That's basically it.  The US itself hasn't suddenly lost half its military power or whatever, but its global influence and power has changed via growing economies, etc.  If you read any of the reports its more about a world where the US has less influence and less power to dictate than in the past rather than any inward decline as such.

I think that the discussion about military power is a smoke and mirrors problem. There's no military power without economic power, that's what we learned from WWII: at the beginning of the war Germany had the best trained and best equipped army in the world, but they had not enough resources to recover from losses (the same happened in WWI btw). The same could happen in the future and many countries know that.
Moreover many here seem to ignore that China and Russia signed a military alliance in 1996...

It is more symbolic.

Some put it in one sentence 'For USA astronauts to get into space they need to rely on Russia'

It is that USA gets more dependent on other countries like the above statement clearly shows.

Secondly the financial crises and being in the top 10 biggest debt countries are not really a good sign..

Thirdly is USA futureproof? Investments for the future of USA are kind of underwhelming, not only talking about education....but what about an future without no more oil, USA is not like an country like Sweden that will be ready for it something that will hurt USA a lot...

If anything USA is more like France and UK after the SUEZ crisis when people were thinking that UK and France don't really mean much in the world anymore.


future proof...

War = Money.

I might be the only one who thinks this but I think US like to get into Wars and play supercop.

I'd say our decline is primarily the result of over-spending on the War on Terror, and increasing our national debt by significant margins in the past 10 years - we've added about 10 trillion to the debt in a little over 10 years, which is horrible.

Most of our problems, though, could be rectified very quickly with the right people in power. I don't think our decline is a serious one - just one that needs addressed with a few measures.

China's rise doesn't mean the US is declining. It just means they are rising. However, they have a lot more deep-rooted problems than we do. They are not making friends in the area, as they are harassing the Indians, Vietnamese and Fillipinos due to the Spratly issue.

In addition, the reality is that we're evolving into a tri-polar future in regards to superpowers and alliances. It will be similar to the one we saw immediately after the Sino-Soviet collapse of the 60s, but instead of Moscow, it will be New Delhi.

Additionally, as mentioned somewhat, the backlash against Chinese aggression and force progression will only get more vocal. ASEAN will be a very prominent force in the future, especially backed by the rapidly advancing Korean economic complex. The Indonesians have recently signed onto a joint venture with South Korea on a 4.5 or 5th generation fighter, which is pretty much unheard of outside of Beijing and Russia. Likely, such armaments will spread throughout the region, fortifying the enemies of China, which will counter their influence.

Why say all of this? Because it shows that China has a lot of struggles ahead. They are a superpower with superpower problems, but few superpower solutions that America has been afforded - namely democracy and a general history of non-aggression. Both will hurt China immensely in the next 20 years.

In the end, we're not declining. Other nations are increasing, and there is nothing wrong with that. The question is what will we and others do with the power that we wield.

I think the future will be more than tri polar. Economically it has been tri polar for a while (US, Western Europe and Japan centred) but of course now you can throw the BRICS groups of nations in there. The South Korean's aren't ready to make their own 5th Gen aircraft so they've gone out to tender and will accept 4+++ Gen fighters since currently there are no 5th Gen fighters available for export at the moment (F-35 delayed though will be tendered and F-22 export banned). Russia has offered it's T-50 but like the F-35 it's not ready yet and they are unlikely to win it due to the close defense ties between the US and S.Korea though the Russians have in the past managed to woo US arms buyers.

I agree the rise of China has created issues for itself (never mind it's internal issues) so the surrounding nations may wish to strengthen their alliance with the US but on the other hand since they are so close to China, Chinese influence will be massive and will grow while the opposite could happen for the US as it tries to concentrate more on it's domestic front. After all many great Empires have fallen due to complacency, military overstretch & economic issues and the US is not immune to such banes. I disagree calling China a super power. It's not there yet. And I disagree with your assessment on US non-aggression. The US military has been involved in a lot of wars over the decades.

ECONOMIC MESS

also the wat US glorifies the hollywood,famous,rich life and other things,kids tend to follow those things and in the long term if nobody does work then US's exports will go down and imports will increase.

further hurting the economic situation

I was about to state that the future will be more than Tri-polar, but I am somewhat skeptical of some potential outcomes, especially militarily. The EU is certainly an economic powerhouse, but I feel they will be de-stabilized for awhile due to the Greece issue, and this will likely throw them back a few years - not to mention the EU is lacking in strategic capacity in regards to their military. Compared to China, India or America, they are certainly taking a back seat.

SK has indeed tendered other fighters, but their future is through indingenous production: http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4709554 . Indonesia has pledged another $20 billion in the near future, and I am certain that other countries will seek out ties with South Korea - Taiwan wants new craft, and Japan has had major setbacks with their F-X program. Additionally, South Korea is arguably one of the most poised economies in the world. Bear Stearns anticipates them to have the 2nd largest economy in per capita spending by 2050, and if unified would be even stronger by then.

The US has been involved in a lot of wars, yes, but not ones that have damaged ties with significant allies or made significant enemies... The Chinese have. Through a few moves, you essentially have 75% of Asian countries against China with only minor players still in their sphere of influence - Burma, Cambodia and North Korea.. None of which are military powers and have significant problems. China is starting to play into very questionable hands in Africa as well due to their food crisis. Although I think its a smart move for them, the long term effects may not be beneficial - as you've said, the more an empire meddles in the affairs of others, the quicker they lose. I think China is starting too early for that kind of thing, and will pay for it later.

I agree that the US is suceptible to potential downfall. I just don't think we've passed the Rubicon quite yet. We have not had our Stamp Act of 1765 moment.

Damn, I spilt my milk reading that. Do you really believe this, lol? US has the most powerful military since end of WW2, and it's been constantly practising it, you know? That's one of two main reasons why it became the greatest country on this planet, the only superpower atm (and the other reason is huge wins from WW2 itself). And I'd say actually it's lack of such tradition which is one of main problems China will struggle with if ever to become superpower. And right now they are far far from its definiton, see how West is throwing them off Africa, and they couldnt't do a thing against it. It's soooo superpowerish, lol.

You do realize we've been a nation since 1776, right? We've intervened in wars for about 75 of those 235 years. And for the worst offenders of war, we've been dragged into conflict by others. I'd say that would constitute a 'general history', given that we stayed out, or attempted to stay out of other conflicts that were waged for the totality of 235 years of American history.