Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

The Strongest Super power in History

Status
Not open for further replies.
decksnap said:
You far underestimate the US military then. They could probably take on most of the world and win.
Click to expand...

Another display of american arrogance. We spent the most money so we must win...

I wonder how much the vietnamese spent.

Most of that budget goes on coke machines anyway (this is a joke)
 
BakedBeans said:
Another display of american arrogance. We spent the most money so we must win...

I wonder how much the vietnamese spent.
Click to expand...

How is that a display or arrogance? It's an investment in technology and training, for better or for worse, but not arrogance.
 
BakedBeans said:
Simply not true.

Does George jr just decide to press the big red button and everyone dies then?
Click to expand...
Let's analyze this. North Korea fires a nuke at the US. Hits San Francisco. 5 million are dead. 30 minutes later, North Korea will not exist. Period.

The US is the strongest military force currently. There is no doubt about that. That is not arrogance.

Now saying the SAS is the best special forces unit, which, they arguably are, and discrediting American special forces just because the SAS is better, is, my friend, arrogance...
 
decksnap said:
How is that a display or arrogance? It's an investment in technology and training, for better or for worse, but not arrogance.
Click to expand...

Technology and training are good, but they're not the end all, be all. With all the technology and training, we still haven't got Bin Laden. I'd say the most critical element is quality intelligence. And in many areas of the world, we don't have it.
 
ham_man said:
Let's analyze this. North Korea fires a nuke at the US. Hits San Francisco. 5 million are dead. 30 minutes later, North Korea will not exist. Period.
Click to expand...

...and what does China and Russia do?
 
decksnap said:
How is that a display or arrogance? It's an investment in technology and training, for better or for worse, but not arrogance.
Click to expand...

The "take on the rest of the world and win" is complete arrogance. Technology is all well and good but it is well known who does the planning in the latest wars.

AGAIN it is not how big your bombs are or how much they cost. you can kill millions with no money if you are intent, hell you could probably take down a nation with just a few hundred well trained people if you thought about it enough.

The 911 bastards didn't do a bad job at killing people for a quick plan did they. that was a small group of averagely trained guys.

For all your money and big loud laser guided bombs... your having trouble finding the guy that did that...
 
ham_man said:
EDIT 2 - Jaffa...the first known "Printing Press" (i.e. Ink would be spread on something, then stamp down to form an image) was first developed in China (I think it may have been Korea, although it wouldn't surprise me if they held Korea at that point). The idea spread when one of the Arabic empires (I believe) conquered a Chinese held city in the late first millenium. There they discovered that technology, and over the course of a few hundred years, the idea spread throughout the Middle East into Europe, where Guttenberg would build upon it with the movable type printing press.
Click to expand...
Yep, you're certainly 100% right that printing was developed in the vicinity of China and that it later spread westwards.

When I say that the printing press was invented in Germany, I'm referring to the mechanical press mechanism developed by Gutenberg – he based the device on existing machinery that had already been developed for wine presses. In all truth, I'd have been more accurate to have said "the printing press as we know it today comes from mid-15th Century Germany" – while we can be pretty much certain that the Chinese invented print, I don't think they had press machinery as such... as you say ink would be applied to the woodblock or clay surface and paper would be sandwiched between, transferring the ink. I don't think machinery in the form of a 'press' was involved – I might be wrong though, as it's been a while since I had my typography and print lectures, and we tended to go down the pub afterwards so that wouldn't have helped my memory. 😉

What Gutenberg did was combine the various techniques, refined the inks that were used, and used his training as a goldsmith to perfect the techniques required to cast reliable metal type. All of these together with his press led to printing becoming cheaper and faster. He certainly didn't invent printing though, nor did he invent moveable type (the latter in particular is often credited to him). What he did was to invent the printing press as we know it today. 😉
 
Jaffa Cake said:
Yep, you're certainly 100% right that printing was developed in the vicinity of China and that it later spread westwards.

When I say that the printing press was invented in Germany, I'm referring to the mechanical press mechanism developed by Gutenberg – he based the device on existing machinery that had already been developed for wine presses. In all truth, I'd have been more accurate to have said "the printing press as we know it today comes from mid-15th Century Germany" – while we can be pretty much certain that the Chinese invented print, I don't think they had press machinery as such... as you say ink would be applied to the woodblock or clay surface and paper would be sandwiched between, transferring the ink. I don't think machinery in the form of a 'press' was involved – I might be wrong though, as it's been a while since I had my typography and print lectures, and we tended to go down the pub afterwards so that wouldn't have helped my memory. 😉

What Gutenberg did was combine the various techniques, refined the inks that were used, and used his training as a goldsmith to perfect the techniques required to cast reliable metal type. All of these together with his press led to printing becoming cheaper and faster. He certainly didn't invent printing though, nor did he invent moveable type (the latter in particular is often credited to him). What he did was to invent the printing press as we know it today. 😉
Click to expand...
Its all just a bit technical isnt't it? 😉
 
BakedBeans said:
The "take on the rest of the world and win" is complete arrogance. Technology is all well and good but it is well known who does the planning in the latest wars.

