Qui-Gon Glenn Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 My mother is quite heavy into new age mysticism and such, and has heard from several "ascended masters" as well as several seers and mediums, that in 2010 the US economy will disolve, that the country will become literally divided into 6 separate chunks, that.... cats and dogs will live together in harmony.... pandemonium essentially. I take my mother's ideas with a grain of salt, as I take anyone's ideas. However, I stumbled upon this article today, taken from the WSJ, that is telling me the same things that my mother said, just from a completely different, and many would say more credible, perspective. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html Any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrtoken Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 It makes a great premise for some installment in the Battlefront series, but nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qui-Gon Glenn Posted December 5, 2009 Author Share Posted December 5, 2009 I was thinking more CoD 3.... but really, the guy is no dummy, and economically I think he is dead on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediAthos Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with his whole premise...I'll give that the U.S. economy is not in good shape...but the Great Depression didn't destroy the United States any more than the current economy will. I would think that for the United States to dissolve would take some other major political or social issues such as those behind the American Civil War of the 1860s and I just don't see it happening...especially not into 6 sections. Mexico is in no position to take over anything, and I fail to see how Alaska would end up under Russian control or how any part of the country would end up under control over any other foreign power without acts of war. To surmise..my opinion is that he's full of sound and fury signifying nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverNight Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Unless this guy's name is Hari Seldon I think he's just blowing air and making waves hoping for his 15 minutes of fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purifier Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Well now....that's a real possibilty. Not so sure that it will happen though, but come to think of it, we've had two civil wars in the past because of economic's and political rivalries. And regrettably, we could be in for another if at least half the nation doesn't get back on it's economic toes (so to speak) and our current government just keeps screwing around; pulling the same crap they've been doing lately with this economy. But nothing is a sure bet, yet anything can happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hallucination Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence. Ni hao, bra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Haha, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 wall street journal article;didn't read Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Unless this guy's name is Hari Seldon I think he's just blowing air and making waves hoping for his 15 minutes of fame. Haha, love the reference. My turn: Does this mean that Cthulhu has finally awakened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hallucination Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Does this mean that Cthulhu has finally awakened? I think you may have misread it, he says the United States are going to dissolve, not the faces of the entire world's population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 This guy, Panarin, sounds like he is obsessed (possibly to the point orgasm) with USA's demise. Pre-emptive notice to the mods: I am feeling a bit snarky and sarcastic. You may have to smack me around a little. Prof. Panarin, 50 years old, is not a fringe figure. A former KGB analyst, he is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats. Ah. A "Killer-Green-Bud" feller, eh? Cheech and Chong would have a blast. But it's his bleak forecast for the U.S. that is music to the ears of the Kremlin, WHAT?! Kremlin???!!! You mean this guy is working for King K.Rool--the jerk who tried to steal Donkey Kong's banana hoard? ZOMG! which in recent years has blamed Washington for everything from instability in the Middle East to the global financial crisis. Mr. Panarin's views also fit neatly with the Kremlin's narrative that Russia is returning to its rightful place on the world stage after the weakness of the 1990s, when many feared that the country would go economically and politically bankrupt and break into separate territories. Really now? You know what? It's also been speculated that China, India, and other affluent countries are about to take the helm of "first power nation" in the world. So, Russia has some serious competition if that is true. You can make many an outlandish speculation, not that it really means much until it materializes in some form. [Meanwhile]: Zangief must be really happy as he yells "Mother Russia" after a match of pounding some poor Marvel rival or fellow Capcom icon into the ground. [/sarcasm] A polite and cheerful man with a buzz cut, Mr. Panarin insists he does not dislike Americans. But he warns that the outlook for them is dire. Seriously now? I had no idea. "There's a 55-45% chance right now that disintegration will occur," he says. "One could rejoice in that process," he adds, poker-faced. "But if we're talking reasonably, it's not the best scenario -- for Russia." Though Russia would become more powerful on the global stage, he says, its economy would suffer because it currently depends heavily on the dollar and on trade with the U.S. Hmm. Wreaks of ambivalence, but whatever. Funny, all the economic sources I have come across (and some table scraps by the Trends Research Institute) say that while they see the economy's double dip coming up on us in our recession hard (estimate hitting Jan.-Feb. once the holiday 'boost' effect wears off) it doesn't seem to mean much. Even as bleak as it is right now, I do not see an utter collapse and downfall in the near term. I see a painful and slow year ahead of us thereafter its onset. Mr. Panarin posits, in brief, that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar. Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces -- with Alaska reverting to Russian control. Mmmmmmmmmmm, nope. Wishful thinking. I'll agree those factors are contributory to our recession, but each have a counteracting effect that nullifies them significantly. Mr. Panarin's apocalyptic vision "reflects a very pronounced degree of anti-Americanism in Russia today," says Vladimir Pozner, a prominent TV journalist in Russia. "It's much stronger than it was in the Soviet Union." Mr. Pozner and other Russian commentators and experts on the U.S. dismiss Mr. Panarin's predictions. "Crazy ideas are not usually discussed by serious people," says Sergei Rogov, director of the government-run Institute for U.S. and Canadian Studies, who thinks Mr. Panarin's theories don't hold water. Mr. Panarin's résumé includes many years in the Soviet KGB, an experience shared by other top Russian officials. His office, in downtown Moscow, shows his national pride, with pennants on the wall bearing the emblem of the FSB, the KGB's successor agency. It is also full of statuettes of eagles; a double-headed eagle was the symbol of czarist Russia. The professor says he began his career in the KGB in 1976. In post-Soviet Russia, he got a doctorate in political science, studied U.S. economics, and worked for FAPSI, then the Russian equivalent of the U.S. National Security Agency. He says he did strategy forecasts for then-President Boris Yeltsin, adding that the details are "classified." This all speaks for itself. I'll let that marinate in here like a fart. Skipping over some... California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Lolwut? I actually LIVE in CA. Granted it's so minced it might as well be a foreign country...where's all the heavy chinese influence, exactly? It actually looks more heavy Mexican influence in some areas. Others are just diced up, and you have rich people all over with their domiciles and little communities. The north, is a bunch of redwood dwelling artists and such. Small economy, but very beautiful places to camp. South is cities and such except up in the hills. Lots of bums, loads of Mexicans, and a lot of blacks around Compton and Riverside. The coast: meh, it's a mixture of retired folks and young people last I checked. Haven't been out there in few years. I suppose in 3-5 years time there could be a mass influx of Asians that I don't know about. Central north to south...pretty spread out, unless he's talking about Sacramento (Hi everyone!--though I'm a ways off out in the 'booneys') and San Francisco. Even then...I don't see what he's talking about... All in all, CA might be its own 'republic' but TBH unless certain industries pick up around here, we really aren't going to be much of anything. In fact Michigan has been playing commercials to corporations thinking about relocating somewhere else to get out of silicon valley. Well professor, looks like you don't know as much as you think you do about CA. (EDIT: Oh, and the sierra mountains bordering NV have their own little economy that seems quite recession resistant, BTW. So unless it's in the nearby valley areas from north to south which seem quite unpopulated and undeveloped at this time, I *still* don't see where there is a little china about to take California over...Maybe hiding out in southern Nevada's missile silos, and 100-200+yr old mines with all their unstable dynamite?)... Texas will be the heart of "The Texas Republic," a cluster of states that will go to Mexico or fall under Mexican influence. Hmm. Comments anyone? mimartin? Sam D.? S.D. Nihil? Tobias Reiper? Somehow this rings false to me. I last visited Texas in 2001, so it could have become heavily Mexican in that time period. I thought Mexico wasn't in much a position to take anything over? Washington, D.C., and New York will be part of an "Atlantic America" that may join the European Union. Canada will grab a group of Northern states Prof. Panarin calls "The Central North American Republic." Hawaii, he suggests, will be a protectorate of Japan or China, and Alaska will be subsumed into Russia. Mmmmm, bull****. "It would be reasonable for Russia to lay claim to Alaska; it was part of the Russian Empire for a long time." A framed satellite image of the Bering Strait that separates Alaska from Russia like a thread hangs from his office wall. "It's not there for no reason," he says with a sly grin. More romancing the idea of Alaska being under Russian control again? Dude, hey, not that there's really anything wrong with whatever gets you off, but you seriously need to keep it behind closed doors, and I mean literally. You know what, I'll read the rest of the article later. I'm late for karaoke right now!!! However I *will* say that was quite the lawlfest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW01 Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 He says most in the audience were skeptical. "They didn't believe me." Shocking. Odd how all of the secessionist views that must be rife in America (considering it's going to fall in less than a year, apparently) have been so well concealed from the media. It reads more like some grasping hope for the return to prominence of Russia, or perhaps one might argue the Communist state, based on the ideas of Chinese eminence. I'm sure there is sime immensely complex and altogether incomprehensible economic rationale behind all this, but I'd love to know why each 'Republic' would be likely to first fall under anyone's external control, second why those particular countries? As said by others, I can't see Mexico staging any kind of invasion sweeping through Texas and all of those other states, or persuading people to vote to join them...and the idea of a European America is pretty good too - Turkey is seen as a borderline European state: I wonder what that makes the Eastern US? Though, if Russia gets Alaska back, can we have the Thirteen Colonies back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Hunger Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 While I don't