Empire America? - YES!

PipeBombNews.com ^ | October 9, 2001 | William A. Mayer - Editor & Publisher, PipeBombNews.com

[palmer]

That was 200 years ago and we have matured. Without an American empire, 9/11s will continue to happen over and over again.

There's good evidence that the opposite is true. A younger, ruthless empire might stop terrorism (with a high price in personal liberty), but an aging empire such as ours has very little chance.
I think our dilemna is similar to the aging Roman empire, our citizens are too fat, dumb and happy.

What happens if the Saudi princes are overthrown and the oil shut off by Islamic nutcases? Under your theory we simply give up, dont we? Under a policy of empire we take over the oil fields and survive.

You either buy oil from the Islamic nutcases and keep your SUV, or get a honda and run it on Colorado shale oil at $2.50 a gallon, your choice.

[kd1pl@nationlink.com]

I think if Sadam or anyone took over the oil fields, we would buy oil from him, if the price was too high, then we would find a cheaper source. Its better to let the market decide these things than the sword.

[ignatz_q]

World protector? Does this include: etc.

No, it mostly includes things like working with Winston Churchill to save western civilization. Your point is well taken, though. Perhaps I should have written that some of our finest moments, as well as some of our darkest moments, have been when we have participated actively in international affairs.

[Greg Weston]

Pat Buchanan's argues that America can simply walk away from foreign squabbles, using the verbiage from George Washington’s farewell address that warned of “entangling foreign alliances." GO PAT GO!!!

[Greg Weston]

What happens if the Saudi princes are overthrown and the oil shut off by Islamic nutcases?

I guess they will just drink the oil and not make any money off it won't they?

[johnqueuepublic]

Greg

Pat B is a fruitcake.

What has he ever done but flap his lips?

Never elected to office, he was a freakin' speechwriter for Nixon - that is his sole accomplishment.

Oh, i forgot his appearances on crossfire and his anti-Semitic remarks

Buchannan is wrong almost every time he opens his mouth

Yes, by all means Go Pat Go....yes go Pat go... go far, far away and shut your pie hole while you are at it.

[ewchil]

If we asserted ourselves the U.N. could do nothing about it. It ultimately exists at our pleasure.

[Gerfang]

Hate to break the news to you but Star Wars was fictional, Darth was a guy wearing a plastic helmet.

It’s a metaphor, the purpose of which is to point out that Empires are Bad things that freedom loving American’s don’t like.

You might want to recall such useful historical tidbits like:

• We revolted against the British Empire.
• We liberated Cuba and the Philippines from the Spanish Empire.
• We saved Europe from the Nazi Empire.
• We fought a cold war against the Soviet Empire.

To sum up: Empire=Bad

I hope that clears things up for you.

[johnqueuepublic]

Gerfang

You are attempting to committ revisionism of the lowest order, comparing a potential American empire with the Nazis and the Spanish is pretty silly dont you think.

There is the term called "moral relativism" that you should really investigate.

We are better than them.

ps - What happened in the wake of the British Empire? I say look to Africa for your answer - they are MUCH better off today dont you think?

LOL

[Greg Weston]

I don't agree with Pat on some things, but on foreign policy he's one of the few that makes any sense. Our Globalist world cop policy has been a miserable failure.

Knock em flat Pat!

[johnqueuepublic]

Greg Patt B is an isolationist, when will you Libertarians get it?

[Gerfang]

You are attempting to committ revisionism of the lowest order, comparing a potential American empire with the Nazis and the Spanish is pretty silly dont you think.

And how precisely am I revising the history of an American empire, which hasn’t occurred? I am not committing revisionism, I am warning you that you advocate a counterproductive, generally unworkable, and morally reprehensible course of action.

There is the term called "moral relativism" that you should really investigate.

Lets see here:

1. The Romans invaded other nations, overthrew their governments and enslaved their people.
2. The Spanish invaded other nations, overthrew their governments and enslaved their people.
3. The English invaded other nations, overthrew their governments and enslaved their people.
4. The Nazis invaded other nations, overthrew their governments and enslaved their people.
5. The Russians invaded other nations, overthrew their governments and enslaved their people.

That’s bad.

You suggest that America invade other nations, overthrow their governments and enslave their people.

But that’s good.

And I’m the moral relativist?

We are better than them.

