Should the United States seek to preserve its empire?

[mix]

Poll question: Should the United States seek to preserve its empire?

[Prometheus Bound]

1. It's not like you're going to have a choice.

[mix]

3. Empires are like that. nt

[whathehell]

53. You sound so sure of it.

..Would you care to elaborate?

[Prometheus Bound]

55. You can't afford it.

Do you really need the details? Can it not be more obvious?

[whathehell]

59. Well, we're still doing it, so apparently we're "affording" it, although at great price.

Do you see any other country better able to take our place, btw?

For what it's worth, I don't approve of imperialism on the part of any country. I prefer to see all countries being self-determined and in harmony.

[Prometheus Bound]

63. No I don't.

I wouldn't even trust my own country, Canada. Any country with the kind of military dominance the US has at present will inevitably be controlled by evil people determined to use it for vile purposes. It's just the way it works.

[whathehell]

66. If you say so...

:eyes: Sorry, I don't agree completely.

Some of us would be glad if the other NATO countries, for instance, would do expend a little more militarily.

Regarding military interventions of the non-evil kind, who was going to stop the Serbs if we didn't?...During the Bosnian war, Europe even left ThAT to us.

[Ozymanithrax]

2. To clarify, my "no" means we should not seek to preserve our empire.

You gave an either/or choice with yes and no answers.

[mix]

5. oops, i fixed it nt

[Upton]

4. I don't understand the question..

what does "yes" mean?..That the US should preserve it's empire or that it should let it go?

[Taverner]

6. Empires are too hard to keep. Besides, they're all going away anyway...

[L0oniX]

7. Close all the bases outside our country. Stop playing world police. Take care of our own!

...and I don't like Ron Paul so STFU.

[mix]

8. hell yeah nt

[proteus_lives]

9. So isolationism?

Yeah, that's worked out well in past.

[mix]

10. Isolationism or empire?

Are those our only choices?

[proteus_lives]

11. No. That's why I picked "other".

[Ozymanithrax]

25. Getting rid of he empire doesn't make us isolationist.

England, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Holland all once had empires, some more than once. They are empires no longer and do not have isolationist policies.

So those are not the choices.

[L0oniX]

15. What past are you talking about? WTF We've been imperialists for a long time.

[proteus_lives]

17. Google "American History"

[Confusious]

19. Isolationism involves more then just pulling troops out

Of the 100+ countries we are in right now.

It also involves not taking part in things like the united nations, g8, etc etc

I don't really see us leaving those groups, or not participating in the world.

[proteus_lives]

23. What about NATO?

[Confusious]

24. We would probably still be part of NATO

I just don't think we need troops all around the world in 100+ countries.

NATO is kind of obsolete anyways, it was formed to stop the soviet union.

These other countries have to step up and start paying out a little more for defense. We're going broke and not taking care of people here at home doing it.

[proteus_lives]

33. I basically agree with you.

I don't think NATO is obsolete but I think we should cut about 90% of our overseas bases.

I'm just wondering how far people want to go.

[Confusious]

57. 90% would be good.

Reduce the fleet too. Leave bases in strategic positions, Germany, Kuwait, japan, american soil overseas.

Other then that, I don't see a need.

[Ozymanithrax]

27. NATO is a treaty organization. Other members are not empires...

An empire is not required to be part of the club.

[VioletLake]

21. Absence of empire does not equal isolationism. n/t

[L0oniX]

39. Apparently it does for some here.

:crazy:

[mix]

43. Empire is obviously a subject that is not to be broached.

Empire? What empire?
:rofl:

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. That is nice binary thinking there

is France not playing in the world stage? How about Spain? Russia? England? oh hell's bells, what about Belgium?

[TheKentuckian]

32. Why did you jump to isolationism when asked if we should maintain the empire?

Odd reaction, it would seem a nation could be an engaged member of the global community without a military footprint in every nation on Earth as well as unilaterally playing world police. All on our dime too.

[L0oniX]

40. Oh yea ...we are forced to keep bases up all over so we won't be accused of being isolationists.

:crazy:

[Confusious]

12. The sky is blue, the grass is green, they sun is yellow

No, we can't afford it, in more ways then one.

