You have a lot in common with Henry Kissinger and every other globalist tyrant throughout modern history who has wanted a one world government. Yes, the nations should just hand over their sovereignty so we can be ruled by a bunch of people who want to kill us. Makes a lot of sense. You don't have a clue. Why do you think people like David Rockefeller want a world government? To make things better for the people? You are very naive.
No no no, he's right, Rat. It's what Britain did to India and about 100 other sovereign nations, look how well that turned out...
I agree, that was pretty much the communist party line for the post war period. Hate America and seek solutions in global socialism. Kinda retro to hear it again.
Really? All empires fail? Like the British empire, the French empire, etc. etc. lol Those countries are still running fine and they were HUGE HUGE HUGE empires.
The Brits did fail, they were forced to hand over their empire and then they joined the EU..........do I even need to point out the French??? Of course they are both still countries but they are a pathetic shell of what they once were...However neither of those "empires" is even on the scale of the US, nor have they ever been....the US has military bases in virtually every country in the world, the US controls a majority of the world through proxies, the US dominates world economy (which is farcical in and of itself).........the Brits and the French don't even compare...............ever heard of Rome??? Rome is a more apt comparison.........do you know what happened to Rome???
The main difference between the US empire and the Roman empire is it took two centuries for Rome to fall, the US will fall much quicker due to the fragility of a credit economy and complete and total dependence on foreign oil........bankruptcy is the new plague, the USSR went from being one of the most powerful empires in history to total devastation in less than 24 months.......
Lol the brits have militarty bases around the world, the brits also dominate a large portion of the worlds economy, they are pretty equal to the US actually (in their influence and power in the world). The French almost took over all of Europe (after that it would have been pretty much the world). so yeah, you're totally wrong. The main differences between Rome and the US is that Rome was: A. way too greedy and expanded way too fast, thinning their resources tremendously (in the modern world the US has almost limitless resources, especially compared to most countries) B. It was a TOTALLY different time and a HUGE downfall of Rome was letting Romans breed with the barbarian tribes they once hunted down, this effectively destroyed Rome from the inside because the idea was Romans V the world. America does not have this problem because we can integrate different cultures into our society. Don't ever try to lecture me about history or say comments like "ever heard of Rome?" You couldn't hold a candle to my knowledge of...pretty much ANYTHING.
You must be a child. I can pick out numerous flaws in this post, and prove them, however I refuse to debate someone with this attitude, it's a waste of my time. You know zilch, that is abundantly clear by your asinine remarks. Happy trolling.
Hahaha! You refuse to debate because you know you are wrong. I know people exactly like you, when they are cornered in an arguement they "refuse to debate" because they know if they talk anymore they just dig themselves deeper holes. There are exactly NO flaws in my arguement and I challenge you to find one (besides gramatical errors). I've been in multiple college-level history classes, one of which specifically focused on Rome. Even if I was a kid (which I am technically not, though i am 18 which is young), it does not take away ANTYHING from my arguement or historical facts. There are 15 year old geniouses that know more than either of us, so age is not a factor at all.
Or the other explanation could be that you act like a rude little know-it-all child. You're already under the deluded impression that you're some kind of genious, you can lead a horse to water but you can't force it to drink. Ok, here's one. This statement is completely devoid of merit. The United States has been extremely greedy, and developed extremely fast, any scholar worth their salt can see this, it's widely regarded as fact. As far as resources go, we have virtually none with the exception of land and freshwater. We have no solid monetary wealth (gold standard eradicated in 1913), our country has become a service economy, outsourcing manufacturing and resources, completely and totally dependent on credit. We have absolutely no energy resources, we are dependent on energy imports just to sustain life, let alone growth. The United States has the largest percentage of debt ever calculated in all of world history, with no way to repay it. The only thing holding the United States economy afloat now is the use of the dollar in international trade, if another standard we're used (which is inevitable) we're sunk. So in effect, the United States empire mirrors that of Rome, in that we did expand to fast, we did become too greedy, their is no such thing as a perpetually growing economy (at some point you have to balance out to preserve sustainablility), and we have no viable resource to sustain things as they are. I never berated you for your youth, and until this post I had no idea how old you are, I simply stated that you must be a child, based on your infallible attitude and the level of immaturity in your posts. I do not deny that young people can be intellectually viable, that would be childish on my part. The fact that you've been in "multiple college level history classes" isn't any kind of credential in and of itself, that does not make you anything, and is meaningless. You automatically judge me for an idiot because I pointed out you were wrong, and you have a superiority complex that doesn't want to hear that. For the record I have a B.A. in Sociology and i'm working towards a Masters in Politics and Philosophy, I don't think this makes me smarter than you, and it's just as meaningless as your "multiple college level history classes" credentials mean nothing in reality, simply an identifying tag.
