US needs to show it's still top dog

[webfact]

US needs to show it's still top dog
John Simpson
World Affairs Editor, BBC News

(BBC) Once upon a time the job of president of the United States seemed clear-cut: you knew who the enemy was, and you knew you had the economic and military measure of them.

You were seen as the most powerful man in the world.

That isn't necessarily the case any more.

True, no other political leader has the reach or resources of Barack Obama.

Compared with him, China's Xi Jinping looks like a decidedly local political chieftain with a big chequebook, but with nothing very serious in the way of firepower.

Russia's Vladimir Putin appears almost bankrupt. The naval ships he took to the G20 summit in Brisbane in order to flex his famous muscles were so old-fashioned they made people laugh.

As for Europe, it seems to have vanished down a plughole of its own creating.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-30414233


-- BBC 2014-12-12

[Ulysses G.]

The USA has no hope of being top dog again until Obama is out of office, The man is a disgrace and his limp-wristed foreign policies are going to be a very difficult to recover from.

Edited December 12, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[NeverSure]

The Author is spot on. It's Obama who makes the US look indecisive.

Carter will be a good addition and don't forget, there is the Joint Chiefs of Staff (leaders of the branches of the military) who have stupidly been left out of the loop by Obama.

All the US needs to do to answer the author's questions is to get rid of Obama which is about to happen.

[Somtamnication]

LOL. The US lost its high moral ground after Bush was elected. They will never get it back. Next!!

[Morch]

LOL. The US lost its high moral ground after Bush was elected. They will never get it back. Next!!

Never? How is that?

Are there any major contenders around for winning the non-existent "most moral country" pageant? Did past transgressions of some countries rob their current leaderships of somehow assuming a stance of moral superiority?

The USA may not be perfect of even nowhere near some imagined moral goal post. However, the USA, compared to some other nations does seem to engage more freely and more often in examining its past mistakes. Some would say that because this does not achieve some unattainable ideal, it is all for naught. Some would claim that the USA is over-doing it.

More a question of seeing the world in absolute terms.

[JetsetBkk]

The USA has no hope of being top dog again until Obama is out of office, The man is a disgrace and his limp-wristed foreign policies are going to be a very difficult to recover from.

"No boots on the ground!"

Hopefully that mantra will follow him to his grave.

[LawrenceChee]

Obama is indecisive ...both Bush overreacts and were trigger happy and facts denial folks and Clinton well... he just needs therapy for his urges

Would need a good leader to recover that reputation for USA

Has been quite a bad spell

[Morch]

Obama is indecisive ...both Bush overreacts and were trigger happy and facts denial folks and Clinton well... he just needs therapy for his urges

Would need a good leader to recover that reputation for USA

Has been quite a bad spell

Not sure if a bad spell or just that information flows more easily nowadays (despite claims to the contrary), and the public being

generally more aware of decision making processes, personal faults of leaders and alternative points of view.

[elgordo38]

LOL. The US lost its high moral ground after Bush was elected. They will never get it back. Next!!

Sure they will just put a map of the world on the wall and throw a dart at it. Next invasion target. Ooops it hit Canada

[lust]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

Which nation is capable to do what they do? And of those nations, which ones could be trusted globally?

[soalbundy]

woof woof

[Floater 7]

More clueless TV members. The leaders everywhere are bought and paid for. The major corporations are in charge, with figurehead puppets. Some like Obama, try to do the right thing, but big money calls the shots. Why do most major players have national Healthcare, and the US, just now, under Obama, is catching up? Why was he hindered every step of the way? And by whom? Always plenty of money to fight wars around the globe, but the health of its's citizens, is not a priority?

[doggie888888]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

Which nation is capable to do what they do? And of those nations, which ones could be trusted globally?

Not necessarily. Usa's position is only a small period in history. The have been other empires in the past, many lasted longer than current blip that usa thinks will last forever (a dangerous form of hubris for the rest of the world - one sole superpower that uses whatever means to ensure its citizens and values rank over all others).

I think it is better not to have one sole superpower because absolute power corrupts absolutely. Who cares if it's China or Russia or some other bloc like the EU that may have ascendancy in the future. The world needs another power to counter the existing one that may or may not recover is moral compass.

[sustento]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

You're obviously not a student of history.

[Morch]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

Which nation is capable to do what they do? And of those nations, which ones could be trusted globally?

Not necessarily. Usa's position is only a small period in history. The have been other empires in the past, many lasted longer than current blip that usa thinks will last forever (a dangerous form of hubris for the rest of the world - one sole superpower that uses whatever means to ensure its citizens and values rank over all others).

I think it is better not to have one sole superpower because absolute power corrupts absolutely. Who cares if it's China or Russia or some other bloc like the EU that may have ascendancy in the future. The world needs another power to counter the existing one that may or may not recover is moral compass.

What does having another superpower, or even two more got to do with an imaginary World moral compass?

How were things better at times in history when there was another superpower?

[soalbundy]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

You're obviously not a student of history.

or a student of anything

[soalbundy]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

Which nation is capable to do what they do? And of those nations, which ones could be trusted globally?

Not necessarily. Usa's position is only a small period in history. The have been other empires in the past, many lasted longer than current blip that usa thinks will last forever (a dangerous form of hubris for the rest of the world - one sole superpower that uses whatever means to ensure its citizens and values rank over all others).

