What's new

Obama says the U.S. will lead the world for the next 100 years. China disagrees.

StarCraft_ZT

FULL MEMBER
Joined
May 14, 2013
Messages
1,193
Reaction score
2
Country
China
Location
Japan
This week, President Obama said that the U.S. will remain the one indispensable nation in the century to come. One country who has its own dreams of leadership wasn't quite so sure, however.

On Thursday, at a regular briefing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Qin Gang commented with sarcasm. “It seems that the U.S. really enjoys being the leader of the world,” he said, before casting doubt on Obama's prediction by making reference to a World Cup-predicting sea creature. “However, in the field of international relations, I wonder if there exists a 'Paul the Octopus' who can predict the future.”

His comments were a direct response to remarks delivered by Obama at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., commencement ceremony this Wednesday. In his speech, Obama reflected on America’s foreign policy agenda and articulated his vision of America’s role in the world.

“America must always lead on the world stage," Obama declared. "If we don’t, no one else will.”

Qin's comments weren't the only sign of an official reaction. The Global Times, China’s state-run nationalist-leaning newspaper, later published an editorial and challenged that view, asking, “America wants to lead the world for another 100 years, but with what?”

The editorial went on to say that America was not powerful enough to support its “luxurious dream” of leading the world, arguing that America was “greedy for all kinds of power” but lacks “a big heart,” which is “a key factor to be a leader.”

“The revival and rise of China and Russia makes America extremely anxious,” the editorial said. With volatile policies towards China and Russia, America will “be importing its anxiety to the world if it is to ‘lead the world.' ”

Another editorial published in Party mouthpiece People’s Daily said Obama’s remarks on the U.S. world leadership “once again revealed that America wanted to seek hegemony with the cold war thinking of a global alliances system.” The rapid development of technology, integration of world economy and people has never “changed America’s old weakness of seeing the new world with old thoughts and exceptionalism,” the editorial said.

Comments from the U.S. about foreign policy often stir discussion in China, and both leftists and rightists fiercely debate whether the Chinese adore the West too much. Even the self-reflection of a U.S. president on its own foreign policy has caused blatant criticism from state media.

Compared with direct criticism from state media, however, the comments from Qin Gang, the Foreign Ministry spokesperson, seemed to be more restrained and veiled. He resorted to ancient Chinese wisdom. “China once led the world for more than one hundred years in history. The rise and fall in history left us with both experience and lessons.

“Today, we still talk about the wisdom recorded over 2,000 years ago in a chronicle called Zuo Zhuan. It reads: Some rulers can lead their states to unstoppable prosperity because they examine themselves instead of blaming others, like Emperor Yu and Emperor Tang, while some bring their reigns to swift demise because they always criticize others, like Emperor Jie and Emperor Zhou.”
 
“America must always lead on the world stage," Obama declared.

"If we don’t, no one else will.”

Maybe that is better? For there to be no global hegemon, no sole superpower, no unipolar world?

Instead, I look forward to a multipolar world, where all the great powers act to balance each other out, without any one nation having sole global leadership and hegemony.
 
The world's largest dictator----- the United States
:wub:
The so-called democracy, democratic countries, are to let the American dictatorship,

Why Americans while preaching world fair,
While they have to dominate the world, calling them to lead the world
Who gave the right of Americans?
In addition to Western countries, everyone agreed to be the slave of the United States??
 
remarks delivered by Obama at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., commencement ceremony

Much ado about nothing.

Obama may be right or he may be wrong but, given the occasion and the audience, what else do you expect him to say?
 
Much ado about nothing.

Obama may be right or he may be wrong but, given the occasion and the audience, what else do you expect him to say?

What is your analysis of America's chances of maintaining global hegemony for the next 100 years?

Even now, the US could not fulfill the promise they made to Ukraine in 1994, to protect Ukraine's borders in exchange for them giving up their nuclear arsenal.
 
US would remain World's strongest country not only for next 100 years but for forever. US supremacy is based on cold facts. It is practically a continent rather than a country and has corresponding resource base;It is protected by Oceans on two sides and is bordered by friendly and benign countries, and it has a whole hemisphere to which it is a primate country.No other country in the world would have similar set of advantages.Let's say for example China. China is poor in Energy resources; It is bordered by strong neighbours like India,Russia, ans Japan which means that it would have to keep large portion of it's military strength at home rather than posting them overseas. The argument of China being strongest country in history is also flawed. India and China combined accounted for as close to 60% of World's GDP to as late as early 19th century,but that figure was of the era when resources of Western hemisphere and Africa were not brought into mainstream.


The point here , which Obama seems to be missing , is not whether US would remain strongest but whether it would have enough Power over Second best country that it could enforce it's will without support of coalition of willing and on that parameter 100 years boast sounds hollow. The power differential between US and Second best ( China or China + Russia ) would reduce enough in coming 10-15 years that US would need allies to get anything done. Days of Desert storm are over.


What is your analysis of America's chances of maintaining global hegemony for the next 100 years?

Even now, the US could not fulfill the promise they made to Ukraine in 1994, to protect Ukraine's borders in exchange for them giving up their nuclear arsenal.


Obama is perhaps worst US president since Carter. He does not understands that that if he does not keep his word he would make US lose credibility, and send it's allies scrounging for alternative alliance or capitulation.

