NationStates Jolt Archive

Today we were reminded that Castro is an increasingly frail old man. He cannot remain dictator for long. He will probably die within the next decade.

What will happen when he dies? Vote in the poll!

Cuba will become the first Anarchist nation.

[/optimism]

Who can tell?

I would say that one of the party loyal will try to seize power. He will probably not last very long, and the situation will very quickly degard into one of violence and oppression. That's when the US, acting on "interests of national security" and egged on by a very vocal minority in Florida will send a stabilizing force in and set up another puppet government.

His brother Raul is going to succeed him and he is going to continue to Castro-style dictatorship.

It'll become partytown USA.

His brother Raul is going to succeed him and he is going to continue to Castro-style dictatorship.
Only with a pink triangle accent to marxism! :p

Cuba will become the first Anarchist nation.

[/optimism]

i don't think there are quite that many of us down there.

maybe we'll see some system of workers' councils spring up. assuming that the us doesn't go round up all the poor cubans and force them off their land so it can be given back to the people living in mansions in florida, of course.

[/slightlylessoptimism]

When Castro dies? When Castro dies?

He smokes a box of Cuban cigars a week, he's survived many assassination attempts, and he was never properly treated for injuries sustained in the Cuban revolution. He's 70+ years old. The man may never die...

i don't think there are quite that many of us down there.

maybe we'll see some system of workers' councils spring up. assuming that the us doesn't go round up all the poor cubans and force them off their land so it can be given back to the people living in mansions in florida, of course.

[/slightlylessoptimism]

Let us do it.

Castro's actually a pretty popular leader. The people would be grieving and give support to his successor, his brother.

same thing that happened to everywhere else. some leader of an anti-castro force will be appointed and militarily supported by the US, he will become a worse dictator than castro ever was and the US will ignore it as the new dictator will make the US the primary trading partner and all the cubans wil be fucked even worse

Castro will either be frozen like the Duke and both will be revived to fight at Armageddon (final fight: cowboy vs. commie!) or only his brain will be preserved and in that case it will be John Wayne versus Robo-Castro. Either way, the Duke will ultimately triumph as it was foretold in Revelations. :D

When Castro dies? When Castro dies?

He smokes a box of Cuban cigars a week, he's survived many assassination attempts, and he was never properly treated for injuries sustained in the Cuban revolution. He's 70+ years old. The man may never die...
his dr predicted he would live for until he is 200 and cuba has a damn good healthcare system for a third world country with a dictator, if the people have almost as long life spans as the US, imagine what the dictator gets

so its almost sorta not ludicrous

Castro's actually a pretty popular leader. The people would be grieving and give support to his successor, his brother.

That's what I noticed when he fell. Everyone was worried, and crying, and all this other stuff because they support him so much.

Face it, if one of our presidents did the same thing, people would've just been laughing.

I bet you there will be civil war in Cuba of some sort

That's what I noticed when he fell. Everyone was worried, and crying, and all this other stuff because they support him so much.

Face it, if one of our presidents did the same thing, people would've just been laughing.

Thats cause if they laughed in Cuba they would not be laughing for very long.

I still stand by my "freeze Castro so he can be unfrozen along with John Wayne once we find a cure for cancer to fight the final battle" theory.

"Castro will live forever!/Che Guavara will rise from the dead!" Go Castro Go!!.. Go Castro Go!!..



Disclaimer: I do not necessarily like Castro or his system of government. But... the more thorns in America's backside, the better :D

Disclaimer: I do not necessarily like Castro or his system of government. But... the more thorns in America's backside, the better :D

Castro is hardly a thorn in anyones side. His military has been reduced to nothing more than a glorified police force since the collapse of the Soviet Union. He will die in a few years, his brother will take over, and being the dullard Raul is, he will be deposed in a short while. Then Cuba will be free.

it will go the way of the soviet union
his brother will succeed him but there wont but the same fervor for keeping things as they are. the US will back off and cuba will stumble toward a homegrown form of democracy.

and then it will truly be the envy of the carribean.

it will go the way of the soviet union
his brother will succeed him but there wont but the same fervor for keeping things as they are. the US will back off and cuba will stumble toward a homegrown form of democracy.

and then it will truly be the envy of the carribean.

And on that day...Cuban cigars for ALL!

I'm voting he stays alive forever, because dammit, it's really looking that way :p

you all know damn well the us government and industries wont miss an opputrunity to install some evil puppet dictator

you all know damn well the us government and industries wont miss an opputrunity to install some evil puppet dictator

Why do you even live in the US? I could never live in a country that I hate as much as you hate the US. Then again...you are from Alabama. ;)

you all know damn well the us government and industries wont miss an opputrunity to install some evil puppet dictator

If it gets us high quality cigars I couldn't care less :D.

it will go the way of the soviet union

an authoritarian kleptocracy run by the mafia and former secret police, with all of the productive assests of the country given away to former party elites and multinational corporations, with dramatic crashes in living standards and life expectancies for the average person?

I honestly don't think that Castro is going to die any time before 120 so we might as well just wait him out. He's on healthy SOB and god knows what medicine he allows to be done down there with cloning and genetics that is outlawed here in the US. As much as I hate socialism/communism, I admire Castro that he's still there.

I honestly don't think that Castro is going to die any time before 120 so we might as well just wait him out. He's on healthy SOB and god knows what medicine he allows to be done down there with cloning and genetics that is outlawed here in the US. As much as I hate socialism/communism, I admire Castro that he's still there.

Its the smoking. There must be something in those cigars. They are the key to eternal life! :D

Its the smoking. There must be something in those cigars. They are the key to eternal life! :D
So that's the REAL reason they're illegal in the U.S....I knew there was something more to it!!! :D

I think Cuba will have a civil war and that the US will support the pro-democracy faction.

