Staredit Network

I was just putting the point across that China has a lot of people and could take over the world with each civilian knowing how to shoot a gun and 3 bullets.

I would love to say the same to you. Post 3 sources saying that we have the 2nd largest active army. And please take into consideration that a decent portion of that army will not be sent into combat, such as spies and others. Also take into consideration that no country would be able to control the world for more then a few years unless some miracle happened. Not China, not Russia, not the U.S., no country can do it alone.

Active army isn't saying much. Plenty of countries have inactive armies that can be 'activated' whenever they wish it to, and I'm sure that some of them have a larger army then America. The difference is that America has plenty of technological advantages, spies, and other such advantages, as well as a lot of cash to use on war, which is why it would win anyway. Submarines and jets won't help you control the world, you need people who can make rational decisions.

And about the bullet thing.. So what? So China has a lot of people, everyone knows that. Nothing new.

I'm Canadian, so maybe if Canada took over the world, I'd get to be part of the new ruling class...

You'd invite me, wouldn't you? Put in a good word for me?

Maybe if Voy took over the world, all of the Modders would be on the top of the Hiearchy, followed by BSG Lovers, Canadians, Americans, Europeans, Other.

I dont think you understand. And although not a reliable source,
http://www.wikipedia.com - even wikipedia cant get it wrong with ranks.
TAG: Military of United States

Centreri. Also, theres no such term as "Inactive" army. Although theres a term called Viable manpower in the country ( which counts civilians man and woman in the country ) America's total viable manpower isn't alot compared to other countries. But Americans have "ACTIVE" armies.
active army - an army that consists of trained soldiers.
You dont just "activate" armies. When going into war, there must be alot of preperations. Weapons check, more weapons in the making, and more and more weapons.

How can you post 3 times?

Anyway, link the exact page saying this. I tried 'American Army' and nothing showed up saying it had the second largest army.

Do you have the ability to examine things thoroughly? If someone gives a source, you should examine it thoroughly. And the tag was not "American Army" It was the "Military of the United States"

Oops, sorry .

Believe it or not, you were right, I apologize.

But I still say that no country can control the world for a long time, and certainly not through diplomacy.

Most of the votes were by Nationalism. Lets be logical people, I didn't even vote for my country.

Its not if you voted for your country or not, it is your opinion on what country the U.S. would benefit more from by taking them over. Or just which country do you think the U.S. should take over, I would hope to think that the U.S. wouldnt take over the country I live in. But I live in the U.S. so I have no issues.

I didn't know that Africa, Europe, Communists, and the Terrorists are countries!

Anyways, I voted Australia, lets hope that the vombats can take over!

Let's hope not. The world would be combined by the means of force or diplomacy. Technically, America already rules the world because of all the governments it influences and made alot of governments. America is trying to conquer the world by force. Why the hell did they invade Iraq in the first place?

You might notice the majority opposing this war. The fact that someone can be booted out of office every four years by the people certainly helps. So unless a president can take over the world in under 4 years, it wouldn't happen.

Even if the president could, the impeachment would surely take place, it has never yet been used but once thought of it cam up, the president took himself out of office so it kinda worked!

Ya um guys the U.S. isn't on the list so try to keep it to options on the list k

I am not talking about the U.S. being an option on the list, this whole thing is about what country the U.S. would take over, So obviously the topic of U.S. will come up.

Just because you neglected to put it on the list doesn't mean we can't discuss it.

Well. Some debate topics state specifically not to debate such things. However, your topic did not say that... whoever it is and you can't change it because its already in the process.

Ya uh.. the poll isn't "who would you like the U.S. to conquer next"

Stop acting stupid, that's not what we're discussing if you don't know that you're an idiot a not smart person.

And I'd like to remind, again, that no country can hold control over a taken over world, in case anyone is forgetting. Someone can take it over using nukes, but to keep control without destroying more then a half of the total population of earth is nearly impossible.

You don't take over the world with military force, you take it over with financial power. Not that there's really a world left to take over.

Exactly, you buy them out just like Wal-Mart buys people out, stop trading with them, cut off their trade sources and buy them when they beg for money. They wont like you when you own them, that is when the military comes in and you enforce laws that keep them in check.

You're assuming the country is stupid. If any one country stops trading with all countries.. the other countries will trade with themselves. The country that's taking the offensive is losing the most resources.