In 2100, which country will have the strongest military?

Reasons why India can't be a superpower:

1, The country is corrupted.

2, There is a huge gap between the rich and the poor, planting a root for potential future social unrest.

3, The economy is bad. You can't rely everything on your I.T. people. It's the largest democracy in the world but also the largest economic disastar.

4, The country will be overpopulated, lacking resources.

5, The country is near China.

6, The country is near Pakistan.

Due to the above reasons, it is for sure that India will not have the "strongest" military in 2100.

What makes you think it can compete with China and USA economically and militarily?

It is really hard to know what the world will become within one century. We know that during the 70s and 80s, Japan was the number 1 economic power: the estate of the imperial palace in Tokyo was equivalent to the estate of whole California in early 1980s, and the top 10 world banks were occupied by Japanese banks in early 1990. Japan's miracle created an unseen public fear in US. Americans at one time bashed Japanese cars on the street, and burn their products as unemployment in US was so high due to the economic deficit to Japanese exports. Japanese economic success forced Westerns to rethink their model of market economy and even their democratic values. Famous academic books such as "Japan #1" from Harvard research center was widely praises and studied. In this book, the Harvard scholar wanted American government in 80s to adopt Japanese format of top-down economic policies in order to overcome long periods of economic stagnation under Reagan administration. The suspicious and fear of rise of Japan was most apparent in puplic expression in arts and media. Many movies were often included with futuristic cities based on the present day Tokyo, and their dominance in technological inventions (Blade Runner, Alien3), or basically a consipiracy of Japanese companies that posed threat to the security of USA (Rising Sun).

My political professor (University of Alberta), who was undergraduated study in Japanese politics in Japan, told us that most scholars in 80s believed Japan would no doubt took over US as number 1 economic superpower by early 1990s. But, as we know it now, Japanese stock market collapsed with stagnation in economy in 1990. Since than, they had not found a feasible solution for it, and the present Koizumi's reform was facing pressure from strong LDP conservative force. Despite all this, Japan was still the number 2 economic power in the world.

So, what is the next superpower? My political profs. believed it WOULD be China as we witnessed how China sustained itself during the Asian Economic crisis in 97, but it was really hard to predict whether China will overcome its serious domestic problems, notably corruption (it was really heart breaking, as millions of peasants were struggling for justice everyday).

"Americas success was not overnight, it had alot to do with the 2 world wars."

You must remember that US is only 200 yrs old. And in the first 100 yrs it's relatively weak. That leaves one hundred more years, and we're talking about the superpower in year 2100.

"U still never said anything about the 2 wars. That had a major impact for US becoming the dominant country over the world economically and militarily."

Yes, the world wars did elevate the nation into power, but that doesn't account for the quick rise of EVERY nation in history. Look at Macedonian Greece, the European Imperialists, and the Mongol Empire.

And it's US because?

And when you say European, do you mean it as in combined European?

"Regarding my vote for the US, sorry i forget to justify. US have more soldiers, much more technology, much more money. They can make intervention wherever they need and wherever they want. I remember how fast they take Afghanistan.I can't think of any army beating them."

Ah, but it's the same with the Mongolian Empire, and they collapsed in a snap. Also Afghanistan is the poorest country in the world, no offence to Afghans, since they suffer from being cut off from the ocean, ignored, ect... US is a superpower, but 100 years may be enough time for someone else to take it's place, although I'm not saying that someone will, just saying it's possible.

" I disagree whith you when comparing a nomadic culture with the united states of america. US are a stable state. Mongols didn't have nuclear weapons....... "

Well, considering that many other countries also have enough nukes to blow up the Earth a couple of times, a nuclear war would be... Hope it doesn't happen though.

Power today has very little to do with armed forces, maybe it did when the mongols rulled china but unles im very much mistaken much has changed in the socio-political scene since then. Todays world is ruled by economics and mass media, two subjects that obviously correlate. America may have the biggest, most advandced, albeit poorly trained, army, however do you think they would have gone to war if they werent publicly supported by their people through the amount of hysteria the US media whips up. Even though it is stating the obvious America is really ruled by economics and in the spectrum of economics, things can change in an instant.

Look at how quickly America came to be top in the world compared to the rise of all other major powers throughout history. Coupled with the uncertainty of economics, i'd be very surprised if America lasted out the next century with their current 'top dog' title intact.

Back to the point at hand though, socio-polotical power translates into military power, both through propaganda in the media and through economic prosperity for obvious reasons. As i said before these can change very quickly.