US versus China for world position

Air OOB: http://www.scramble.nl/index.html

Land OOB:http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/army-orbat.htm

sea OOB:http://jfs.janes.com/public/jfs/index.shtml

wow, I remember Moses from back in the day. :-)

LOL Thread Necro!  This topic died 8 years ago!

you have reversed the situation falk. i dont complain about your usage of “USan”. you complain about others’ usage of “american” as referring to “those of US nationality”, and i argued with you that “american” is the accepted term, and “USan” was merely your term. i didnt complain about you using it however. use it as much as you like.

@El:

Another form of World Charity…
What happens to the world’s economy if all countries buy their own products where available, but elsewhere when necessary…

I think i didn’t totally understand that. You mean “buy their own even if moer expensive”, and only if that is not enough go and import?
I suppose so, so let’s look…

Canada buys its own lumber. The US buys Canadian lumber. Who is helped? Canadian limber industries. Who is hurt? US lumber industries.

Not right. Canada is the biggest exporter of lumber products (21.2%). They would be hurt if people did not buy from them. The US only has 11.1% of that market, they mainly sell their lumber in their country anyway. In contrast the 31 millions Canadians don’t use as much wood as the 275 million USies (per capita they are comparable). The US lumber industry would lose not as much as the Canadians. So…. you are wrong :)

Source: http://www.cofi.org/reports/factbook2000/Chapters from FACTBOOK 2000-Part I.pdf

The US buys its own Christmas decorations. China buys its own Christmas decorations. Who is helped? The US foofaraw industries. Who is hurt? Chinese prison wardens and sweatshops.

Well, does it hurt the chinese (who probably don’t have that big market for christmas deco)? They would put that work into something else. It would help the US industry though, taken that you USies import a cheap lot from China.

Japan buys its own computer chips. The US buys Japanese computer chips. Who is helped? Japanese tech industries. Who is hurt? US tech industries.

Why are they hurt? By what you say in the beginning the above means that there are no US chips available. How does that hurt the US, when there are none anyway?

The US buys its own wines and beer. France and Germany buy their own wines and beers. Who is helped? The US alcohol industries. Who is hurt? The French and Germany brewmeisters.

Do not forget the US customers here, who are hurt, and the german and french drinking people, who can be sure to get good beer and wine only and not fall into this mean “Budweiser”/“Budvar” trap….

Russia cannot afford to buy its own diamonds. The EU and US buy Russian diamonds. Who is helped? Russia, the EU and US. Who is hurt? Nobody.

“Can’t afford” kind of contradicts the term “available”. The EU and US, having no large diamond mines would buy russian/south african diamonds anyway. So, i don’t see why the real world and your model would differ here at all.

The US watches its own Whorelywood movies and TurpitudeVision. The EU watches Cannes movies and ?. Who is helped? France is better off because the youth of France no longer have American negative behavioural influence and the French language is saved from Anglicization. The US is better off because Whorelywood only has 30% of its original budget. This causes fewer movies to be made, but they are of better quality(otherwise, the good and great directors, producers, actors keep working, but Sean Penn, Michael Moore, Madonna and Julia Roberts are working as telephone solicitors in East LA.) Both the US and Europe find a strange thing happening… families are spending personal time together. Who is hurt? Canada has an influx of unemployed actors and Peter Jennings.

Don’t forget Australia who would suffer from that with unemployed actors… and i don’t think the quality for Hollywood movies would go up:
(1) Sean Penn is a great actor
(2) you would lose/have lost the services of Mel Gibson, Nicole Kidman, Cate Blanchett, Russell Crowe, Elle Macpherson, Stephen Hopkins (dir), Errol Flynn (all Australia); Klaus Kinski, Johnny Weissmüller (!), Franka Potente, Marlene Dietrich, Fritz Lang (dir), F.W. Murnau (dir), R. Fassbinder (dir), W. Wenders (dir), Billy Wilder (dir), Roland Emmerich (dir); Wolfgang Petersen (dir), E. Lubitsch (dir), Peter Lorre (all Germany, Austria)…

Now look at the movies never made or seen by you…
Casblanca (Lorre), Tarzan (Weissmüller), for Flynn see:
http://www.imdb.com/Name?Flynn,+Errol
No “Independance day”, no Godzilla (Emmerich), no “Patriot” and “Lethal Weapons” (Gibson), No “beautiful mind”, “Gladiator” (Crowe), no Nosferatu (Kinski, Fassbinder; Murnau), no Metropolis (Lang), no “M” (Lorre, Lang), no “Run, Lola, run” (Potente),
etc. etc. etc. etc.
and these are only two countries …

So, i guess the quality would be even worse :)

Mr. Ghoul, I think the Japanese started in China as far back as 1933. You are right as to why the US cut off her fuel supplies. You’re right that didn’t give the Japanese the right to attack in the minds of the US and according to their law. And that is probably the right position legally. However, how would the US react if her oil supply was threatened. Ahhhhh yes, if radical Islam swept across all the oil in the middle east and the world decided to shut of the oil to the US. How would the US react.

The only difference is the degree to which their arguments are valid. Both Japan in 1940 and the US in the last 5 years of done some bad stuff, broken internation law etc. Of course the rape of Nanking is orders of magnitude worse then anything the US has done since perhaps the Indian wars, even then it was spread out over centuries not weeks.

I believe the US had and has laws on her books not to sell weapons to countries at war that don’t involve the US. The US was not at war during WWII until Dec 8, 1941. Therefore it was illegal for the US to supply ANY weapons or war materials to any country at war during the period preceding Dec, 8 1941. The US doesn’t like syria selling weapons to Iraq now, why should they expect war time Germany to like the US selling weapons to England.

In fact, Germany had a legal right to stop and sink any ships entering the british home waters found to be carring war materials. But I digress on this law and history lesson.

BB

hmmmmm, the US government paying for every familys morgage

3 people per family,300 000 000 people in the US, 100 000 000 familys, 300 000$ home, 300 000x100 000 000= 30 000 000 000 000$

thats a lot of money!