Very interesting subject I think because until the 1880's many in Europe were skeptical that the US would ever be able to challenge let alone dominate their nations. But now, it is obvious that the reverse is true.

My question I suppose is why do we in the West divide ourselves? Why do we not establish a bloc? We're both pushing forward the same ideals (Democracy, Free Trade, Human Rights etc etc) albeit in different manners so why don't we join so that we can choose the right way to push these ideals? Instead we choose to go our different ways even though we both are the product of the Western civilization.

It seems in some circles in Europe, they would celebrate the idea of the dismantling of American power even though America is itself the child of Europe, and stands for the same ideas. I would argue that it is our duty to as the leaders of democracy and the world to do whatever we can to dismantle one by one the dictatorships of the world. The argument of 'It's not our problem' does not cut it anymore. It is our duty in my opinion to stand up for the people around the world who cannot stand up to the people who oppress them. Even if this means cutting economic relations around the world with nations who oppress then so be it. However this is not an option until we ourselves are able to sustain our energy demand domestically. Once this happens, tell me what is the limit?

__________________
I'll tell you this no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn
Nothing to kill or die for and no religion too
You may bury my body, down by the highway side,
so my old evil spirit can get a Greyhound bus and ride.

The problem, as I see it, is that the US is squandering its strenght through overconfidence. While it is the globes strongest "hard" power its "soft" power is declining in relation to other bloc's. And more so, while in general Americans and Europeans have alot in common the fact the US government policy tends to be so triumphalist alienates alot of people.

__________________
"Better to die on you feet than live on your knees" - Emilio Zapata

Yes this is true what you say about American foreign policy alienating Europeans. I feel personally that America is simply the most modern form of the European empire's that charcaterised the 19th century, and arguably any European nation would do what America was doing if it itself was the sole superpower.

Europeans and American's should really focus on builidng the trans-atlantic relationship instead of dividing themselves through foreign policy. Should'nt we really if we both stand for Free Trade make a free trade area from Hawaii to Poland? Should'nt we place more importance on collective security through NATO as opposed to dividing our resources through argument on foreign policy?

America cannot alone take on the burden of carrying the very way in which the West dominates the world by itself. Eventually economically and militarily America and Europe will be overshadowed. America is already pushing itself to military overstretch with it's global miltiary commitments. What happens if a war breaks out between Colombia and Venezuela? Who will be there to stop it? How embarrasing would that be for America? Allow this war go on in the US's backyard and skyrocket thr price of oil? It would be a lot more severe and embarrasing than the European's botched effort in Bosnia.

With American power fading, doesn't our European bretheren feel they need to help support us? Don't they want to help America or would they rather it collapse? How would this help Europe if America collapsed, I don't think it would but some people might disagree.

__________________
I'll tell you this no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn
Nothing to kill or die for and no religion too
You may bury my body, down by the highway side,
so my old evil spirit can get a Greyhound bus and ride.

It's just natural that all the little dogs would be nipping at the alpha male's heels, right?

I mean, for a long time, the US was the only dog on the block (except for the one other dog, that was clear down at the other end of the block, and all the rest of the dogs in the neighborhood, were just pups.

But now, everyone and their brother is rattling sabers, thinking they're gonna challenge the big guy. China's done a few symbolic things lately, the Arabs never did like the Great Satan, Iran wants to be the first on the block to stand up to the nuclear superpower on its own, Venezuela's looking to form anti-US alliances, and..... Putin's playing on his country's nationalistic sentiment and re-asserting Russia's influence as a dominant power in Europe.

So I mean, at the end of the day, what can the US do? What do we have, except nukes? You know, what other "competitive advantage" do we truly have? So like, in a world in which the use of nuclear weapons is consdered insane, and everyone kinda guesses that they'll never be used again, how do they really qualify in terms of making the US a "super-power"? I mean, certainly, that's the question the "little guys" are asking, right? 'Cause if the US ain't gonna use its nukes, I guess that leaves 'em pretty much free to do whatever they want, right?

So yeah - I mean, my opinion is that Bushie has completely dropped the ball, in every area but one, which is the proliferation of nuclear material. But meanwhile, there's like these thousands of other problems, that he hasn't been paying attention to, 'cause he's been too (*)(*)(*)(*) busy with this "terrorist" thing and Iraq and all that - and he's even been failing miserably on those last two pieces - so I mean, you know, everyone is kinda starting to see the US as being a little "impotent", know what I mean?

