4 ms·

Who is saying they would "like" to see US carriers at risk? Whether they wish that or not is irrelevant. The carriers are vulnerable, or not, wishes irregardles

by sho 18y ago

Who is saying they would "like" to see US carriers at risk? Whether they wish that or not is irrelevant. The carriers are vulnerable, or not, wishes irregardless. I think the article is bunk, anyway, for reasons stated in the parents to this comment. What I meant is that Iraq is a very good example of why the "braggart" could not be ignored. That's all I meant. I didn't mean to get into a discussion of UN resolutions, etc. Let's not go there, OK, it's been done to death. Suffice to say that the US has not been too interested in enforcing, militarily, any other UN resolutions in approximately forever. That was just a pretext - we all know it. Anyway, it's done, and I don't think it will happen again. China's record is terrible, as is Russia's. But America is a western liberal democracy and is held to a higher standard, as it should be. I think we actually agree on many things. America needs a counterweight, it needs to play a game with an opponent. If it sits too long on the throne of absolute power, it grows corrupted by it, and its best attributes wither. The rise of China could be the best thing that has happened to America in half a century, and I truly hope that America's noble character comes again to the fore.

DanielBMarkham 18y ago
I like being an American. I think Americans have always liked being Americans -- long before the end of WWII. I'm perfectly happy with 19th century America: mostly agrarian, no income tax, weak federal government, little or no world power. Back in those days Europe was the place to go for nationalism and jingoism. They had war after war. Intrigue was thick. Quite frankly Americans were sick of it and didn't want anything to do with it. After WWII, America was deeply concerned that the Europeans not draw them into another world war. At any cost, they wanted a stable Europe. What ended up happening was that they got exactly what they wanted: Europe has basically no capability for force projection and is peaceful even in the face of terrible atrocities. They simply don't have the ability to do a lot. The Americans were left holding the bag that Europe had in the 1800s -- projecting force, ensuring trade, meddling in foreign conflicts. In general, I'm not buying into a pretext argument unless a person can demonstrate some kind of ulterior or true motive. Otherwise it's just arm-waving and innuendo. A legitimate reason is not a pretext. This was not Germany invading Poland. Having said that, there is a great difficulty is trying to pick a single reason for a legislative body to vote the use of force. There are probably dozens. So yes, I'm totally happy with America sharing the world stage. Wouldn't it be much better to share it with Australia or France though? Aren't there dozens of better choices than a country stuck with a political system that is bound to collapse at some point?
- sho 18y ago
  Ha. You're kind of outing yourself as a white male with statements like that. I daresay blacks or women would be none too eager to join you in your idyllic 1800s paradise. There is something to be said for the simple life on the land, though for me I'll keep my A380s, internet and penicillin, thanks. I like your point about "be careful what you wish for". America was certainly left holding the bag all right, and perhaps it took a long time to sink in the reasons that the Europeans had been so eager to hand it over. Truth is, no one country should be holding that bag, which is why a proper UN (not necessarily the UN we have today) is so desirable and inevitable. Hopefully the USA, realising that playing the role of global policeman is not the fun career it envisaged in its youth, will come to realise that a supranational pseudo-government is actually a very good idea. I predict this "realisation" will occur right about the time China overtakes the USA as the world's pre-eminent nation, in perhaps 20 or 30 years' time. Well, like I said, the Iraq question is a very, very dead horse by now. The American opinion might have something to do with WMDs and UN Resolutions and what not, but the rest of the world has pretty much decided Iraq was pretty much just a 9/11 scapegoat and would never have been attacked absent the WTC incident. Argue if you want but there's not much point - I was explaining a sentiment, not trying to defend it. Anyway my own country was right there beside you, so not like I can point fingers. Folly on your part was also folly on my part. Ah well. Lessons learnt, hopefully. Well, regarding the world stage - I don't think France or Australia are the peers you're looking for. France is 1/5th the size of the USA and Australia, 1/15th the size! Not really on the same level. America's natural peers are the EU, India, China, ASEAN, CAFTA, CIS, and other blocs. America, too, will subsume into a bloc (NAFTA or successor), in time. I really see this process as inevitable. Hopefully we'll arrive fairly soon at a point where we have 10 or so major blocs sitting around a table, almost like elected officials representing their electorate, and they can duke out this kind of stuff with real authority and the power to back up their words. Not there yet, but it's a hope. One more thing - don't bank on China's political system collapsing anytime soon. It won't. It's not even that bad, really. Communism is practically gone and if anything the country as everyday people experience it is now even more capitalist than America. They have even been experimenting with local elections, though not called by that name. Give them a few more years and I wouldn't have any problem living in China. It's a toss-up even today, honestly.

