Talk:Major power

message: Should Sports Power and performance in sports be included under all of the nations listed on this page and the pages Superpower, Potential Superpowers and Regional power.
*No Nobleeagle  (Talk) 00:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW I agree. But really, who are we to decide these criteria? I'd like to see some proper cites here, and less original research.Guinnog 00:56, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No offence Guinnog, but I've seen you write that comment so many times and fail to find anything credible so many times that it is annoying me. I think we get the point, if you find somewhere to remodel the criteria on, tell us the site. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 00:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote (CLOSED)

message: The article contradicts itself. It says: "China is the world's fourth largest economy in terms of market exchange rates." Yet further down it says: "The United Kingdom possesses the fourth largest economy in the world in terms of market exchange rates." Hardouin 01:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Problem solved MainBody 09:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Problem is, it is China which is the fourth-largest economy in the world at market exchange rates, not the UK. You probbably haven't heard the latest revision of Chinese GDP by economists. Hardouin 10:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I edited according to this. Let me know if I'm wrong MainBody 15:48, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: You are always mentioning Brazil, Egipt, Israel, Australia and never Italy which is in every aspect superior to all this countries and superior even to Brazil, India and China in very aspects.
Lets see why;
First error of all is in the Great Power pages, which I already reported, the downfall of Italy as a great power was 1943 and not 1945. In 1943 Italy surrendered and in the two subsequent years it passed thru German invasion, Civil War and Allied Occupation. So 1945 is wrong. 
The bigger mistake is not considering Italy as a Great or even Major Power from the 80's till present. Italy is a member of the G-7, meaning is a major economic power,in certain years was the 5th major on earth, the Made in Italy is the second most competitive after Made in Germany, the international trade is big, since the war it has grown at a very high rate, almost like Japan. It has a population, GNP and economic position like that of France and UK,altough in recent years it has fall behind a little. If you consider GDP PPP Italy as the same amount of total GDP as France. Italy has many more big or medium companies than Russia, India or China. It has companies active in gas and oil field, the biggest of whose is ENI,which is one of the major players in that fiels. Take Germany for an instance, it has none, only subsidiaries of foreign companies, it has Rurhgas and some Utilities but a Petroleum company it doesn't have, and Italy has. Italy also has a residual amount of Gas and Petroleum but nevertheless it has more petroleum than Germany, Japan or France, altough it has almost none too. The diplomatic and International Relations of Italy in the recent years changed too.Now Italy is not anymore the silent partner of the Franco-German axis on EU, it is an important partner of UK and has halted some federalistic ambitions of the Franco-German axis. Even on the World stage its word is more important than someone could judge at first glance and than many countries. What was the diplomatic achivement of the G4 so far, none. Italy with her allies has managed to block the entrance of this countries to UN Security Council. It proposed semi-permanet seats or permanent seats on a reagional basis with rotation,like another from EU which could be to Germany, Italy or even Spain or even more EU members on a rotational basis, others seats to other parts of the world. If the G4 proposition would go thru many important countries no only economically,but also geostrategically speaking would remain outside the real decisions. And don't forget who is the 4th net contributor to UN budget-Italy. Also in foreign relations, the position of Italy is geostrategically much more important these days than that of Germany. Cold War is over,in that time Germany was at the center, now the problem is in Meadle East and Arab countries in general, ao Italy is much more well connected, its like an aircraft base in the middle of the Mediterranean .Japan could be important in future, but today altough its is the 4th spender in defence and as large armed forces, they only serve to self-defence and peace missions. And what was the first real war Germany was allowed to intervene in the post WWII- Kosovo in 1999.It had a smal contigent in 1991 in the Gulf War, but nothing like Italy.Japan cannot enter agressive wars, Germany could only after 1990,when Italy could after 1970. Italy entered a real and difficult war cenario in 1982 in Lebanon and altough at the beggining the allies mistrusted Italy,in the end its participation was fulcral even to safeguard the life of french and USA citizens. In 1991 it sent a substantial contingent to Operation Desert Storm mainly consiting of F-104 and Tornado Bombers, which made their very countribut too. In 1999 in Kosovo was the same, even more with the AM-X Ghibli. In Iraq, (agree with the war or not) Italy has the third largest contingent, many italians have died and even a secret service official was killed in a position of honour, defending the life of a civilian. Italians are not cowards as the anglo-saxons tend to generalize. In military technologies Italy has it indigenous industries, the major of which is Finmeccanicca, a huge conglomerate. It builds its own tanks like the Ariete, Tanks destroyers, like Centauro, Dardo AFV's and many more. It builds missiles and is part of MBDA consortium, the second largets of the world after Raytheon corporation in missile technologies. Italy has a