Uzique The Lesser wrote:
history will judge you. no empire lasts forever.
True enough.
Uzique The Lesser wrote:
In fact, america's time is already on the way out
"This report of my death was an exaggeration" - Mark Twain
Uzique The Lesser wrote:
most of your worst empire-building strategy has arisen from this new predicament you find yourselves in: it's a power squabble. you've been the pre-eminent global power for, what, 100 years? you got a rise from europe blowing itself to smithereens and coming to you for massive loans and support in the two world wars. 100 years is a pathetic time.
You conflate two concepts.
The British Empire was focused on building Empire
(note: East India Trading Company, history of India/Pakistan/Afghanistan).
The United States is more concerned with trade.
We don't want to rule the world, we just want to buy & sell stock in everything.
Or, to put it more cynically; 'we want your oil. We'd actually prefer not to see the human and environmental cost of how you get it out of the ground'
We don't want to OWN anything. That's far too long term for our attention spans. We'd rather be a shareholder, or renter.
Uzique The Lesser wrote:
say hello to your new asian overlords.
Oh, you mean the ones that are choking on their own coal pollution, passed 'peak labor' 7 years ago (available labor is on the decline), and are facing myriad social and economic issues?
Also, China is about as interested in Empire (in the British & European sense) as the United States or Russia.
Which is to say - not at all.
The US, Russia, and China already have all the land they want.
We're all more interested in global influence, and not so much on occupying India or Algeria.
To counterbalance the above point; China will get by. China has been China for 10,000 years. They'll be there 10,000 years from now too.
10,000 years. A longer lifespan than your British Empire, by far.
Uzique The Lesser wrote:
when people write the history books in 250 years' time, and the global discourse/consciousness shifts away from yankiee doodle america, you guys are going to come off all the worse for your actions.
Western history seems to have forgiven Spain, England, France, Russia, and others for their past excesses.
China, Japan, and Korea have their own (longer) perspective on history.
And their own ability to forget certain events, while holding ancient grudges over other events.
European "World Wars" from 1915-1945? 10 million dead, including the Jewish Holocaust of 6 million.
Russia and China lost over 60 million people during WW-II alone.
For as much narcissistic 'storm and noise' as Europe makes about their self-destruction, the majority of the suffering was in Asia and Russia, NOT Europe.
Compared to that, our pissing about in the desert for 10-20 years is nothing.
Uzique The Lesser wrote:
you guys have an attitude like america's place as a superpower is some sort of 'natural' right and privilege. the italians and french thought that, too. look what happened as soon as the major european empires lost their no.1 spot: 50 years of post-colonial critique, and a major turn in historicism towards outright criticism of these powers. you think the same thing won't happen to america? bring on the centuries of self-loathing.
You neglect to mention the British Empire. Again.
Put down the Camus, and his incessant hand-wringing over the French Empire in North Africa.
Try a little Kipling or TE Lawrence for a bit.
Perhaps a light read of
Games Without Rules: The Often-Interrupted History of Afghanistan by Tamim Ansary.
Middle East is going to turn into a regional stalemate between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Asia is going to be a stalemate between Japan & Korea versus China.
The 19th century game was "Empire" as practiced by Europe, Britain, and Russia.
The 20th century was "The Great Game", post-colonial tin-pot dictatorships, and drawing ill-conceived lines on maps at the UN.
The 21st century is going to be about "regional balancing".
Why send your troops "over there" when you can set the locals against each other in a neatly balanced stalemate?
People are always going to find a reason to be pissed at the other guy - give them a controlled, balanced conflict.
Clear out all the old, outdated Sunni strongman dictators (Quadaffi, Saddam Hussein, etc) - in with Persians versus Arabs, Sunni versus Shia.
In essence, if you've got two regional powers glaring at each other, they're
NOT wasting their energy on your nation.
Let the locals deal with the locals - keeps the Westerners from doing the bleeding and dying, and the locals are better at understanding the locals (duh..)
When the US left Iraq, the most useful bits of Iraq fell under Shia control (i.e. Iranian influence)
When the US leaves Afghanistan, it's going to be a pissing contest between the Pakistani ISI, Al Quaeda/Taliban, and Iranian Quds forces.
