Debate: Position of US Superpower

[DeZmond]

DeZmond's Debate: January 30 2006
What is the position of the US as a global superpower?

I was thinking this as I was reading a BBC News article about a declassified security document which show that the US military was ready to knock out the use of the entire electromagnetic spectrum if it so desired was released today.

This got me thinking: what is the US playing at? Seriously. If they want to, they are talking about potentially affecting the lives of everyone worldwide who relies on any kind of electronic communication. They seem content to better their military and try and transform remote corners of the world to their thinking, so, piece by piece, they can eventually lay claim to the world.

Okay, that might be a bit too harsh/paranoid. But still: think about it. Look at just about every science fiction film involving invading aliens, made in the US: who just so happens to be in charge of defense? Good ol' US of A. Who's making the decisions that affect the world: the President, of course!

So I ask you: is this just an oversized media just so far up it's own ass that it's tangled up in circles, or is it something more sinister? Would the US really have followed through with these plans, given the chance? What would this have meant for other countries?

So let me know what you think. Post up here and we'll get involved in some serious debate. A warning: I'm not going to accept blatant racism, or a general "I hate america" message without some justification.

Okay... fire when ready.

 

[Gopha]

I believe that the Americans are obviously the most powerful country in the world, the last superpower, they are slowly adapting the rest of the world to their own way of life, half the shows on tv that we ewatch are american, and this is not just their fault, people want to be american becasue it would make them acceptable but i do not wish for them to change the elcromagnetic spectrum as that would leave the world at their mercy, so to speak.
If the US actually went through with this it would be catastrophic, it would mean that countries would suck up to them more than some do already and everone would have to obey to them!
Overall it would be terrible if this happened, but what about the leading parties in the United Nations, what could they do about it?

Gophmeister

 

[KillCrazy]

I agree that the US are trying to overpower the world with anything and everything. Even with the control over the internet, the US seems to have managed to be the leaders.
The internet should not be controled by any person or any government of any country. The Internet should be owned by everyone.

 

[DeZmond]

Indeed. The internet is technically controlled by an American organisation, which was originally part of the US Defense Department but split. There's loads of information about the internet at this era, and I'll dig some more and let you know what I turn up.

 

[Gopha]

yes but then in China the Chinese government are trying to censor their google network

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4650158.stm

Apparently because China is a country of no free speech the internet has to be like this in their so called republic. They are not allowed to research things like the Daila lama, i think that os how it is spelled.

 

[Gibsonfire]

Well I dont think America would try and do something like that. They are trying to give a message to the world that they are 'Democracy' and a 'Free' Nation. Although China is now starting to challenge America as another superpower. Even though the chinese military is not as advanced, china can call upon millions of men when at war and also their economy is growing rapidly.

 

[Gopha]

yes and so is their usage of coal and oil

 

[Fi$hy]

Yes, America is quite fond of the ole "Free with restriction" nation message, but ah well, welcome to modern-day conservatism.

Honestly, I've never seen the idea of a superpower come true. Yes it's all very well to be able to produce lots more guns, but if you can't find a use for them, it's very much pointless.

Back on topic:
Internet censorship is futile and pointless, it's impossible to regulate something powered by intellect and innovation.
Look at it this way - "school blocks P2P networks" = reaction = "find a way to connect around the firewall"
The problem with the internet is it isn't solid, it's not like paper which can be blocked and censored, all you need is one stray connection and everythings gone to waste.

 

[DocBot]

My views coincide a bit with yours - I'm not sure which is the hen and which is the egg, or for that case who came first... It's all connected to the patriotism that is so encouraged over there (and in all countries that have become independent, for that case - sweden was never dependent, and so there is not much patriotism over here) I believe. A stagnant and insufficient education system combined with strong religious influences and a successful right-wing movement has led to a diminishing intellectual society (seen as a percentage of the population, of course) - which in turn gives less intellectual debate and less awareness of the "outside" world. This, I think, is one of the reasons they act like they do.

Still, I don't think the percieved threat here is that big. There are several reasons:

1) If they overstep their bounds, so to speak, economic sanctions from for example EU and China would instantly cripple their economy (I believe). The reason for this, i think (argh, just assume that all I say from now on is speculation, so I don't need to point it out all the time)
, is that they rely so heavily on their dollar to be a world currency.

2) The military operations they are currently running is draining the country of it's monetary equity (is that how you say it?) - starting more would not, I think, be possible, at least not until they've sorted out their national debt somewhat.

3) argh, I don't have time for this, need to study for my exam tomorrow.

please feel free to debate against me, I _like_ that

 

[Pestcontrol]

This is what i call pentagon fiction. It's getting far more attention than it's worth, sort of like the factual accuracy of the Da Vinci Code

The document describes only what should be, in the view of the authors, who appearantly have nothing better to do. I recommend they spend less time on dreaming and nitwit govspeak and more on reality checks next time, but hey, burocracies will be burocracies.

This isn't the first time i see such things about information warfare, how the US military seems to view the internet, and so forth. As if every cruise missile has a built-in web interface....

And what's an internet "attack" anyway? How would you "fight the net" and if "Networks are growing faster than we can defend them..." then what the do you think defense is in the first place? Station troops at every new router? Are bigger networks harder to defend? Wouldn't it be easier because you have far more redundancy?
I can go on and on

And, in a grand finale, the document recommends that the United States should seek the ability to "provide maximum control of the entire electromagnetic spectrum". US forces should be able to "disrupt or destroy the full spectrum of globally emerging communications systems, sensors, and weapons systems dependent on the electromagnetic spectrum".

Well that would be nice, wouldnt it? You might as well seek total control of every single bullet, every single draw of breath or every single thought every single person on earth has, because you're just as likely to get that.


Unfortunately the laws of physics dictate that it's next to impossible to drown out every single other transmitter on every single frequency, because of range limitations due to a conveniently curved earth (you'd need a very large amount of transmitters), and because of the sheer amount of energy it would require. Not to mention the fact that there are such things as directional antannae, and point to point links not susceptable to any interference originating from outside the field of view of the dishes.
Not without coincidence some nations have mesh networks of point to point microwave links for their critical communications.


Not to mention ordinary wires, and fibreoptics not susceptible to any EMI to begin with.


History has proven time and time again information cannot be fully controlled.


As for the internet, it may be controlled from within the US, but that does not mean the net cannot function without US support, or that the US can shut the net down if they wanted to.






File this under humour next time.

 

[Fuzzy Bunny]

The electromagnetic spectrum includes visible light. Is the U.S. going to drape a giant blanket around the world?

 

[Carth]

So who thinks Europe should be more united to balance the US?

 

[pHatBambi]

I do!

 

[Ronin Storm]

US forces should be able to "disrupt or destroy the full spectrum of globally emerging communications systems, sensors, and weapons systems dependent on the electromagnetic spectrum".

Or, how about "US forces should be able to selectively remove oxygen from any region on the planet without harming American citizens"...? Sounds just about as reasonable.