Is the reign of the United States as the world's only superpower over? (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/issue_julyaug_2002/wallerstein.html) Discuss.
"Saddam Hussein’s army is not that of the Taliban, and his internal military control is far more coherent. A U.S. invasion would necessarily involve a serious land force, one that would have to fight its way to Baghdad and would likely suffer significant casualties. " Discuss.
What kind of crap is this? If anything, the US is on the rise. The 21st century is one of American power. I mean, people may not agree with it, but even people like superdave know that we arn't on the decline@ I mean, it says we've been fading "since the 70's." Huh? This really is just mindbending, especially since it doesn't name a power that will surpass us. Who writes this stuff?
What a complete and total piece of drek this article is.. You know, once again, it's these barely repressed desires on the part of liberals to see the United States humbled...and to assume with the preternatural pessimism so characteristic of the left, and that it is ALL going to fall apart, that it is ALL going to descend into chaos... Really, this is just a laughable article.
So Karl, do you defend the notion that the US has more or less ideological currency in the aftermath of the Iraq conflict? FWIW, this is an unsurprising essay from Wallerstein. He really made his mark with World-Systems Theory and impressed many international development specialists during the Cold War. It's certainly very easy to see a New American Century from the neo-realist standpoint but it has yet to enjoin the billions affected by globalizatoin peacefully without outright subjugation on behalf of American imperial interests. What happened to the "humble" US foreign policy promised during your election campaign Mr. Bush? Seems the bearded-one is still having the last laugh.
Post being strategically avoided by our favorite leftists! I mean it's not the left wishes for an American decline....oh wait, there's more.Gary Kamiya, executive editor of the left-leaning Internet journal Salon, confirms what some Americans have suspected: Liberals were cheering for the enemy in Iraq, the Washington Times pointed out today in an item headlined "Cheering the enemy." "I have a confession: I have at times, as the war has unfolded, secretly wished for things to go wrong," Kamiya wrote. "Wished for the Iraqis to be more nationalistic, to resist longer. Wished for the Arab world to rise up in rage. Wished for all the things we feared would happen. I'm not alone: A number of serious, intelligent, morally sensitive people who oppose the war have told me they have had identical feelings." "serious, intelligent, morally sensitive people?" Hoping Americans die to further your political agenda? That's hardly serious, intelligent, or morally sensitive. Unbelievable
If by Iraqis, you mean Baathists, then you're correct. You know, when are you just going to admit this guy, or maybe even you, were wrong? It's wrong to wish for our troops to fail. Face the facts
By the way, if you find out what Kamiya had for lunch today, you'll know what I had as well. After all, all of us liberals think alike.
Where did I say I wished the troops to fail? Please point that out to me. And by Iraqis, if I had meant Baathists, I would have said Baathists. How many of the dead civilians were Baathists? Is it OK they're dead?
No, but i'm not using their deaths to further my agenda. It's the tragedy of war, wheras salon wishes for American failure.
Whooop -whooop!!!!! Unintentional Irony Alert! It is not OK to use dead Iraqis to further the agenda of the anti-war folk. However, it is OK to achieve an agenda of finding WMD and getting cheap oil by killing Iraqi soldiers and civialians. Nothing to see here...move along....
Well, yeah, if you say so. Do you actually find this Workers' World tin-ear jargon/rhetoric appealing?? It crumbled along with a couple of huge office towers...remember those?? You think?? Let's see... ....my former stomping grounds were obliterated by JDAMS and special ops... ...the guys I could count on to let me have a free reign are either dead or on the run ...a lot of my key operatives are sunning themselves in Cuba, or have been obliterated by unmanned Predator drones or are hunkering down Allah knows where... ...everytime I try to wire money, my bank accounts are frozen ...I'm holed up in this sh-t village on the Pakistani border and I can't even do my laundry ...I'd use the phone to call my pals, but if I did, the NSA would listen in and Special Forces guys would be inside my underwear... ...I can't even get a decent video camera so I can preen for Al Jazeera... ...and, jeez, the last time I had dialysis was the last time I peed?? Or was it the other way around? Yep, I'm laughin' all right...hardy har har.
Here's an e-mail I just sent to Wallerstein: ****************************** Professor Wallerstein -- I have just finished reading the aforementioned article in Foreign Policy, and looked at some of your other Fernand Braudel Center commentaries. Your take on events is depressingly consistent. The views you espouse provide further evidence, if any were needed, that at root the left/liberal sensibility is cynical, pessimistic, conspiracy-laden, patronizing, and chicken-littleish. Virtually all your ideas are complete balderdash. There are so many preposterous assertions, it's hard to know where to begin, so I'll just pick out one, reflected in your statement: "In terms of basic capabilities - available capital, human skills, research and development - western Europe and Japan/East Asia are at a competitive level with the United States." I suggest you start reading some empirical economic studies before you start lacing your articles with this drivel. See: http://www.zei.de/download/zei_emu/emu-9/inzerillo.pdf And http://www.eco.rug.nl/medewerk/inklaar/papers/ictdecomposition.pdf The United States now leads Europe in productivity -- and that gap is going to widen over time unless key European economies, particularly France and Germany, figure out ways to deploy their labor forces efficiently. Finally, I would counsel you to step outside your knee-jerk cynical and pessimistic view of the United States, and instead think on these things: --Maybe, just maybe, the US economy can continue its generally upward growth and its technological and productivity innovations. --Mabye, just maybe, the USA might be on a course to help reshape the Middle East away from its totatlitarian fundamentalist tendencies toward free markets and democracy --Maybe, just maybe, the USA can get the rogue states to cease their efforts at developing a nuclear weapons capability --Maybe, just maybe, the USA is deploying its military and economic power in the service of morally sound political and economic ideals --Maybe, just maybe, the USA might be successful in its long-term goal of emasculating terrorist networks --Maybe, just maybe, the guys running the show in the USA have a clue about what they are doing. Maybe you'll come around to this view, or at least recognize its legitimacy. But I doubt it.
