will humanity still exist 50,000 years from now?

sebcoe59 wrote: I believe it's the US goal to give every other country the freedom to choose it's own government.

That's not actually true. It is a foreign policy objective of the United States to promote democracy around the world. At least I believe this to be the case - I got this info second hand from my wife, who learned it during the research for her masters thesis. Anybody either confirm or refute?

circle three wrote: When did we lose to Canada?

Well, strictly speaking, it wasn't "Canada" at the time, it was the British living in the British colony that would become Canada some 54-55 years later. Google the war of 1812, and you'll be ignorant no more. ;-)

Pete wrote:

sebcoe59 wrote: I believe it's the US goal to give every other country the freedom to choose it's own government.

That's not actually true. It is a foreign policy objective of the United States to promote democracy around the world. At least I believe this to be the case - I got this info second hand from my wife, who learned it during the research for her masters thesis. Anybody either confirm or refute?

That's better stated, but essentially the same thing I was saying.

Thanks,

That war was essentially a stalemate that changed nothing. We lost nothing and remained free from the British. I would hardly call that a defeat.

you f****** ruined a perfectly good thread

sebcoe59 wrote: That's better stated, but essentially the same thing I was saying.

Thanks,

Sure, no problem. I love explaining US foreign policy to Americans. ;-) Hahaha just kidding obviously.

What you originally wrote had a significantly different connotation than what I think the actual policy objective is.

I believe (again, someone who really knows jump in and correct me) it is a US policy objective to eradicate all other (i.e. not democratic) forms of government from the globe. So while this isn't as insidious as eradicating all Gypsies or Jews, as in a historical example, it is something that causes me some personal discomfort. And I believe this specific objective is the source of some considerable tension.

Is anyone other than me concerned about the recent joint China-Russia military exercises? Not to get away from the original fascinating topic... :-)

circle three wrote: That war was essentially a stalemate that changed nothing. We lost nothing and remained free from the British. I would hardly call that a defeat.

Perhaps you can interpret the history that way.... but we did burn the White House down, if nothing else. :-)

Pete wrote:

sebcoe59 wrote: That's better stated, but essentially the same thing I was saying.

Thanks,

Sure, no problem. I love explaining US foreign policy to Americans. ;-) Hahaha just kidding obviously.

What you originally wrote had a significantly different connotation than what I think the actual policy objective is.

I believe (again, someone who really knows jump in and correct me) it is a US policy objective to eradicate all other (i.e. not democratic) forms of government from the globe. So while this isn't as insidious as eradicating all Gypsies or Jews, as in a historical example, it is something that causes me some personal discomfort. And I believe this specific objective is the source of some considerable tension.

Is anyone other than me concerned about the recent joint China-Russia military exercises? Not to get away from the original fascinating topic... :-)

To stay off the original thread, I too am concerned about China and Russia. They, both, have the potential to create a lot of havoc in the world, and both have shown a proclivity in the past to invade and occupy neighboring countries. Russia is having a lot of difficulties at home with it's own Islamic revolutionaries, but I think that China could be the most ominous threat. I think that they've got their eyes on Taiwan and one of these days they will attempt to invade Taiwan. What will the US reaction be to that? When will China invade? Not till after the '08 Olympics for sure, but sometime after that I would anticipate China invading Taiwan. Just my 2-cents worth.

Whether or not you agree with current US policy in Iraq, if we leave prematurely and looking like we altogether abandoned the situation, it is an absolute GUARANTEE that China will go after Taiwan. Perceived softness begets more adversarial uprising.

Unless you have access to raw intelligence indicating that China would make a grab for Taiwan, stop using the words 'absolute GUARANTEE.'

Paul Osborn wrote:

Unless you have access to raw intelligence indicating that China would make a grab for Taiwan, stop using the words 'absolute GUARANTEE.'

The "GUARANTEE" aside, do you think that China will invade Taiwan? Do you accept the premise that China has "eyes" for Taiwan?

Paul Osborn wrote:

Unless you have access to raw intelligence indicating that China would make a grab for Taiwan, stop using the words 'absolute GUARANTEE.'

Ok, fair enough. Let's just leave it as a 99.9% certainty instead.

Pete wrote:

sebcoe59 wrote: I believe it's the US goal to give every other country the freedom to choose it's own government.

That's not actually true. It is a foreign policy objective of the United States to promote democracy around the world. At least I believe this to be the case - I got this info second hand from my wife, who learned it during the research for her masters thesis. Anybody either confirm or refute?

I'll refute this:

How does the US-led assassinations of the democratically elected presidents if Iran and Chile promote democracy?

square two wrote:

The USA probably has the worst track record for victories in war of the modern time, suffering defeats at the hands of Canada, Vietnam and Iraq. I’m not American and feel very sorry for what has happened to your country over the past 8 years.

To be fair, the reason we can't (and were not able to) to beat the guerrillas of Vietnam and Iraq is that we're trying to fight with a conscience. You know, keep the moral high ground. Yes, I know you can cite examples of American solders and the administration resorting to less than tasteful tacts, but for the most part we are holding back. Let's be realistic here - if the U.S. really wanted to blow Iraq to smithereens, within a week that country could be devoid of life. Everything and everyone would be gone. The war would be over.

But since that would be barbaric, instead we have to go in and find every individual bad guy hiding in every little hole in the ground.

Not as easy. Fighting with a conscience severely limits our ass-kicking options.

Only scratched the surface wrote:

"The height of civilization that we've reached" We have only scratched the surface. A thousand and then ten thousand years from now man will be astounded when they uncover artifacts and find out how primitive we were in this century.

I agree completely with this idea.

While many of you may be on the fence, civilization will not die from Peak Oil or Climate Change. It will suffer though, and when you speak about suffering, its hard to say what is tragic and what isn't. There are energy sources we can use for liquid fuels and electricity but they are neither cheap nor abundant. That just means the current concepts of economic growth and prosperity are wrong, very much so. People like Wejo, TxRunnerGirl, Skuj will still die, your family along with them. There will be massive wars and holocausts to kill the undesirables, or anyone not part of the majority. People will go from 240ibs to about 120, and then may go to 100. SUV's will be left abandoned as relics. Suburban homes will become overgrown. Roads, Bridges, will break down. Airplanes will stay parked at overgrown runways. People with guns will rule. Cities like New York, Chicago, Washington D.C may survive, but will be far different than what you currently think of them. Cities like Los Angelos, Houston, Phoenix, will be abandoned. New Orleans, Miami will be under water. It will be a much different world in just 100 years. But there will still be billions of people, living like animals, but living.

Think of it as a 50 year depression, combined with African style famine, war, and diseases. Many of you have no idea, but also many of you will survive. Guys, chill out, we haven't even see the massive sea walls that will be built around lower Manhattan and San Fran. The oil crunch will make the 30's depression seem like a picnic. Climate change will dwarf everything before it. But we will survive. cheer up, you'll probably die or want to!

In a few centuries race will no longer exist. Everyone will just be a mix of everything.

There will probably only be one commonly used language. There will only be one country, so we won't even refer to it as a country any more.

The rate of globalization gets faster and faster every day.

circle three wrote:

That war was essentially a stalemate that changed nothing. We lost nothing and remained free from the British. I would hardly call that a defeat.

it was about the same level of defeat when compared to current wars that are not really resolving anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phan_Thi_Kim_Phuc

mobile9 wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phan_Thi_Kim_Phuc

What's your point?