List of world powers Tier 1 : USA, the general of tier 1 France

File: osborne 3000.jpg (2MB, 3001x1801px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3001x1801px

UK strong

>>53221625
frencH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! like!!!!!!!!!!!!! leeeeeeeeeeeeeeaoooooooooyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

File: image.jpg (16KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 200x200px

>China
>world power

>>53221680
>leaoy

?

>>53221690
OAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

>THAT GFLAG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ELLLLLO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

File: london goose.jpg (68KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1000x800px

1. USA
2. China
3. UK
4. France
5. Germany
6. Russia
7. India
8. Japan
9. Italy
10. Brazil

r8 me, lads

>>53223453
>brazil

spain has much better army than brazil, desu.

>>53223556
Yeah I guess that's true.

On the other hand, Brazil is more important in their region and they have a bigger economy than Spain (although at this rate they might fall below you!). Also Brazil is in the G20.

However, being one of the larger countries in the EU increases Spain's power.

It's a close one.

>>53223630
ok. i thought we are speaking about military power only....

File: juan carlos i.jpg (558KB, 2417x1599px) Image search: [Google]

558KB, 2417x1599px

>>53223697
I was doing a general power ranking. Economic + diplomatic + cultural + military

Spain's military has some nice stuff

>>53221625
How to name a country in French
add a random "e" somewhere

>>53221625
DR Congo was not a French colony
> Based French people

>>53223832
Amérique! :D

>>53221625
>his country only has military bases in Africa and one in the Middle-East
lel

>>53221625
ameriboo detected.
i have no idea what you are talking about but this is just almost the powers of nukes.

>>53223453
>>France
>>Italy
leeel

>>53227134
>Just almost the power of Nude.
>Number 1 not Russia.

>>53227335
France destroy Russia alone, so stfu.

>>53221625
Why France, UK, Russia - manlet "powers" are in the same tier as China?

>>53227482
China is just in one continent + they live thanks to the West. We buy our shit in China. "Made in China" everywhere

>>53227544
nice delusions from year 1995

but world has changed, is it that difficult to accept you are not dominant anymore?

you are like a worm compared to China, kek

>>53227544
Why does no one ever make this argument about Germany? It's the same weakness

>>53221669
>hold triangle to activate power stance

>>53223453
I'd say that Germany is above France and (maybe) the UK.

>>53227692
And you say bullshit, adieu.

File: grumec12.jpg (82KB, 636x472px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 636x472px

>>53223556

Besides being on NATO. I don't think so.

File: n.jpg (187KB, 960x684px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 960x684px

RUSSIA IS THE STRONGEST

Russia defeated Napoleon who conquered almost all of the europe.
Russia defeated Hitler who conquered almost all of the europe.

>>53227692
Germany would be able to shift production much quicker and more efficiently than the UK and France and their ground forces are slightly larger but they lack the naval and air power. I also don't think they have any military bases outside of their country.

And of course both UK and France have nukes but if we're leaving those out, Germany is still below imo.

>>53227953
But then France defeated Russia in Malakoff during Crimea war.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Malakoff

>>53227953
>nations in nuclear alliances

What does that mean? They get to use our nukes if they need to or something?

If so, they better be sending some coin this way. Nukes are expensive as fuck you greedy niggers, get your own.

>>53227335
You couldn't even defeat us

>>53221625
>France considering themselves as strong as China or Russia

please...

>>53228224
>China
>Strong

I bet you're a chinaboo jap made in China

>>53221625
Pretty sure Japan and Brazil are more powerful than India. The only difference is that they have nukes, which both countries can produce very quickly if they want to.

>>53228212
Ok.

>>53228503
That's ok, that's ok
...don't nuke us, tho

>>53228434
China is far above any country(which you can clearly see anyway, looking how Cameron and Merkel sucks Jingping's dick) excepts for the US. Better read up and stop living in XX century.

>>53227335
Yeah I think France deserves to be up there, but their position isn't safe. Their economy needs to see improvement, and their military needs more investment.

Italy is underestimated. Did you know, Italy is a top 10 economy, it's in the G7, and it has an aircraft carrier?

File: manifestation-tibet-libre-paris.jpg (47KB, 620x390px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 620x390px

>>53228681
But French remains the alpha of Europe. Free Tibet before the Eiffel Tower

>>53228681
China tows most of its military by horse and can't make baby food without putting arsenic in it.

Like it or not, the French and British are the only countries without a burger addiction that can put nuclear weapons anywhere they want from anywhere they want. China simply doesn't have that range.

>>53221625

>Russia
>India
>Brazil

>>53228174
This concerns me too. Apparently our nuclear weapons are part of NATO's nuclear deterrent. If we are providing this horrendously expensive service to non-nuclear NATO, I want some kind of payment.

File: power details.png (66KB, 1040x465px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 1040x465px

memes

>>53228922
no one cares at all about military

China is 10x larger(in almost any term) than both UK and France, they simply don't compare

>>53230042
>China is 10x larger(in almost any term) than both UK and France
UK GDP: $2,865 trillion

China GDP: $11,385 trillion

So China is 4x larger

File: f2IQti7.png (681KB, 826x613px) Image search: [Google]

681KB, 826x613px

> France

File: jew_basic.jpg (19KB, 220x220px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 220x220px

>>53228174

File: ebin.png (16KB, 685x452px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 685x452px

List of world powers


Tier 1 :

FINLAND

Tier 2 :

All else lands

>>53221625
Tier 1:
USA
Russia
China
Tier 2:
Turkey
UK
France
India
Tier 3:
Germany
Brazil

>>53227949
mmm i think yes. we have modern european and usa weapons..

air combat: 86 f-18hornet + 47 (73 in 2017) eurofighters between other planes

naval army: frigates f100 with AEGI sistem, one carrier with 15 harriers plus, 3 submarines + 4 in building....

army: about 300 leopards 2a6, 24 eurocoper tiger, taurus estrategical missiles,patriot missile system...

i think our armament is pretty modern than yours.

