Text 14245, 100 rader
Skriven 2005-10-06 12:29:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 14232 av Raymond Yates (1:3613/48)
Ärende: forever in debt
=======================
Hello Raymond,

 MvdV>>>>> The US empire won't last that long.

 PS>>>> You expect it to implode before then ?
 PS>>>> That may not be such a bad thing.....

 RY>>> First, we have to become and Empire, we've not done that.... Yet..

 BF>>    A country that is accountable for more than 50% of the total
 BF>> military expenditure of the world is not an Empire? Are you kidding
 BF>> us, of course you are!

 > No, and that's not the only component required for a classical empire.

No one used the term "classical empire". Let's call it an "empire new style"
then.

 > By defintion, empires have conquests of the military nature,

Whose definition?

 > and the inhabitants of the conqured lands become vassals of the
 > "winners".

There are some opinion makers here in The Netherlands who say we have de facto
become a vassel state of the US.

 > Now yes, we have a huge military, chock full with very expensive
 > equipment. And yes, we have troops stationed all over the world
 > (the sun never sets) but there are significant differences.

Not all that significant I'd say.

 > Most cases (and there are currently exceptions, sad to say) we
 > are where we are by invitation.

I bet Ceasar would make the same claim...

 > We do not have colonies in the traditional sense of the term,

But you do have them in the *new* sense of th eterm. Hawai is a de facto colony
of the USA. And it does not even need a big strectch of the imigination to call
it a colony in the *tradional* sense of the terme.

 > but we do have strong economic ties with countries all
 > over the planet.

Yes....

 > We have not behaved like a traditional empire, in that we have
 > not dictated terms to places we have occupied,

Are you sure about that? My guess is that some would feel different about that.
You may not have doen it at gunpoint but used more subtle mehods, but I am sure
that many would say that you have dictated terms in some places and on some
occasions.

You may already have forgotten about the "The Hague Invasion Act", but many
here haven't.

Well, that wasn't all that subtle...

 > as nearly every place we've been we've left to allow their
 > own sovereign governments to form.

Provided of course those governments were USA friendly. If not...

 > Another factor is the fragmentation of power. There is an
 > equal amount of power held in the hands of multinational
 > corporations as there is in our own government.

Just as it was in the 17th century with the VOC and the Dutch government. There
was much power in the hands of Trading Cooperations.

 BF>>    But, as I explained in a previous post, your days are numbered.
 BF>> When the economy crashes, it'll be the 1930s all over again. Only this
 BF>> time there will be no Lend & Lease Treaty that will give you the
 BF>> entire wealth of the British Empire, plus the Russian gold reserve.

 > Our days may be numbered , that's true, but if/when the
 > economy crashes (as we know it will) it will be exactly
 > like the 1930's...

 > Worldwide.

Maybe. Maybe not.

 > Who comes to the rescue then?

The Chinese?

 > If it were me, I'd not be cheering for the collapse.

I am not cheering. But sticking the head in the sand is no good either.

Cheers, Michiel

---
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.nodelist.org (2:280/5555)