Raven Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index#Global_Peace_Index_rankings United Kingdom - rank 26/153 most peaceful 2011. Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zak Something Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 82/153... I feel very safe... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted October 22, 2011 Author Share Posted October 22, 2011 Oh, lol. USA's rank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Specifically, according to The Economist, the weighting of military expenditure "may seem to give heart to freeloaders: countries that enjoy peace precisely because others (often the USA) care for their defense." Good enough for me at 82. Plus, we're like 14 places up on the first year so IT'S THE UP AND UP FOR THE US OF A! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acacia Sgt Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 121st place. Why am I not surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlet Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 15th. Except I'm really not noticing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vorena Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Interesting study and ranking system. I think 153 is about 2/3 of the total countries established and recognized. Either way, another reason for me to want to move to Canada or New Zealand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defeatist Elitist Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 8th, though it's a sort of wierd ranking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methan0n Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 74th, I'm not really surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freohr Datia Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 (edited) =o I wanna live in New Zealand since it's a great place for a future volcanologist to live =] And it's close to Australia. And now it comforts me to see how NZ is ranked 2! Though Ireland's not doing so bad either. But it doesn't have volcanoes. Iceland is a volcano but would be too cold for me =[ And =ooooo Germany?? I'm almost half german =D The other half of me is from Canada though =o And another small portion of me is from Ireland and some Poland and some others... But for now, I'm stuck in the US. Edited October 22, 2011 by Freohr Datia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Horace Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Huh, both countries I've lived in are in the top 25, 8th and 23rd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kintenbo Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Given the U.S' glamorization of violence, it's not a big surprise we rank relatively low. Do I think its possible for improvement? If only people let it happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excellen Browning Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 25th. Man I call BS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icon of Sin Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 (edited) Libya from 56th to 143rd? Hopefully it won't stay like that for long. Meanwhile, 8th position is pretty sweet. Trees, mountains, rivers and lakes are pretty peaceful, eh? Edited October 22, 2011 by Dio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zanarkin Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 139/153... Meh i doubtits position when compared to others /biased Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrhesia Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 18th. Glad we've improved of late. New Zealand is just that awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor Odinson Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 US ranking below China I call BS. China should be waaaaaaaay lower. Just that the government's good at hiding shit most of the time. >| Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defeatist Elitist Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 US ranking below China I call BS. China should be waaaaaaaay lower. Just that the government's good at hiding shit most of the time. >| Note the things it's based on. China in general is involved in fewer conflicts, and even though it spends loads of dosh on its military, the USA spends absolutely mind boggling amounts. Even when you go beyond the Chinese government's official numbers and start getting speculative, the USA still far outspends them, even as a function of GDP, which is also one of the reasons why the popular "What if the USA went to war with China?" question (disregarding the fact that it would be retarded for either country to do so) has a rather boring answer, which is that the USA would just straight up win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor Odinson Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) Well, I guess that makes sense since the US likes to wage war on every thing it sees. :< I was mostly basing off my statement on internal conflicts, though. Shit gets bad in China in that aspect, but it's all covered up by the government. Edited October 23, 2011 by Luminescent Blade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I wish we were 81st or something, because then idiots could misinterpret this and shout "USA NUMBER ONE." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Alear Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) I wish we were 81st or something, because then idiots could misinterpret this and shout "USA NUMBER ONE." I'm an idiot and I have no idea how to interpret 81st as 1st without going blind too. Note the things it's based on. China in general is involved in fewer conflicts, and even though it spends loads of dosh on its military, the USA spends absolutely mind boggling amounts. Even when you go beyond the Chinese government's official numbers and start getting speculative, the USA still far outspends them, even as a function of GDP, which is also one of the reasons why the popular "What if the USA went to war with China?" question (disregarding the fact that it would be retarded for either country to do so) has a rather boring answer, which is that the USA would just straight up win. Theorycraft huh? Depends utterly on the US's aims in the war. If it was simply to crush China's military strength I would agree that the US would probably win. But did the US win the War in Iraq or the War in Afghanistan? It looks like the US populace might not be too satisfied with the result, even though we killed Ben Laden and Hussein. Can a (representatively - note, not a word?) democratic country be said to have won a war when the populace seems dissatisfied with the result? Since we both have nukes, it might be a moot point, but I'm not sure of China's delivery systems. If China has effective delivery systems which the US cannot counteract, we would both lose big time in a war if both sides had full resolve to destroy the other (or, more accurately, it seems very unlikely that either side would go to war). Anyway, it is not so easy to win in war. It is not so hard to lose less. The US might lose less than China in a war between the two countries. That's not the same as winning. Also, while the US almost certainly does have a truly stronger military than China due to air and naval superiority, spending as a function of GDP is a simplifying way to account for the strength of a military. For example, if we spend much more on maintenance than China does, or if there are other ways in which our military spending doesn't result in military force due to inefficiencies, then the US might not be so strong as it appears. I wouldn't just look at a number and say that tells the whole story. Edited October 23, 2011 by BlueMartianKitty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defeatist Elitist Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Theorycraft huh? Depends utterly on the US's aims in the war. If it was simply to crush China's military strength I would agree that the US would probably win. But did the US win the War in Iraq or the War in Afghanistan? It looks like the US populace might not be too satisfied with the result, even though we killed Ben Laden and Hussein. Can a democratic country be said to have won a war when the populace seems dissatisfied with the result? When I say win, I mean it in the sense of victory in a symetrical war (Iraq, Afghanistan, and for that matter Vietnam were all asymetrical wars), that is to say, to force the surrender of the opposing country, and/or destroy their capability to properly wage war. In this, the USA would no doubt succeed. Since we both have nukes, it might be a moot point, but I'm not sure of China's delivery systems. If China has effective delivery systems which the US cannot counteract, we would both lose big time in a war if both sides had full resolve to destroy the other (or, more accurately, it seems very unlikely that either side would go to war). I'm mostly ignoring nukes, partially because of MAD, and partially because it's pretty difficult to really figure out what would happen. I doubt either side would use them though. Anyway, it is not so easy to win in war. It is not so hard to lose less. The US might lose less than China in a war between the two countries. That's not the same as winning. Adressed above. Also, while the US almost certainly does have a truly stronger military than China due to air and naval superiority, spending as a function of GDP is a simplifying way to account for the strength of a military. For example, if we spend much more on maintenance than China does, or if there are other ways in which our military spending doesn't result in military force due to inefficiencies, then the US might not be so strong as it appears. I wouldn't just look at a number and say that tells the whole story. I agree. The GDP numbers don't tell the whole story, but if you actually look into it it actually makes things even more one sided. Specifically, United States air superiority and naval power is so massive that it makes Chinese ground forces almost completely irrelevent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterJP28 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 145? I know I'm surrounded by terrorist countries but still. Oh well I guess that's why I moved to the US a decade ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Alear Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 145? I know I'm surrounded by terrorist countries but still. Oh well I guess that's why I moved to the US a decade ago. You guess? Is that why you moved or not :P ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Life Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Canada - 8/153 Israel - 145/153 Awesome. Guess where I'm going in 3 weeks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.