When did America become most powerful country?

[Vivaldi]

In 19th century or 20th century?

[ChrisMaster69]

It was a strong industrial country heading in to the 1900’s, it was however a young country and not really geared for war.

The First World War saw Americans taking part in the closing stages, however pretty much everything was given to them by the French, as the Americans were not equipped with certain equipment in the numbers required.

Post WW1 they then fucked things up by hamstringing the rest of the world (apart from Japan and Germany).

They headed towards 1930’s building up its military and economy to rival European powers.

During WW2, its economy, industrial capacity went in to high gear.

it was then pretty much number 1 in all areas, so back end of WW2 was when the US very much stamped it’s foot as a global superpower.

[slatyb]

There's no sharp line. Perhaps as early as the late 19th century, probably after World War 1. It was clear after World War 2 that the US was the most powerful. Since then we've mostly squandered our resources on idiotic unwinnable wars -- Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

That becomes the issue of nation building.
The United States is very capable of destroying enemies...
the issue always seems to be helping burgeoning nations build to a level of self sufficiency

Though I will say
Iraq at least still exists and is somewhat self sufficient.
South Vietnam at least fought for a couple years after the USA left

Afghanistan though is a perfect example of the pointless of nation building
The Government of Afghanistan was so inept and corrupt that it couldnt last weeks..
Even its military due to that corruption was incapable of fighting without any sort of USA support

[erandal]

I would agree that it was during the first half of the 20th century. Up until that time it was probably the United Kingdom, they slowly lost their empire, sitting on their laurels all happy and fat with wealth. I see the same thing happening with the United States now and I would not be surprised if by the mid 21st century China has overtaken them by a noticeable margin. Just watch how China is expanding their interests in Africa. I do however see some attention to this in the US so maybe this can still be changed.

[slatyb]

@erandal Xinping seems to be set on the CCP controlling EVERYTHING. This will stifle innovation, drive a brain drain to the West, and eventually wreck the economy.

[jshm2]

It never has been. No other country has lost more wars than America.

It's an unbalanced superpower, but only because the Soviet Union isn't there to counterbalance it.

[Vivaldi]

English is the international language of the world because America is the strongest country.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

Not exactly a historical genius here I can see.
The only losses in American history were political defeats (2 in particular)
Other than that, every other war was either a victory, or a stalemate.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

@Vivaldi
His answer is not the most informed
if anything, its the most ignorant one I've seen here.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

@Vivaldi to be more specific
American Revolutionary War = American Victory
Native American Conflicts (which which there were 40+) = American Victory in nearly all of them
Quasi War = American Victory
Barbary Wars (2 of them) = American Victory
War of 1812 = Stalemate
Mexican American War = American Victory
Texas Revolution = American Victory (though we don't necessarily need to count this one due to Texas not being part of the USA at the time, but its central to Texan history)
Civil War = Union Victory (Northern vs Southern War, where the Northern forces won.. . once again we don't need to count this one.. but the conflict makes up over 50%+ of all American military deaths in all wars combined... the bloodiest war by far)
Spanish American War = American Victory
Banana Wars (several Latin American conflicts) = American Victory
Philippine American War = American Victory
World War 1 = American Victory
World War 2 = American Victory
Korean War = Stalemate (agreed armistice)
Vietnam War = Political Defeat, The South Vietnamese government (and ARVN, the military wing) collapsed 2 years after the last American soldiers withdrew in 1973 (the collapse was in 1975, the USA decided not to intervene and help and instead evacuated its embassy)
Dominican Civil War = American Victory
Korean Border conflicts of the 60s = American Victory
Mexican Border conflicts of the 1910s = American Victory
Grenada Conflict = American Victory

[PeterQuillsAlive]

@Vivaldi Libyan conflicts of the 1980s = American Victory
Libya War of 2011 = American Victory
Iranian Boat War of 1980s (known as Tanker War) = American Victory
Panama Conflict = American Victory
Gulf War = American Victory
Serbian Conflicts = American led victories
Somalian Conflicts = UN led failures to bring stability (There was limited success, but considering a stable Somalian government was central.. the ultimate objective failed)
Iraq War = Military victories with questionable political results, IE; Defeat of Iraqi forces led by Saddam, Defeat of Insurgents (through military means, or political), and a Strengthened Iraqi Government. However, many would question if it was worth it (where the main "question" comes).
ISIS conflict = American victory
Afghanistan = Political disaster. This was largely due to the ANDSF taking complete control of security in 2014. The United States only played a minor role in the conflict over the past 7 years.
The ANDSF collapsed quickly when all American support was removed.
The Afghan Government collapsed as well
Though ultimately not a "USA Defeat", it is clearly a political disaster
due to Afghan government corruption, ineptness, and lack of American interest in the conflict.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