>>53230467
and China grows for 6.9% this year while UK only for 2.1%

the gap will be getting larger and larger

>>53230965
Yeah I know. It's a big gap already, so why lie about it?

>>53231154
ok maybe it's not like 10x larger but still the gap is so huge you can't place China and UK, France, Russia in one category

turkey because turkish special army BORDO BERELİLER eheheheehehe

>>53231433
The UK has many strengths that China lacks

>>53221625
Move France to tier 4, and move Japan up to tier 2. Then everything would be fine.

File: unscflags.jpg (181KB, 500x351px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 500x351px

USA, CHINA, RUSSIA, UK, FRANCE are relevant countries and other are not.

>>53231539
like ?

guys, actual tier

Tier 1
USA
Tier 2
China
Tier 3
Russia, UK, France, Japan, Germany

Soon Tier 3 will be replaced with Brazil, India, Indonesia etc.

>>53227953
but no one would use nuke on civilians except cockroaches so I don't see the point

>>53231873
> Soon Tier 3 will be replaced with Brazil, India, Indonesia etc.

What would you consider "soon"? Because it fortunately still seems a long way off.

File: black grey orange.jpg (1MB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1365px

>>53231873
>like ?
- Advanced, high-value service economy
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-economy-exports-analysis-idUKKCN0T40QI20151115

- Global naval power
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_Royal_Navy_deployments

- London
http://www.cityam.com/224938/london-top-world

- Membership of more important international groups + better bilateral relations with many countries

- Stable political system

- More cultural output and soft power

Can someone please explain why Britain is always quite high in these things because I live in the north and everything looks bleak as fuck here, I never thought this country still had so much power

>>53232297
>I never thought this country still had so much power
Most Brits have no idea. It's a combination of taking it for granted + a very self-hating domestic media + our glorious history (which makes anything today look worse than it is by comparison)

How many people do you think realise we have the 5th biggest economy? I bet 90% of people wouldn't believe it. There's also a lot of general ignorance about our military

>>53230526
>>53231544

>imblyin it is not

>>53232501
Yeah I guess the media here is fuck horrible for giving Brits a negative view on our own country. I must admit I thought with the cuts in funding for our military we weren't up to the standard we should be

>>53232628
>I must admit I thought with the cuts in funding for our military we weren't up to the standard we should be
No you are right. We're NOT up to the standard we should be. The cuts had a big negative effect on our military, and it will take us several years to recover some capabilities we lost.

But in parallel there have been many improvements (such as new overseas bases, new support ships, new aircraft carriers and planes), and despite the cuts the military has pretty impressive capabilities.

Do you remember that typhoon in the Philippines. When that happened, a British aircraft carrier and destroyer were in the area, they picked up supplies and went to help straight away. This was on the news and wasn't strange to us. But how many countries retain a fleet with patrols literally all over the world that those large British ships could be in the area to help? Very few indeed. Only us and the Americans, and the French (but they don't have any military facility in the Far East) can sustain a global fleet.

But most Brits don't see ourselves in this top tier of global powers. We will see the latest article in the Mail saying we have a fraction of the ships that the Russians have, and conclude we're shit.

>India
>World Power
>Can't even into plumbing

>>53230042
>no one cares at all about military
Says who? Military power is one of the two key components to hard power, the other being economic power. In addition to hard power, there is soft power (diplomatic and cultural influence, etc)

China has superior economic power, but the UK (and France) has way more global reach and influence through its military and soft power.

>>53221669
>Dat power stance

HE'S A BIG GUY

>>53230608
Oldest ally, what are you even doing?

>Russia

Russia has very little in terms of global reach and it has less economic power than Italy (and less than even Spain at one point). It also has nonexistent soft power.

>China

China is incapable of sustained global reach and acts more like a regional power than a global one. It also has no soft power, just like Russia.

File: Global_GDP.png (275KB, 1842x1044px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 1842x1044px

>>53221625
Actually objective list.

France to be surpassed by India in 2016.

Only Proper list

World Powers
Tier 1 (Undisputed)
USA
China
Russia

Tier 2
France
UK
Germany

Regional
Asia:
Japan
Iran
Saudi Arabia
India

America
Brazil
Mexico
Canada

Europe
Italy
Turkey
Spain

Africa
South Africa
Egypt

>>53234806
Honestly I would put USA in a tier of its own.

File: 1448481493900.jpg (27KB, 508x524px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 508x524px

>>53230608
>turkey

>>53227614
Goddammit every pole on this forum has been sucking Chinese dick of late

Top Kek

>>53234865
yeah, Hillbilly tier

Tier 1
USA

Tier 2
China
Russia

Tier 3
UK
France

Tier4
India
Japan
Germany
Brazil

actually UK and France aren't that strong in terms of absolute power, but as they have a seat in UNSC, i put them in Tier3 ( they aren't anywhere near China and Russia though). India would be in Tier3 before long.