I love a good debate. I really love a good debate when some moron comes in here flashing his diplomas and tells other people they know nothing. It turns thoughtful discourse into slapstick comedy. And it brings my participation to a close. You all have fun throwing pies at each other.
I never intended to argue that the American economy is more fucked up than the Roman economy........I was just using the Romans Empire as an apt comparison, not identical by any means.
The USA ended the policy of isolation when it entered WWII. The people in countries like the UK, France, Canada, Russia, China .... well, it's a long list, were very happy about that. HMmmm ... So fill us in please, what are " geniouses " ? Peace, poor_old_dad
"BUT, America is the greatest Nation on earth." Horseshit. That's the reason people hate us in the first place, because we think, wrongly, that we're so superior to everybody else. If we'd start having a little humility about our faults, I mean present ones, not just ones that occured in the past, maybe the rest of the world wouldn't hate us so much. No nation is superior to any other. Every country has its good and bad aspects. Until we wake up and realize that, and then start acting like it, most of the rest of the world is gonna stay pretty pissed off at us. And rightly so.
budd toker you may have attended your lessons but you certainly never learnt anything from them save some rote regurgitation.
Why is a brit here making comments about the US? I’ve explained this so many times and often to the same people that I would have thought some of it would have got through, but oh well, here I go again. I came here in 2001 to learn about how Americans thought about politics and the world in the aftermath of 9/11. I ended up at this site because it was mainly inhabited by Americans but was much more tolerant towards those that had criticisms of the US government and their policies than all the others I visited in those fraught times, (when even the mildest of criticism could result in a torrent of abuse from US citizens and seemed to always get me banned). People may not remember those times but any dissent from the ‘war on terror’ line by anyone was seen by many as an act of treason. I’m still here because I’m still learning and this is still a place more frequented by Americans than any other group. But this place is by no means my only source for my research into American politics and culture and the US is not my only interest. The thing is I have been interested in politics and political thought for most of my life than that doesn’t just cover current events but past events and it isn’t just confined to one region or one nation but many. Frankly if Americans stopped coming here my reasons for coming here would wan because American ideas and views would cease to be expressed here. ** It is interesting that none of the replies seem to be willing to actually tackle the issues raised in my post. In fact the lack of introspection and the arguments presented actually only back up what I’ve said. For example British history is brought up as matching or surpassing that of the US. But that was my point. Popular and educational history in the UK does not pull any punches about British history. There have been a few right wing historians and commentators that have popped up from time to times trying to push the idea that our imperialism was good for the ‘natives’, but they doesn’t stand long when the real effects (both short term and long term) of British rule are so widely known. And I’d be one of the first to point out to anyone talking about Britain’s glorious past just how tarnished a most of that history is as I have done on this forum a few times. (By the way my own ancestry is Celtic) Also it must be remembered that the ‘British’ empire was not in fact the work of the British people, only of a ruling elite. All men in Britain didn’t get the vote until 1918 (after the Empire was very long established) and women not until 1928. The thing is that many Americans I’ve talked to here don’t even accept that America was and is an imperialist power. And many Americans abused me and others for suggesting that Iraq was just a continuance of an imperial policy that went back to the beginning of the Republic. And many continue to see some actions of the US as been essentially honest and benign even when they have been shown to be self seeking or malign. Americans in my view need to look back at their history with open eyes and learn from it not try and disregard it. ** “So basically I'm saying, we're stuck with what we have. Just remember to blame the head asshole in charge, not the people who had nothing to do with his idiocy. We're not innocent, but we didn't cause this.” I’ve actually pointed out the stupidity of this viewpoint many times; it is one of the things that I feel is wrong with the US system. The cult of personality around the individual President allows political policy failures to be blamed on that individual President. This allows the mistaken thinking behind such policies (or even the policies themselves) to escape questioning and their continued survival into new administrations. For example this can lead those people that thought invading Iraq was a good thing to continue in that belief but be able to blame Bush for his incompetence in following out the policy. ** In fact the whole ‘hating of America’ thing is a way of getting out of introspection, it is about blaming others. It basically says – ‘look yes we’ve done bad things in the past but get over it, we really are good people” But that doesn’t ask why were those bad things done? And does the mentality that countenanced those deeds still around today? Just because someone says something or themselves is good does not necessarily mean they or it is worthy of praise. A suicide bomber and the people that supply the explosives might thing they are good and just but to me indiscriminate murder is not worthy of praise. The thing is that in US history many Americans have thought some ideas or actions good, because these ideas or actions were presented to them as good and their mental framework was receptive to seeing them as good. But were they good were they worthy of praise?