So as you can see his reply is nonsense
He also knows its nonsense
because he is more interested in spewing Anti-American perspectives
than having any basis in objective reality.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

@Vivaldi
So as you can see, you don't become a Superpower, by losing wars.
You do not become a military power without having great reach and strength.

@jshm2 made several fatal errors in this reply, which show a mix of things
1. His complete ignorance of history
2. His own personal biases an grudges

We can see this through every section of his post
For example, he says "It never has been"
even though its VERY commonly accepted that the United States is the most powerful country.
Its not something people just "say", it is commonly accepted due to the economic, military, cultural.. etc strength of the United States.

We can further see this through the second part, which is "No other country has lost more wars than America"
Where not only does this make little to no sense... for countries like the UK have a longer military history. . and have obviously lost far more wars than nations that are younger (like the US)
but it also shows a great deal of ignorance on American history... Which I have shown above

the third portion of his reply contradicts the former
by admitting the United States is an "unbalanced superpower" due to the lack of an adversary like the Soviet Union to counterbalance it

Be careful of fools like @jshm2
they answer questions less on the basis of objective reality
than by their own personal grudges and biases

[PeterQuillsAlive]

@Vivaldi
@jshm2

So hopefully my friend, I helped you out a bit! :)
also, to jshm2
if you were keeping track of what is listed there
that is easily 60+ conflicts that were VERY CLEAR American victories
several stalemates
and a couple of political defeats

The only times the United States suffered "defeats" in war...
were during conflicts the USA was no longer a major party, or actively heavily engaged
but instead, where another party was the main force.

For example,
in Vietnam... the ARVN were the combatting force against the NVA from 1973-75 without any sort of American support outside of $$. The disaster ensued due to a lack of American military involvement, a cutting of funds in congress, and the Case Church Amendment which prohibited American forces from returning too Indochina without Congressional aid
When the ARVN began to lose the war, there was no support in Congress for an American return to the conflict
Instead, Congress only allowed the USA military to evacuate its embassies
a political disaster to be sure

In regards to Afghanistan,
the United States combat mission ended in 2014 (the same applies to your country).
The ANDSF took up all responsibilities of the war, but still relied heavily on Western logistics and support.
Just like with ARVN in South Vietnam.. a mix of corruption, ineptness, and reliance made the ANDSF an incapable force
HOWEVER, it was even worse than that...
the ARVN lasted 2 years by itself
the ANDSF lasted only about 2 weeks.
immediately when the USA logistical forces removed themselves (be it the small contingent of 2,000 USA soldiers, and contractors).. the ANDSF began to lose major ground (which they had been slowly losing over 7 years without any major USA military support)

Once again, like in Vietnam
there was not much USA interest in the conflict
and instead of aiding the ANDSF
the USA and its allies decided to remove its embassies
once again, a political disaster to be sure

[PeterQuillsAlive]

However, that being said
the United States has never suffered an actual defeat similar to that of Russia in WW1, or Japan/Germany in WW2, Iraq armed forces of 1991/2003, or the British in the American Revolutionary War.
the disasters of the USA have always been at a point when USA involvement was small, minor, and allied parties had control of the conflict.

Its better to say that at times the USA fails at nation building, or picking the right sides in a conflict.

Please try to learn history.

[Kaneki05]

USA isn't? But if your talking about what made there country thrive so quick would of been due to the slaves they had and back then.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

So why didn't Brazil thrive and become a powerhouse?
They made up the majority of the slave trade, and became the last Western nation to abolish slavery?

[Kaneki05]

That's not a hard one to figure out but i'll leave you to try figure it out. And what kinda idiot argues that slaves don't improve a country in many ways when history has shown that works pretty effectively. Shrugs go learn.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

Likely, because you don't want to answer it.
Brazil made up over 40%+ of the Slave Trade (USA/British America made up less than 10%)
and Brazil ended Slavery in 1888... 2 decades after the United States.