Thank you for cluing this guy in. America in decline? This guy sounds like M.S.S. "The American infidels are in decline! They have faded since the 70's, and will commit suicide at the gates of Baghdad."
And that something gave him carte blanche in Afghanistan. It did NOT give him the right to wage "preemtive wars" on whomever the hell he pleased. Iraq had NOTHING at all to do with 9/11, and the only reason Bushies cite it constantly is to sway the dull-minded in the country (a larger number than any one of us would like I'm sure, as shown by the number of people who think Iraq was directly responsible for 9/11). Iraq didn't even have strong ties to international terror. The best Ann Coulter could come up with is a guy from 1985. Right wingers keep talking about how the left has been "proven wrong" and is eating "humble pie." WHY? Everyone knew the USA would win the war. Most thought it would be won easily. The difference of opinion has ALWAYS been whether or not we had justification to be there in the first place. Even looking at the war (along with the one in Afghanistan for that matter). Look at our stated objectives during Bush's term: Get Bin Laden- STILL FREE Take down Taliban- DONE Put peaceful regime in Afghanistan- NOT DONE Capture Saddam and sons- STILL FREE Find WMD- NONE YET (I thought we knew just where to look?) Out of those "big 5" objectives, only one has been accomplished, and the right wingers are dancing in the streets and attempting to gloat? I'm not even far to the left (slightly left of center) and I can see the insanity with gloating right now. That whole "if I just repeat it enough times and get Fox News to run a story on it, it will be true" schtick might work on the mindless, but give people here a bit more credit. You want to gloat? Show me the bodies of Bin Laden and the Hussein family. Take the picture in front of a big ole stash of WMD's. Until that time, don't you dare try and gloat to me, because those are the things our soldiers died to find, and the job isn't even close to being done yet.
That's sort of the point though Manny. You don't argue. You never do. You repeat what Fox News spouts as if it was gospel. More often than not, you'll jump into a thread where some other polar right wing nut is doing the same and give him a verbal high five. But whenever you are presented with an actual argument, you're even more predictable. When presented with any type of intelligent argument, you make some wiseass comment and walk away as if the argument isn't worth your time. When you have no answer for something, you act as if it doesn't deserve one. That's a sign of true weakness in a debate. You're just as bad as Universal. Neither one of you is capable of either realizing or admitting that there is another side, with valid points and issues. You're far right; he's far left, and when the two of you, or people like you, get together, the only thing that gets accomplished is an online pissing contest where you both spout propoganda and finish off with some retarded comment that you think makes you look witty. It doesn't. If you can't answer a serious question, then simply walk away. My main point stands. During Bush's term, our 5 most important goals as stated by the administration have been: 1- Capture Bin Laden 2- Capture the Husseins 3- Find WMD's 4- Topple the Taliban 5- Establish stable Afghan gov't until at least more than one of those goals is accomplished, the Republican public masturbation needs to stop.
Well Mr. High and Mighty, I don't watch Fox News, and that is the first strike against you. No need to get all bent out of shape; insults never help your case. As to your "point," do you know where OBL is? So you even have proof he is alive? Is he on TV every other week? No? Ok then, shut up about that point. Second, capturing the Husseins only became a priority on March 19,2003, not January 20, 2000. Also, we have captured or killed a lot of valuable people. Again, do you have proof Saddam or his sons are alive? If not, they could just as easily be dead. Thirdly, we will find the WMD's, we just need more than 2 weeks to find them. Remember, you gave them 12 years. Also, the NYT is reporting that the Baathists started destroying evidence only days before the war started. They, have it, and we will find it. Fourth, the Taliban has been toppled, and i think you know that. Lastly, I would argue that Karzai's gov't is the most stable Afghani gov't since i can remember. Yes, there is surely room for improvement, and i hope we remain dedicated to Afghanistan. Ok, so why is there constant cynical nay saying? I don't see why it is acceptable to go pouting around when things are looking up.
Comments? http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,940757,00.html The bottom dollar There is only one way to check American power and that is to support the euro
To defend our sovereignty - and that of the rest of the world - from the US, we must yield some of our sovereignty to Europe. This is precisely why I am pro-European. By sharing power with our neighbours, our power would be increased because of our increased international power. The whole would be greater than the sum of its parts. One key tipping point, he suggested, could be the adoption of the euro by Europe's two principal oil producers: Norway and the United Kingdom, whose Brent crude is one of the "markers" for international oil prices. "This might," Yarjani said, "create a momentum to shift the oil pricing system to euros." I don't think it's likely that Norway or the UK (as a whole) would adopt the € any time soon. Interestingly, however, if the nationalists could ever win an election in Scotland, the UK oil would probably end up in the € zone. This is because an independent Scotland would be likely to adopt the €, and most of the UK oil is in Scottish territorial waters.