Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rolan7]

https://xkcd.com/753/

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

I know it's silly, but sometimes I do think that being in the Commonwealth - having Her Majesty as a figurehead - might have helped us (the US).  Not just this election, but in general.  We conflate figurehead with leader of the armed forces, and then he's manager of the branch that actually does everything.

You know, I kinda want to see the UK invite the US to join the Commonwealth.  The reactions of the world would be hilarious.

[Loud Whispers]

You know, I kinda want to see the UK invite the US to join the Commonwealth.  The reactions of the world would be hilarious.

It would be pretty spooky tbh and could possibly end up killing the Commonwealth

[Strife26]

The world was remarkably peaceful in the Warsaw-NATO two pole system and has been in the one pole system after the USSR collapsed. Looking at the coming non-polar world, there's no guarantee it's going to be a nice place.

[Loud Whispers]

>remarkably peaceful
>close to human extinction
ayy lmao

[Rolan7]

To be fair, we have been and always will be close to extinction with these MAD (heh) numbers of nuclear weapons.  I think it's impressive that we avoided it during those times.

[smjjames]

It'd be more like multi-polar with no single pole absolutely dominating. Basically, the Great Power system of the 19th century (actually, a lot further back too) and the first few decades of the 20th.

However, the Great Power system then was concentrated in Europe (the US didn't get to the status it has now until after WWII, although it started on the road to it after WWI), now it's spread out (US, Europe+Russia, China, Iran*), and nukes didn't exist. As has been mentioned, Africa and South America don't have anybody remotely close to Great Power political status. Brazil was on it's way there, then it broke.

*Although there isn't any single dominant power in the MidEast, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are both vying for regional dominance as well.

[Reelya]

I ... guess Iran as a regional power.

But I'd argue that their power is heavily exaggerated because they're the designated bogeyman. You always need to keep one of them in stock. The Turks and the Saudis have about double the GDP each, and about double the military expenditure of Iran.

Economically, Iran rates #27 in the world, behind Nigeria even. So on pure economy, they don't rate highly at all. Also, if you look at World Bank figures for Iran's military expenditure, they dropped it right off after the Iran-Iraq war ended (1988). It's now about 2.3% of GDP, which is low for the region.
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?locations=IR
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS
Iraq spends 7.3% of their GDP on weapons, Jordan 4.3%, Israel 5.4%, Saudi Arabia 13.5%. So you can see, not only are they average in GDP, Iran is actually one of the lower spenders on arms in the region. If they're causing an arms race as idiots will try and claim, they're doing it in a weird way that involves not investing much in their military.

[smjjames]

I guess Iran as a regional power. But I'd argue you have to add Brazil and others to world powers if you're counting Iran. Iran has a fairly low GDP, and they have almost zero ability to project military force (other than sending some militia to help a civil war here or there).

That's what I'm saying, it's more of a collection of regional powers of varying strength trying to vie on the world stage in a very global geopolitical community. With the US maintaining it's miitary power projection capabilities. The last time such a Great Power type situation happened, things weren't as globalized as they are now (nearly entirely Europe centered, and China at the time had been in isolationist mode for a while), so, it's a new situation in human history as well.

[Reelya]

I was mainly pointing that Iran doesn't fit the description of a regional power. They have middling GDP and actually don't invest as much of their GDP in arms as other nearby countries. Don't let the media mislead you, look up the information yourself (see the edit). Iran just isn't investing in being a military power, according to international sources.

[Loud Whispers]

I was mainly pointing that Iran doesn't fit the description of a regional power. They have middling GDP and actually don't invest as much of their GDP in arms as other nearby countries. Don't let the media mislead you, look up the information yourself (see the edit). Iran just isn't investing in being a military power, according to international sources.

>doesn't post any sources
>doubts that a regional hegemon fits the description of a regional power without sources
Their power extends through their lands and into mesopotamia

[Neonivek]

Well you know... Reelya didn't post any real sources, unless you look at the real source he posted.

Just sort of tilt your eyeballs upward.

[Reelya]

I posted world bank sources in the previous post. Iran's military expenditures are well below the regional average. Basically they massively scaled-back their military spending in 1988 when the war with Saddam ended.

Their entire defense budget is $10 billion. To put that in perspective, New Zealand spends $3 billion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

As a comparison, the Saudi's spend $87 billion on arms, which is basically what France and Germany combined spend.

[Neonivek]

To an extent I wonder if Iran serves as a stabilizing force in the Middle East (I said Stabilizing force, not magic source... Don't go "Well there is still war in the middle east")

But my only source that suggest that is from the freeken 90s... It also says Egypt also serves that role.

Mostly because if any Middle Eastern Country gets too rowdy they will be steamrolled by them.

[Baffler]

Iran doesn't spend much compared to the Saudis but their influence should not be underestimated. They have a powerful proxy group in Hezbollah and other smaller Shia militias, and their military assistance to the Syrian government gives them a good deal of pull there (though not as much as Russia.) They also have one of the best navies in the region, and are the most populous after Turkey.

And you need look no further than the Saudi's trouble with Yemen (and Houthi tribespeople) to see how much that ridiculous defense budget is actually getting them. Defense spending is a very shallow metric for military power.