They're looking at us going, "gee, those guys are thinkin' they gotta torture people now - things must be really bad over there"......

Well, I'm still counting the calendar days till Bushie leaves office, The sooner we get rid of that idiot, the better off we'll all be.

I'm do not agree with every aspect of Bush and the Neo-Con agenda. Personally, I think we should have waited a few years before getting involved in the Middle East. It was obvious Bush was going to getbus into the Middle East I mean all you had to do was know of the Neo-Cons. I think that the Blood and Treasure we have spent would have been better directed at Afghanistan than Iraq. Afghanistan could work still but by now I think that we if we hadn't of invaded Iraq we would have been in a better position with Iran, the Iranians wanted to help us calm down Afghanistan!!!!!!

Anyways, I have digressed. Nonsqtr, America is currently more powerful than all the nations you have stated, not if we were alone but still, the amount of money that we possess is staggering. Between the US and the EU, 2/5's of the world economy belongs between us. A fifth for each otherwise, however we seem the US is by far better at killing people than the EU, to be blunt which is sadly what makes us 'Alpha Dog' in the global village. We also have a very strong economy popular to current thinking and this will be seen as the ripple effects of this blip is felt throughout the world economy, say perhaps we stopped buying Chinese goods and then instead, save money and use it for oil?

I do agree with what you say about American impotence, Bush has eroded our credibility and damaged our fundamental ethos to which the world believes we have. We should really not carelessly use our military at the disgression of Big Business. Fair enough one might argue, the oil situation isn't looking to good, but at least, at least we could've used the UN (or at the very least) the whole of NATO!!!!!! However the world percieves our cowboy mission in the Middle East imperialism and too be frank it is. Call it what you will (Regime Change, Neo-Colonialism etc etc) we are in the most oil rich region in the world at a time when oil our most consumed resource is becoming more expensive. Personally, when Bush leaves we'll need someone who is a good cleaner......

I myself (first time voter ) have not decided who I definetely would vote for if they won the primaries. Yeah, i'll get disillushioned by the lack of choice throughout my political life but hopefully there's one stand up politician who will truly represent what makes America great. (A nice bit of idealistic thought thrown in there)

__________________
I'll tell you this no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn
Nothing to kill or die for and no religion too
You may bury my body, down by the highway side,
so my old evil spirit can get a Greyhound bus and ride.

We are not on the same page with the euroweenies. The euros are committed to a declining western civilization, with themselves gradually fading into the Eurabia branch of the caliphate, and slowly strangling themselves with Pee See and eurostatism. If continents were like patients, they are terminal and what they want to do is go to the hospice and die a nice, if lingering, death. As europeans become a smaller and smaller percentage of the population of europe, they want to ease themselves out by smothering the backsides of mideastern potentates with kisses, and keep their welfare states going till the end by selling anything to anyone there, including any weapon and nuke plants.

The US is disruptive of this scenario - we are like a noisy guy outside the hospice yelling "C'mon! There's a cure! We can win!". They wish we'd just go away so that they can fade into oblivion in peace.

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847

The general notion of the Initial Post is a nice one, if anything else, at least in thought, but there are a few problems with it as far as I can see.

If the U.S is the child of Europe, then perhaps we are the black sheep.
Too much time has passed since then to even toy with thought that the EU (in its entirety) and the U.S government can agree on something. Judging by the United Nations voting (for example), you often times see the U.S stand alone on the other side of the fence. There would be too fences to even begin mentioning.

The "Super-power" issue (beyond the economics that you brought up) is the ability of the U.S to simply veto these issues. This, in part, is another reason why the world views the U.S in a negative manner.

I think Blade over did the picture-painting of the EU, but I agree with the final statement, for good or ill.

As far as the EU arming the world, the U.S is far worse, and this is also in terms of the Black Market. The U.K and France are pretty strong arms dealers as well, but it's the Russians, leading in terms of selling Nuclear-tech to everybody and her sister. But what can you do right?

