5 ms·

>his is one of the reasons the world hates us. We think it is our position to unilaterally police everyone in the world. You are being incredibly naive. The US

by blahi 10y ago

>his is one of the reasons the world hates us. We think it is our position to unilaterally police everyone in the world. You are being incredibly naive. The US is the de facto hegemon on Earth. We have been living in Pax Americana for close to 100 years and knew about it for around 70. All pretenses fell around 30 years ago. When it comes to military power, the US is in a league of its own with one empty league between it and everybody else. The US is an empire (and the mightiest one yet) and will act like that until it isn't capable to do so any more. Historically, that's around 100 more years but I'm not sure history is predictive here.

GunboatDiplomat 10y ago
Assuming we can hold our alliance system together, we've got a good 15 years before anyone can think about direct military confrontation with the US. As long as 30. Of course, that assumes China's trajectory remains the same and doesn't change. If China fails in some way, then the US remains sole hegemon for the foreseeable future.
throwaway2016a 10y ago
> You are being incredibly naive. The US is the de facto hegemon on Earth. We have been living in Pax Americana for close to 100 years and knew about it for around 70. All pretenses fell around 30 years ago. "Incredibly", eh? Sounds like hyperbole. Also, let's not result to personal attacks shall we? Right now we are seeing a para-military terrorist group that is a global threat. We have that because the US created a power vacuum that started by intervening in the middle east. Which both Bush AND Obama contributed to. And for that matter the first Bush and Clinton as well. And there is a strong argument to be had that the 9-11 attack was because of prior middle east interventions especially with Israel and Saudi Arabia. But by all means let's create another vacuum in Asia too that will destroy our ally South Korea and create a vacuum that will probably be filled by China not South Korea as much as we'd like that to be the case. > We have been living in Pax Americana for close to 100 years and knew about it for around 70. All pretenses fell around 30 years ago. I'm not sure this is not the point you are actually making so I might actually be agreeing with you. But before we were in this place we didn't assert our power like we do now, yet -- just an observation -- all the sudden we have all these problems. Not to be treasonous but when the "de facto hegemon[sic]" comes into power and the world falls to shit maybe the world and Americans are better off with a more even power balance. > When it comes to military power, the US is in a league of its own with one empty league between it and everybody else. Yet somehow we are weak according to many Americans.
- blahi 10y ago
  I don't know what else to call you since you continue to write incredibly naive things. Many Americans? Many Americans are dumb as a brick like most people in every other place. The world falling to shit? How much history have you read? Because the world is better than it has ever been. War activities are at an all-time low. I won't even start with the middle east. That issue was started at the start of the 20th century. It sort of got solved and then the SU opened it up again. If you think people hate Americans, you live in America or in one of very few America-hating countries. The US is a very new country with no bad blood running deep. Japan and China? China and Korea? Japan and Korea? India and Pakistan? Iran and Saudi Arabia? Now that is hate.
  - throwaway2016a 10y ago
    > I don't know what else to call you since you continue to write incredibly naive things. So it's naive to say that intervention has often negative consequences that are often worse than the problem we're trying to solve when it is demonstrably true? Because that's all I said. I might even gloss over the naive part. But the fact you put "incredible" in front of it I take exception to and you did it again. I gave you an out yet you doubled down. That is not a positive signal of civil discord. > Many Americans? Many Americans are dumb as a brick like most people in every other place. I was disagreeing with those people so I'm OK if you call them dumb as bricks. > The world falling to shit? How much history have you read? Because the world is better than it has ever been. War activities are at an all-time low. Mea culpa. I used hyperbole. I apologize. The world has absolutely not fallen to shit in the historical scale. However, I do ask for a citation on the "all time low" part for my own education. And what statistical buckets are you using, all time by year / decade / century? > If you think people hate Americans, you live in America or in one of very few America-hating countries. The US is a very new country with no bad blood running deep. Japan and China? China and Korea? Japan and Korea? India and Pakistan? Iran and Saudi Arabia? Now that is hate. Do they have demonstrations in China where they shout "Death to Japan?" The hate might be there but at least the government isn't breading extremist. Also, hate is such a strong word. I regret using it. Disrespect would be a better one. And I'm not sure "Other countries hate each other" is a good argument. It is giving up. I have hope and think we can do better. If having hope makes me naive than I guess I'm naive and I will take it as a compliment.
easuter 10y ago
> The US is an empire (and the mightiest one yet) and will act like that until it isn't capable to do so any more. Historically, that's around 100 more years but I'm not sure history is predictive here. Agreed, but one thing that has been a constant throughout history is that empires eventually become complacent and buckle under their own weight, and have to face smaller contenders that don't have the inertia to maintain the status-quo. It's telling that there really isn't any empire that has endured "forever", probably because this is simply not possible. Portugal was the first global empire and ostensibly lasted for 600 years, but its decline started much sooner than it's total lifespan (around the 200 year mark). The country is now a shadow of what it once was, and the US will also be one day.
- s_q_b 10y ago
  At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it?-- Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years. At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.
- blahi 10y ago
  Yes, I commented on that. However history is not predictive of future events. In this case, there are no hostile neighbours and the empire does not rely on long term invasions and occupations. Instead it relies on economic and financial dominance. With the massive brain drain going towards the US having no signs of slowing down, I don't think that's gonna end soon. Additionally there hasn't been such a complete military domination ever. But what is most important is that (most of) the nations are content with this situation. The complete hegemony will probably end soon-ish but the US will probably be the leader for the foreseeable future.
swalsh 10y ago
> When it comes to military power, the US is in a league of its own Against NK, which would probably the last "conventional" war in history (unless we started a war with Russia)... we'd be a force to reckon with. After that, though, the state of war today are unconventional forces with unconventional tactics. The US then has a disadvantage. We're too big, too traditional, all we have is a hammer to solve problems, when what we need is a tiny screw driver.
- blahi 10y ago
  That's a concern for sure but not as big as you make it out to be IMO.

