>US definitely has declined from its peak position of '90-'00. By the end of the last century, even allies were openly voicing concerns over US being a hyperpow

>US definitely has declined from its peak position of '90-'00. By the end of the last century, even allies were openly voicing concerns over US being a hyperpower and not just a mere superpower. [They are calling us a superpower again.] People in the '90's would have bemoaned that the US was well down from its peak in The 40's (you know, when we had nuclear superiority for c. 5 years). But in neither era would an average Congolese citizen use a US-developed product for most of the day (though now they sure as hell use Android and Google). Soft influence is a thing too. >9/11 is the inflection point George Bush et al really wanted Americans to believe that, but why? It's not like Iraq is that much different from Vietnam. Both were ill-fated wars we mostly lost, but not in a way that makes our enemies see us as weak (Iraq, particularly its leaders, got annihilated, The US just failed at rebuilding) >Second, Putin's adventure would not have happened in an environment of robust US prestige and power Yeah, the Soviet Union never invaded bordering nations during the 20th century. >We've lost prestige on that end as well. What made this little man so confident? Why is he still hanging on? It should have been well over by now. You really weren't alive during the Cold War, huh? Remember Chernenko? The one that invaded Afghanistan? He held on just fine. >Finally, RF appears to have forced US to use mechanisms -- confiscation of sovereign reserves, etc. -- that I assure you must have scared the living light from all spectators with treasure trusted to the "international order". They are all saying 'but by the grace of god of mamon there go I'! Or they are saying 'better to be a friend of the US vs. an enemy!" It's not like we are picky in who we like (cough MBS cough), we just are opportunists who will welcome anyone who plays along.