Blackhawks are a bit old, but they're better in a defensive role, where the Apache leans toward offense. Still, if China was really threatening Taiwan, the U.S. would likely sell them Apaches, in addition to other hardware.
Still, that sale would depend on Obama's foriegn policy. Although I support the guy, I have mixed opinions on his foriegn policy. He calls it "more diplomatic", I call it a bit on the wimpy side. Though the reconciliation with Europe and the speech in the Middle East was good, there have been oppertunities that he could have done a lot better. First of is the Iran Protests. We all know about that, with demonstrators having the shit beaten out of them on the orders of a crazed anti-semite and an even crazier towelhead who calls himself a supreme leader. As all this happened, Obama did a few speeches, basically saying "The demonstrators are being repressed. That really sucks." No throwing massive support behind the demonstrators, many of whom are pro-U.S., no pressure on the UN to try to stop Iran, nothing. If Obama and the EU had done that, the demonstrators may well have surged past the riot police and sent the clerics packing.
The other was the recent sinking of a South Korean ship by North Korea. Again, nothing major was done. He simply got the UN to investigate, instead of showing strength and threatening the North with war, which would have ended within days with Kim Jong Il's little regime collapsing.
I know my views aren't very diplomatic, but it's foolish to soften your perspective on an enemy who won't do the same to you.
Funny, how we go from "Will America Always be a Superpower" to "Let's have War with China! HELLZ YEA!" to "Obama Talk: What's ur Opinion"...
anyway, Obama's foreign policy, to me, says that he wants the U.S. to step down from it's current responsibilities and just be another big country on the block, not THE big country on the block. He's saying, in his diplomacy, that "We, as the US don't give a $#*! what you do, just make sure we get our trade goods and you'll be fine".
That's, at least, IMO.
Richter {^}
It's amazing how much wisdom can be found in computer games.....
China is not "closing in" on the U.S.; China is just about up to their first manned moon flight--which the U.S. did in 1969. Big whoop, the Chinese are only forty years behind! They're catching up to where we were, but in that space of time we've pulled even further ahead--we're now at the point where force fields and cloaking devices actually seem possible, and military laser weapons are already in the field (though they're more of a defensive anti-artillery weapon than anything else).
Watch. Two centuries from now we'll build our first Illuminator frigate, and CNN will report that the U.S. has become a bunch of LRF spammers......
Getting back on topic:
Wrapping this fascinating conversation up, I think that America will only cease to be a superpower when the phrase "Superpower" becomes irrelevant, AKA, the day when all countries have the ability to "Project dominating influence anywhere on the globe", as the definition for Superpower stands.
All in favor?
Well, given the rapid globalisation of the economy and increasing technology leading to weapons which have greater and greater range, we will all be superpowers soon
I'm thinking the new definition of "Superpower" will have to include the ability to project power to other stellar bodies at some point, and other starsystems, if or when FTL is discovered.
China will be the next superpower
Obama actually is imposing sanctions on Iran and getting the U.N. in on it too. Also sanctions have been in place against North Korea for quite a while now. We just can't jump into wars anymore after all the cowboy shootin that Bush did.
If that's the definition then china is already a superpower too and america is only being ignorant in thinking its the only one.
This is all wonderful conversation, and a truly fascinating discussion. I have learned so much, trying to follow all the threads in this conversation. The greatest question I have is simply this: when are corporations going to really begin governing directly, openly, and not through the smoke and mirrors of 'governments." I await that day, because, only then, will the masses of people know who is really is in charge, and only then will they then be able to begin making the corporations accountable for their generally draconian decisions. "I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half," is still, sadly, closer to the truth, than not.
Sorry, had to do it.