>>53236627
Japan belongs in Tier 3, alongwith India

>>53232283
>- Advanced, high-value service economy
>http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-economy-exports-analysis-idUKKCN0T40QI20151115
it doesn't matter on global scale
>>53232283
>- Global naval power
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_Royal_Navy_deployments
>military
It's not 19th/early 20th century, no one cares about your military. Also UK Navy is a fucking meme right now, I'm not into military but I can see Chinese navy is 10x larger.
>- London
And China has Shanghai, Shenzhen(the entire world cared so much about these cities' stock exchanges, all over the news kek), Tianjin, Guangzhou, Chongqing...
>- Membership of more important international groups
Membership in more western circlejerk groups you say? Why did you join the AIIB? Finally noticed that western world is nothing more but a delusion?
>- Stable political system
Of course you are brainwashed westerner, nothing "non-democratical" automatically qualifies as "non-stable" for you. But Chinese system since it's establishement is pretty stable and Chinese government managed to take hundreds of millions out of poverty.
>- More cultural output and soft power
I don't know what output you exactly mean, of course Anglo World has more cultural output as a whole but it's mainly due to the USA... Your contribution is dwarfed by Americans.
>more soft power
Is that a joke? That's why UK global influence is drammatically diminishing while the Chinese are investing everywhere, colonising Africa, building artificial islands, and preparing a tremendous undertaking of Silk Road 2.0? I think you don't noticed what is your real position, fortunately for you, your goverment knows that even if UK does any kind of deal with China it's just a junior partner. : ^ )

>>53232297
Because while you are above the most countries in the world thanks to your wealth, power, knowledge and influence accumulated since Colonial Era, you are still dwarfed by the US, so you don't look powerful at all.

>>53237424
Chinese dick is 10x your dick

You got cucked by he ching-chong

>>53237424
I'm not the anon you're responding to but...

>it doesn't matter on global scale
The world's fifth largest economy doesn't matter on a global scale? Are you a retard?

>Also UK Navy is a fucking meme right now, I'm not into military but I can see Chinese navy is 10x larger.

Yes, you are retarded.

The Chinese Navy isn't global in any sense. That's the point which you seem to be missing here. The Chinese Navy is larger (read "is a paper tiger") but does it have anywhere near as many standing deployments overseas as the British Royal Navy? No. In fact the Chinese Navy isn't doing very much outside Asia at all.

The Chinese and Russian militaries are memes. Paper tigers with lots of numbers which look impressive to uneducated children like you. The reality is, the overwhelming majority of their numbers are made up of obsolete equipment, operated by inexperienced conscripts, with no logistics or force projection capabilities to deploy them far beyond their own borders.

>And China has Shanghai
Which isn't even a global financial centre, with anywhere near the economic credentials as London. Even China's HSBC is headquartered in London, you dweeb.

>I don't know what output you exactly mean
Because you don't know anything about "soft power", just like you don't know anything about military or economic power, either?

>Your contribution is dwarfed by Americans
You really are a living and breathing meme.

The UK is always ahead of the USA in soft power rankings:

http://softpower30.portland-communications.com/ranking

http://monocle.com/film/affairs/soft-power-survey-2014-15/

Everything you post just oozes juvenile. You are clueless.

Now piss off and clean my toilet polak. Leave these kind of discussions to adults.

File: rn activity one month.png (773KB, 1115x569px) Image search: [Google]

773KB, 1115x569px

>>53237424
>it doesn't matter on global scale
Yes it does. As the emerging economies develop, the global demand for services will increase. Also services are typically higher value and retain their value for longer

>It's not 19th/early 20th century, no one cares about your military. Also UK Navy is a fucking meme right now
Whether you care about it or not is irrelevant. Perceptions are secondary to capability. And in war, being underestimated is an advantage.

>Membership in more western circlejerk groups you say? Why did you join the AIIB? Finally noticed that western world is nothing more but a delusion?
Membership of both western and eastern groups is important if one aspires to global influence. Denying this is dumb.

>Of course you are brainwashed westerner, nothing "non-democratical" automatically qualifies as "non-stable" for you.
I've just read basic history, which demonstrates that autocratic regimes are less stable than established democracies. China has made great progress, and could have a stable and prosperous future if it's careful, but you would rather have a messy democracy (as in India) than a one-party state. The public must be able to give the government a kicking at some point - if not democratically, it can get messy.

>Your contribution is dwarfed by Americans.
Does that mean it's small? No. The UK's cultural output is huge. China's cultural influence on the world is much smaller, but you don't berate them for it.

>That's why UK global influence is drammatically diminishing
Oh really? Establishing the first new Royal Navy base east of Suez since the British Empire, opening a British Army base in Central America, single-handedly making the EU change its laws for Britain's benefit and commitment to beefing up British military activities in the Far East means the UK's global influence is diminishing?

That's... an interesting way to put it.

Vatican City is the neo-Roman Empire. Billion+ Catholic worldwide is the world's largest empire. Jesus never ever went to Rome in his life. He lived in Jerusalem NOT Rome. So why does Rome claim to speak for him? Very odd and no good answers here.

World Powers: USA, Roman Empire (Vatican), Socialism (Spread out now but still remains).

Do not forget Best Korea m8s, it now has even H-bombs

File: 1282353657006.jpg (14KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x300px

>>53221625
>UK
>France
>tier 1

>>53239519

>Canada
>Regional Power

What? Over who, St Pierre and Miquelon?

