PZ

Nuclear Deal Is Dead? Iran Distances Itself Further From ND, Alarming Russia And France

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Marcin said:

To be hegemonic country like US, China or Roman Empire you need decent population.

"So the population mark is around 5% at least"

To my knowledge (I may be wrong) the British Empire was the largest by land mass in the history of the world. I would estimate at that time that the UK population was a fraction of 1% of the world's population so I don't really think your statement that you need a population of 5% holds any water, as history is at odds with this.

"plus centralized country with common soul, sense of destiny."

I dont believe the above as USA is not centralised, I doubt it has a common soul and I'm damn sure it didnt have a sense of destiny!

Regarding a common soul and a sense of destiny, I presume you mean China have been indoctrinated since Mao and have several generations of this indoctrination and don't have access to anything else due to the PRC's policy of censorship and a lack of freedom of speech?? This may actually be correct and time will tell whether this policy works for China to become the next hegemony or whether it will lead to civil unrest and potential civil war as the people wake up to the fact they have been lied to for decades.

Interesting and dangerous times we live in!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rob Plant said:

But it isnt and its extremely unlikey to be in the near future

I agree as far as the near future is concerned (5 - 10 years). But necessity is the mother of many things. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I agree as far as the near future is concerned (5 - 10 years). But necessity is the mother of many things. 

Haha it is indeed Rasmus.

My belief is there are too many chiefs playing internal politics (call it Nationalism) for there ever to be a long term agreement on anything in the EU. This will always play havoc with a long term strategy and direction for the EU.

Hopefully I'm wrong and your dream comes to fruition☺️

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Zhong Lu said:

Actually, America has invaded Mexico and Canada, but that was early on in its history so I'll give it a pass.  My main point is that Douglas's definition of "invasion" is so distorted that a Russianphile could use it to argue that Russia has never invaded anyone, either.  After all, when USSR sent its troops into Afghanistan, it was done as "part of a coalition" (the coalition of the Soviet Republics) and so according to Douglas's definition of "invasion" this means it is not an "invasion."  

Nice try, but a ‘coalition’ of the members of the Soviet Union is like forming a coalition of the 50 separate States to ‘invade’ Iraq and calling it the USA. Never happened.

The USSR, in and of itself, invaded Afghanistan. Your so called invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea and yes, even Vietnam, were by coalitions of distinctly separate and sovereign nations.

Don’t believe me about Vietnam? I suggest you visit the war museum in Ho Chi Minh City, they spell it out for you.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

3 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Hopefully I'm wrong and your dream comes to fruition☺️

Thanks... 

 

Edited by Rasmus Jorgensen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

"So the population mark is around 5% at least"

To my knowledge (I may be wrong) the British Empire was the largest by land mass in the history of the world. I would estimate at that time that the UK population was a fraction of 1% of the world's population so I don't really think your statement that you need a population of 5% holds any water, as history is at odds with this.

"plus centralized country with common soul, sense of destiny."

I dont believe the above as USA is not centralised, I doubt it has a common soul and I'm damn sure it didnt have a sense of destiny!

Regarding a common soul and a sense of destiny, I presume you mean China have been indoctrinated since Mao and have several generations of this indoctrination and don't have access to anything else due to the PRC's policy of censorship and a lack of freedom of speech?? This may actually be correct and time will tell whether this policy works for China to become the next hegemony or whether it will lead to civil unrest and potential civil war as the people wake up to the fact they have been lied to for decades.

Interesting and dangerous times we live in!

You twisted a little bit my message, so I will repeat my points in different structure for overall clarity:

1. China the only civilization with longevity (2500 years) and size (25% of global population -5%/10%)

(so British Empire, Mongol Empire - short ventures, similar to1 Chinese dynasty, Roman Empire longer most similar to China but still very short by comparison).

2. a) Centralized country with common destiny (definitely China, definitely USA) and 5% mark : actually point 2 is repeat of point1 but is more general. centralized: means stability (not British or Mongol Empires with loose colonial structure, short ventures look at point 1), 5% mark: means enough economic and military power to exercise control over the rest of humanity.

Now refuting you other statements:

- give any argumentation that US is not centralized ( it is about economy, military, internal security, common language etc.  the fact that you can legally piss on the street in rural Idaho or smoke marihuana in Colorado does not apply)

- rule of Communist Party is 70 years, 1/30 of Chinese history, blink of an eye, another dynasty very similar to all previous dynasties. Nothing substantially different from the point of Chinese heritage or civilization from Quing, Ming, more freedom than in 1900. Yes the world developed with steam engine, automobiles, computers and free speech yet Chinese are still Chinese.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

My belief is there are too many chiefs playing internal politics (call it Nationalism) for there ever to be a long term agreement on anything in the EU. This will always play havoc with a long term strategy and direction for the EU.

I guess I can agree. 