I think it is better not to have one sole superpower because absolute power corrupts absolutely. Who cares if it's China or Russia or some other bloc like the EU that may have ascendancy in the future. The world needs another power to counter the existing one that may or may not recover is moral compass.

What does having another superpower, or even two more got to do with an imaginary World moral compass?

How were things better at times in history when there was another superpower?

Super powers were careful then, it's rather like having 3 parties in parliament

[Morch]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

Which nation is capable to do what they do? And of those nations, which ones could be trusted globally?

Not necessarily. Usa's position is only a small period in history. The have been other empires in the past, many lasted longer than current blip that usa thinks will last forever (a dangerous form of hubris for the rest of the world - one sole superpower that uses whatever means to ensure its citizens and values rank over all others).

I think it is better not to have one sole superpower because absolute power corrupts absolutely. Who cares if it's China or Russia or some other bloc like the EU that may have ascendancy in the future. The world needs another power to counter the existing one that may or may not recover is moral compass.

What does having another superpower, or even two more got to do with an imaginary World moral compass?

How were things better at times in history when there was another superpower?

Super powers were careful then, it's rather like having 3 parties in parliament

Careful as in having better records of human rights? No wars? No torture?

Careful as in placing nukes at each other doorstep?

And why stop at the cold war time? Even going a wee bit earlier would summon another fine example of moral collaps

while having more than one superpower around.

[lust]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

You're obviously not a student of history.

or a student of anything

You are both correct. I am a veteran and a teacher.

Btw, neither of you have a counter-argument other than "no".

[Morch]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

You're obviously not a student of history.

or a student of anything

You are both correct. I am a veteran and a teacher.

Btw, neither of you have a counter-argument other than "no".

Always as in forever? Like the Roman empire? The British? The....and so on....

[mesquite]

The US is no longer top dog. China is. So any countries begging for money, support, aid, etc, just call 1-800-REDCHINA and don't bother us anymore.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-official-america-is-now-no-2-2014-12-04

[sustento]

Like it or not, US will always be the world leader.

You're obviously not a student of history.

or a student of anything

You are both correct. I am a veteran and a teacher.

Btw, neither of you have a counter-argument other than "no".

All of these thought they were going to be the 'world leader' for ever...

http://listverse.com/2010/06/22/top-10-greatest-empires-in-history/

[squarethecircle]

I read it said that "if you protect your nerds, you rule the world".

[LawrenceChee]

The US is no longer top dog. China is. So any countries begging for money, support, aid, etc, just call 1-800-REDCHINA and don't bother us anymore.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-official-america-is-now-no-2-2014-12-04

What do you have to sell ? China doesn't give anything away for free.

[Daniel Boon]

Ulysses is part right; the USA will never be top dog again ...the USA is in a similar state of collapsing infrastructure to Russia and the Chinese are have the biggest standing army and technology and superior air power ... I 'd rather they didn't, but a fact is a fact

[wwest5829]

LOL. The US lost its high moral ground after Bush was elected. They will never get it back. Next!!

Never? How is that?

Are there any major contenders around for winning the non-existent "most moral country" pageant?

Did past transgressions of some countries rob their current leaderships of somehow assuming a stance of moral superiority?

The USA may not be perfect of even nowhere near some imagined moral goal post. However, the USA, compared to some

other nations does seem to engage more freely and more often in examining its past mistakes. Some would say that because

this does not achieve some unattainable ideal, it is all for naught. Some would claim that the USA is over-doing it.

More a question of seeing the world in absolute terms.

Agreed. Unfortunately or some may say fortunately the wave of unilateral power effective use has been declining since WW II. Many things have brought this about most notably the economic accendance of countries that suffered from the ravages of WW II. Now the course of action for the U.S. appears to be multilateral or we are best advised to stay out of the issue unless directly attacked. The time for unchallenged swaggering is past. Multilateral cooperation, and yes, with some leadership provided if called for but not king of the mountain thinking. We cannot nor should we bear the financial or manpower unilateral action. If others do not step up to the plate for combined facing an issue......

[Loptr]

It's an opinion piece <deleted> and John Simpson has only shown his own level of uninformed, biased ignorance... Proxima!!!

[F430murci]

Stupid article from stupid, sensationalist news source.

Regardless as to what BBC thinks or says, most Americans could give a hoot less about too dog, Putin's ships and problems in China.. Americans just want a good, peaceful, prosperous life and don't walk around thinking about too dog bs. Americans are focused on daily life life, family, careers, children, new movies out, good food, hobbies and things that makes them happy.

As long as we are happy and doing well, most don't care if we are considered too dog or bottom dog. Besides, who decides too dog? Is there a top dog trophy? Is the trophy a bronzed or golden wiener dog? Is this a size issue thingy so a longer wiener dog trophy is better than a shorter wiener dog trophy? Who the heck even uses this terminology top dog? Asians, Russians, English?

Top dog just makes me hungry for a hot dog with some kraut, relish, ketchup, mustard and onions. Now that is a too dog!

[Floater 7]

China needs to clean it's own backyard. Suffering from massive pollution problems, with unregulated growth, and over population. Russia has its own economic problems, and Putin's overly big ego, will not help. That leaves the U.S.

But they need to get their Shit together, and quit letting big corporations run the show with unlimited cash donations to their corporate stooges.

[ggt]

LOL. The US lost its high moral ground after Bush was elected. They will never get it back. Next!!

The US did not lose its high moral ground...it was always an illusion...now the world knows that a hypocritical government is trying to rule the world...