Forums → WEPR → [necro] Tensions with Iran

keep laughing, it good for the health.

Last time I checked, Russia was at least as powerful back then. Another proof you are just a kid who watched to many tv-shows. And before you use superman as proof of your superiority, then I will highlight you for the reality and tell you he isn't real.

you couldn't even fight people from Vietnam who is halve the size of an average american. You had even superior weapons and yet your super USA lose to them.

Just another proof how weak USA are. Even with such superior weapons you cant even defeat some guerrilla fighters

coming from a kid

Beside your insane fellow americans with guns. you cant even go to a movie in peace or to school for that matter. USA is a richer version of Afghanistan. At least in Afghanistan it not allowed for civilians to have guns. Even a war torn country like Afghanistan is better then USA.

the biggest over spenders are gone aswell.
you people still have more import then export. stop spending money that you did not earn.

whit all the money that we do not have to spend on usa anymore we can build greenhouses in said countries. give them work, money and food.

who said we need you? we are experts of it comes to water. most water projects are done by a dutch companies because we are the experts.

a real american ignores all thats outside his own nation

But tell me, does it loses enough energy to prevent its major damage?
If some credible source, a physics proffessor or otherwise has said it then it holds some weight other wise, you are talking from your hand

Yes legal opinion does matter, we are not in 1400, we are in 21st century.

As for the rest, others have answered you better

I know you didn't read the article because in big letters on the top of the page, it tells you who the author is: Hugh Hunt, from the prestigious Cambridge University.

So the article explains how it survived impact

No they don't because there is no court of law on the face of the earth that can actually enforce its opinions. Which is where "might makes right" comes into our play: we have our facts, and we have the force to back it up. Or as Andrew Jackson said: "Marshall has made his descision, now let him enforce it."

So the article explains how it survived impact. And yes, it did survive impact. And you why? Because id it had been utterly destroyed in a crash, there wouldn't be enough left for Iran to fuss about. So that Iran is talking about it would imply that it survived in good enough condition to make it worth recovering. And common sense strikes again!

It explains the phenomenon.
What I am asking about is a theory or soime thing relating to the drone presented by some reputed expert based on this principle.

But your allies can back out of it.

?Yes, common sense strikes and says it was hacked.

Who, then, would you export to?

Lack of any centralized government means the greenhouses are never built. Everyone starves and dies. Thank you for playing. Please insert one token to try again.

The US Navy is responsible for keeping world-wide trade routes open.

No USN means no open routes, which mean trade stalls and dies out.

Everybody becomes economically inviable due to an inability to exchange resources, starves, and dies. Thank you for playing. Please insert one token to try again.

The fact that I'm posting in a thread about an international issue...

And the phenomenon applies to the drone. I don't see what the issue.

He's a physics professor, which is what you asked for after I gave it to you. Unfortunately, there is no field of falling-drone-ology, so if you won't accept a physics lesson from a Cambridge Professor, you won't be satisfied with any source given.
To use your own words from your previous sentence: The article explains the phenomenon. The phenomenon applies to the drone. Quod Erat Demonstradum.

So what? Allies are great, but not necessary. The fact that much of these allies gt a lot of support from the US means the allies really need the US.

hoe

EnigmaX, entertaining as your nationalistic rhetoric might be, partydevil is right. The EU is perfectly capable of monitoring their own sea lanes. The fundamental flaw in your argument lies in the assumption that America's status derives from the capabilities of our armed forces simply isn't true. Furthermore, America cannot operate independently. Our nation's growth relies on the support of many other parts of the world. There is, of course, a flip side.

During the Cold War, the term 'Mutually Assured Destruction' rose to prominence, based on the principle that any launch of nuclear warheads could be anticipated enough to perform a counter-launch and ensuring nuclear holocaust. This principle was and still continues to be one of the main deterrents of international nuclear war. But the term can apply to more than nuclear threats.

It's common knowledge that America is deeply indebted to China. However, China won't come to collect. The reason for this stems from an economic phenomenon known as 'Interdependent Trading Relationships'. Essentially, due to intense participation in the free market by both America and China and expansive trading that developed as a result, the economic ruin of America--and China collecting their debt would ruin for America--would also cause the economic ruin of China. This is primarily because China would lose it's primary consumer, and should America attack China, America would lose it's primary supplier.

Interdependent trading relationships aren't solely restricted to China and the USA however. Most first world countries are connected through trade. In fact, should economic disaster occur in one of the three largest trading blocs (NAFTA, the EU, or China), the other two will almost certainly face economic disaster. This is most apparent in the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, in which a collapse in the American real estate market directly resulted in a worldwide economic crisis. We are all so heavily invested in each other that the loss of one of us would be devastating for the others.

Partydevil, I'm glad you know enough about Global Economics. Everyone should. However, I'm surprised that someone with a basis in economic studies, especially in macroeconomics, would make the assumptions that:

a) Import/Export ratios are an indicator of a country's economic value.
-----This is an understandable assumption when looking at values and costs as relating purely to physical objects. However, much of America's value comes from the export of ideas and investments, especially since the dot-com boom. Most of the worlds top corporations that provide you with computers, software and many other goods are based in America, and they mostly manufacture research and ideas.