agree with his theory, I do think that America is headed towards a civil war that will be far worse than our first one. Our country is actively consumed by two inconsistent ideologies constantly fed to us by our new media and our two political parties/collectives of parasites. What is likely to happen is a civil war between the most rural states (dominated by "conservatives") and the most urban states (dominated by "liberals"). Who would win? That's up in the air. The Government and Military would be split in half so each side would get an equal portion of the troops, so it'd come down to whether or not the "left" would be hypocritical enough to take up firearms against the "right". Also, it depends on how unified each side is, and since the "left" generally professes itself to have more diversity than the "right" it would be more susceptible to internal division. There is also the possibility of military intervention from other world powers such as China, Russia, and the European Union, all of which would likely assist the "left" as that faction would be more willing to accept foreign demands. I do not agree with the time this guy has set up. While I do not believe in the 2012 Theories, that year would be the most likely for a civil war to begin as it would likely be a race between President Obama and Sarah Palin. Either individual achieving victory would be the catalyst for a complete split in this Republic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rake Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 While I don't agree with his theory, I do think that America is headed towards a civil war that will be far worse than our first one. Our country is actively consumed by two inconsistent ideologies constantly fed to us by our new media and our two political parties/collectives of parasites. America has always been dominated by two inconsistent ideologies, smear campaigns and mudslinging have existed since the Election of 1796' in the States; however, that didn't lead to civil wars every 10 years. The losers always screamed apocalypse while the winners slowly lost popularity. What is likely to happen is a civil war between the most rural states (dominated by "conservatives") and the most urban states (dominated by "liberals"). Who would win? That's up in the air. The Government and Military would be split in half so each side would get an equal portion of the troops, so it'd come down to whether or not the "left" would be hypocritical enough to take up firearms against the "right". Also, it depends on how unified each side is, and since the "left" generally professes itself to have more diversity than the "right" it would be more susceptible to internal division. Isn't America like 90% urban now? Your also over-generalizing. There is also the possibility of military intervention from other world powers such as China, Russia, and the European Union, all of which would likely assist the "left" as that faction would be more willing to accept foreign demands. Funny, usually it takes a dictator to maintain stability after revolution. I do not agree with the time this guy has set up. While I do not believe in the 2012 Theories, that year would be the most likely for a civil war to begin as it would likely be a race between President Obama and Sarah Palin. Either individual achieving victory would be the catalyst for a complete split in this Republic. I'm surprised, people would give up their homes, lives, stability, and their child's safety all because they lost an election? I don't think the cultural differences nor the motives are present for a civil war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 OK, Karaoke was dead, so I'm back. Some of what I skipped over: At the end of the presentation, he says many delegates asked him to autograph copies of the map showing a dismembered U.S. Oh man, this loon bag actually has a fan following. More propaganda. He based the forecast on classified data supplied to him by FAPSI analysts, he says. He predicts that economic, financial and demographic trends will provoke a political and social crisis in the U.S. When the going gets tough, he says, wealthier states will withhold funds from the federal government and effectively secede from the union. Social unrest up to and including a civil war will follow. The U.S. will then split along ethnic lines, and foreign powers will move in. Reeeeeally? And, uh, I suppose the foreign powers will all be on the same side, riiiiiight? I think if they align with the infighting left before it turns on itself, the fracture will amplify and it will be a world war on our soil which would ruin the very thing they wish to take over. Or if the infighting already occurred, they would come in and fight/subjugate the inhabitants AFTER they got done fighting each other outside the U.S.A. Which assumes the Government inside U.S.A. isn't manipulatively still alive and functioning. Destroying that would be, as the article admitted, to nobody's economic advantage. Interestingly enough, I don't see our friend has taken any of that into account or that more likely they all would just bide their time carefully and let a nation or two most friendly to U.S.A. go in and do the dirty work of helping piece the nation back together. Especially considering if economically it is in their best interests. I'm sure they'd all embolden and get a little more cocky. Either that or the nation most pissed off enough at us comes to seize its assets, which is most likely be be China. It is my understanding that while their economy is a modern equiv of the industrial revolution (or so my penpal ladyfriend in Shenzen City says) it is still infatile, going slow and fragile like it has a bad stomach blockage--in an economic sense. Certainly correct me if I'm wrong on that and China is roaring and ready for world domination. In the meantime I'll be shoveling snow and petting my wookiee. Americans hope President-elect Barack Obama "can work miracles," he wrote. "But when spring comes, it will be clear that there are no miracles." Why do we even have to wait that long? I think the most gullible of American people are already waking up to that reality and it isn't even