It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by rockymcgilicutty
As we have been told repeatedly on how bad America is to and for the world.Let's just pull out.We can take the worlds largest economy and move back to isolationism. Just like before ww2 after all we did pull out of a world depression through isolationism in the mid to late 30's.We can do it again.
Think of all the money we can save,no large Navy to keep the ocean's safe.No more economic handouts.We can pull all funds and equipment out of N.A.T.O.Close all the air bases in foreign lands.Most of all bring all our troops home!
Afterall we have been told that we use our economic might to crush other nations.So maybe they are right.So lets take our money and run.Cancel all our foreign debt,default on all treasury bonds outside the U.S.
Well it's a thought,but the U.S.A would never do that.
Why?? Because the World Would Burn !!!We have have been given this responsbility we did not ask for it ,but we will not run from it.
So the U.S.A will just have to get use to being treated like the parent of a teenager.Being told that they are evil and wrong in every action they take.But everytime something goes wrong are the one who has to bail them out.
Yea mods you should probably move this to rantedit on 12-1-2013 by rockymcgilicutty because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by rbnhd76
A lot of small mindedness in this troll thread.
Shut up. Nobody cares whether you like us or not.
America has made mistakes. Just like every d body else.
The difference is, we can and do eventually right our wrongs.
Mods? How many times should we listen to this?
Please add your comments to one of the other 642 threads.
Originally posted by dollukka
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
There were no real threat in Europe in cold war, don´t know what they teaches you. Cold War was basicly between U.S.S.R and U.S.A and thats why America wanted to establish bases in Europe because they were scared and wanted to their military closer to their OWN enemy.
And yes i live in Finland which happens to have next door neighbour called Russia, we managed keep our independence in war against Russia in WW2 and when we asked help from UK and USA then we got nothing.. why? Because they didn´t want to interfere and was also afraid Russia to turn against them if they would have... bunch of cowards i can say. So we fought and kept Russia away from our country BY OURSELF independently, when peace came we decided not to take part of either part of cold war.
Originally posted by digital01anarchy
Originally posted by dollukka
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
There were no real threat in Europe in cold war, don´t know what they teaches you. Cold War was basicly between U.S.S.R and U.S.A and thats why America wanted to establish bases in Europe because they were scared and wanted to their military closer to their OWN enemy.
And yes i live in Finland which happens to have next door neighbour called Russia, we managed keep our independence in war against Russia in WW2 and when we asked help from UK and USA then we got nothing.. why? Because they didn´t want to interfere and was also afraid Russia to turn against them if they would have... bunch of cowards i can say. So we fought and kept Russia away from our country BY OURSELF independently, when peace came we decided not to take part of either part of cold war.
So you telling everyone that you fought Russia during WW2 when a majority of their forces had been fighting the Germans. Case in point you didn't fight the full might of Russia probably only a small portion because they had bigger issues to deal with at the time and if you had fought them with their full might you would have had your arses handed to you.
Originally posted by dollukka
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
Lol actually they don´t teach you real History, in that war after UK and USA declined any help for us we got guns from Germany. When you are at war to something that big as Russia and are declined help when you ask for it, if you lack of armor you will find them somewhere. There were no other help here during that war than that and Germany was busy in their own grounds they were not intrested fighting here. Germans were intrested about Lapland as a path to attack Soviet up North which is very rural area and just few inhabitants.
The truth about this war has come open since Soviet Union became history itself and most of your history books about this has false information.
Originally posted by dollukka
reply to post by rockymcgilicutty
It was a transit agreement between Finland and Germany, Germany fought in northern Finland area called Lapland which is very rural area even today. Finland didn´t believe that Russia would attack in north Lapland as there were not much roads. Even then Lapland was ready as it could have and had as many finnish soldiers there as 991, this amount should tell you how much there was people at least. Don´t really understand why Germans were intrested attacking Russia from there as the other side of borderline Russia had as minimal population on their side too. Who knows what they were really after gold perhaps..
When peace was signed with Russia, Finland had another war called Lapland war when we forced Germany out of our country.
You want more history?
Originally posted by mytheroy
I think this map say's it all,
president.globalincidentmap.com...
For our officials that is, I firmly believe that it's not us they hate, It's our rouge government.edit on 13-1-2013 by mytheroy because: (no reason given)
The United States will continue to be identified throughout the world as the leading proponent and beneficiary of globalization. US economic actions, even when pursued for such domestic goals as adjusting interest rates, will have a major global impact because of the tighter integration of global mar- kets by 2015.
Diplomacy will be more complicated. Washington will have greater diffi- culty harnessing its power to achieve specific foreign policy goals: the US Government will exercise a smaller and less powerful part of the overall economic and cultural influence of the United States abroad. • In the absence of a clear and overriding national security threat, the United States will have difficulty drawing on its economic prowess to advance its foreign policy agenda. The top priority of the American pri- vate sector, which will be central to maintaining the US economic and technological lead, will be financial profitability, not foreign policy objec- tives.
T he world of 2030 will be radically transformed from our world today. By 2030, no country—whether the US, China, or any other large country—will be a hegemonic power. The empowerment of individuals and diffusion of power among states and from states to informal networks will have a dramatic impact, largely reversing the historic rise of the West since 1750, restoring Asia’s weight in the global economy, and ushering in a new era of “democratization” at the international and domestic level.
The diffusion of power among countries will have a dramatic impact by 2030. Asia will have surpassed North America and Europe combined in terms of global power, based upon GDP, population size, military spending, and technological investment. China alone will probably have the largest economy, surpassing that of the United States a few years before 2030. In a tectonic shift, the health of the global economy increasingly will be linked to how well the developing world does—more so than the traditional West. In addition to China, India, and Brazil, regional players such as Colombia, Indonesia, Nigeria, South Africa, and Turkey will become especially important to the global economy. Meanwhile, the economies of Europe, Japan, and Russia are likely to continue their slow relative declines.
the Us, european, and Japanese share of global income is projected to fall from 56 percent
today to well under half by 2030. in 2008, China overtook the Us as the world’s largest saver; by
2020, emerging markets’ share of fnancial assets is projected to almost double.
The current, largely Western dominance of global structures such as the UN Security Council, World Bank, and IMF probably will have been transformed by 2030 to be more in line with the changing hierarchy of new economic players.
The US most likely will remain “frst among equals” among the other great powers in 2030 because of its preeminence across a range of power dimensions and legacies of its leadership role. More important than just its economic weight, the United States’ dominant role in international politics has derived from its preponderance across the board in both hard and soft power. Nevertheless, with the rapid rise of other countries, the “unipolar moment” is over and Pax Americana—the era of American ascendancy in international politics that began in 1945—is fast winding down.
Potential black swans That Would cause The Greatest disruptive Impact.
China is slated to pass the threshold of Us$15,000 per capita purchasing power parity (PPP) in
the next fve years or so—a level that is often a trigger for democratization. Chinese “soft” power
could be dramatically boosted, setting off a wave of democratic movements. Alternatively, many
experts believe a democratic China could also become more nationalistic. An economically
collapsed China would trigger political unrest and shock the global economy.
A collapse or sudden retreat of Us power probably would result in an extended period of global
anarchy; no leading power would be likely to replace the United states as guarantor of the
international order