If we do the same things they did, then we are the same as they were.

ps - What happened in the wake of the British Empire? I say look to Africa for your answer - they are MUCH better off today dont you think?

I’d say it’s not much different from Europe after Rome fell. I say this because empires tend to decimate the cultures of the peoples they enslave. This goes right back to my thesis:

Empire=Bad

Got it yet?

[Red Jones]

bump

[freefly]

Mr.Clark said it well in post 7: Empire almost always leads to the end of freedom. Gotta pay for it with taxes and bodies. But let me go down through the article and point a few things out.

· They ordered society from top to bottom, training young minds and bodies together at rigorous levels

Indoctrination to state ideals. Who sets them? How are they enforced?

· They developed new concepts of governmental organization and integration

What is being advocated for our "new concept of governmental organization"? Not possible under our current form, let alone the one this country is founded under.

· They invented the science of military tactics - analyzing the lessons of previous wars and battles

We develope tactics as the technology developes. Of course, guerrilla warfare works well in spite of technololgy. Fighting it is mighty ugly and isn't possible in a free society.

· They developed the idea of public works and public sanitation

Well, our government is really into taxing it's citizens to pay for "public works". Of course, the surcharge is mighty high. But that is what socialism is all about: Rule of the masses by an elite, using the "common good" as the rational.

· They were able to instill among the citizenry, and above all the martial class, absolute devotion to duty and fidelity of purpose

Having been a member of the martial class myself, I would say that we still had that at least up to the clinton years. Of course, the "wanna be" crowd wants that feeling without having to personally pay the price. After all, that's what kids are for.

Above all it was successful, guaranteeing relative peace (or what could pass for it in a world primarily populated by, what only can be described as, quasi-human beasts) for nearly a millennium.

Peace enforced by "police action". Peaceful as long as the slaves to the state don't revolt. Then it's death to those who oppose the state. Which is anything but peaceful.

the Romans were oft times cruel themselves, but their cruelty generally had a purpose.

Cruelty is ok as long as you have a purpose... Interesting way of looking at it. Not valid, but interesting.

America has a meeting with destiny, history and events beyond her control have demanded her presence.

Where have I heard this one before... "We MUST rule the world, it is our DESTINY!"

We have learned that we are alone in this world;

Really? We have 300 million people in this country. The world's population is what...4 billion? Hardly "alone".

our complex society, , is so delicately balanced - so free - that it is in many ways as fragile as a mayfly.

Not as long as our citizenry is armed. As long as individuals in this country have weapons, we cannot be defeated. Destroyed, maybe, defeated, never.

If we cower from this challenge, if we pull inward we will be picked off one by one, community by community.

Yea, right. A bunch of people with boxcutters are going to destroy us. I doubt that they will do it, but a bunch of politicians who have been waiting for an opportunity to push a global power agenda may well succeed.

There can only be one response – to embrace power, to accept the role for which we have been unknowingly grooming ourselves for 200 years.

To become that which we have fought against whenever we come up against it: authoritarian government.

We must establish a Pax Americana – a worldwide dominion – an Empire – hard when need be - but fair and leavened with our deep regard for liberty.

The same liberty that is out the door as soon as the martial society described is implemented?

We must create our own martial culture, appropriate for the times, as did the Romans. Our young people must be educated and inculcated into this culture.

Once again, what happens if you don't spout the party line? Who determines the agenda? How is this enforced?

We must develop and deploy the weapons ...whatever advanced technological means whereby power, authority and in the case of attack - revenge - can be projected.

We must be able to destroy any who oppose our agenda.

We must not strike indiscriminately at innocents, but we will not let their presence shield our enemies.

Ie: kill them all, let G*d sort them out.

Rome does not consult Babylon on matters of foreign policy.

Don't expect to have a voice in matters of foreign policy. Your betters will make decisions for you.

Grasping at the mantle of such awesome power brings with it the attendant duty of exercising it in a way consistent with the values that have preserved us to this point.

Even though exercising it trashes those values.

Our founding fathers could never have conceived the world in which we live,

Yes they did. That is why they put the government they founded under control of the citizens.

but they would never forgive us if we departed from the ideals that they died for.

That's true. Of course, that is what this entire article is advocating: departing from those ideals. Of course, it's "for the common good".

By observing and acting upon what is best in our heritage we can avoid becoming merely another Reich - smug, egocentric and eventually despotic.