small aircraft carrier and its building another one bigger, with the most powerfull conventional(non nuclear) angine of the world. As I know Germany and Japan doesn't own aircraft carriers, nor big destroyers like the 2 ones Italy is building with France, and the 10 frigates of ultimate generation its building with France too. In terms of Nuclear capabilities, German and Japan sometimes talk of owning its own deterrent force, but the only missiles Germany is supposed to have owned was in WWII. Itally planned a nuclear destroyer in the 60's,nuclear submarines which would have been equiped with Polaris missiles, but it was forced by the USA, Nato and other preesures of its own to abanon them. But it lauche one of the first satellites of the world, has an important space agency-ASI, its the thir more important member of ESA, the VEGA project its almost all from Italy, and in the 70's it tested sucessfully ballistic missiles- ALFA, made by italian industry, but the signed the Non Proliferation Protocol,but in the early 80's the idea emerged again and it Italy was to have its own Force de Frappe, if you don't believe ask Mr. Lelio Lagorio, defence minister at the time. It builds since the 60's good conventional submarines,the last in cooperation with Germany. Italy has the third most important Navy of EU and the 6th of the world, Germany only equalls that of Holland. It builds fighter aircrafts too. It entered the Tornado and EFA Typhoon programm, with a minor quote but is part of the consortium. Since the 50's it produces advanced jet trainers from Aermacchi sold all over the world with much sucess, helicopters, it has build the firs attack heli in EU, the A129 Mangusta, now its one of the major player in that industry, owning AgustaWestland. It also haves Alenia, Telespazio, Avio, Selex, Fincantieri, Otobreda, Iveco Defence Unit.The Fiat G91 was another sucess, winning a NATO contest for a light attack and strike aircraft, Germany bought and manufactured under license many of them. The AM-X was mainly Italian, altough Brazil had a 30% quota on it. So you put Brazil as a potential Major Power and Italy, wich deserves a place for a long, you don't even consider it for the future. Even if Brazil growns economically, in military, international relevance, its nothing compared to Italy. Doesn't have nothing indigeneous in terms of military-industrial, while Italy has lots of things. Brazil, India and China have aircraft carriers for instance, but they are old crapp bought from real Major Powers. Even in the F-35 JSF Italy is a 2nd level partner, being the USA the main contractor and the only first level partner the UK. Its is a partner also in the Dassault Neuron UCAV.ACamposPinho 00:16, 7 May 2006
:Nobody really thinks that Egypt, Israel, and Australia are Major powers; some think that Brazil could be, but many years in the future, around 2050 (see BRIC).
:As for Italy, there's no reason why it can't be considered and voted upon.  My own view is that Italy is certainly in the top tier of European economies, in fourth position - with a GDP well above that of Spain in fifth position.  Italy's large economy leads to a place in the G8, but there is no permanent seat in the UN security council - nor is there any big campaign for Italian admission such as there is for Germany.  It has capable armed forces - but ones rather behind the leaders, the UK and France; barring their involvement in Iraq, Italy does not seem to have many large-scale overseas deployments (note the emphasis on 'large-scale').
:My personal view is that Italy has many of the attributes for 'Major power' status, but that politically it doesn't seem to wish to play a larger role in the world (although its contribution to Iraq could be a sign of its intent to play a bigger role in the future).  
:Xdamr 23:58, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When it comes to demographics, politics and military factors. I don't think Italy can cut it as a Major power. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 01:21, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

text: This underlines the main problem with this page; as it is primarily OR, Sr Pinho above wants to lobby us to include Italy. Others have argued the case for the inclusion of their favourite countries too. Nowhere is there any reference to any verifiable or reputable organisation which classifies countries this way, so it is down to whatever we decide here. And that just feels wrong. While I have put a lot of work and thought into this article, I really think it is now time to put it to sleep and put our energy into something better. Guinnog 22:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I believe you know that Regional Power is based on regions and the power you'd see in Eastern and Western Europe is very different to the power you'll see in the Middle East. South Korea, for example, cannot be compared to China but can be compared to nations like Malaysia and Australia. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 07:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Of course Regional Power is based on regions, that in turn make the world.So if one country is a regional power, it should be a world power, too? Wrong because as you say different regions have different levels of power, so if a nation is powerfullin Africa for ex. it will be more difficult that nation to be a world power than if it was a power in Europe or Asia for instance.In the case of the UN Security Council Reform I think that is one of the biggest issues.They talk about two places for Africa and the candidates most speaked are South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt and even Angola. Its a joke. Angola isn't even a minor power in Africa and wants a UN Permanent seat in the SC. Only for having petroleum and diamonds.Its very little. What makes a coutry rich is that country knowledge, industry, not natural resources. The only countries that are rich and have in simultaneous natural resources are the USA and Canada.
