Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Will India become a hyperpower, i.e. a country as strong or stronger than the US?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   
How do you think, will India become a hyperpower, i.e. a country as strong or stronger than the US? It has a population of 1.031 billion, in 2050 it'll become the world's most populous country, it has nukes, but how do you think will it become a hyperpower comparable to the US?




posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   
I don't think so, but 40+ years is a long time and anything(conducive/adverse) can happen in that period.
Would you please share reasons to support your thoughts and also links if possible?

Thanks.

EDIT:
Are you 'asking' 'how' India will become a hyperpower or 'if' it will?

[edit on 30-7-2006 by Daedalus3]



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   
India seems to be to aggressive in their notioning as a nuclear power. In other words, all eyes on India.



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Are you 'asking' 'how' India will become a hyperpower or 'if' it will?

I'm asking if people think India will or they don't think so.



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   
India will become hyperpower, but not so soon, maybe within 20-40 years. China is likely to become world's no 1 superpower much sooner. IMO, the time of US being only super/hyperpower is at end. And yes, there is Russia, wich is rising again, in many aspects (including economy and military).



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Duby78
yes, there is Russia

Incorrect. Russia's military is weak. Its military equipment is crappy. Its tanks are easy to destroy, its subs sink even if not attacked by an enemy and their fighters couldn't shoot down even one Israeli fighter during the Israeli-Syrian war in 1982.



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter

Originally posted by Duby78
yes, there is Russia

Incorrect. Russia's military is weak. Its military equipment is crappy. Its tanks are easy to destroy, its subs sink even if not attacked by an enemy and their fighters couldn't shoot down even one Israeli fighter during the Israeli-Syrian war in 1982.
Thanks for the insight.



I think that US power will decline - not overnight and not to the point of loosing superpower status anytime soon but India, Russia and China are catching up. Europe, as in a "Federal Europe" is the other encroaching power.



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by planeman
I think that US power will decline

This will NEVER happen. Economically, the US is outperforming the rest of the world. In the first quarter of 2006 alone, the American economy has grown by 5.6%. Industrial production is growing. Unemployment is 5.1%.

Originally posted by planeman
Europe, as in a "Federal Europe" is the other encroaching power.

Keep wishing. First off, there will be no federal Europe, the EUC has been rejected. Secondly, Europe is the world's weakling. It's economic growth is just 1.7%. Unemployment is 10%. Entrepreneurs are fleeing to the US. Between 1990 and 2001, the American economy has grown by 75%, the British economy has grown by 44%, the French economy has grown by 8% and the German economy has shrank.



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 12:03 PM
link   
never say never...

At its current rate of expansion economically China will surpass the US as the top economy eventually, provided the current trends in our economy and theirs continue as they are doing now. My money is on China in a top position, India second, and the US third if we get out self in shape. Of course people tend to not want to hear their country will be knocked off its pedestal, so maybe a butt-hurt US would think by attacking China it could stop them from surpassing them, who knows. If I picked the right order of the three horses running do I get a payout?



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   

A superpower is a state with the first rank in the international system and the ability to influence events and project power on a worldwide scale; it is considered a higher level of power than a major power.

Superpower Definition



While China and India have good chances at being Superpowers they still have a ways to go in respect to influencing events and most importantly projecting power.
There are very few nations that can impose their power on another nation halfway around the globe. The U.S. can, U.K. and France can do it to some but not every nation. Russia used to be able to, remains to be seen if they can again. China and India's military are mainly national defence forces, although modernizing and quite large. Neither of those countries have the ability to place multiple divisions, air wing, naval groups halfway around the world and project power. Neither country has multiple world spanning military arrangements for bases and assistance all around the world.

Not saying that India and China can't be superpowers in the classic sense, only that it will take much time and effort to achieve that status. Population wise and Economic wise they are well on the way if not there already. Militarily and Politically they have a very long road ahead of them. Once you are a superpower, many on the globe will not like you being able to influence events far from your shores. Pretty thankless task, being a superpower IMO.



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
GB and France can do it to some but not every nation.

France cannot project power to any foreign country. It is a military weakling. There are two reasons for that.