It has been repeated by lily livered Leftists that US could not afford Nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine, but they ignore that Russia also could not afford Nuclear war with US over Ukraine. It was a game of Chicken and Obama blinked as he had blinked in past on Philippines and Syria before. Capitulation is second nature to Obama.

Cultural Marxists have made whole of West ( US + EU ) impotent rendering them incapable of defending themselves, and this damage is psychological rather than physical , and would take generations to heal properly. The worst of this saga may be that US Democratic party like those in every other democracy including India may have cultivated a vote bank comprising of Blacks, Hispanics, People on welfare, and East and West coast liberals thus winning election even after a horrible stint in office.


@flamer84 @KAL-EL @Desertfalcon
 
Last edited:
China is poor in Energy resources.

Do you know we have the world's largest reserves of Shale Gas, enough to last thousands of years? :no:

In fact, according to a recent study, China has so much potential renewable energy, that even wind power alone could provide 100% of our energy needs by 2030:

China could meet its energy needs by wind alone | Harvard Gazette

A team of environmental scientists from Harvard and Tsinghua University has demonstrated the enormous potential for wind-generated electricity in China. Using extensive meteorological data and incorporating the Chinese government’s energy-bidding and financial restrictions for delivering wind power, the researchers estimate that wind alone has the potential to meet the country’s electricity demands projected for 2030.

In practical terms it would be much more difficult, still the potential is there.
 
US would remain World's strongest country not only for next 100 years but for forever. US supremacy is based on cold facts. It is practically a continent rather than a country and has corresponding resource base;It is protected by Oceans on two sides and is bordered by friendly and benign countries, and it has a whole hemisphere to which it could be a primate country.No other country in the world would have similar set of advantages.Let's say for example China. China is poor in Energy resources; It is bordered by strong neighbours like India,Russia, ans Japan which means that it would have to keep large portion of it's military strength at home rather than posting them overseas. The argument of China being strongest country in history is also flawed. India and China combined accounted for as close to 60% of World's GDP to as late as early 19th century,but that figure was of the era when resources of Western hemisphere and Africa were not brought into mainstream.


The point here , which Obama seems to be missing , is not whether US would remain strongest but whether it would have enough Power over Second best country that it could enforce it's will without support of coalition of willing and on that parameter 100 years boast sounds hollow. The power differential between US and Second best ( China or China + Russia ) would reduce enough in coming 10-15 years that US would need allies to get anything done. Days of Desert storm are over.





Obama is perhaps worst US president since Carter. He does not understands that that if he does not keep his word he would make US lose credibility, and send it's allies scrounging for alternative alliance or capitulation.

It has been repeated by lily livered Leftists that US could not afford Nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine, but they ignore that Russia also could not afford Nuclear war with US over Ukraine. It was a game of Chicken and Obama blinked as he blinked on Philippines and Syria before. Capitulation is second nature to Obama.

Cultural Marxists have made whole of West ( US + EU ) impotent rendering them incapable of defending themselves, and this damage is psychological rather than physical , and would take generations to heal properly.


@flamer84 @KAL-EL @Desertfalcon

An indian polishing the boot of America. So sad the caste system of looking down themselves compare to whitemen still exist. :lol:

China in fact, is resources rich. China Shale gas reserve is the largest in the world. Same as Coal and many other resources.

Democracy is slowly showing its sight of weakness as many western countries are crumpling.
 
Obama is perhaps worst US president since Carter. He does not understands that that if he does not keep his word he would make US lose credibility, and send it's allies scrounging for alternative alliance or capitulation.

It has been repeated by lily livered Leftists that US could not afford Nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine, but they ignore that Russia also could not afford Nuclear war with US over Ukraine. It was a game of Chicken and Obama blinked as he blinked on Philippines and Syria before. Capitulation is second nature to Obama.

Obama also drew a "red line" over the use of chemical weapons in Syria, that line was crossed but with zero consequences?

Anyway do you really believe that America should have fought with Russia, just to keep their 1994 promise to protect Ukraine's borders?

Global hegemony is a tough thing to maintain, and Russia has clearly shown that American hegemony is zero in their part of the world. Unless they are willing to fight and win, how can they maintain global hegemony.
 
Isn't it a bit much, to hope for such a mass slaughter of innocent people?

I thought you were a devout Muslim?

You don't need to be a Muslim to hope for the criminals of the earth to perish. I really do hope they kill each other and do us a favor. Get a taste of the suffering they've been exacting on poor and defenseless people for the past century.

Anybody that is moral or believes in God supports justice. On top of that they deserve to burn in hell and when the time comes we will take revenge on anybody who contributed even a tiny bit to injustice against our people.
 
You don't need to be a Muslim to hope for the criminals of the earth to perish. I really do hope they kill each other and do us a favor. Get a taste of the suffering they've been exacting on poor and defenseless people for the past century.

Anybody that is moral or believes in God supports justice. On top of that they deserve to burn in hell and when the time comes we will take revenge on anybody who contributed even a tiny bit to injustice against our people.

By hoping for the deaths of billions of people? Seriously?

Why do you want to hurt innocent people, just because you don't like the policies of their governments?

When you advocate the murder of billions of women and children, tell me why should they be blamed and be punished for government policies that they had NOTHING to do with?
 
Back
Top Bottom