Africa is the best example of a continent that should have one permanent seat in the Security Council but with rotating countries, it could have in the maximum two seats with this sistem. But the best sistem for Africa, specially subsaharian Africa should be a seat to the AfricanUnion, because African countries are the ones with less national identity, it only takes one to look at their geometric borders and continuous lines of border.They are a product of late European colonisation. The most identity the people in Africa have is to their tribe/region and to mother Africa,not to the country, only in big cities a sense of national identity is surgingbutcan't be compared to countries in other continents.   
The fact that Israel is always mentioned as a regional poweris because of that proper definition. Do you consider Israel to be more powerfull than Spain, only in a few militarysub-units, not in its whole. But Spain is never mentioned and even Itally is barelly mentioned just because there are already many powerfull countries in Europe. But lets notforget the central position of Europe,its world geostrategical importance and that inside Europe there are atleast 4 major powers excluding Russia, and we should always consider them as separate countries-entities, because there history, culture, position in relation to world problems is very different.Altough there is the EU, in foreign and defence policy the decision of each coutry is still the one that mattersand even if EU wants to build a common foreign and defence policy,inthe end it will be the countries that decide for themselves or the bigger ones will try to persuade EU to follow what they want, (only if they agree in some fact). Talking about EU: even things that already exist like the Euro, the constitutional Treaty(this treaty only puts on paper what is being done already) are questioned more and more. The economic union is questioned, whatdoyou think of major factors of sovereignity like defence and foreign affairs? ACamposPinho 3:29 12 May 2006
My two cents on the issue of Italy:
Here is a list from an independent source and an american one at that.
http://www.globalfirepower.com/index.asp
This site lists countries global firepower taking into account all resources needed to fight a war, economic, military, infrastucture, etc (oops, so sorry for you non latin speakers). Any way, as you can see they list Italy as number eleven in the world, two away from the UK. 
I have another page as well from a different source: http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/armies/e.asp
Again Italy in sixth place in Europe.
Naval strength on another page: http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/armies/e.asp
Again sixth place. 
Here is another page from the CIA, whose job it is to know these things:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2067rank.html
Look at that seventh place in the world. Hmmm.
How about economic power, again from the CIA:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html
Wow, number 10 in the world in terms of GDP by PPP, and not even a mention in your article.
Here is a list of the country's total output and infrastructure with links to rank in each category:
http://www.globalfirepower.com/country_detail.asp?country_id=19
Hey how about cultural influence with say something like tourism as a barometer:
http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus/1408_international_tourism_receipts_leading_countries.html
Again, number 4 in the world. Is there a trend here?
How about science and engineering:
http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus/1382_patents_by_country.html
Number 8 in the world. Not bad.
How about GNP versus GDP. ANd those of you who don't know the difference, GDP is the goods and services produced within a country regardless of the nationality of the company or individual. Whereas GNP is the good and services produced by a country's citizens and national companies regardless of the actual manufacturing takes place.
Now looking at the next web page:
http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus/1364_gross_national_product_by_country_1998.html
Again sixth in the world. Wow am I missing something!!???
How about another indicator of fighting power. Homogeneity of the population:
http://www.allcountries.org/uscensus/1354_foreign_or_foreign_born_population_and.html
Again Italy has far fewer immigrants than the other countries. Try to get a Turk to fight against Turkey in a war even though he's a German citizen. What about France's five million Islamic North Africans. Hey did you guys go up north during the summer during the riots.
How about merchant fleets, you know the ability to ship stuff around the world.
http://www.immigration-usa.com/world_fleet.html
Not great but where's that power house France. Hmmm.
