Empire America?

hermit22 · 10-02-2002, 11:03 AM

This article goes into depth about the actual motives for a war in Iraq, saying that they are the workings of an empire being setup by the elite aides to Bush. While he does miss a few points (like saying that this is completely opposite of the Bush campaign platform, neglecting that the necessities of Sept. 11 forcibly changed this) I think the overarching theory is correct - or at least worth examining.

Comments?

Hubris Boy · 10-02-2002, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by hermit22

Comments?

Gibberish.

Cam · 10-02-2002, 07:17 PM

Wow, exciting article. Lots of theories, lots of assumption. Very few facts.

jaguar · 10-02-2002, 07:52 PM

The concept of America as the new roman empire is far from new. Gore Vidal for one has written plenty of great stuff on this. The empire edition of AdBusters is worth a look too, some really good stuff in there. Recently the Age had a piece summerising the concept really well too. Might be availaible online still.

Griff · 10-30-2002, 06:34 AM

hmm... maybe a Barbarrosa analogy is in order.

The key paragraph-
Remember, before the Nazi invasion or pre-emptive strike, to use a Bush Administration term, almost all of the citizens of the Soviet Union hated the communist system and their control over the many nationalities, religious and ethnic groups while few supported the Soviet government. Stalin utilized police-state terror to maintain government control over his nation and empire because there was little loyalty or patriotism, only quiet opposition to the Soviet government. Nothing could have brought about real support for Stalin and the Soviet government, except for Hitler’s invasion. This was the catalyst which created “The Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union” and millions of Russians and others in the Soviet-occupied nations risked all and willingly gave their lives in the defense of the motherland against a foreign invader.

10-30-2002, 06:52 AM

Just like how it happened in Afghanistan with the Taliban, right?

It's definitely a point to be considered, but I don't think it really holds water. Besides, Hussein can be likened to Hitler as well - invasion of Poland == invastion of Kuwait, etc. Who's to say that an invastion of Iraq isn't stopping the next Hitler?

I'm still not sold on a war in Iraq, but that piece sure as hell didn't put me in the "Strongly Disagree" group either.

Undertoad · 10-30-2002, 08:34 AM

Why is the Hitler invasion of the USSR the valid analogy, and the Roosevelt invasion of Germany not the valid analogy?

He's saying that Hitler's invasion of the USSR coalesced support for Stalin. Is he saying that Bush's invasion of Iraq will coalesce support for Hussein? No. So he's starting out with a bad analogy.

What happens then, apparently, is the worst thing imaginable: the entire region will coalesce in an air of anti-Americanism and Saudi Arabia and Iran "will offer sanctuary for Islamic terrorists and guerrilla fighters."

Oops too late.

Griff · 10-30-2002, 09:33 AM

No. He's saying the invasion caused the people to rally behind Stalin's communist government because it was the organized force of opposition and the perceived lesser of two evils. The radical Islamists are the organized opposition who will receive the default support. A similar thing happened when the Japanese invaded China, the Chi-Coms were perceived as the legitamit opposition, since they were not western dominated and were already mobilized.

What happens then is the nominally pro-western governments in the region fall in a wave of Islamic radicalism, oil becomes a weapon, is cut off and Griff puts up a windmill and looks into a little bio-diesel operation, while hoods and hillbillys die for oil.

Undertoad · 10-30-2002, 10:02 AM

Well here in the NY Times is the opposite opinion. Even though registration is required, I urge ppl to read this.

To summarize: democracy and self-determination are key to improving the state of mind of the average middle eastern person. More Arabic peoples understand this than we would imagine. What they have now is an empty, unfulfilling materialism. The bin Laden followers are not the disenfranchised Arabic man on the street, as we would expect, but rather the moneyed ruling and upper class. 6 out of 6 Bahrainians at Gitmo are upper class. Encouraging the end of fascism and the spread of democracy beyond Bahrain, where it has taken root, is the key to solving the middle eastern problem because it will stop people from looking to others as the source of their problems.

Undertoad · 10-30-2002, 10:08 AM

And by the way, I understand that there are enough strategic reserves of oil to outlast any Arabic outage, and the money on oil futures bets that the war will be short and the price of oil will fall. No need to buy gold bullion and bunker down.