>>53239314
>muh un security council
>muh nukes

>>53238716
>The world's fifth largest economy doesn't matter on a global scale? Are you a retard?
No, the thing you are muh "advanced high-value service economy" doesn't really matter that much. What matter is the general economical output of the country. Also China is shifting towards service economy aswell and they are stimulating the internal market to not rely on export anymore.
>In fact the Chinese Navy isn't doing very much outside Asia at all.
Maybe because China understands that it's goal is to take control of South Chinese Sea and not some meme "standing deployments overseas". China is realizing it's goals, you are not any global navy by the way. The only global navy, dominating in all oceans is the US, not fucking UK.
>>53238716
>The Chinese and Russian militaries are memes
>everything better/larger than me and not allied with me like my big brother America is a meme
But everyone considers both Chinese and Russian military much stronger than the UK military. http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp
But that will be probably a meme for you too. : ^ )
>>53238716
>Which isn't even a global financial centre
That's why all the world is autistically obsessed about Shanghai Composite and it's plunge is all over the news everywhere? Kek...
>>53238716
>Even China's HSBC is headquartered in London, you dweeb.
HSBC comes from HK and it's mainly British you fucking idiot. But wait, it's only the 4th largest bank in the world by total assets, and the top 3 is ... Chinese.
>>53238716
>Because you don't know anything about "soft power", just like you don't know anything about military or economic power, either?
Oh but I know what soft power is. And no country in the world even will compare to China in that regard if they pull off their Silk Road 2.0.
>all these Europeans(especially Merkel and Cameron) sucking small Chinese dick to be part of it

>>53221625
>Tier 2
>Germany
HAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
Germany barely has working Cold War Sabers

>>53238716
>You really are a living and breathing meme.
>The UK is always ahead of the USA in soft power rankings:
Why you don't posses any reading comprehension even in your OWN NATIVE LANGUAGE?

I said your contribution to anglo CULTURAL output is dwarfed by Americans.
>>53238716
>The UK is always ahead of the USA in soft power rankings:
>http://softpower30.portland-communications.com/ranking
>http://monocle.com/film/affairs/soft-power-survey-2014-15/
But they are just fucking composite surveys. Don't even link bullshit like this, it's completely pointless.

And just tell me, outside of this "hard evidence" where is your soft power? You are the one sucking Chinese cock to get your Silk Road 2.0 terminal in London or they are sucking your cock? You are the one joining AIIB(backstabbing the US) or the Chinese are joining your AIIB?

>>53233941
for you

>>53239737
>No, the thing you are muh "advanced high-value service economy" doesn't really matter that much.
That's not me. I replied to you here >>53238987

>>53223453
1.USA
2.China
3.Russia
ftfy
F

>>53239614
Over Greenland. I guess they can sell you resources and stuff.

>>53239987
>You are the one sucking Chinese cock to get your Silk Road 2.0 terminal in London or they are sucking your cock?

You are a bit obsessed with cocks. In a deal like that both countries get something out of it. China gets greater status for the Renminbi and the chance to showcase its nuclear power stations for export to other countries, UK gets more money coming through London, and lots of investment in different parts of the country.

>>53238716
>>53238987
>muh power projection
>muh soft power

How many marines could the RN deploy with your 3 amphibious ships? 1500? 2000? That the RN is one of the few navies investing in amphibious warfare doesn't mean you properly can project power. Really only the US is capable of doing that.

And tell me what being a soft power has done for the UK recently?

>>53238987
>Yes it does. As the emerging economies develop, the global demand for services will increase. Also services are typically higher value and retain their value for longer
Yes China is still behind that's obvious. For how long it will stay behind though? Already their services output is more than twice larger than yours. And will grow faster than yours. Now what?
>Whether you care about it or not is irrelevant.
Who cares about your muh military except for you? Military now is only a second tier argument when it comes to politics. It can change obviously, and Chinese themselves are building a huge and modern military despite the fact they are clearly basing their world domination on economy(just like they always did in history). But again - China already has a better/larger/more powerful military than the UK and will obviously invest more and will continue outpacing you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
>Membership of both western and eastern groups is important if one aspires to global influence.
Ok what groups exactly you are talking about and why are they so important?
>>53238987
>I've just read basic history, which demonstrates that autocratic regimes are less stable than established democracies
I've jus read basic history and there were regimes running for hundreds of years while democracies crumbled. Democracy in China got rekt before it even started. Probably democracy isn't even a suitable option for countries like China. For now Chinese government is doing better than good and there is no sign at all that Chinese government is unstable or falling.

You know, that is UK not China where you have fucking no-go shariah zones. Lmfao.
>>53238987
>The public must be able to give the government a kicking at some point - if not democratically, it can get messy.
It's not getting messy in China at all. Chinese aren't as obsessed with muh freedom of speech, muh human rights as the Westerners.

>>53239737
>Also China is shifting towards service economy aswell and they are stimulating the internal market to not rely on export anymore.
>shifting towards
Oh so you admit they don't have one already. Nice. The brain dead Pole is actually catching up.

>Maybe because China understands that it's goal is to take control of South Chinese Sea and not some meme "standing deployments overseas".
You really are an idiot.

This whole thread and debate is about national power. If China's military is only acting regionally, then China is a regional power, and a regional power is never above a global power.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

>The only global navy, dominating in all oceans is the US, not fucking UK
Who actually claimed the UK was dominating in all oceans? You really don't know what you're talking about.

The point was the UK is acting globally, like the global power that it is, sending its navy on sustained deployments all around the world. Meanwhile, China keeps its navy within its own region.

Again, a regional power acting only regionally is never above a global power acting globally.

