imperialism is a good thing.

[Shad0hawK]

someone is going to run the show, it may as well be us.

 

[conjur]

Stop trolling

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

So much for freedom.

Glad to see your true colors at last.

 

[Zephyr106]

I propose a thousand year empire, expanding from Fortress America.

Zephyr

 

[lozina]

So you feel our mission in Iraq is Imperialism?

 

[sMiLeYz]

No I think hes right! An empire would return america to it's former glory. Think about it! Like Iraq, we can spread peace democracy and american values everywhere through warfare. It's worked for the Romans and the Brits... why not us?

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
No I think hes right! An empire would return america to it's former glory. Think about it! Like Iraq, we can spread peace democracy and american values everywhere through warfare. It's worked for the Romans and the Brits... why not us?

No, we don't want democracy. Just look at how pissed we got when Spain democratically ousted the regime that kissed our asses.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
No I think hes right! An empire would return america to it's former glory. Think about it! Like Iraq, we can spread peace democracy and american values everywhere through warfare. It's worked for the Romans and the Brits... why not us?

Only if I'm allowed to have multiple wives and Toga parties on the White House lawn.

 

[Shad0hawK]

i am not trolling.

historically some of the freest societies that promoted(and in fact invented) democracy in the world were "empires" civilization itself and the code of law came from them. if you doubt me read a history book or two...

also the US has actually been an "empire" for well over 150 years.

compare the nations that gave birth to civilization to say...

the union of soviet socialist republics.

germany under hitler, the head of the national socialist german workers party.(aka NAZI party)

the italian social republic under mussolini.

china.

etc...etc.

it seems "imperialism" (as far as the indivdual is concerned) is much better than socialism/communism.

but why let historical fact get in the way of political ideaology?

 

[SuperTool]

If empirialism is such a good thing, how come every empire so far has collapsed?

 

[Shad0hawK]

before i goto bed let me make it an easy choice.

would you prefer the whole world be run by the US constitution...

or just like one of the socialistic/communistic countries previously named?

*theme from jeopardy starts*

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK


also the US has actually been an "empire" for well over 150 years.

compare the nations that gave birth to civilization to say...

the union of soviet socialist republics.

germany under hitler, the head of the national socialist german workers party.(aka NAZI party)

the italian social republic under mussolini.

china.

etc...etc.

I don't understand what you're trying to say right there. Are you trying to say those imperial empires (USSR, Nazis, China) are good for civilization?

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
If empirialism is such a good thing, how come every empire so far has collapsed?

at some point EVERY nation, imperial or not has. the empires did tend to last longer though.

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK


also the US has actually been an "empire" for well over 150 years.

compare the nations that gave birth to civilization to say...

the union of soviet socialist republics.

germany under hitler, the head of the national socialist german workers party.(aka NAZI party)

the italian social republic under mussolini.

china.

etc...etc.

I don't understand what you're trying to say right there. Are you trying to say those imperial empires (USSR, Nazis, China) are good for civilization?

try harder, i would expect this sort of silly semanticism from a 2nd grader.

*edit*

are you implying socialism is really imperialism?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
before i goto bed let me make it an easy choice.

would you prefer the whole world be run by the US constitution...

or just like one of the socialistic/communistic countries previously named?

*theme from jeopardy starts*

If the whole world was run by a constitution similar to the US, that would be fine, but the US history of dealing with other nations is nowhere near the US Constitution.

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

try harder, i would expect this sort of silly semanticism from a 2nd grader.

Funny you should say that, considering "semanticism" is not a word. But please elaborate, do you mean to argue that USSR or Nazi Germany were not Imperial empires? What definition of imperialism are you using?

 

[Zephyr106]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
before i goto bed let me make it an easy choice.

would you prefer the whole world be run by the US constitution...

or just like one of the socialistic/communistic countries previously named?

*theme from jeopardy starts*

If the whole world was run by a constitution similar to the US, that would be fine, but the US history of dealing with other nations is nowhere near the US Constitution.

Bwhahaha not to mention that it's one thing for all nations to have our constitution, another thing for all be ruled by us in some "Global Reich".

A ridicoulous question.

Zephyr

 

[SherEPunjab]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
No I think hes right! An empire would return america to it's former glory. Think about it! Like Iraq, we can spread peace democracy and american values everywhere through warfare. It's worked for the Romans and the Brits... why not us?

spread "peace" Good one.

spread "American values" even better.

 

[ReiAyanami]

as long as there is an ashcroft in every country, no constitution is safe

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: SuperTool
If empirialism is such a good thing, how come every empire so far has collapsed?

at some point EVERY nation, imperial or not has. the empires did tend to last longer though.

Nations outlast empires. People have national identities, not imperial.

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

try harder, i would expect this sort of silly semanticism from a 2nd grader.

Funny you should say that, considering "semanticism" is not a word. But please elaborate, do you mean to argue that USSR or Nazi Germany were not Imperial empires? What definition of imperialism are you using?

ROFL!! this "non-word" sure is used alot! (even in collegiate essays)

linky

i guess in a way they could be "empires" they certianly were expansionist...aggressively so. does this mean socialism/communism are hyper-imperialistic? it would seem so...

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: SuperTool
If empirialism is such a good thing, how come every empire so far has collapsed?

at some point EVERY nation, imperial or not has. the empires did tend to last longer though.

Nations outlast empires. People have national identities, not imperial.

you would have a point except that many people have national identities but no nation...as a member of the cherokee nation i am living proof. the jews had this problem for awhile, as did the serbs, the estonians, the latvians..etc....etc...etc.


i guess since we have moved on the failure of socialism/communism on a national scale is obvious?

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Bwhahaha not to mention that it's one thing for all nations to have our constitution, another thing for all be ruled by us in some "Global Reich".

A ridicoulous question.

Zephyr

actually the only thing ridiculous was the non-answer you gave and the conclusions many people jumped to at the beginning of this thread...

 

[SuperTool]

Well, you can't expect to always have an empire. Even if Jews had an empire at some point, there is no way it would last 4000 years. So if your nation needs an empire to survive, it won't last very long either. Empire building is also draining, because you are investing money and people building stuff overseas that may one day not even be part of your empire anymore, instead of building things at home. Look at Mongolia for example. They spent so much effort occupying other countries, they never bothered to build anything in their homeland.

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Well, you can't expect to always have an empire. Even if Jews had an empire at some point, there is no way it would last 4000 years. So if your nation needs an empire to survive, it won't last very long either. Empire building is also draining, because you are investing money and people building stuff overseas that may one day not even be part of your empire anymore, instead of building things at home. Look at Mongolia for example. They spent so much effort occupying other countries, they never bothered to build anything in their homeland.

that is true. however in the mongols case the rate of expansion was too much to keep up with, a slower rate of expansion is actually beneficial economically which is a good example, when an economy expands too fast a severe recession or depression will follow, however a slower rate of sustainable expansion provides economic security. in both cases it is a fine balance of physical/economic expansion..they must be in proportion to each other.