Griff · 10-30-2002, 10:59 AM

For *once* I agree with Friedman, a man whose Pax Americana world view IMHO was utterly discredited on 9/11. Yes, somehow the Arab peoples need to throw off their governments, without ending up being ruled by mullahs. An American invasion would be counterproductive to that outcome. Is your use of the term fascist supposed to remind us that supporting the insane Sharon government in Israel is our first priority here? I guess by that standard it makes sense to just pay for the right to defend Israel.

Undertoad · 10-30-2002, 11:19 AM

An American invasion would be counterproductive to that outcome.

Maybe, maybe not. Things suck right now, so I am cautiously optimistic that rolling the dice will get us a better result.

Is your use of the term fascist supposed to remind us that supporting the insane Sharon government in Israel is our first priority here?

While trying to understand the logic of the anti-war crowd it is indeed helpful to imagine that they really do believe that Bush and Sharon are fascists. After you accept that belief, everything else in their argument makes sense. And it sure is politically useful to push that notion.

Unfortunately when we compare them to real fascists, that supposition is more than a bit of a bad joke. Heh heh, Bush is such a fascist, heh heh heh. We sound so smart when we talk political talk.

That stuff worked in college. It may even have gotten us laid with the coffeehouse chicks. But real fascists killed tens of millions of people in the last century so if we have fascism in the US it is deadly serious. Time to drop the pretentious partisan name-calling and get real. Bush and Sharon are not fascists and the structure of their governments ensure that it wouldn't even matter if they were.

If you need a demonstration of what fascism is, I will be around at your door with a baseball bat to show you what your opinion should actually be.

Griff · 10-30-2002, 11:23 AM

My point exactly, quit calling the Arabs fascists.

Undertoad · 10-30-2002, 12:39 PM

OK. But then what do I call this thing?

Griff · 10-30-2002, 01:07 PM

Okay you win they are all spades, Bush, Sharon, and all the little tin pot Arab dictators.

Anyway, I don't see a clear way to impose on the Arabs a reasonably tolerant democracy, so I'm gonna bail on this whole arguement... at least until I get sick of hearing how Hussein has some effect on American security.

10-02-2002, 11:03 AM	#1
hermit22 sleep. Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: So Cal. Posts: 257	Empire America? This article goes into depth about the actual motives for a war in Iraq, saying that they are the workings of an empire being setup by the elite aides to Bush. While he does miss a few points (like saying that this is completely opposite of the Bush campaign platform, neglecting that the necessities of Sept. 11 forcibly changed this) I think the overarching theory is correct - or at least worth examining. Comments? __________________ blippety blah bluh blah blah

10-02-2002, 07:17 PM	#3
Cam dripping with ignorance Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Grand Forks ND Posts: 642	Wow, exciting article. Lots of theories, lots of assumption. Very few facts. __________________ After the seventh beer I generally try and stay away from the keyboard, I apologize for what happens when I fail.

10-02-2002, 07:52 PM	#4
jaguar whig Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 5,075	The concept of America as the new roman empire is far from new. Gore Vidal for one has written plenty of great stuff on this. The empire edition of AdBusters is worth a look too, some really good stuff in there. Recently the Age had a piece summerising the concept really well too. Might be availaible online still. __________________ Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain

10-30-2002, 06:34 AM	#5
Griff still says videotape Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 26,813	hmm... maybe a Barbarrosa analogy is in order. The key paragraph- Remember, before the Nazi invasion or pre-emptive strike, to use a Bush Administration term, almost all of the citizens of the Soviet Union hated the communist system and their control over the many nationalities, religious and ethnic groups while few supported the Soviet government. Stalin utilized police-state terror to maintain government control over his nation and empire because there was little loyalty or patriotism, only quiet opposition to the Soviet government. Nothing could have brought about real support for Stalin and the Soviet government, except for Hitler’s invasion. This was the catalyst which created “The Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union” and millions of Russians and others in the Soviet-occupied nations risked all and willingly gave their lives in the defense of the motherland against a foreign invader. __________________ If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you. - Louis D. Brandeis

10-30-2002, 09:33 AM	#8
Griff still says videotape Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 26,813	No. He's saying the invasion caused the people to rally behind Stalin's communist government because it was the organized force of opposition and the perceived lesser of two evils. The radical Islamists are the organized opposition who will receive the default support. A similar thing happened when the Japanese invaded China, the Chi-Coms were perceived as the legitamit opposition, since they were not western dominated and were already mobilized. What happens then is the nominally pro-western governments in the region fall in a wave of Islamic radicalism, oil becomes a weapon, is cut off and Griff puts up a windmill and looks into a little bio-diesel operation, while hoods and hillbillys die for oil. __________________ If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you. - Louis D. Brandeis

10-30-2002, 06:52 AM	#6
dave Guest Posts: n/a	Just like how it happened in Afghanistan with the Taliban, right? It's definitely a point to be considered, but I don't think it really holds water. Besides, Hussein can be likened to Hitler as well - invasion of Poland == invastion of Kuwait, etc. Who's to say that an invastion of Iraq isn't stopping the next Hitler? I'm still not sold on a war in Iraq, but that piece sure as hell didn't put me in the "Strongly Disagree" group either.