by blahi 10y ago

GunboatDiplomat 10y ago

Assuming we can hold our alliance system together, we've got a good 15 years before anyone can think about direct military confrontation with the US. As long as 30. Of course, that assumes China's trajectory remains the same and doesn't change. If China fails in some way, then the US remains sole hegemon for the foreseeable future.

throwaway2016a 10y ago

> You are being incredibly naive. The US is the de facto hegemon on Earth. We have been living in Pax Americana for close to 100 years and knew about it for around 70. All pretenses fell around 30 years ago. "Incredibly", eh? Sounds like hyperbole. Also, let's not result to personal attacks shall we? Right now we are seeing a para-military terrorist group that is a global threat. We have that because the US created a power vacuum that started by intervening in the middle east. Which both Bush AND Obama contributed to. And for that matter the first Bush and Clinton as well. And there is a strong argument to be had that the 9-11 attack was because of prior middle east interventions especially with Israel and Saudi Arabia. But by all means let's create another vacuum in Asia too that will destroy our ally South Korea and create a vacuum that will probably be filled by China not South Korea as much as we'd like that to be the case. > We have been living in Pax Americana for close to 100 years and knew about it for around 70. All pretenses fell around 30 years ago. I'm not sure this is not the point you are actually making so I might actually be agreeing with you. But before we were in this place we didn't assert our power like we do now, yet -- just an observation -- all the sudden we have all these problems. Not to be treasonous but when the "de facto hegemon[sic]" comes into power and the world falls to shit maybe the world and Americans are better off with a more even power balance. > When it comes to military power, the US is in a league of its own with one empty league between it and everybody else. Yet somehow we are weak according to many Americans.

blahi 10y ago
I don't know what else to call you since you continue to write incredibly naive things. Many Americans? Many Americans are dumb as a brick like most people in every other place. The world falling to shit? How much history have you read? Because the world is better than it has ever been. War activities are at an all-time low. I won't even start with the middle east. That issue was started at the start of the 20th century. It sort of got solved and then the SU opened it up again. If you think people hate Americans, you live in America or in one of very few America-hating countries. The US is a very new country with no bad blood running deep. Japan and China? China and Korea? Japan and Korea? India and Pakistan? Iran and Saudi Arabia? Now that is hate.
- throwaway2016a 10y ago
  > I don't know what else to call you since you continue to write incredibly naive things. So it's naive to say that intervention has often negative consequences that are often worse than the problem we're trying to solve when it is demonstrably true? Because that's all I said. I might even gloss over the naive part. But the fact you put "incredible" in front of it I take exception to and you did it again. I gave you an out yet you doubled down. That is not a positive signal of civil discord. > Many Americans? Many Americans are dumb as a brick like most people in every other place. I was disagreeing with those people so I'm OK if you call them dumb as bricks. > The world falling to shit? How much history have you read? Because the world is better than it has ever been. War activities are at an all-time low. Mea culpa. I used hyperbole. I apologize. The world has absolutely not fallen to shit in the historical scale. However, I do ask for a citation on the "all time low" part for my own education. And what statistical buckets are you using, all time by year / decade / century? > If you think people hate Americans, you live in America or in one of very few America-hating countries. The US is a very new country with no bad blood running deep. Japan and China? China and Korea? Japan and Korea? India and Pakistan? Iran and Saudi Arabia? Now that is hate. Do they have demonstrations in China where they shout "Death to Japan?" The hate might be there but at least the government isn't breading extremist. Also, hate is such a strong word. I regret using it. Disrespect would be a better one. And I'm not sure "Other countries hate each other" is a good argument. It is giving up. I have hope and think we can do better. If having hope makes me naive than I guess I'm naive and I will take it as a compliment.

easuter 10y ago

> The US is an empire (and the mightiest one yet) and will act like that until it isn't capable to do so any more. Historically, that's around 100 more years but I'm not sure history is predictive here. Agreed, but one thing that has been a constant throughout history is that empires eventually become complacent and buckle under their own weight, and have to face smaller contenders that don't have the inertia to maintain the status-quo. It's telling that there really isn't any empire that has endured "forever", probably because this is simply not possible. Portugal was the first global empire and ostensibly lasted for 600 years, but its decline started much sooner than it's total lifespan (around the 200 year mark). The country is now a shadow of what it once was, and the US will also be one day.

s_q_b 10y ago
At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it?-- Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years. At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.
blahi 10y ago
Yes, I commented on that. However history is not predictive of future events. In this case, there are no hostile neighbours and the empire does not rely on long term invasions and occupations. Instead it relies on economic and financial dominance. With the massive brain drain going towards the US having no signs of slowing down, I don't think that's gonna end soon. Additionally there hasn't been such a complete military domination ever. But what is most important is that (most of) the nations are content with this situation. The complete hegemony will probably end soon-ish but the US will probably be the leader for the foreseeable future.

swalsh 10y ago

> When it comes to military power, the US is in a league of its own Against NK, which would probably the last "conventional" war in history (unless we started a war with Russia)... we'd be a force to reckon with. After that, though, the state of war today are unconventional forces with unconventional tactics. The US then has a disadvantage. We're too big, too traditional, all we have is a hammer to solve problems, when what we need is a tiny screw driver.

blahi 10y ago
That's a concern for sure but not as big as you make it out to be IMO.