The American Flag....How do you feel about it? (Nevada, Maryland, money)

[66nexus]

I would actually piggyback off your list (w/ somewhat different rankings) and add military capability along w/ a few others. To me, being a 'great country' has to mean more than what it can offer its people (which is still important).

-I would have to put political stability in the top 10. As wild and crazy as our system is, it's actually an durable/enduring system (even if it's a roller-coaster along the way)
-I would put military power at number 1 or 2 (whether or not you're looking at capability or sheer numbers)
-I think global influence counts for a lot.
-If the US were to withdraw from most global organizations UN, Nato etc. those groups would most likely collapse
I think despite the country's flaws its one of the few (if not the only) that can weather conflicts/disruption and still remain intact w/o fear of collapse or revolution (not yet at least).
-research and development/discovery I would put it in the top 3. Only country to have a human presence on the moon. (many of the countries have the know-how as their populations are, in many ways, more educated in sciences, but many of them lack the capabilities to field such research)

-----

To be clear, I somewhat expect folks to say 'this is the greatest country on Earth'. I must've heard that hundreds of times in 20 different countries. Just like the flag, I don't think it's a literal take. Everyone has their reasons (as you and I do)

For me, some bias is almost expected ie fans would root for their team even if they were the worst team in the league b/c in the end, that's their team.


As for the flag, I use it the way I believe it should be used: representational purposes only.

[Redshadowz]

Originally Posted by 66nexus

-I would put military power at number 1 or 2 (whether or not you're looking at capability or sheer numbers)
-I think global influence counts for a lot.

I don't think either of these things mean absolutely anything. Maybe they are important in the context of the history books and bragging rights, but they don't in any way improve the human condition. In fact, the spending on the military largely takes away the resources necessary for actually improving the human condition.

Originally Posted by 66nexus

-If the US were to withdraw from most global organizations UN, Nato etc. those groups would most likely collapse
I think despite the country's flaws its one of the few (if not the only) that can weather conflicts/disruption and still remain intact w/o fear of collapse or revolution (not yet at least).

I think the UN and Nato might collapse without the USA, because the UN is run out of New York City, and is largely subsidized by the US government. Nato would probably also collapse, but it is mostly just the military arm of the USA and Western Europe anyway. I think if these things disappeared, they would just be replaced by other organizations. For instance, there is the European Union, which without NATO, they would produce some other kind of military alliance.

As for the United States being stable and not fearing a revolution. I don't know, I think the United States is moving towards breaking apart. The political division seems to be increasing more and more. After Obama was elected, you saw a massive expansion of militia groups and death threats. You have several states issuing 10th amendment declarations and people talking about secession. I would hardly consider America to be all that stable. Most of Western Europe is much more stable than the United States. Japan is much more stable than the United States. As well as much of the rest of Asia. I don't know if I would rank Canada as more stable than the USA, only because Quebec has quite a history of wanting to break away from the rest of Canada.

I personally feel like we are one natural disaster plus a severe economic crisis plus a racial conflict away from this country falling apart. Though the fastest way to destroy this country would have to be some sort of gun control legislation. That one would be ugly.

Originally Posted by 66nexus

-research and development/discovery I would put it in the top 3. Only country to have a human presence on the moon. (many of the countries have the know-how as their populations are, in many ways, more educated in sciences, but many of them lack the capabilities to field such research)

I don't find the USA to be overly impressive in this regard. Most of our technology and the space program actually came from Europe. We stole them away in the aftermath of WWII, because Europe lay in ruins. I don't particularly believe that the USA spends more money per capita on R&D projects than other countries, we just have more resources because of the size of our population and economy, so it has been easier for us.

I mean, China will undoubtedly lead the way in the future in regards to technology. But per-capita I would bet Japan and Germany are far better innovators than China and the United States. I wouldn't be surprised if many other Scandinavian countries weren't also above us in innovation per-capita. I know a lot of the new"green technology" is being developed in places like the Netherlands and Germany. As you mentioned before, most European countries have a far higher percentage of highly educated people than we do.