How about central government expeditures, how much money a government spends every year:
1 United States 1,780,000
2 Japan 706,000M
3 Germany 694,000
4 France 662,000
5 United Kingdom 531,000
6 Italy 504,000
7 China - Mainland 400,000
8 Brazil NA
9 Russia 156,000
10 Canada 142,000
11 Spain 124,000
12 Netherlands 118,000
13 Belgium 115,000
14 Austria 113,000
15 Poland 110,000
Number 6 again but sadly not considered a major power even though it's ahead of China, Russia and Brazil.
How about number of scientific papers produced and published:
http://www.in-cites.com/countries/2004allfields.html
Internet users: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?t=100&v=118
Number eight worldwide. So much for soft power.
How about world influence in terms of what people buy from where:
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?t=10&v=85
Again number 7 in the world for exports.
How Olympic medals as measure of a country's pride and ability to waste money on international competition in order gain world prestige and bragging rights:
http://www.aneki.com/olympic.html
Number six. Those Italians have a lot of medals considering they are unable to feed themselves :P
I can go on and on and on. If you can't see that Italy is a major power in the world in almost every respect then you are deluding yourselves.
"You can bring a horse to water but you can't make him drink."
And for my brothers: "Andiamoci!"
--65.95.147.214 03:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Not bad... I'll take that as enough initiative for a vote as soon as the AfD proposal is over and the result sorted, we don't want to create something large only for it to be deleted. Thanks, all I wanted was a bunch of decent sources, which you provided. But lastly, do you have sources, neutral news sources perhaps, that note Italy as Great powers or Major powers? A Google Search would bring up stuff on Mussolini's Italy of the Second World War. Nobleeagle  (Talk) 07:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

text: As you see that are strong arguments as Italy being a amjor power.
You tought I was crazy or something.We are talking ofa coutry untill recently the 5th almost 4th major economic power in the worl, the 4th main contributot to UN in cash amounts.
And comparing Italy with Brazil or India for ex.; Italy can build its own military material, in the AM-X joint development with Brazil Italy has a 70% share versu Brazil 30%; Brazil major fighters are bought from abroad an India is only now constructing a fighter aircraft but can't be comparable to the US, Russian and European ones and will be only part of India's fleet of fighters, the major part being russians.
In the other hand, the definition of Major Power as it cames on the articlu, makes Italy a major power by itself; a coutry that its not a superpower but can influence others.
You can deny that Italy can influence its neighbors, the wholle EU is influenced by Italy, at lesat is the 4th major country of EU, and 3th in economicall affairs, because Britain is shareholder of ECB but doesn't have the Euro, the Mediterranean area is heaveky influenced by Italy, even Iberic Peninsula. The major supporter and  interested in EEC entry of Portugal and Spain was Italy, as weel of Greece.
In fashion, alimentary industry, design, artcrafts, auto industry and even space and defence  industries Italy has influence in the whole world.
Look again at all the facts presented and include Italy. And don't delete the page, develop it instead.
The great power page should also be developed and improved.
Only to finish GOOGLE is not the source of everything, and when it cames to searching Italy as a Major Power only comes Mussolini, is like in peoples talks, its a stereopychal interpretation, if you talk of Germany as a Major Power people will mostly talk of Nazi period and in Google I don't know but perhaps is the same as in Italy's case. 
[[User:ACamposPinho|ACamposPinho] 3:27 , 15 May 2006
Other source i've got a few time ago ona net forum, and I had the link.I don't know it now, but I will search.The facts of that linak are here:
Capacity of war:
1937
Country	% of Total Warmaking Potential
United States	41.7%
Germany	14.4%
USSR	14.0%
UK	10.2%
France	4.2%
Japan	3.5%
Italy	2.5%
Seven Powers (total)	(90.5%)
	
2005
United States 35.4%
Japan 13.4%
Germany 6.6%
UK 5.2%
France 4.8%
Italy 3.9%
China 2.5%
Seven Powers (total) 71.7%
So Italy is one of the world seven powers and ahead of mighty China. You should know that in order to make a war and go trhough with it, you should have economic power, not only personnel, and good equipment. Things Italy has.
ACamposPinho3:57 ,15 May 2006
Hey what happened here? I thought I made a great case for including Italy as a major power and the page got deleted. You spend hours researching to get sources and someone deletes the page. 
--Hadrian1 02:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: '''ITALY, WHY YOU DON'T YOU EVEN MENTION ITALY?'''

message: These aren't contextualized. What are they meant to show and why are there two? --Robdurbar 16:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Maps