The first cause is that France cannot become a military power. Consider: it spends 60% of its military budget on pays for its soldiers and only 19% on equipment. It has only 1 nuclear-powered aircraft carrier which can carry only 40 aircraft. Its A310 transport planes aren't capable of flying long distances. To project power to the Ivory Coast for peacekeeping purposes, it had to rent helicopters from the US.

The second reason is that France wants to be a military weakling. It (and every other Continental European country except for Poland) likes being militarily weak. As a result, Poland is the only Continental European country with a decent military.


Originally posted by pavil
China and India's military are mainly national defence forces, although modernizing and quite large. Neither of those countries have the ability to place multiple divisions, air wing, naval groups halfway around the world and project power.

But both countries are now strengthening their armed forces to gain this ability. They have tankers, transport planes and nuclear subs.

[edit on 30-7-2006 by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter]



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 03:12 PM
link   
There needs to be impetus to become a world superpower. This usually comes in the form of some sort of all-out war where the country feels threatened and it is warranted. See the example of the US with WW2 and the Cold War. India would need to feel threatened by the likes of either the US or China, something of actual danger, not Pakistan. That then causes the more money to be spent on the defense budget and allows more research and troops, etc etc. I'm not saying that Pakistan isn't dangerous, but they're dangerous because they have nukes. India in times of war could probably roll them once the war machine got moving. India then needs to start making their own weapons, not hard they've already got industry that can be vamped up. The economy has to be friggin' booming when you do this so you can absolutely throw money at the defense industry.



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 04:45 PM
link   
JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter, are you being serious?

Re France, they have ICBMs on subs and nuclear cruise missiles (the ASMP) on Mirage 2000N and Super-Etendard strike aircraft. They have a number of "power projection" warships in addition to the CDG, notably the two Mistral class "Projection and command vessels".

Summary of European navy's power projection support vessels. These example demonstrate the INCREASING emphasis on support of overseas land operations that European navies are making.

UK:
3 x Invincible class light carriers en.wikipedia.org...
1 x Ocean class LPH en.wikipedia.org...
2 x Albion class LPD en.wikipedia.org...

France:
1 x Charles de Gualle aircraft carrier en.wikipedia.org...
2 x Mistral class LPD en.wikipedia.org...
2 x Forde class LPD en.wikipedia.org...
2 x Uuragan class LPD en.wikipedia.org...

Italy
1 x Giuseppe Garibaldi class light carrier en.wikipedia.org...
1 x Cavour class light carrier (nearing completion) en.wikipedia.org...
1 x San Giusto class LPD www.marina.difesa.it...
2 x San Giorgio class LPD www.marina.difesa.it...

Spain
1 x Príncipe de Asturias class light carrier
en.wikipedia.org...
2 x Galicia class LPDs
2 x Pizarro class LPDs
1 x Strategic projection vessel LHD under construction www.armada.mde.es...

[edit on 30-7-2006 by planeman]



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Planeman, despite what you post, Jimmy will not face truth, and wants to believe Poland has a decent military. Don't crush his dreams, in his world, the US will be no. 1 for ever and ever, no matter what anyone says...


And in times of war, Poland will use his non-existent nukes to deterr, as well as the powerful navy it has to protect the coasts which is:
and the very powerful fighters it has such as EF? oh no, wait, they don't have them...I guess they'll have to stick to SU-22 and the old trusty Mig-29...a hundred craft in total.
Now that's decent, isn't it?

And france, with 1,000 craft in arsenal is a weakling, 330 modern fighters is weak, isn't it?
As well as weak germany, who is receiving EF-2000, and is scheduled to receive 180. 180 is still more than the decent Polish army...I think



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Whats so good about being a superpower?. I think its more harm than good



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter
Incorrect. Russia's military is weak. Its military equipment is crappy. Its tanks are easy to destroy, its subs sink even if not attacked by an enemy and their fighters couldn't shoot down even one Israeli fighter during the Israeli-Syrian war in 1982.