>That's why all the world is autistically obsessed about Shanghai Composite and it's plunge is all over the news everywhere? Kek...
Riiiiiiiight. So if Shanghai really is a global financial centre more relevant than London, could you give me some evidence to prove it so? Meanwhile pic related proves that it's less relevant than Luxembourg.

Also, are you seriously using its "plunge" as a boasting point against London? .... Really?

>Oh but I know what soft power is. And no country in the world even will compare to China in that regard if they pull off their Silk Road 2.0.
Oh yes, because Silk Road 2.0 will definitely put China at the forefront of global cultural influence and soft power.

Kek. Just hurry up and clean the shitter will you?

>>53240351
>And tell me what being a soft power has done for the UK recently?
Nothing, no one fucking cares about their non-existant soft-power. I pay attention to the news but even BBC probably reports more on Chinese activities in the world than on British...

File: new expeditionary force.png (129KB, 937x567px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 937x567px

>>53240351
The three amphibious can deploy something like 2200 Royal Marines at once, but there is more to power projection than the Marines. You are forgetting, for example, that the Paras always go in first with the Royal Marines.

The old plan was that the British Armed Forces would be capable of sending a maximum of 35,000 troops, independently, on an expeditionary mission. This has recently been increased to 50,000. Pic related.

>>53240995
Sorry, the old plan was 30,000 maximum

File: Luxemberg more relevant than wanghigh.jpg (140KB, 793x891px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 793x891px

>>53240916
Forgot pic.

>>53221625
>France and UK are on the list of tier 1 as if it were a matter of cource.

>>53240351
>3 amphibious ships
It's actually 6. An LPH, three LSDs and two LPDs.

And those aren't our only tools for force projection. We have lots of overseas bases, lots of heavy lift aircraft, nuclear subs, sealift ships, lots of logistics ships, etc.

>>53240916
>Oh so you admit they don't have one already. Nice. The brain dead Pole is actually catching up.
No, you are the brain dead one.

China has already more than two times larger services output than the UK. And it will keep growing faster.
>>53240916
>You really are an idiot.
>This whole thread and debate is about national power. If China's military is only acting regionally, then China is a regional power, and a regional power is never above a global power.
I fucking kekd. You really don't know basics on 21st century geopolitics don't you? You don't know that Western Pacific is the pivotal area now, most important politically, militarily and especially economically. What they are doing is agressively pushing borders in the most relevant region in the world. It's not regional, it can appear as regional, but after all why would we be hearing about that in the news here?

Aside of that, so what is UK doing globally? Nothing(of importance)?

While China "keeps it's navy within it's own region" - what is best to China's interests as global power, UK is engaging into some pointless "global activities" while having not enough economical, military and political output. Kek, so you are telling me you are weaker than China in every term possible but you are still trying to be the US?
>>53240916
>Riiiiiiiight. So if Shanghai really is a global financial centre more relevant than London, could you give me some evidence to prove it so?
I never said Shanghai is right now more important financial centre than London. But it will be. And China has atleast 4 other megacities. All of them will be as relevant as London in 10 years.

>Also, are you seriously using its "plunge" as a boasting point against London? .... Really?
It clearly shows it global importance.

>>53230772
http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp?form=form&country1=brazil&country2=spain&Submit=COMPARE

>>53241354
>It's actually 6. An LPH, three LSDs and two LPDs.
Yes true.

HMS Albion, HMS Bulwark and HMS Ocean are the RN ships that move Royal Marines around. They can move 2200 in total.

But there are also the RFA Bay Class amphibious ships. They have space for max 700 troops each. Which is 2100.

So I make the total 4300 Royal Marines that can be moved at once by sea. Then you have 16 Air Assault Brigade coming in by air, and the rest of the Army afterwards I suppose

>>53240916
>Oh yes, because Silk Road 2.0 will definitely put China at the forefront of global cultural influence and soft power.
Why do you lack basic reading skills? Quite pathetic considering English is your native language.

I never said Silk Road 2.0 will put China at the forefront of cultural importance, because it won't.

I was referring to Silk Road 2.0 as a soft-power, which is really is, attractive and appealing undertaking.

Will it put China at the forefront? I don't know, but it will clearly put China ahead of Britain.

They care about Silk Road 2.0 in Beijing, they care about it in Chengdu, they care about in Astana, they care about it in Moscow, they care about it in Minsk, they care about it in Warsaw, they care about it in Berlin and London. How can UK even compare? : ^ )

>>53230608
>>53221625
Why do you lower Germoney? US occupied?

>>53221625
Russia can't even project it's power properly outside it's own borders except harass it's smaller neighbours with random aircraft.

Turkey alone could block majority of their fleet in Black Sea if they wanted lel.

File: jedwabny szlak.png (343KB, 854x439px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 854x439px

Someone is clearly mad they are so irrelevant they weren't even put on the map kek.

File: 21252196608_f1533f29e6_h.jpg (646KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

646KB, 1600x900px

>>53232283
really pathetic skyline as for alleged "world finance centre"

no wonder london is not even marked on the map

I was enjoying this autism battle. Keep it up lads.