And

b) That the loss of one of the worlds largest trading blocs (NAFTA) would constitute a 'slap'. It'd be more like a brutal mugging and the ensuing hospitalization (EnigmaX, this holds true for us with the loss of the EU-- and if we attacked the Netherlands we would lose the support of the EU). That is not the kind of thing you can easily recover from.

Partydevil--I would highly recommend taking a look at Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell if you have the time, which is a book commonly used by universities for non-economics majors. Although in sections there is a capitalist/American slant (as Sowell is American), the book mostly covers basic economic principles that exist regardless of personal beliefs or bias.

EnigmaX--What you're saying sounds very Orson Scott Card-ian. Do you read many of his books? If not, take a look at Empire, or and of the Shadow of the Hegemon books. They relate very well to what you're saying

what about the rest of the world?
i never said it wont have a inpact but we will get over it. i'll be happy to get a financial slap in return for that. (btw i know enoufg anout global economics don't be afraid of that)

they are already building them on small scale

stop the lies plz

or beter. get some knowles

only spewing your "oww america is so great and better then anyone els" BS

cigarette.(Cigar will cause you mouth cancer

Tell me again hoe enthiusiastic EU nations are about current war?

The USN *does* keep world trade lanes open because it keeps its own trade lanes open. He US trades with a vast number of states, and so the converse is that, through their trading with the US, all trade lanes are kept open.

And I highlight the US' military power because it is this power that allows it to keep everything else. Without the ability to defend itself, the other things that made America great would not long exist.

a) Import/Export ratios are an indicator of a country's economic value.

That the loss of one of the worlds largest trading blocs (NAFTA) would constitute a 'slap'. It'd be more like a brutal mugging and the ensuing hospitalization

When Rome fell it plunged Europe in a thousand year dark age. Now throw in globalism, and you're cooking up a sh*t storm.

The problem is that the world economy is too dependent upon the US for trade. China and India are heavily dependent upon the US for trade. The removal of the US from this trade triangle will will quickly bring down these two nations because other trade parterners won't be able to make up the difference. And so in very short order the world's three largest economies are gone. KO blow to the world.

Key words being "centralized government." This just shows your lack of reading ability

The next time you call someone a liar, you might actually want to show some proof that said individual is actually a liar.

that the US Navy is important in protecting the nation's trade

I'll do that right when you learn to spell "better" and "knowledge."

Silly me! Uganda is clearly the greatest nation on Earth! How could I be sooooooo naive?

You are correct that the US Navy does do that

This is actually the exact point made in Empire. However, I disagree. At one point, this was most certainly true. Over time, as the free-market globalized, more and more foreign powers have invested in global markets, especially the American market. I'd say our greatest power comes from corporations and their global influence. The loss of Coca-Cola, Apple, Microsoft (just to name a few) and, not to forget our most powerful asset, the rampant American consumerism, would utterly destroy most of the first- and some of the second- world economies. That's ample enough defense from foreign powers for now (although it might change in the future). However, I do agree that the military is currently necessary for defense from lesser powers, terrorists, or just insane nations (North Korea anyone?)

How is this relative, exactly? And since quoting the employee of a state, heres what the US said happened to their drone: crash! And whats more, US Officials say the Iranians painted the drone and concealed the bottom of it with curtains when they revealed it to hide damage sustained when it crashed! ZOMG!

Thanks for watching for me.

In today's modern world, Russia lacks the ability to project its power outside of its immediate region

Having an incredibly large army means nothing if you can't get it where you need it.

50000 American Dead for 1000000 Viet Cong dead is hardly a failure militarily.

The US failed because it was unable to maintain a high enough support for the war and allowed politicians to dictate to generals, as opposed to letting the generals do their job. Vietnam was a loss, but not because of military defeat.

Lol, do you even know how old I am?

Don't you wish?

maybe import and export are not the right words.
i mend that they still buy more then that they sell.
i'm used to be working whit import and export myself. thats why i probably made the mistake.

i'll be happy to get through all that if i get in return that the usa will be gone.

simply not true. as we had seen in 2008/9 they are perfectly capable to move their trade away from usa and spread it over the rest of the world.

by far they are not the only one.

i disagree whit both of you. (your partly true whit the companies part)
if military power was the most importend thing. then how come japan still exists? and how come japan has 1 of the best economies on the planet?
no debt, highly advansed, and nearly no enemy's.

27 wars in 60 year. that has never happend ever in history. about a new war every 2 year. that is why people hate you and that is why you need to protect yourself.

i say japan is superior then usa. solely because they are not power hungry violent maniacs that want to be the "hero" all the time. as the americans are.

False. In the past 3,400 years, there have only been an estimated 268 years of peace. America is not unique in that respect.