Nonsense. Are you aware that India has the largest amount of arable land in the world? Technically, India's landmass can support more people than China's. Or even that of America.
Posted on 03/04/2007 12:35:05 AM PST by Lorianne
Summary: Controversies over the war in Iraq and U.S. unilateralism have overshadowed a more pragmatic and multilateral component of the Bush administration's grand strategy: its attempt to reconfigure U.S. foreign policy and international institutions in order to account for shifts in the global distribution of power and the emergence of states such as China and India. This unheralded move is well intentioned and well advised, and Washington should redouble its efforts.
(Excerpt) Read more at foreignaffairs.org ...
Europe definitely should not have three (or two if you exclude Russia) permanent seats on the UN Security Council. And Germany definitely should not get an additional seat. The EU can have one seat, and the remaining one can go to India (so still five permanent seats).
Some EUers act as though the EU is a country when it fits their purposes (such as gloating that the EU has a larger GDP and population than the United States), and yet want to be considered separately in international organizations--wanting their cake and eating it, too.
This is sort of EU bashing--sorry EU freepers.
Have an inclusion of India and China and a dissolution of Europe and Japan (and the wannabes of Russia and Brazil, of course). This is simply based on fairness--it would be more useful for the United States to include the relatively allies which are Europe (minus Russia, Belarus, etc.) and Japan, while continuing to exclude Communist China and Socialist India.
Sorry if posting so much on one thread is a break of netiquette.
Zounds.
Much of the world, including Europe and Latin America, nurse grudges against the United States--it comes with being a superpower that is viewed as a former colony by one group (Europe) and as what should be a peer by the other (Latin America/Canada).
Nonsense. Are you aware that India has the largest amount of arable land in the world? Technically, India's landmass can support more people than China's. Or even that of America.
The Ganges river basin is fertile--but the most fertile is the basin between the Yangtze and Hu Rivers in China. Though less fertile, the Mississippi River Basin is also fairly fertile. The thing is, is that the Chinese and American basins are huge, India's is not. The most arable region is the northern European plain--but Europe isn't a country. Furthermore, India's Deccan takes up a large part of the country. So to does the Mojave Desert and the Rocky Mountains in the USA you might add. And in that case, it could again be brought up that the United States and China (which has the Gobi Desert and the Himalayas) are larger than India, and that their fertile regions are capable of producing more food.
Also, though your map doesn't specifically state so, it seem to be measuring the percentage of the arable land. 40% of India (1.3 million sq. km) (if the map is accurate--40% is very, very high) is not 19% of the USA (1.8 million square km), or 14% of China (1.3 million sq. km). This is if the amount of arable Indian land is 40% (the range is 40+%), and if China is 14% (although both India and China are about 1.3 million sq. km, China's amount is higher). The United States has more arable land even if it is only 15%.
See that the map is from Wikipedia, ostensibly from the CIA factbook.
This seems to be another case of Indians not accepting that their country isn't number one at everything. Yes, there are many Americans who have the same view about the United States, including many freepers, but many Americans, and many freepers, recognize that the United States is not perfect (simply number 1 out of many imperfect countries).
India has a lot going for it. Land area isn't one of them.
The Ganges river basin is fertile--but the most fertile is the basin between the Yangtze and Hu Rivers in China. Though less fertile, the Mississippi River Basin is also fairly fertile. The thing is, is that the Chinese and American basins are huge, India's is not. The most arable region is the northern European plain--but Europe isn't a country. Furthermore, India's Deccan takes up a large part of the country. So to does the Mojave Desert and the Rocky Mountains in the USA you might add. And in that case, it could again be brought up that the United States and China (which has the Gobi Desert and the Himalayas) are larger than India, and that their fertile regions are capable of producing more food.
Also, though your map doesn't specifically state so, it seem to be measuring the percentage of the arable land. 40% of India (1.3 million sq. km) (if the map is accurate--40% is very, very high) is not 19% of the USA (1.8 million square km), or 14% of China (1.3 million sq. km). This is if the amount of arable Indian land is 40% (the range is 40+%), and if China is 14% (although both India and China are about 1.3 million sq. km, China's amount is higher). The United States has more arable land even if it is only 15%.*
See that the map is from Wikipedia, ostensibly from the CIA factbook.
This seems to be another case of Indians not accepting that their country isn't number one at everything. Yes, there are many Americans who have the same view about the United States, including many freepers, but many Americans, and many freepers, recognize that the United States is not perfect (simply number 1 out of many imperfect countries).
India has a lot going for it. Land area isn't one of them.
*Country land area sizes taken from Wikipedia. For India and China, the land area of the territory that they administer was used, not the territories that they believe are theirs (which would largely be Himalayan--see practically nonarable--land).
Should have looked at the preview before posting--and then reconfiguring the picture.
India
arable land: 48.83%
permanent crops: 2.8%
other: 48.37% (2005)
China arable land: 14.86%
permanent crops: 1.27%
other: 83.87% (2005)
United States arable land: 18.01%
permanent crops: 0.21%
other: 81.78% (2005)
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2097.html
'Nuff said.
Account for the fact that large portions of Chinese and American arable lands are not cultivable to a large extent in the winters. In India, the winters are milder, and the summers are favourable to crop growth.
| This link isn't posted as much as the Enlarged USA one, so it can be posted by itself. |
Also to be taken into account is that a lot of arable land in all three countries is covered by cities.
The American demographic growth is too small--and its economic growth could be higher, too. Revalue the yuan.
Big bump to that. Though, in fairness, most of the 50 states have much smaller populations that European countries. As for economies, Germany and the UK still beat the largest state economy--California's, but they also have around 3 to 2 times the population.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.