Yet Brazil did not become a Superpower?

[PeterQuillsAlive]

Also, I am not making an argument "Slavery has no influence on power"
Nowhere in my reply was such a statement made.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

Also notice I didn't even comment on your "USA Isn't?" aspect
which in itself shows an extreme amount of ignorance to
1. The question in itself which is "When did America become the most powerful country?"
and
2. to any sort of current issues? (which once again, isn't even the discussion here).

[Kaneki05]

And the idiot still persists probably thinks Egypt wasn't helped by jews slaves. Just because Brazil didn't work out for very obvious reasons. Slaves time and time again have improved a country. Arguing that one place it didn't and has very good reasons why it didn't is really dumb go learn why it didn't.

[EnglishEuropean]

It's doubtful if America made much money from slavery. Slaves have to be fed and housed, ultimately you get the same result by paying them to work.

[Kaneki05]

@EnglishEuropean ah yes they slaved them for no reason because no one profits from slaves and especially not a country when all through history it's been proven that's exactly how it works and why they slave people in the first place.

Why are there idiots in denial that slavery is a profitable thing and the whole reason for it in the first place. In your logic paying someone fully to work for me would be equally the same result as me just forcing someone to work for me for basically no money.
I can tell you there is a massive profitable difference there and that been quite the exact reason for me to even consider doing it in the first place.

Next people gonna be like ah stealing from a bank wouldn't help one get rich lmao. Or nah I'm sure been a dictator would give me zero power over what i am ruling.

[EnglishEuropean]

Well you can't steal from a bank because they keep very little money on the premises. Also banks don't have any money, even the deposits are gone, banks retain a fractional reserve which in no way matches their commitments.

[Kaneki05]

@EnglishEuropean ah yes that's why there has been 0 cases of anyone stealing from a bank ever. My mistake. And all stealing from banks is just in shows my bad. Just like how murder is a myth that don't happen either. You really need to look up any amount of history lol. And not like there is bank scam frauds all the time nah.

I would love to live in your world of make belief were crimes have no reasons for doing them and many crimes that involve easy way's to make money don't work and never happen because no would have any reason to try since they don't work at all.
What a nice make belief world.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

I would say mid 20th century
after the end of World War 2

[PeterQuillsAlive]

^ Might I mention that @kaneki05 has shown a great deal of ignorance in his post...
not to mention his defensiveness, and immediate block of my replies?

that passes as a "guru"
?

[PeterQuillsAlive]

Furthermore the absolute rudeness of @keneki05 is depressing.
Who immediately resorts to name calling, when an aspect of your answer is questioned by another?
Its quite pathetic.
It shows a great deal of insecurity, and also a level of prejudice (based upon false assumptions) of an individuals views on a topic
its complete defensiveness for no purpose other than someone is asking you to expand upon your answer.

Grow up. :)
Learn!

This is one of the great failings of society today.
Yet such people are viewed as Gurus

[DamnSam]

I would say the 1960s... but it went south somewhere in the 90s when prices exploded but salary stayed the same

[exitseven]

I would say after Japan surrendered during WW2 the US was considered the top dog.

[noohair]

The most bold and adventurous people from every country came here. The risk takers, and without risk, there is wealth development.

[elzamarzkie]

Isn’t Russia the most powerful country in the world?

[PeterQuillsAlive]

Not really, Russia is quite weak in comparison to what it use to be.
It was able to compete with the USA during the Cold War (as the Soviet Union)... slowly it lost that influence and power

Though its been gaining more strength over the years..
is still a hollowed out shell in comparison to the past.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

Also to be more specific
in terms of Economy
Russia would likely be in the top 15, but would NOT be a contender for number 1.
That would either be China, or the USA depending on how you define it

In terms of military power
Russia would likely be in the top 3.
With the United States as number 1, and China as a likely number 2

In terms of Cultural influence
United States would likely be number 1
Russia would not likely be in the discussion

[hahahmm]

@PeterQuillsAlive And the only reason Russia was competitive during the Cold War is because the west kept sending massive free shipments of food grain to Russia. The value of the food was later to be found to be exactly equal to the amount of cash the Soviets put into their military program.

[PeterQuillsAlive]

@hahahmm You are correct

[boobliker]

just after the second world war

[888theGreat]

Right after World War 2

[Steve1071]

After WW2