advanced technology and that it does play a role in how we conduct war but one cannot forgot the essential human element and culture in all this. Just because a country can produce advanced military weapons does not mean necessarily that they will or can produce a good military. As an institution our military has far more experience both in terms of years it has been in existence as well as the number of wars it has been part of. After bad experiences in Vietnam our military adapted and now it is an all volunteer professional army which performs much better than an army filled with draftees who don't necessarily want to fight. I don't know much about the Chinese army but China being communist and all I doubt their army is volunteer based. It's true given we don't have recent examples how China's army performs it's hard to really know their true strength and ability but I don't believe a military can be that effective unless it has been engaged in at least a couple of wars to see how it's strategies and tactics hold up in reality. China hasn't been engaged in any major conflict since the Korean war and that army is from a different time in history and not of much use to guage the effectivness of their current military. The U.S. on the other hand has the experience of Vietnam, Kosovo, Gulf war 1, and 2. Another interesting fact about China is given it's one child policy it's inevitable that as the main population now ages and becomes old they will have a hard time continuing to grow as they are now which might also be said of the U.S. but to lesser extent I think. All said, it's highly unlikely the U.S. and China will ever engage in a conventional war since both are nuclear powers. "Iraq isn't large enough to qualify as a war, it never was, it was a joke when we violated UN Orders and invaded iraq the first time (he did have permission to invade kuwait by why on earth should he have to ask permission?) --- WTF are you talking about, we didn't violate any UN orders in Gulf War 1 or 2. Gulf War 1 never technically ended it was just suspended with a ceasfire just like between South Korea and North Korea. and it was a joke when we did it this time. Us fighting any nation in the middle east is simply bullying those who are two week to defend. It doesn't matter if it's us, russia, or china, they would fall in a week or less if the fight were taken seriously." ------ Well let's just say that if Russia or China invaded Iraq there would be a hell of a lot more casulties especially civilians and that no it would very likely take them longer then two weeks to take all of Iraq. You also shouldn't discount the amount of organization and planning required to conduct any war and considering how smoothly this one ran the U.S. military deserves plenty of praise for the invasion part of the war.
From my understanding the whole point is when China and everyone signed into the WTO with trade agreements they also agreed not to artificially hold low their currencies or anything else that goes against free trade. For example the U.S. imposed tariffs on foreign steel not too long ago to protect our home industry but other countries brought this to the WTO legal court or something along those lines and they indeed found that that action wasn't acceptable. The U.S. I heard was in the process of appealing the decision but that should go to show you that WTO has some major clout. What China goes against what they agreed to when entering the WTO. The WTO is essential for China's economic growth so the WTO does hold enough power to force China to play by the rules. China technically just as any other sovereign nation can do what it wants with it's currency but this whole idea of free trade they signed onto when they became a member of the WTO prohibits this because it goes against the idea of free trade because by undervaluing your currency industries in China gain an unfair and unnatural advantage over their foreign competitors.
Ok it's not simply technology that makes U.S. better militarily then China at this point in time. It's also training which I mentioned but you seem to have wholly forgotten in your response. I'm not saying China have sticks for weapons but nevertheless they're still very much outgunned by the U.S. We have complete air superiority, naval superiority, and land superiority. This last invasion of Iraq I wouldn't call a joke but it was obviously extremely one sided. Nevertheless the one sideness wasn't due to just Iraq's military weakness but also to the U.S. strength. This war would have had far more military & civilian casulties and would have lasted far longer had another country other then U.S. invaded Iraq such as China. The fact is the U.S. military accomplished unprecedented military achievements in the invasion of Iraq this past march and in 1991 in terms of speed, organization, and professionalism. Now I'm not saying that the U.S. military will always be able to maintain this military edge over everyone else but it seems pretty clear to me that no other military force can take us on and win right now. I'm not claiming to be a military expert but I think I've learned enough not to judge a military force simply by it's level of technology and the number of troops it has. Judging by how smoothly the invasion in Iraq went it's clear the U.S. military is not lacking in any of the essentials I've listed above including experience. I can't say the same for China.
Just you wait. As soon as we get over this North Korea Crisis where we need China's assistance expect that in some time in the not so distant future the U.S. will pressure the World Trade Center to get China to change it illegal ways of artificially holding low it's foreign currency.
Another point, right now the U.S. holds complete military supremacy over every country including China. If we engaged in a conventional war with China let there be no doubt that we would defeat them quite quickly. There numerical superiority is clearly offset today by the superior training and technology of our military which makes every one of our soldiers more then likely worth more then 10 or 100 of theirs. Things can change but I really think this China is going to be the World's next overlord mentality rather foolish. They'll become more influential in the world but then so will India in the future.
E-voting could make it possible for the implementation of a true democratic system akin to the one of ancient Athens where every citizen partook in all of the state decisions. There's still the question of whether this would be better for the security and prosperity of a state then our current system of employing a small group of people known as politicians to handle all governmental affairs. Nevertheless at the very least one could allow the people to decide for themselves what laws they want implemented in the state.