Christmas yet. the article, emphasis mine The article prompted a question about the White House's reaction to Prof. Panarin's forecast at a December news conference. "I'll have to decline to comment," spokeswoman Dana Perino said amid much laughter. For Prof. Panarin, Ms. Perino's response was significant. "The way the answer was phrased was an indication that my views are being listened to very carefully," he says. Really now? You think that's nervous laughter? Why? Oh yes your views are indeed being listened to very carefully, professor. Not in the way you think. Put another way, I think this guy could be a real comedian. the article, emphasis mine The professor says he's convinced that people are taking his theory more seriously. People like him have forecast similar cataclysms before, he says, and been right. He cites French political scientist Emmanuel Todd. Mr. Todd is famous for having rightly forecast the demise of the Soviet Union -- 15 years beforehand. "When he forecast the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1976, people laughed at him," says Prof. Panarin. Really? Well, let's see now... is America or has America ever been, the U.S.S.R.? Butt-Head: Uhh, No. Beavis: Thank you, Drive Thru. Meh-heheh-heh. Besides, even if we are close to some kind of collapse, where is this tremendous imminent upheval going to start in America? This revolution? Seriously, I'm asking in real earnest. I look around me and I see upset people, but they aren't clawing at everything as though we're about to have a violent showdown. Too apathetic. Odd how all of the secessionist views that must be rife in America (considering it's going to fall in less than a year, apparently) have been so well concealed from the media. Yeah I'm still trying to figure that one out myself. Especially considering how nosy and biased to one polarity or the other that the media is in the U.S. Wish I could afford *THAT* kind of protective concealment of information. It reads more like some grasping hope for the return to prominence of Russia, or perhaps one might argue the Communist state, based on the ideas of Chinese eminence. Which raises several questions alone on how China will pick it up--I wonder what they have to say about this. Besides, wouldn't that pose an obstacle to Russia "getting its piece of land back"? While I don't agree with his theory, I do think that America is headed towards a civil war that will be far worse than our first one. Our country is actively consumed by two inconsistent ideologies constantly fed to us by our new media and our two political parties/collectives of parasites. It would have to be a long time from now: people are rather docile, currently. In actuality I think the real division is between the people, the wildcards and the elite. If the elite on both 'sides' are working in tandem (think about it: same government, 2 sides of the same coin as it is now), then what it really boils down to is how those in charge will best liquidate their assets and leave the rest of us out in the cold to fend for ourselves. It would make no sense to square off in an actual combatant war unless things got so horribly bad it was about to fall apart anyways. What is likely to happen is a civil war between the most rural states (dominated by "conservatives") and the most urban states (dominated by "liberals"). Who would win? That's up in the air. The Government and Military would be split in half so each side would get an equal portion of the troops, so it'd come down to whether or not the "left" would be hypocritical enough to take up firearms against the "right". Also, it depends on how unified each side is, and since the "left" generally professes itself to have more diversity than the "right" it would be more susceptible to internal division. Well, that is a setup for failure if a foreign entity were to try to even infiltrate it and ally itself, let alone 2 or 3. Seeing as how Mexicans and Natives want to reclaim land, they aren't likely to trust another overlord government to 'share' it with them. They'd dead-weight, or possibly even turn on the new entity. The rest, well, they'd just put along for the ride but similarly deadweight when it was their turn to help the foreign entity. Bleed them dry. More likely, the elite would be working together hidden away behind the scenes and would just declare martial law like a dictatorship. Their elite squadron at their command. There is also the possibility of military intervention from other world powers such as China, Russia, and the European Union, all of which would likely assist the "left" as that faction would be more willing to accept foreign demands. Actually, no it would be a state of martial law with our supposedly "split" government all around, with interlopers, defectors, multiple state splits, and infighting within the parties and classes. The elite of the "sides" would come to a grudging agreement first on top of the heads of just others who don't fit one clique or another. Devil with silver tongue, offer the little people rewards and incentive to join them. Or more likely 'offers they can't refuse' if you catch my drift. Foreign aid would then maybe occur as their means of settling the problem if.F* there was no other way to bring about order. The rest can hide out in the woods. Possibly to be hunted down later for their crimes against society of evasion of serfdom and daring try to live independent of the now dictatorship government. The Elite meanwhile resting atop the underclass like the despicable fat-cats they are and the veil fallen. *:Geometry or Mathematical acronym for conditional staement beginning "If, and ONLY if." I do not agree with the time this guy has set up. While I do not believe in the 2012 Theories, that year would be the most likely for a civil war to begin as it would likely be a race between President Obama and Sarah Palin. Either individual achieving victory would be the catalyst for a complete split in this Republic. It would probably just be a civil split between East and West U.S.A.