Moral authority? Did you support the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan to liberate them from dictators at the cost of trillions of dollars and thousands of lives? Did you support the removal of Saddam Hussein from Kuwait at the costs of billions and hundreds of American lives? How many Americans must die and how much money should we spend to demonstrate our moral authority? The deaths in Libya and Syria are the result of civil wars, which we have no responsibility for. And we were and are part of a coalition of nations. What responsibilty do they bear?
You can argue until you're blue in the face, but until you can convince people in other countries that we're still the "good guys", we are witnessing the slow beginnings of the beginning.
We are and continue to be the good guys. We have a lot of skin in the game with little to show for it. The test should always be what is in our national strategic interests. There are limits to what America can and should do.
And I think our inside people know this. The only option is war with not one, but two+ nuclear equipped adversaries. We won't pull the trigger, and they will simply but surely continue filling the void.
Once nations acquire nuclear weapons, they limit what we or any other outside interests can do to them. This is one reason why Iran wants a nuclear weapon and why NK, Pakistan, India, Israel, and China acquired these weapons. Proliferation will accelerate once Iran has a weapon.
To be honest, one can be fairly stoic/philosophical about this: was the USA to last forever? If not, when/how would it decline? Aren't all the pieces that one would cite now in position? So why would anyone be surprised that it's occurring now?
America's decline is no different than many other "empires" before. It is an implosion rather than outside influences taking down a global power. We are being destroyed by the welfare state (Guns vs Butter and butter always wins) and mass (lgal) immigration.
Exactly - even without over-extension (which you refute) - the internal mechanics are sufficient for the game to be over.
Since I'm not one to cry over the past, I've already (mentally) moved on. But I do find it interesting that many don't seem to be that curious about how we reached our current state of affairs.
There is a possible hail-mary, but that would first require people to finally recognize the enemy, and then elect someone with enough electoral support who could/would prosecute to the fullest extent of the law (and I mean "fullest" in the sense that a penalty is actually spelled out in the constitution).
Do you think that will happen? Would someone finally reject the authority the court assumed (but never included by amendment) by Marshall and never challenged? That's the kind of extreme action required - to have Congress be the final arbiter of what is constitutional eg the 14th. Unless that kind of emergency action happens, then my money is on the downside.