You are gravely under-estimating Russia, France etc. But I won't waste my time and energy trying to explain it to you. Have it your way



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 06:40 PM
link   
My prediction is that in 50 years there will be no superpowers left on this earth(So I guess the answer to India becoming a Hyperpower is NO IMHO). There will be powers and such, but not in the way we perceive them today. Every so often the power structure changes and I believe we are on the cusp of one such paradigm shift myself. I can't say for sure what this change will be or whether it will be beneficial or not, but I can say for certain one thing: It will change what it means to be a power on this planet.

Perhaps in 50 years, power will focus not on single nation states, but on large multi-national corporations who get their power from control of Space Tethers bringing down huge amounts of resources for extremely cheap prices. (Anarcho-Capitalism)

Perhaps in 50 years power will become more of a "family" thing, with everybody pledging their loyalty to Clans, with the richest Clans controlling Molecular Assembler Technology. (Nanotech-Feudalism)

My point is, try to keep an open mind when thinking of these sorts of things. For all we know the Nation State itself could be in for a dramatic overhaul or even widescale abandonment. The primary drivers for all this is Economics, Technology, and Resource Availability. All three of these factors could prevent even China from becoming a Superpower(It could just become too expensive in the long run).



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
There is much more to being a superpower than just military power and the ability to project it. Politically, you have to be able to set the agenda as well. No offense to India or China but they are not exactly leaders in any way when it comes to international politics. The foreign aid that China and India give is relatively modest and they both seem content to be a follower or bystander when it comes to events far from their sphere of influence. When a major event worldwide happens, do people look to see what India and China are doing/ not doing.

For good or ill you must respect and take notice of what America and the British Empire/Commonwealth have done in regards to relations with other nations around the globe. The network of agreements, alliances and the like the U.S. has formed since WWII are truly globe spanning.


The United States presently occupies 702 military bases in 132 different countries.en.wikipedia.org...


There are only 192 or 193 countries in the world.


The Commonwealth is an association of 53 independent states consulting and co-operating in the common interests of their peoples and in the promotion of international understanding and world peace. The Commonwealth’s 1.8 billion citizens, about 30 per cent of the world’s population, are drawn from the broadest range of faiths, races, cultures and traditions. Commonwealth





[edit on 30-7-2006 by pavil]

[edit on 30-7-2006 by pavil]



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Duby78
India will become hyperpower, but not so soon, maybe within 20-40 years. China is likely to become world's no 1 superpower much sooner. IMO, the time of US being only super/hyperpower is at end. And yes, there is Russia, wich is rising again, in many aspects (including economy and military).

Very unlikely.

Anyone with an education in economics 101 can tell you that China's economy is in a dependant state.

China is dependant on selling cheap mass produced goods to the U.S. while undervalueing it's own currency. China needs the U.S. to keep itself above water. China officially gets over 60% of all it's national income from American trade, however that number is estimated to be much higher.

Most of China is still below the poverty line and this is true of India aswell. While this will not be a preventitive aspect of keeping them from becoming a "hyperpower", it doesn't help.

The fact that a large portion of China's people dislike the communist system and dislike the government will eventually lead to a collapse in the government if it does not act soon.

There are three key elements to being a superpower.

1. Strong economy. China is getting a strong economy, but it's dependance on the US and the undervalued juan don't help China's economy just surpassed that of Italy, and Germany is still a larger market player.

2. Strong Military. China's military is large, but a large military doesn't mean it is strong. China is atleast 30 years behind the latest aerospace technology being developed by the world's current "hyperpower", the U.S.

3. Dedicated Population. This is the area where China fails to become a superpower. In China, the rich are heavily seperated from the poor. Most of China's people support the idea of a revolt and don't like their government. There ismuch more to this side of the story but I will let this to you.

Now back on topic to india. India could very well become a superpower, but first it must get a stronger economy.



posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Night
China officially gets over 60% of all it's national income from American trade


How is that worked out?. America is only 1/5 of our export trade


Most of China is still below the poverty line and this is true of India aswell.


Whats 1.3 BILLION divided by 90 million?

Thats about 7~8%. Using the word "most" would imply a majority or a large percentage. That is not a large percentage.

The american poverty line is 12% of the population. More than china


Most of China's people support the idea of a revolt and don't like their government.


There are over 70 million members of the CCP in china. Count the family members of these and you could have 50% of the population being a affiliate of the communist part of china.

Now where is this idea of revolt?






top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join