File: 2r3r839.gif (2MB, 240x180px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 240x180px

>>53242529
this
also ktos tu sie naogladal Bartosiaka

File: 1448148195761.jpg (78KB, 340x314px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 340x314px

>tier 1
>france
>UK

File: 1444593831142.jpg (96KB, 306x806px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 306x806px

>>53240637
>Yes China is still behind that's obvious. For how long it will stay behind though? Already their services output is more than twice larger than yours. And will grow faster than yours. Now what?
I meant an economy that does services well, like the UK's, is well positioned for the changes that will happen in the global economy. China's service sector will grow with their economy, but making the transition to a modern economy will be a long and slow process. While China catches up, the UK will continue modernising. The UK is ahead of all the major Western advanced economies in this area, let alone China! From that article:

>For rich countries, manufacturing still tends to make up the lion's share of exports. But Britain has proved an exception.

>Some of this is due to advantages that date back centuries, such as the global influence of the City of London, the English language and its legal and educational systems.

>But it also reflects how Britain is further along a path of deindustrialisation affecting most advanced economies.

....

>Who cares about your muh military except for you?
Well, I don't know, perhaps Bahrain who are literally paying £millions to have the Royal Navy based in their country, or Belize who have been asking the British government for years to re-open the Army base there.

>I've jus read basic history and there were regimes running for hundreds of years while democracies crumbled.
Most of the world today is democracies, why is that

>It's not getting messy in China at all. Chinese aren't as obsessed with muh freedom of speech, muh human rights as the Westerners.
It has the potential to get messy though. The risk is greater than in a democracy where the public can make their frustrations known

>>53241795
You live in a soviet bunker without news informations ?

>>53248031
whoose country is full of niggers, mon copain ?

>>53221625
"France > Germany"

AHAHAHAHAHAHA MUHAHAHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MUHAHAHAH AHHAHHA HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA XAXAXAXAXAXA AHAHAHAHAHAHA MUHAHAHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MUHAHAHAH AHHAHHA HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA XAXAXAXAXAXAAHAHAHAHAHAHA MUHAHAHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MUHAHAHAH AHHAHHA HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA XAXAXAXAXAXAAHAHAHAHAHAHA MUHAHAHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MUHAHAHAH AHHAHHA HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA XAXAXAXAXAXAAHAHAHAHAHAHA MUHAHAHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MUHAHAHAH AHHAHHA HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA XAXAXAXAXAXAAHAHAHAHAHAHA MUHAHAHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MUHAHAHAH AHHAHHA HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA XAXAXAXAXAXA AHAHAHAHAHAHA MUHAHAHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MUHAHAHAH AHHAHHA HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA XAXAXAXAXAXA AHAHAHAHAHAHA MUHAHAHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MUHAHAHAH AHHAHHA HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA XAXAXAXAXAXA AHAHAHAHAHAHA MUHAHAHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA MUHAHAHAH AHHAHHA HAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA XAXAXAXAXAXA

File: my sides.png (425KB, 657x595px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 657x595px

>>53248784
All aboard the banter train

>>53230772

Nope again. Most of our equipment also been updated, plus we build our own equipment, which it gives a huge advantage. Also way more experience and personell.

Also we are the one of the suppliers who provides the spanish army ammo.

>>53248880
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/10/sandwich-firm-fill-vacancies-factory-east-european-workers

>>53248784
Why do eastern countries suck german cock ? I noticed that. Germany has a strong présence in these countries ?

Meanwhile top news on BBC are about irrelevant Chinese markets.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35248798
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35253188

>>53248784
It clearly is though

File: 1442834283058.jpg (52KB, 816x812px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 816x812px

>>53249191
>the Eternal Magyar has humiliated us... AGAIN

>>53249437
Well honestly in Europe Germany is probably more influential - their economy and population is significantly larger than French and British, and of course Germany is traditionally very influential in countries like Hungary, Poland.

But due to former French colonies and French military, on global scale France is probably atleast equally relevant.

>>53237140
Is your head filled with shit or something? Japan has had completely literally no economic growth for the past two decades and absoloutely no power projection anywhere in the world of any type except maybe exports. Im not even going to bother with india, both countries clearly dont rival the UK and France at all

>>53249513
Lol at the chinese traders, they are not classy like the french ones in London

>>53249652
but Japan is still economically larger than France and the UK.

>>53221625
USA is OP.

>>53249759
Economic power isnt everything, especially when your economy is poison for foreign investors. Germany, France and the UK will all almost certainly pass Japan in 15-20 years and thats not even mentioning everything else

>>53221625
>Thinking that any nation on earth comes even remotely close to the US or China
lel

File: image.jpg (170KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 640x960px

>>53230042
>no one care about military

>>53249941
>Germany, France and the UK will all almost certainly pass Japan in 15-20 years and thats not even mentioning everything else
Do you see the future?

>>53221625
Comparing countries that have one fifth of the American population, one sixth of its production output, a military that is comparable to a tenth of the American military is laughable. Comparing the amounts of cultural and international influence the US have to that of France or the UK could be considered an insult to the US.

Also could the people of /int finally decide which of these two it is? Either Germany is controlling europe and the UK and France are mere lapdog to it or the UK and France are much more powerful than it for whatever reason. Doesnt really matter to me on what you decide on personally, as both is wrong, but make up your minds already.

>>53249941
>and thats not even mentioning everything else
Like Indonesia, India, Brazil, Mexico overtaking Britain?

File: Chrysippus.jpg (35KB, 229x343px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 229x343px

>>53249513
>crashing and burning

>>53250956
Brazil is too stagnant, Indonesia and Mexico too small economically as of yet. Japan has the same GDP as it did two decades ago account for inflation

>>53250956
India will overtake us, the rest? Nah

>>53251583
>Brazil is too stagnant
True desu. Once it gets back on track it will overtake all european countries though.
>Indonesia and Mexico too small economically as of yet
With their growth it wont take long until they overtake most countries just by population numbers. Indonesia alone has more people than France, Uk and Germany combined. Mexico a bit less but they have the biggest (or soon to be second biggest) economy at their border as a major plus.