AGAIN it is not how big your bombs are or how much they cost. you can kill millions with no money if you are intent, hell you could probably take down a nation with just a few hundred well trained people if you thought about it enough.

The 911 bastards didn't do a bad job at killing people for a quick plan did they. that was a small group of averagely trained guys.

For all your money and big loud laser guided bombs... your having trouble finding the guy that did that...
Click to expand...

There is a huge difference between finding a needle in a haystack and blowing up a haystack altogether.
 
ham_man said:
Let's analyze this. North Korea fires a nuke at the US. Hits San Francisco. 5 million are dead. 30 minutes later, North Korea will not exist. Period.
It isn't about a nation with a big bomb then you pushing a button and bombing them. is it.


The US is the strongest military force currently. There is no doubt about that. That is not arrogance.
Click to expand...

It is arrogant to thing that big bombs make you mighty.

Now saying the SAS is the best special forces unit, which, they arguably are, and discrediting American special forces just because the SAS is better, is, my friend, arrogance...
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were the best... I said I would choose whatever side they were on (and they are, luckily for the states, on the same side)

Why do you think the states and the uk have such a tight "friendship" it is because the uk are unbelievably efficient at warfare.

I don't care who has the biggest planes or the most nukes. What happens if you don't know who you are fighting? You can't fire upon a nation that you don't know has a fight against you.

and when people say that they can beat the rest of the world... yeah... ok then.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
decksnap said:
There is a huge difference between finding a needle in a haystack and blowing up a haystack altogether.
Click to expand...

I know. but I would like to bet that the "war on terror" has claimed more us victims than terrorist victims.

It really wouldnt be that hard to knock america out and set it in complete disarray without even knowing what hit them.
 
yellow said:
I'm amazed where this thread has gone from it's humble beginnings.
Click to expand...

It was always going to go there because Americans thing they are the great invincible (some americans would be more fair)
 
ham_man said:
What would they do? We were defending ourselves from further aggression...
Click to expand...

There are treaties and financial interests which they all share. If you may recall, when we declared war on Japan in WWII, we did not declare war on Germany. They declared war on us 4 days later. Japan and Germany were allies in WWII.
 
OK. Let's try to get this thread back on track. I'm going to try and make a case for each of these "superpowers" in terms of influence...

Greeks - art, science, concept of democracy, philosophy

Romans - urban planning, latin, democracy on a large scale, warfare tactics, agricultural tactics

Han - ran a large empire very, very smoothly

Arabic dynasties (~650 - ~1200) - preserved ancient Greek and Roman culture, medicine, mathematics

Chinese dynasties (Warring States period - 20th century) - printing, gun powder, technological advancements

Britain - the industrial age

America - the computer age
 
Oh dear, it seems the thread is turning into a pissing contest between Americans and Brits, which I'm sure is not what the OP intended.

Can we just get something clear? We're not talking about a video game. War is not clinical. Real people die in horrific bloody ways.

The point of this thread was to discuss who IN HISTORY was the greatest power of their time and how that ranks against others. The term POWER can mean military, or it can mean economic or cultural, but is normally a combination of all three.

Jesus, haven't you lot ever played Civilization (sic) III? 😀
 
BakedBeans said:
Jokes..

Delta force.. oh dear oh dear.



Yeah, you carry on with your arrogence and rolling your eyes.

Whilst your men are arming up there nukes and planing the 2 day operation behind it... my gurkhas will slit there throats with $10 knife.

AGAIN, it isnt about who has the biggest bomb. If the american forces could organize a piss up in a brewery then maybe they would be feared more.
Click to expand...

"Sir, I don't understand. Who needs a knife in a nuke fight anyway? All you have to do is push a button...sir."

<Extra dialog, dramatic pause... *thunk*>

"The enemy cannot push a button, if you disable his hand."

-Starship Troopers
 
Let Africa Unite and theres your powerhouse of the world...but since they are not united...I'm going with Iceland.


Bless
 
BakedBeans said:
I know. but I would like to bet that the "war on terror" has claimed more us victims than terrorist victims.

It really wouldnt be that hard to knock america out and set it in complete disarray without even knowing what hit them.
Click to expand...

i agree, there has never been a large scale war on american soil. i don't think it would take much to completely wreck the United States temporairily at least. remember 911? how insane things were and how no one knew what was going on for a loooong time. things are the same if not worse now. an attack on say D.C. could and would devistate the us immediately.

the U.S. is not invincible. are we powerful? yes.
are we the greatest superpower of all time? no.
could we be? possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back