REALLY??!! This article is advocating just that: ignoring what is best in our heritage and becoming smug, egocentric and, in order to implement all of this, despotic.

This is the same crap spouted by every dictator that shows up on the scene. Change very little, and it could be used by any one of history's most notorious.

If you support our current effort against the Taliban, then you are in effect supporting an aspect of empire.

Our current effort against the Taliban is the result of p-poor foreign policy over the last decade (at the least). It is a good example of what happens when we play "empire games". Unfortunatly the situation has come to this: a position where we have no other choice other than to make war to protect ourselves. A good close look at our policies (and why they were implemented) will show that all is not as it seems.

The founding fathers argued against foreign entanglements only because we were too weak to have our focus taken off the goal of establishing a new government.

No, they argued against foreign entanglements because they result in bigger government that has to take more freedom away from it's people in order to "protect them" from the messes those entanglements result in.

That was 200 years ago and we have matured.

It's been 200 years and we the people are firmly under the control of a quasi-socialist democratic government that has little in common with that described by our founding documents.
(The senate report of 1973 said straight up that the American people have not lived under the protection of the Constitution and Bill of Rights since 1933. We are seeing the results of that now.)

Without an American empire, 9/11s will continue to happen over and over again.

WITH an American empire, 9/11 WILL continue to happen. American empire policy IS one of the primary reasons 9/11 occured.

...we cant continue down the same old path and survive.

THAT's probably true. The world is a BIG place. We have empowered enemies in all directions. We give them technology and the economy to purchase it and we give them the tools that their propaganda needs to inflame the emotions of their people against us. Foreign policy needs to be looked at, hard and soon. (It may already be too late, it's difficult to put the skunk back in the bag.)

What happens if the Saudi princes are overthrown and the oil shut off by Islamic nutcases?

How about we develope our own resources? How about we quit selling to them? How about we quit developing their oilfields? How about we quit feeding their people?

Under your theory we simply give up, dont we?

Hardly.

Under a policy of empire we take over the oil fields and survive.

Under your policy, we make war on anyone that might object to our taking another country's resources. And, (for instance),we may well get wiped out by a Russia/China alliance that is concerned about an American empire coming for them next.

There are better ways. Dropping taxes back to early levels and allowing American citizens to be even more productive than ever would be a good start. Not sending our tax money and food to prop up socialist and dictator ruled governments all over the world would also help. When the rest of the world sees how well the TRUE "American Way works, -work hard, get to keep your money, invest in your future, etc- (instead of the democratic socialism that our government is pushing us toward) they start putting pressure on THEIR government leaders to do the same.

It would beat putting the American version of Hitler, Stalin, or Mao in charge.
We've seen what happens when that takes place.

[Beenliedto]

Empire almost always leads to the end of freedom.

Empire also always leads to the end of Empire... and the aftermath in the world's history has never been pretty....

Line 'em up and count 'em... Greek, Roman, Ottoman, Soviet, Brtish (BTW, we have simply inherited the British Empire in the Middle East)....

Ane yes, the fall of the British Empire was not pretty, either... particularly in Africa.

[Beenliedto]

Hate to break the news to you but Star Wars was fictional,

So was 1984....

BTW, it's almost uncanny how so much of the science fiction written over the last decades has evolved into fact....

Anyway, I think we can draw on history to prove the point.

It's just that now the prospects are Orwellian.

[Beenliedto]

...... an American empire, which hasn’t occurred?

That's the sole point on which you and I might disagree....

It's an empire. alright... has been since the days of Wilson.

[CubicleGuy]

Critics from the squishy right, mostly champions of libertarian thought, counsel a retreat from any American role that even approaches that of global policeman.

Unfortunately, being a global policeman usually means that the jobs of judge and jury go along with the role of policeman, and imposing western ideas of justice, crime and punishment in non-western locations sometimes gets us into more trouble than it may be worth. Are your jet commercial airplanes more likely to be crashed into your supersized office buildings by people who are ticked at you because you stuck your nose in their business, or because you refused to stick your nose in their business?

Libertarians have no problem with the idea of being adequately prepared for a war waged on them by someone else, but are not real fond of drawing someone else's fire because they intervened where they weren't wanted in the first place. If we're determined to annouce ourselves as being the friend of a country with many enemies, then we'd best expect to gain a whole bunch of new enemies to go along with that friend.

How many countries have announced themselves to be the mortal enemies of Switzerland?