We simply have to accept that the age of europe is over and that other countries will be the leading powers soon, or are if you look at the US which still dwarfs any other nation in pretty much anything. Soon China will be up there as well even if they have economic hickups. Same with India in the mid term.

>>53221625
US foreign policy is eventually going to catch up and lead to its collapse. I don't see it being a world power much longer.

>>53251657
India definitely.
Indonesia could in the next twenty years.
For the other two it may take another decade but the trend is clear.

>>53251846
>We simply have to accept that the age of europe is over

The age of European domination is certainly over. But why assume a European country or countries can't grow more powerful again?

We've been written off before and made incredible comebacks. Remember history didn't begin with a powerful Europe. British history didn't begin with a powerful Britain.

Your idea that history is linear and some countries can only rise, and others will only decline, is utter nonsense

>>53251886
>US foreign policy is eventually going to catch up and lead to its collapse.
I assume youre talking about Russia? It really isnt anymore. After the collapse of the SU Germany took over the leadership of eastern europe by having the strongest economy in the region. The only thing Russia has left is its gas and its military and with the military being obsolete as military power cant really achieve much today anymore and gas being cheap and slowly getting replaced, it isnt really a great power anymore.

>>53236594
>mfw a designated shitter tells off my glorious country

>>53252031
>But why assume a European country or countries can't grow more powerful again?
In the near future? Nah. Dont know what will happen in 600 years though. 600 years ago China was easily the most powerful country on earth if they had wanted to conquer it we would all speak Chinese now.
>We've been written off before and made incredible comebacks.
Yeah and right now Asia is making its come back. Maybe in 400 years when europe has 3 billion inhabitants and is united under the banner of the caliph Al-Baghdadi XXV that will reverse. Who knows?
>Remember history didn't begin with a powerful Europe.
And history wont end now with it on top.
>Your idea that history is linear and some countries can only rise, and others will only decline, is utter nonsense
Im realistic short term, with short term being the next hundred years. In this time europe will lose most of its influence that it has alone while Africa and Asia will rise and dominate with the US left as the only powerful country of the west. And even the US will have to accept that its not longer a superpower anymore at some point in some decades. Some miracle comeback of countries that have 60 million people, like the UK, is something I dont believe in.

>>53234487
Once and for all, can anyone explain the difference between GDP and GDP-PPP, and for which situations one would be more "representative" than the other (and why)?

>>53252096
Our military isn't in the greatest shape either, the Middle East is wearing us out

>>53252404
>Some miracle comeback of countries that have 60 million people, like the UK, is something I dont believe in.
You're concentrating a lot on population numbers. I'll share one fact with you.

In 1850, Britain had a population of 20 million in a world of 1.25 billion, and 45% of the WORLD'S manufactured goods was produced in Britain. Source
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2014/06/britains-economy

Think about this carefully.

1.6% of the world's population
45% of the world's products

How could that happen? Innovation, resulting in high productivity. You think we have stopped innovating? Go and look at history, NO ONE expected Britain to become as powerful as it did. Less than a century before 1850, Britain had lost its first empire and was the laughing stock of the world. Think about it please.

>>53252517
Its still the most powerful. Even in 40 years it will still be the biggest, even though its power will of course shrink compared to countries like China, India or even coming regional powers like Nigeria or Indonesia.

>>53252459
>Once and for all, can anyone explain the difference between GDP and GDP-PPP, and for which situations one would be more "representative" than the other (and why)?

Nominal GDP = monetary value (in US dollars) of all goods and services produced in a country within a given time (usually a year).

GDP (PPP) = PPP is purchasing power parity. This is artificially adjusted GDP to correct for cost of living. A burger is cheaper in China than it is in the UK.

GDP (PPP) is a better measure for the wealth of the average citizen.

Nominal GDP indicates the economic power of the state. One thing about nominal GDP is that it's volatile, because it's affect by exchange rates. But if you currency is getting weaker, it's normally because your economy is getting weaker anyway

>>53252641
>Think about it please.
And before that the Chinese and Asians were the most creative and innovative. Is it that hard to accept that they could be back? I mean compared to world history european domination was a mere fad.

Also uncertainty in the future goes both ways. Who says that the Chinese dont have the next great breakthrough where they create energy out of Polish butthurt for example?

>Think about this carefully.
Then lets take a look at the 1500s where China and India were the most productive and, even though Im too lazy to google right now, I think they produced more than the rest of the world COMBINED.

>>53228174

You test your nukes here - you use them when we need them

>>53252922
I'm not saying China and India won't continue to make their comeback. You don't understand. I'm not saying Europeans are special, I am saying that you CAN'T assume some countries will decline and others will rise just because of their population.

Whether in Europe or other continents.

Chinese could get the next breakthrough, or some African country, or Mexico. It's impossible to predict, although some are better placed than others to do it.

Where you are wrong is that you assume it's over for European countries because they had past success. Wrong. European countries also have potential, just like China and India.

>>53252922
Also innovation isnt treasured by a certain culture anymore. Only the Europeans and Americans could build factories in 1900. Now if something is discovered in Britain the knowledge is transferred to other countries in seconds and Asian countries are much more willing to accept western style production now than they were in 1900.