I mean, it is difficult to compare two countries because we can never compare apples to apples. In my view, if the United States had the same size population as Germany, Germany would simply blow us out of the water in every measure. Our greatness is only related to our economic size and military strength. When you look at us individually, we kind of suck.

[66nexus]

Originally Posted by Redshadowz

I don't think either of these things mean absolutely anything. Maybe they are important in the context of the history books and bragging rights, but they don't in any way improve the human condition. In fact, the spending on the military largely takes away the resources necessary for actually improving the human condition.

I think the UN and Nato might collapse without the USA, because the UN is run out of New York City, and is largely subsidized by the US government. Nato would probably also collapse, but it is mostly just the military arm of the USA and Western Europe anyway. I think if these things disappeared, they would just be replaced by other organizations. For instance, there is the European Union, which without NATO, they would produce some other kind of military alliance.

As for the United States being stable and not fearing a revolution. I don't know, I think the United States is moving towards breaking apart. The political division seems to be increasing more and more. After Obama was elected, you saw a massive expansion of militia groups and death threats. You have several states issuing 10th amendment declarations and people talking about secession. I would hardly consider America to be all that stable. Most of Western Europe is much more stable than the United States. Japan is much more stable than the United States. As well as much of the rest of Asia. I don't know if I would rank Canada as more stable than the USA, only because Quebec has quite a history of wanting to break away from the rest of Canada.

I personally feel like we are one natural disaster plus a severe economic crisis plus a racial conflict away from this country falling apart. Though the fastest way to destroy this country would have to be some sort of gun control legislation. That one would be ugly.

I don't find the USA to be overly impressive in this regard. Most of our technology and the space program actually came from Europe. We stole them away in the aftermath of WWII, because Europe lay in ruins. I don't particularly believe that the USA spends more money per capita on R&D projects than other countries, we just have more resources because of the size of our population and economy, so it has been easier for us.

I mean, China will undoubtedly lead the way in the future in regards to technology. But per-capita I would bet Japan and Germany are far better innovators than China and the United States. I wouldn't be surprised if many other Scandinavian countries weren't also above us in innovation per-capita. I know a lot of the new"green technology" is being developed in places like the Netherlands and Germany. As you mentioned before, most European countries have a far higher percentage of highly educated people than we do.

I mean, it is difficult to compare two countries because we can never compare apples to apples. In my view, if the United States had the same size population as Germany, Germany would simply blow us out of the water in every measure. Our greatness is only related to our economic size and military strength. When you look at us individually, we kind of suck.

It's clear we have different ideas on the military issue. Because I honestly don't think a country can be truly 'great' w/o being at least a moderate military power. If it were just on human condition alone my tone would be different, but overall I think a great country should have great strength.

An EU alliance would be effective most likely on a defensive basis. For offensive style conflicts (like Libya) they lack many strike capabilities the US has.

-----

I also don't think the US is on the verge of breaking up. Tensions do run true, but it's nothing compared to even the unrest of the Civil Rights movement where there was 4x the social turmoil.

------

You are correct in that the US used tech taken post WWII, but countries have been stealing/taking ideas from each other for centuries. Japan did it in the 70's 80's from the US (when things coming out of Japan were unreliable)
But Japan improved it and improved it until they not only got it right, they got it better. China is doing the exact same thing now.

So, sure, the US has used German rocket/fission technology for space programs and the like, but yet, none of them landed a man on the moon. The credit has to go somewhere and I can't give it to Europe. (What good is taking something if you can't improve it?)

------

In order for many other countries to compete it HAS to be on a per capita basis. I think that's one of our greatest strengths (as you somewhat suggest): size and the ability to weather a myriad of conditions and remain stable.