[hayu_lol]

13. What empire are we talking about?

A smattering of islands in the Pacific region and what else?

Hegemony is another matter entirely.

Can't vote in this poll because an ad covers the vote blocks.

[Confusious]

14. Troops in 100+ countries around the world

That empire. It's not an empire in the traditional sense, not an occupation either.

Where American troops go, they never leave.

[pitohui]

50. "it's not an empire in the traditional sense..."

yeah it's not an empire at all

we have troops in 100 plus countries around the world MOSTLY to save those other countries major dollars to their taxpayers if they had to get off their ass and provide for their own defense

do you think japan would like us to go home? do you think costa rica would? in panama all i hear is bitching about the empty unsold housing units from when the americans went home...or maybe you think puerto rico would like to go it on their own?

we don't have an empire, sorry, as the other guy said, guam and the marshall islands do not an empire make, what we have is other nations exploiting our ego for big money, we have to spend trillions on defense because we fall for their pretty helpless ploy...we are like that guy at the poker table who spews off all his cash because the other players play to his ego

some fucking empire, a lot of people and nations profit because the usa is too stupid to look up the definition of "empire" in a fucking dictionary

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. Do you prefer the term hegemony?

[metapunditedgy]

16. Loaded question. n/t

[Confusious]

18. Not really loaded, just obvious

How people will vote on this board.

[mix]

20. .

:rofl:

[metapunditedgy]

41. ?

:shrug:

[mix]

44. sorry, i thought you had made a clever joke nt

[elocs]

22. I just had an OP about the American Empire and its likely demise:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9023720

I don't believe the U.S. can preserve the American Empire for very long term even if it wants to do that. Eventually, like all other empires, the American Empire will collapse and its end will not be pretty and lots of regular Americans will be hurt when it happens with all of the societal and economic upheaval that will accompany it. The nation is now far too polarized to endure as it did through the Great Depression or even WWII.

Did the Romans realize when their empire was in its decline and fall? Somehow we tend to believe this will never happen to us and that America will endure as it has endured. It won't.

[justabob]

34. ot

sorry I am going ot..... I so wish I could get my hands on some kind of diary/chronicle of 'the man on the street' Roman (or the provinces breaking off and the more the better!). Something like the diaries that were kept in occupied Europe through WWII, where you see it through the eyes of the people living it, rather than the historians looking back at it. Diaries are my favorite histories.

[whathehell]

69. I don't believe it can either,

Other countries like Britain, France, and Spain survived their empire's collapse, so I'm wondering what you mean when you say ours "won't be pretty".

[elocs]

70. Other countried and empires are not like the U.S. is now. We are not other countries.

Our country is large with a diverse population. We already see the racial hatred and scape-goating raise its head. Things didn't exactly go hunky-dory when the U.S.S.R. empire collapsed. I don't know of anyone here who would welcome that outcome.

The amount that this country spends on the military is nearly equal to the rest of the world combined. Our armies are extended all over the globe and a massive amount of our budget compared to any other nation in the world is tremendous. In the end the military/industrial complex will not give up their money and power easily. Unlike those other ex-empires those billion$ and billion$ spent on the military is not available to help our own people.

When the empire collapses the societal upheaval in this country will tremendous. As bad as our economic situation is now it will be worse in the collapse of the empire, especially if the Republicans are in control which may well happen. No, a polarized nation with millions out of work and losing their homes with no help at all will not be pretty and this nation will not in any way be the same as it is now.

[whathehell]

71. I know that we "are not other countries"

We're not the Soviet Union, either.

You may be right but it sounds mainly like speculation on your part.

[elocs]

73. Speculation. What do you think most of what we discuss here is about.

Nobody "knows", but you can learn from history. You hold up Britain and Spain as examples, but so casually dismiss the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union as an empire fell apart much, much more recently than those other countries.

Your turn. Speculate away.

[whathehell]

77. Speculation?.....I believe there is wise speculation and that which is less-wise

I have learned from history, dear...and I "dismissed" the soviet union because I can't think of a country MORE unlike the US, just on the basis of its economic system, than the USSR.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. It will fall, no matter how we try to stop it

[stray cat]

28. what empire?