10-30-2002, 08:34 AM	#7
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Why is the Hitler invasion of the USSR the valid analogy, and the Roosevelt invasion of Germany not the valid analogy? He's saying that Hitler's invasion of the USSR coalesced support for Stalin. Is he saying that Bush's invasion of Iraq will coalesce support for Hussein? No. So he's starting out with a bad analogy. What happens then, apparently, is the worst thing imaginable: the entire region will coalesce in an air of anti-Americanism and Saudi Arabia and Iran "will offer sanctuary for Islamic terrorists and guerrilla fighters." Oops too late.

10-30-2002, 10:02 AM	#9
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Well here in the NY Times is the opposite opinion. Even though registration is required, I urge ppl to read this. To summarize: democracy and self-determination are key to improving the state of mind of the average middle eastern person. More Arabic peoples understand this than we would imagine. What they have now is an empty, unfulfilling materialism. The bin Laden followers are not the disenfranchised Arabic man on the street, as we would expect, but rather the moneyed ruling and upper class. 6 out of 6 Bahrainians at Gitmo are upper class. Encouraging the end of fascism and the spread of democracy beyond Bahrain, where it has taken root, is the key to solving the middle eastern problem because it will stop people from looking to others as the source of their problems.

10-30-2002, 10:08 AM	#10
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	And by the way, I understand that there are enough strategic reserves of oil to outlast any Arabic outage, and the money on oil futures bets that the war will be short and the price of oil will fall. No need to buy gold bullion and bunker down.

10-30-2002, 10:59 AM	#11
Griff still says videotape Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 26,813	For once I agree with Friedman, a man whose Pax Americana world view IMHO was utterly discredited on 9/11. Yes, somehow the Arab peoples need to throw off their governments, without ending up being ruled by mullahs. An American invasion would be counterproductive to that outcome. Is your use of the term fascist supposed to remind us that supporting the insane Sharon government in Israel is our first priority here? I guess by that standard it makes sense to just pay for the right to defend Israel. __________________ If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you. - Louis D. Brandeis

10-30-2002, 11:19 AM	#12
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	An American invasion would be counterproductive to that outcome. Maybe, maybe not. Things suck right now, so I am cautiously optimistic that rolling the dice will get us a better result. Is your use of the term fascist supposed to remind us that supporting the insane Sharon government in Israel is our first priority here? While trying to understand the logic of the anti-war crowd it is indeed helpful to imagine that they really do believe that Bush and Sharon are fascists. After you accept that belief, everything else in their argument makes sense. And it sure is politically useful to push that notion. Unfortunately when we compare them to real fascists, that supposition is more than a bit of a bad joke. Heh heh, Bush is such a fascist, heh heh heh. We sound so smart when we talk political talk. That stuff worked in college. It may even have gotten us laid with the coffeehouse chicks. But real fascists killed tens of millions of people in the last century so if we have fascism in the US it is deadly serious. Time to drop the pretentious partisan name-calling and get real. Bush and Sharon are not fascists and the structure of their governments ensure that it wouldn't even matter if they were. If you need a demonstration of what fascism is, I will be around at your door with a baseball bat to show you what your opinion should actually be.

10-30-2002, 11:23 AM	#13
Griff still says videotape Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 26,813	My point exactly, quit calling the Arabs fascists. __________________ If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you. - Louis D. Brandeis

10-30-2002, 12:39 PM	#14
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	OK. But then what do I call this thing?

10-30-2002, 01:07 PM	#15
Griff still says videotape Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 26,813	Okay you win they are all spades, Bush, Sharon, and all the little tin pot Arab dictators. Anyway, I don't see a clear way to impose on the Arabs a reasonably tolerant democracy, so I'm gonna bail on this whole arguement... at least until I get sick of hearing how Hussein has some effect on American security. __________________ If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you. - Louis D. Brandeis

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)