by sho 18y ago

DanielBMarkham 18y ago

I like being an American. I think Americans have always liked being Americans -- long before the end of WWII. I'm perfectly happy with 19th century America: mostly agrarian, no income tax, weak federal government, little or no world power. Back in those days Europe was the place to go for nationalism and jingoism. They had war after war. Intrigue was thick. Quite frankly Americans were sick of it and didn't want anything to do with it. After WWII, America was deeply concerned that the Europeans not draw them into another world war. At any cost, they wanted a stable Europe. What ended up happening was that they got exactly what they wanted: Europe has basically no capability for force projection and is peaceful even in the face of terrible atrocities. They simply don't have the ability to do a lot. The Americans were left holding the bag that Europe had in the 1800s -- projecting force, ensuring trade, meddling in foreign conflicts. In general, I'm not buying into a pretext argument unless a person can demonstrate some kind of ulterior or true motive. Otherwise it's just arm-waving and innuendo. A legitimate reason is not a pretext. This was not Germany invading Poland. Having said that, there is a great difficulty is trying to pick a single reason for a legislative body to vote the use of force. There are probably dozens. So yes, I'm totally happy with America sharing the world stage. Wouldn't it be much better to share it with Australia or France though? Aren't there dozens of better choices than a country stuck with a political system that is bound to collapse at some point?

sho 18y ago
Ha. You're kind of outing yourself as a white male with statements like that. I daresay blacks or women would be none too eager to join you in your idyllic 1800s paradise. There is something to be said for the simple life on the land, though for me I'll keep my A380s, internet and penicillin, thanks. I like your point about "be careful what you wish for". America was certainly left holding the bag all right, and perhaps it took a long time to sink in the reasons that the Europeans had been so eager to hand it over. Truth is, no one country should be holding that bag, which is why a proper UN (not necessarily the UN we have today) is so desirable and inevitable. Hopefully the USA, realising that playing the role of global policeman is not the fun career it envisaged in its youth, will come to realise that a supranational pseudo-government is actually a very good idea. I predict this "realisation" will occur right about the time China overtakes the USA as the world's pre-eminent nation, in perhaps 20 or 30 years' time. Well, like I said, the Iraq question is a very, very dead horse by now. The American opinion might have something to do with WMDs and UN Resolutions and what not, but the rest of the world has pretty much decided Iraq was pretty much just a 9/11 scapegoat and would never have been attacked absent the WTC incident. Argue if you want but there's not much point - I was explaining a sentiment, not trying to defend it. Anyway my own country was right there beside you, so not like I can point fingers. Folly on your part was also folly on my part. Ah well. Lessons learnt, hopefully. Well, regarding the world stage - I don't think France or Australia are the peers you're looking for. France is 1/5th the size of the USA and Australia, 1/15th the size! Not really on the same level. America's natural peers are the EU, India, China, ASEAN, CAFTA, CIS, and other blocs. America, too, will subsume into a bloc (NAFTA or successor), in time. I really see this process as inevitable. Hopefully we'll arrive fairly soon at a point where we have 10 or so major blocs sitting around a table, almost like elected officials representing their electorate, and they can duke out this kind of stuff with real authority and the power to back up their words. Not there yet, but it's a hope. One more thing - don't bank on China's political system collapsing anytime soon. It won't. It's not even that bad, really. Communism is practically gone and if anything the country as everyday people experience it is now even more capitalist than America. They have even been experimenting with local elections, though not called by that name. Give them a few more years and I wouldn't have any problem living in China. It's a toss-up even today, honestly.