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. The one that HISTORIANS and POLITICAL SCIENTISTS

these days acknowledge as quite real.

[mix]

36. some are beyond help nt

[cynatnite]

31. The US is an empire?

:eyes:

[mix]

35. .

:eyes:

[Hugabear]

42. In the sense that we occupy territory around the globe, then yes

We're still occupying territory that we took during the Spanish American War in 1898, well over 100 years ago.

[phasma ex machina]

49. Here's Teddy showing off his big "stick"

PS. Despite my own honorable intentions to keep it high brow and pleasing to the spirit of Eleanor Roosevelt LWolf's storm trooper snark made me slide back into the gutter from whence I snipe.

:rofl:

[phasma ex machina]

46. Does an empire by any other name deploy as many troops in foreign lands?

Political expediency forces America's psychopathic powers-that-be to pretend that both they and their empire don't exist.

[NoPasaran]

37. Better the world belongs to us than the Red Chinese

[mix]

38. or the Green Martians

what nonsense

[whathehell]

52. It would be best, IMO, if there were no "empires" on the face of the earth..

but I don't think I'd want to hand it over to the Chinese either.

[Prometheus Bound]

56. Is there even the slightest evidence that the Chinese are interested in building an empire?

[whathehell]

60. Did I say there was?

[LWolf]

45. I see we've got some storm troopers aboard.

[mix]

47. some posts are perfect

this is one of them

:thumbsup:

[phasma ex machina]

51. +1

[TheKentuckian]

48. Aren't their little puke faces cute as a little brass button?

[mdmc]

54. 1

[ladjf]

58. Empire? What an arrogant joke. We are going to have to fight

like hell to stop our headlong plunge toward becoming a third world Nation.

[mix]

61. Grandeur et décadence nt

[depakid]

62. America is rushing headlong toward collapse

not just decline and fall.

The next 20 years will be interesting to watch.

[ladjf]

64. In order to survive, a population must be (1) fortunate enough to

have life supporting opportunities, i.e. food, water, air, climate, and (2) enough objective, intelligent thinking to be able to make the correct responses to their situations. It is this second point that Americans are not succeeding. They seemed driven to make wrong decisions about what is in their true best interest.

[depakid]

65. The constitution and the nature of the two party system that's emerged

have rendered the American government structurally incapable of responding to exigencies and feedback in either a timely or effective manner. Not to mention that the mass media has become so dysfunctional that citizens can't even agree on what basic objective, objective facts are (i.e. they lack the ability to even discern signals from background noise).

Couple that with the economics of petroleum depletion and one sees "interesting times" ahead.

[ladjf]

75. Very good diagnoses of the current American political problems.

One feasible correction of the system would be to change the Senate rules concerning the filibuster.
And for that matter, abolishing the Senate altogether would be even better. I don't think that is likely to happen.

As it now stands, the Senators for small states are being given more power per vote than those from the larger states. That is a bad setup.

[whathehell]

72. Umm...No...Empire is the major

REASON we're going to have to "fight like hell to stop our headlong plunge toward becoming a third world nation".

[ladjf]

76. I don't quite get your point about "Empire". Please elaborate a

bit more.

[whathehell]

78. I don't need to "elaborate"....

It's already been done for you in other posts. If you read them, I think you'll "get it".

[Douglas Carpenter]

67. Even if one thinks it should and that it is a good thing..It simply can't afford it.

As time marches on this will become increasingly apparent to all but the willfully blind.

[VioletLake]

68. This book was on Emperor Bush's reading list in 2005,

when it was encouraged to acknowledge the American Empire's existence:

Imperial Grunts
http://www.amazon.com/Imperial-Grunts-American-Military-Ground/dp/1400061326

[Odin2005]

74. Imperialism is evil.

[marmar]

79. I don't think we have a choice.....We can't afford it anymore.

We're going broke up in this beeyotch.

[lib2DaBone]

80. The USA should seek to survive...cause the Titanic is going down..