Sorry for the wall of text lol

[Redshadowz]

Originally Posted by 66nexus

It's clear we have different ideas on the military issue. Because I honestly don't think a country can be truly 'great' w/o being at least a moderate military power. If it were just on human condition alone my tone would be different, but overall I think a great country should have great strength.

An EU alliance would be effective most likely on a defensive basis. For offensive style conflicts (like Libya) they lack many strike capabilities the US has.

In order for many other countries to compete it HAS to be on a per capita basis. I think that's one of our greatest strengths (as you somewhat suggest): size and the ability to weather a myriad of conditions and remain stable.

Sorry for the wall of text lol

Well, I can finally understand where we diverge on opinion here. If we applied your criteria for greatness(size, military and economic power), then China would be the second greatest nation on Earth. Yes, I said it correctly. Under your criteria, China would currently be the second greatest nation on the face of this Earth. And honestly, I hear it all the time. People talking about how we all need to learn Mandarin. And maybe there is a certain amount of truth to it, but I wouldn't want to live in China, would you?

Based on your criteria for greatness, a country like Switzerland(which has been traditionally neutral)would be near the bottom of the list of greatest countries.

So where would you rather live? Switzerland or China? Norway or Russia? Kuwait or Iran? Singapore or Indonesia?

With your logic, if Western Europe would simply unite as a single country, and begin building a massive military and space program instead of providing their people healthcare and a high quality education. Then they would suddenly become the "greatest nation on Earth".

Do you begin to understand my objection to your logic?

[Type O Negative]

I respect what it once represented, but those times are long gone.
Freedom of speech does not exist anymore - everything has to be PC
Freedom of religion does not exist anymore - freedom as long as you are "mainstream"
All but native americans were at 1 time immigrants - now immigrants are not very welcome
Just a few thoughts

[Visvaldis]

"The American Flag....How do you feel about it?"

It makes for a handy rag to wipe my hands after doing car repairs.

[abr7rmj]

Originally Posted by Visvaldis

"The American Flag....How do you feel about it?"

It makes for a handy rag to wipe my hands after doing car repairs.

Pathetic.

[annie_himself]

Originally Posted by abr7rmj

Pathetic.

Probably more apathy.

[66nexus]

Originally Posted by Redshadowz

Well, I can finally understand where we diverge on opinion here. If we applied your criteria for greatness(size, military and economic power), then China would be the second greatest nation on Earth. Yes, I said it correctly. Under your criteria, China would currently be the second greatest nation on the face of this Earth. And honestly, I hear it all the time. People talking about how we all need to learn Mandarin. And maybe there is a certain amount of truth to it, but I wouldn't want to live in China, would you?

Based on your criteria for greatness, a country like Switzerland(which has been traditionally neutral)would be near the bottom of the list of greatest countries.

So where would you rather live? Switzerland or China? Norway or Russia? Kuwait or Iran? Singapore or Indonesia?

With your logic, if Western Europe would simply unite as a single country, and begin building a massive military and space program instead of providing their people healthcare and a high quality education. Then they would suddenly become the "greatest nation on Earth".

Do you begin to understand my objection to your logic?

That's not my logic at all. It seems you didn't understand my point.

Re-read my earlier posts. I said I would USE all of your criteria and ADD military power/strength (below is my quote from an earlier post):

"I would actually piggyback off your list (w/ somewhat different rankings) and add military capability along w/ a few others." -66nexus

I didn't dismiss all other criteria in favor of only being a military power (as a symbol of greatness). I simply think being a moderate military power is a part of being a great country (I never ever said it was the only thing to measure a great country). Size, military, and economic strength are simply items I added to your original list (you made a good list, it didn't seem necessary to change it)

Before I go on I'll allow you to go back to my earlier posts.

PS: while I wouldn't pick China over the US, I could definitely live there.

[Visvaldis]

Originally Posted by abr7rmj

Pathetic.

It's nothing that some Tide and bleach can't fix.