Where I disagree is that I think a fuctioning EU is the answer to many challenges facing Europe. And EU is somewhat starting to do things that effects peoples lives positively such as GDPR. Figthing cross border economic crime. Enough small successes that matter and then there will be something to build. 

aim for the stars, even if you miss you land on the moon. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

aim for the stars, even if you miss you land on the moon

Dont do that you'll die! 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Marcin said:

1. China the only civilization with longevity (2500 years) and size (25% of global population -5%/10%)

Sorry What has longevity got to do with anything? Should we be discussing Egypt then? are you saying that China is the only country that has been civilized for the last 2500 years? If my memory is correct the Roman Empire was during this period so are you saying they weren't the hegemony of the time and weren't civilised?

You use longevity as a prerequisite for a hegemony and include the US yet the other ones I mentioned you say didnt rule long enough, seriously???

Population has absolutely nothing to do with it as I have stated with the British Empire which totally disproves your point

58 minutes ago, Marcin said:

5% mark: means enough economic and military power to exercise control over the rest of humanity.

I presume where you dismiss the British Empire you forget that it was the largest the world has EVER known.

I presume you are joking when you say "5% mark: means enough economic and military power to exercise control over the rest of humanity." Are you seriously suggesting the British Empire did not have these?? How come Britain ruled half the world? Did the countries beg us to come over and subjugate themselves? ridiculous arguments Marcin!

50 minutes ago, Marcin said:

centralized: means stability

 
No it doesnt, please see below
 
centralize
verb
past tense: centralized; past participle: centralized
  1. concentrate (control of an activity or organization) under a single authority.
    "a highly centralized country"
     
    bring (activities) together in one place.
    • "the Treasury centralized all naval refitting work at Devonport"
       
      1 hour ago, Marcin said:

      - give any argumentation that US is not centralized ( it is about economy, military, internal security, common language etc.  the fact that you can legally piss on the street in rural Idaho or smoke marihuana in Colorado does not apply)

      I will let you off with this as you do not understand what centralized means and maybe a language barrier thing, although the pissing and marijuana references are bizarre.

      1 hour ago, Marcin said:

      - rule of Communist Party is 70 years, 1/30 of Chinese history, blink of an eye

      Yes but we were discussing whether China will be the next hegemony, history will have zero bearing on this, its all about now and the future! What China did or didnt do 2500 years ago is irrelevant! My point is a populous that is indoctrinated as China certainly is will only have  a short life span as the people will one day realise the censorship they are under and will overthrow that ideology, usually in civil war.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

...barking at the moon Rob.

Apparently so!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/12/2019 at 10:56 AM, remake it said:

Isn't the issue that perhaps many here see that China is not equal - in fact "less than" - but China may see itself greater than, and this underlying reality has not escaped the many here?

This the big problem, nobody mentioned it here before.

Both Chinese and American people, have the same distinct feature that differentiates them from much or all of humanity.

They think that their countries are exceptional and it can lead to people themselves thinking about themselves as

Übermensch

Like they both read this delusional lunatic Nietsche.

Leaders of both countries are increasing nationalism: Xi Jinping with his Chinese Dream and China being the strongest country in 2049, and US Presidents often say something like " God bless America, the greatest country on Earth"

This feature is also caused by history and present day of both countries: both were (or are) the strongest countries for a very long time. China because of 3000 years of its written history ( during 2500 of them was largest economy) and recent, last 30 years sudden rise in power. USA because of recent 100 years of global hegemony.

Rising nationalism&"exceptionalism" of both China and USA is also dangerous from the other point of view.

Think if they will start co-operating in the future, dividing the world between them to the benefit of 2 countries and detriment of the rest of humanity. Nobody could say NO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

#moon  

Can someone explain what the standard USA v China ''get the ruler out'' nonsense has to do with the thread title at all please? Just wondering. Stay on topic please, this place is famous for it. You won't catch me going off topic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

image.png.3440534e4731d4821fb61becebc5a4b8.png

#DT2020     Cheers.

 

Edited by DayTrader
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 11/13/2019 at 6:33 AM, canadas canadas said:

Russia being alarmed at Iran going nuclear is probably no different than China being alarmed at a nuclear North Korea.  I don't really believe it. 

Sometimes we forget that Shiite Muslim Iran has a next door neighbor to its east that is nuclear armed and that is Sunni Muslim Pakistan. If I were Pakistan I would be concerned about being sandwiched between nuclear India to its east and nuclear China to its northeast and a potential nuclear Iran to its west.  Thus, this is quite a nuclear conflict potential area.

China would really prefer both NK and Iran not to have nukes.  Think about it like this: do you want Mexico and Haiti  to have nukes? 

Edited by Zhong Lu
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DayTrader said:

Can someone explain what the standard USA v China ''get the ruler out'' nonsense has to do with the thread title at all please? Just wondering. Stay on topic please, this place is famous for it. You won't catch me going off topic,

Please follow the discussion as it was the USA who reneged on the Iranian nuclear deal, and it is China who is offering some amount of economic comfort, while Iran's decision to step up production of nuclear materials is putting former supporters offside: now tie this in to hegemony and you understand that Iran will place China well ahead... a theme akin to Belt & Road.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, remake it said:

Please follow the discussion

Fair enough man

00100111100010110001010  :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.