The truth is that nobody (in the West) is innocent. If you look as far back as the imperialistic era, and the effects that it has on the current state of Africa. The U.S so-called Saudi friends, who are on the other side of the spectrum as far as what (in concept) the U.S is supposed to stand for. But if you take a deep look into the rabbit-hole, you'll see that the U.S doesn't really stand for what it's supposed to stand for either, not for a very long time.

It's the same old "Power over the powerless" game, and it's happened throughout history. Now it's the U.S turn to be the "World Leader", which is a reality whether we like it or not.

Is there a Solution? An End to the so-called Game? A Chance for Peace? Maybe time will tell...

Much respect.

__________________
I love Us All,
Ziggy
The Ziggy Articles

I know I am going to get attacked as the cowboy, etc. ....but I have to say that I think we have alot of good old fashion "penis envy" in the world. Everyone wants to criticize the U.S. as impeialistic, materialistic,etc. etc.

Let's face it, the last 50 years, the US has redefined the standard of living of the ordinary citizen in terms of freedom, money, housing, etc. etc. For centuries, Europeans have settled for a class base society and the average joe squeaked by.....this was the way of the world.....it was the U.S. that changed all this.

The U.S. is the superpower of the world...it is the only country capable of providing protection for the world against renegade countries....it is the only country capable of providing leadership both militarily and financially to keep these nuclear wanna be's in check. Who else is going to do it? China? France? The U.N.? Seriously, who?

__________________
www.politibyte.com
Check out the new Video section.

Thing is, when you say that "America" is a superpower, what does that really mean? Who has the power? America has got to be the most factionalized, self-combative country in the west. The only thing we spend more money on than brawling with places like Iraq is brawling with ourselves. We're nice enough to generally keep the self-wrestling down a lot of noise and politics, 'cause (almost) nobody is stupid enough to want another Civil War, but we sure do love the fight. How could we not? We're Americans.

Who controls America? Okay, let's be more specific -- who controls America's economy, America's military, and what the American people believe? The military-industrial-entertainment complex -- I believe I can actually say those words without this being shuffled off to the conspiracy theory arena, can't I ('cause if I can't then that proves a couple of conspiracy theories ...)? -- who controls that?

They are the superpower. Everyone else is a cog.

Which faction of America runs America? Now, I may be kind of a retarded idealist, but I do honestly believe that the real power in America, just like any other nation, comes from the people. We really do get the government we ask for, which is the government we deserve. But we've been scared into consolidating power into few enough hands that the system becomes inevitably corrupt due to simple nepotism. Members of a particular ideological demographic are more likely to hire, appoint, recruit or draft other members of their ideological demographic. And no single ideology, cult, religion, philosophy or economic model can possibly stand for or work for all Americans, or even most Americans, because we're actually quite diverse.

And the funny thing is, half of the ridiculous amount of energy we've got comes from the strife. Part of the reason for our position in the world is that there's a lot of money to be made in the imaginary wars between red states and blue states, black cities and white suburbs, liberal forests and conservative hunting grounds. All of those are false divisions. They're made up. But the fight is so profitable.

It's like we put Don King in charge of Earth.

My theory is, there would actually be more power to be gained from all the various factions (which are also made-up things by the way) becoming interested in each other's welfare. When two "sides" seem to have mutually exclusive goals, they should both try to figure out how to accommodate the other guy's position while still getting what they need out of the deal. For example, conservatives might want to generate wealth while liberals want to abolish poverty -- you can't tell me that these are really mutually exclusive goals. There's a way for both of those to happen. They can probably even help each other, y'think?

Americans, God love us, are brawlers. We are the brawliest people ever. Don't get me wrong, we're a very cool people, but we're mostly in charge because we're a very asskickery people. We don't believe in heroes that don't fight. Even Alan Alda has to raise his voice, at the very least.

If we could somehow find a way to be peaceful and get along with ourselves, maybe even figure out a way to share power, which I think is really the crux of the biscuit, I think we would only better our position. Ironically, it would make us stronger.

But now someone's gonna call me a hippy ...

Absolutely false. The US has always controlled its arm sales in pursuit of a greater good. The greater good was opposing the world domination aspirations of the soviet union previous to 1989, and now it is in opposition to islamofascists. This is in stark contrast to, say, france, who has always sold anybody anything they want, with no regard to the consequences.

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847