Flyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (5 years 10 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1757 times:
The way that the US interacts with so much across the world got me to thinking. What countries out there are successful but have little to no interaction with the US? Trade, financial, military, etc.
Of course, I am not trying to imply that the many successful countries across the world depend on the US, but most of them do interact with the US greatly.
To further the question, are there any successful countries out there that don't have much interaction with any of the more powerful countries out there? (such as Russia, China, any of those in western Europe, etc.)
Are you saying those four countries have little or no interaction with the US? Look at the Swedish arms industry, and think again. Norway and Denmark are both part of NATO, BTW. We're perhaps not dependant on the US, but trade and co-operation, military and otherwise, with the US has certainly helped the Nordic countries.
Cheers
Mats
Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
Lijnden From Netherlands, joined Apr 2003, 557 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (5 years 10 months 2 hours ago) and read 1573 times:
I can think of the following countries:
France, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, North Korea, Iran, Mongolia, Syria, The Lebanon, Rwanda, Zaire (Congo), Angola, Laos, Libya, Kiribati & Tungaru, Sudan, Djibouti, Burkino Faso, Swaziland, Madagascar, Mozambique, Chad, Mali, Malawi, Gabon
ArniePie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (5 years 10 months 2 hours ago) and read 1565 times:
Quoting Lijnden (Reply 4): I can think of the following countries:
France, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, North Korea, Iran, Mongolia, Syria, The Lebanon, Rwanda, Zaire (Congo), Angola, Laos, Libya, Kiribati & Tungaru, Sudan, Djibouti, Burkino Faso, Swaziland, Madagascar, Mozambique, Chad, Mali, Malawi, Gabon
He specifically asked for successful countries, which basically almost non in your list are, except France and they do have many and deep-going ties with the US.
As for the question at hand, IMHO it is a bit of a non issue, almost all big countries in the world have far going ties with almost all other countries in the world.
BSBIsland From Brazil, joined Jul 2005, 347 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (5 years 10 months 2 hours ago) and read 1552 times:
Quoting Flyf15 (Thread starter): As for the question at hand, IMHO it is a bit of a non issue, almost all big countries in the world have far going ties with almost all other countries in the world.
Exactly.
It all depends on the level of involvement with each of them.
LAXspotter From India, joined Jan 2007, 3650 posts, RR: 5 Reply 10, posted (5 years 10 months ago) and read 1511 times:
The US is always trying to form a relationship with someone, somwhere. Most countries have some ties to the USA, unless it really doesnt matter on a global scale or on a region scale. My guess in that South Africa would be a much better partner to the US to have than say Swaziland or Lesotho.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Samuel Johnson
I would hate to see how Nokia in FInland would do without the US, they have a massive organization in the US . Finland's economy is very much influenced by trade with the US.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19815 posts, RR: 56 Reply 13, posted (5 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1392 times:
Quoting Flyf15 (Thread starter): What countries out there are successful but have little to no interaction with the US?
There aren't any. The US is deeply involved with every successful country in the world, as well as many unsuccessful ones.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Noelg From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (5 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1297 times:
It depends to what extent you are talking. I doubt any country has absolutely no trade with the US (with the obvious exceptions of Cuba, N Korea etc). Countries that have few political or military dealings with the US that spring to mind would be Russia, China and maybe New Zealand. Russia is almost entirely self-supportive (although they are dealing with more foreign countries these days), China who again are mostly self supporting, and NZ who compared to many western countries don't play along to the US's every whim like many other countries.
Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 55 Reply 17, posted (5 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1287 times:
Successful countries are successful in large part because they trade internationally. To find a nation that is successful without interacting with the largest economy, the greatest importer on the planet would be difficult, for reasons which should be obvious.
Whereas 150 years you could make a case for countries being successful without interaction with the superpower of that era, Britain (especially landlocked countries!), the world is different, with communication instantaneous.
In fact, it's not just a question of the United States. You'd be hard pressed to find a successful country that doesn't trade (and therefore, interacts) with someone like, say, France. The world is that much of a village these days.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
Derico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4233 posts, RR: 13 Reply 18, posted (5 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1274 times:
Argentina became successful in the 20th century with virtually no interaction or trade with the United States.
It also stagnated in the middle of the century because it decided to interact with no one, not just the United States.
Argentina is still trying to regain is former status. The lesson there is that trade, even if it's not completely fair, as long is is not mostly unfair, is good.
My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
Quoting ArniePie (Reply 7): He specifically asked for successful countries,
It's Lijnden. He just didn't want to miss an opportunity to mention France in the same breath with some crackpot nations (or what he thinks are crackpot nations).
Doesn't Nokia employ over half the workforce in Finland? I see a lot of people using Nokia cell phones in the US. Then there is also the GSM/UMTS/WiMax infrastructure of companies like Sprint, AT&T and T-Mobile also being partly Nokia.
SW733 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6108 posts, RR: 10 Reply 21, posted (5 years 9 months 4 weeks ago) and read 1127 times:
Quoting SP90 (Reply 20): Doesn't Nokia employ over half the workforce in Finland
No way, at least I don't think so. They have a huge impact on Finland, and they bring in upwards of 30% of the market capital in Finland, but half the workforce of the country...I would be very surprised. I do, however, think they are the largest employer in Finland.
Let's not for get that cheap furniture store Ikea that has huge big-box stores throughout the suburbs of the United States.
ABBA is still played in dance clubs across the USA.
Andaman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 983 times:
Quoting SP90 (Reply 20):
Doesn't Nokia employ over half the workforce in finland?
in 2006 Nokia employ some 70,000 world wide (Nokia Siemens Networks not included), 24,000 of them in Finland.
After Finland comes 2) China 3) India 4) US
About US and Finland: in 2006 US was Finland's 5th largest trade partner.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8498 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2003, 557 posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24627 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2007, 3650 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 1919 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Feb 2007, 3385 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, 
From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4233 posts, 
From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38599 posts, 
From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2096 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