--which then I can see an N.A.U. forming much as I'd hate to admit it in those circumstances. Mexico and Canada being absorbed into it. Possibly more of Central America too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qui-Gon Glenn Posted December 6, 2009 Author Share Posted December 6, 2009 Yeah, I thought his style might not win too many points. He does come off a wee bit smug. Could also be the tool of a writer that the WSJ employed. I think civil war is a remote, distant possibility at best. What I do fear is the wacky economy most Americans think is doing well when the stock market has a good day. Our dollar is nearing valuelessness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urluckyday Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Oh wow, a Russian says that the US will come to an end...I've heard this bedtime story before...try the Cold War. Seriously though, no way the US just falls apart like that....let's sell more newspapers by having those kinds of stories...just another story that appeals to the fears...best way to attract an audience... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 While I don't agree with his theory, I do think that America is headed towards a civil war that will be far worse than our first one. Our country is actively consumed by two inconsistent ideologies constantly fed to us by our new media and our two political parties/collectives of parasites. What is likely to happen is a civil war between the most rural states (dominated by "conservatives") and the most urban states (dominated by "liberals"). Who would win? That's up in the air. The Government and Military would be split in half so each side would get an equal portion of the troops, so it'd come down to whether or not the "left" would be hypocritical enough to take up firearms against the "right". Also, it depends on how unified each side is, and since the "left" generally professes itself to have more diversity than the "right" it would be more susceptible to internal division. There is also the possibility of military intervention from other world powers such as China, Russia, and the European Union, all of which would likely assist the "left" as that faction would be more willing to accept foreign demands. I do not agree with the time this guy has set up. While I do not believe in the 2012 Theories, that year would be the most likely for a civil war to begin as it would likely be a race between President Obama and Sarah Palin. Either individual achieving victory would be the catalyst for a complete split in this Republic. Laughable. Pakistan has a much stronger chance of being split by a civil war than the United States has, and Pakistan is still very formidable in its own right. With its many enemies, enormous nuclear arsenal, rampant nationalism and international reach, the United States cannot possibly afford a civil war in the near future. It's probably hard to see that in America, but it isn't so hard when you're living outside, and where the American Right and Left are only two sides of the same coin. Regardless of which side controls the government, America largely remains the same. Also, any nations with two stones to rub together for a diplomatic thinktank will know better than to mess with an America in turmoil. It can backfire easily. All in all, if a 2012 happens, it being caused by an American Civil War is very unlikely. Hell, the stories of both Modern Warfare games are much more credible than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Our dollar is nearing valuelessness. No it isn't. At it's worst, it's worth about half as much as it was. The value of money in Zimbabwe is nothing, with 14,000,000% inflation. Even at 10% inflation, the US dollar is still quite strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverNight Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 ^^Thank you, I've always been annoyed by the nay-sayers around where I live whining about how 'weak' the Dollar has become. Anyway, @LOH: Don't buy it. And, as a right-ist I shudder when I think of Sarah Palin in line for the presidency.. but that's for another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Dravis Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 One thing that has happened since the civil war is that, at least from where I live, people are much less likely to identify strongly with their state as opposed to the federal government. Don't get me wrong, I really like Texas and I love shoving how awesome it is into other state's faces, but I don't feel a political affiliation with it in the same way I do with the Fed. Because of that, I'd say it would be extremely unlikely that the US should break up into minor states any time soon. People in America might have their (perhaps overblown) differences, but one thing is certain: virtually all of us like being American. It would take something truly shocking to break that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qui-Gon Glenn Posted December 6, 2009 Author Share Posted December 6, 2009 No it isn't. At it's worst, it's worth about half as much as it was. The value of money in Zimbabwe is nothing, with 14,000,000% inflation. Even at 10% inflation, the US dollar is still quite strong. Facts are good. Nearing perhaps was not the correct word, but you may accept/prefer "approaching" "on the road" "plummeting". These are perhaps better descriptives, but not that different really. It is over-alarmist to say nearing at this time, so I concede that point. As for naysaying, why not naysay? It is the American thing to do, the most American, to speak out when things are screwy. It is something the founders expected us to do, more often and much louder than we have. Complacency has been bred by too many years of easy success, success often garnered for contemporary gains at the cost of the "future" - our present. If you think that the US is still the pre-eminent power, and that the position is unshakeable, you are a fanboy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bimmerman Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 Um....no. Won't happen in 2010, 2012, or any other year anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverNight Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 @Qui_Gon_Glenn: o rly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.