>>53253067
Erm, the ideas from the Industrial Revolution were transferred from Britain to the rest of Europe and beyond VERY quickly.

>Now if something is discovered in Britain the knowledge is transferred to other countries in seconds
What the fuck are you on about? No it isn't, not unless 1) the discover wants to spread the information or 2) it's stolen in a cyber attack

Which is why we're dumping loads of money into cyber defence and offensive capabilities.

>>53253062
>I am saying that you CAN'T assume some countries will decline and others will rise just because of their population.
At the short term, yes, I can pretty much say this as nothing is pointing in the other direction except some "In the future maybe we could...". Nobody knows shit about 2066 but at the moment we can all see China and India rising and europe declining.
>Where you are wrong is that you assume it's over for European countries because they had past success. Wrong. European countries also have potential, just like China and India.
I never said europe cant come back at some point, its just highly unlikely for our life times or those of the next generations.

>>53253188
>Erm, the ideas from the Industrial Revolution were transferred from Britain to the rest of Europe and beyond VERY quickly.
Yeah, to the rest of europe which was culturally very close to Britain as well as technologically and the implementation of British style factories wasnt that hard.
>the discover wants to spread the information
Which is the usual case in the industry. If a company makes a medical breakthrough where is the medicine produced? Right, in India. If a car company makes anew engine where is it produced? Right, China, Mexico, etc.
Most breakthrough are made by normal companies and they arent national property. Only gouvernment secrets are protected. At least until they are stolen.

>>53253376
>>53253238
Also Im going to bed now. if you really think that there is much chance or certainty for a european country to rise again during our life times thats fine for you, but I dont believe you should get your hopes up much.

>>53253238
>I can pretty much say this as nothing is pointing in the other direction except some "In the future maybe we could..."
Not really. According to you, we are in decline right? But in the past couple of decades the UK has overtaken Italy, France and Brazil. Yes we actually moved past Brazil, an emerging market.

China and India are merely reverting to their normal historical positions. Don't hype this up too much. Bear in mind that China was the 2nd largest economy in the world when it suffered its "century of humiliations".

>Most breakthrough are made by normal companies and they arent national property. Only gouvernment secrets are protected.
Yes and the breakthroughs in the Industrial Revolution were made by normal people/companies as well. But today, normal companies can buy security from cyber defence companies. Or the government might become directly involved, such as with the development of the Skylon SABRE engines.

>>53253507
It depends what you mean by 'rise again'. I don't see any new empires happening any time soon. But the next big technological breakthrough could easily happen in Europe, and what then?

>>53227953
>Russia defeated Hitler who conquered almost all of the europe.


Yeah, after the US conquered Nazi territory in France, the Netherlands and North Africa, while fighting a completely separate war in the Pacific. Oh, and due to the lend-lease act, the Russian army was vitally funded by the US.

But hey Ivan, at least you managed to take Berlin after sustaining colossal losses.

>>53253649
>the US conquered Nazi territory in France, the Netherlands and North Africa

Yeah just the US, no one else. Another country definitely did not contribute half the troops at D-Day. Thanks Australia

>>53253760
My bad senpai, British were also vital to the North African campaign. Without Montgomery the takeover of Europe would have been fucked.

In Australia we tend to forget about the British role in WWII since you guys didn't have much of a presence in the Pacific theatre.

>>53253649
maybe it was a team effort and credit isn't due to a single nation; to which the usa and the ussr both played key roles alongside dozens of other countries

>>53253760
Accept that your piddly little island and its inhabitants only importance during the war was to serve as a base for foreign soldiers and to provide an ample supply of women to fill the brothels.

1. USA
power gap
2. Russia
3. China
power gap
4. India

If you don't have a 1 million+ standing army you're irrelevant.

>>53253850
this desu

>>53221625
>UK
>tier 1

toplel

>>53253760
>>53253849
>>53253874

Daily reminder that during the Battle of Singapore, 85,000 British troops surrendered to 36,000 Japanese troops.

Losing Singapore without a fight put Australia and the free Pacific nations at a significant risk and prolonged the war.

Cowardly Brits literally helped the Axis prolong the war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Singapore

>>53253649
>Russia vs Hitler
1-0

>Australia vs Emus
0-1

>>53254010
they just appointed a shitty general

>>53254010
Australians seem to really hate Britain on here. Noticed it in other threads too.

>>53254092
When it comes to military operations Australians harbor a deep resentment for poms.

Mostly because Brits used Australians as cannon-fodder during Gallipoli and the British surrender left Australia virtually defenseless in WWII. If it weren't for the US, we would have lost northern Australia.

>>53254151
That's good to know, I suppose

>>53254030
>Canada vs Relevancy
0-1

>>53254151
>Brits used Australians as cannon-fodder during Gallipoli

utter idiocy. far more british troops died at gallipoli. nationality was irrelevant, if you were a soldier in that war, you were an expendable asset

>>53254217
They learn their history from that Mel Gibson film about Gallipoli, not history books

>>53227953
But didn't Japan defeat Russia?

>>53252896
Thanks m8

File: gallipoli casualties.png (31KB, 554x400px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 554x400px

>>53254151
>because Brits used Australians as cannon-fodder during Gallipoli
Yes that is exactly what happened. As you can see from the casualty statistics, the British stayed in the tents sipping tea while the Australian lions took all the casualties.

Truly, Britain is the most disgusting country in history

>>53254431
russo- japanese war.

>>53255146
Thanks to Teddy!

>>53254552
>Yes that is exactly what happened

We know.