When Castro dies, most likly a dictator would take his place, and another less powerfull dictator after that, and he/she will make a more benevolent dictatorship, and eventually people will get more rights, untill it becomes the embodiment of the "Father knows best" states that are common here. That is, if the U.S. doesn't blow it all down the shitter, and attack, to preserve the peace. I say, let the Cubans kill each other in civil war, one side is going to get war weary eventually. This is not like the Isrealies/Arabs, this is Cubans vs Cubans, who don't want to be fighting brothers at arms.

Its the smoking. There must be something in those cigars. They are the key to eternal life! :D

Apparently Castro gave up cigars. I hear he was trying to set a more healthy example for his people. Something like that. I can't recall where I saw the article.

Kinda hard to imagine him without one though, isn't it?

His brother Raul is going to succeed him and he is going to continue to Castro-style dictatorship.

Come one! Raul is 70! He'll croak any day too!

I think Cuba will have a civil war and that the US will support the pro-democracy faction.
pro democracy my ass, you mean they will support the anti-former-pro-castro people

pro democracy my ass, you mean they will support the anti-former-pro-castro people

NO I mean the pro-democracy people!

pro democracy my ass, you mean they will support the anti-former-pro-castro people
The anti....former...pro.......uh.......dah, nevermind

The anti....former...pro.......uh.......dah, nevermind

It's chess logic. It ends up as a dull buzzing sound. Just try and ignore it. :D

Come one! Raul is 70! He'll croak any day too!
Who knows how long he is going to life. My country had a chancellor who was 73 when he came to office and he ruled for fourteen years - till he was 87. And that was in a democracy.
In a dictatorship there are no age limits.
Shurely the rule of Raul would be limited to a few years. It wouldn´t be that long than the one of his brother. And whether he would be able to keep the one-party dictatorship remains to be seen. But it is the most likely the development. Castro dies and his brother follows.
This solution would also cause the least trouble. So, I think it is the most likely development.

US will probably send in the military to "keep the peace" if things turn violent. Then install a government that basically does everything we tell it to do. Of course, anyone in Cuba who resists the unofficial US takeover will be labeled a terrorist and given a one way ticket to Guantanamo. *please read with some sarcasm*

Apparently Castro gave up cigars. I hear he was trying to set a more healthy example for his people. Something like that. I can't recall where I saw the article.

Kinda hard to imagine him without one though, isn't it?

He may just, for appearances sake, have an herbal one or something. That's what they did on the X-Files for Cigarette Man, who was and is an avid anti-smoker in some Canadian group. All his cigarettes were herbal.

According to this BBC article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/244974.stm),

At 32, [Castro] became a revolutionary icon. At 70, he proved that he could still play to the crowds. He gave up cigars to support anti-smoking groups.

I think Cuba will have a civil war and that the US will support the pro-democracy faction.

Yeah, because the US has a history of over-throwing dictatorships and facilitating democracy in third world nations.

Oh, wait...it's the other way around.

NOOOO!!!!


All this talk of Castro dying made the poor man break his knee while giving a speech..

Castro breaks knee while giving speech (http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2653309?ifilmp=99)

Get well soon, Fidel. Live long and prosper!... :p

NOOOO!!!!


All this talk of Castro dying made the poor man break his knee while giving a speech..

Castro breaks knee while giving speech (http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2653309?ifilmp=99)

Get well soon, Fidel. Live long and prosper!... :p

Um... hate to break it to you, but I think that's what *started* the thread (unless I'm just stupid).

That's what I noticed when he fell. Everyone was worried, and crying, and all this other stuff because they support him so much.

Face it, if one of our presidents did the same thing, people would've just been laughing.

Heck, I almost cried watching that footage, and I'm all the way in Australia (and normally aren't too phased watching people get hurt either).

Seriously, it was like watching a kitten getting smashed by a hammer or something. *Whimpers*

I think the US of A would try to annex Cuba and assimilate it into their empire of fat overweighed people. They'd then install a "governor" to rule benevolently in the best interests of the US. The governor would probably be called Azai or Karllawi.

I think the US of A would try to annex Cuba and assimilate it into their empire of fat overweighed people. They'd then install a "governor" to rule benevolently in the best interests of the US. The governor would probably be called Azai or Karllawi.

I guess someone here does not know American History. At the end of the Spanish American War, we gained the islands of Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the Philippines. We then let Cuba go and Castro came to power. The Philippines are also an Independent Nation. Puerto Rico is still American Territory.

I doubt that Cuba will be annexed by the US.

And as for an Empire, we never had an empire in the normal sense of the word.

We then let Cuba go and Castro came to power.

Not as simple as that. :p After the Spanish American War Cuba was given "independence." here's a quote from the time; “Whatever may be decided as to the political future of Cuba,” the article stated, “it’s industrial and commercial future will be directed by American enterprise with American capital.” The Platt Amendment ensured political domination of Cuba by the US...

What I'm trying to say is, it was very much
conditional independence. While I'm doubtful of an annexation, (How the hell would they justify that one?) it's not impossible.

Cuban history (http://www.historyofcuba.com/history/scaw/scaw3.htm)

I did a term of study in Cuba a few years ago, and it's not as bad as a lot of people think. The major downer is the embargo. Why it's still on when the Cold War is over is beyond me. Maybe that old saying, about presidents never admitting that a former president was wrong, is true. I'm saddened at the thought of what could happen to Cuba when Fidel finally passes.

John Kerry will blame Bush for it.

He'll start decomposing. What else would happen?

Face it, if one of our presidents did the same thing, people would've just been laughing.

I know I would be! LOL! Remember when Bush fell off his bike. I laughed for the entire week!

Apparently Castro gave up cigars. I hear he was trying to set a more healthy example for his people. Something like that. I can't recall where I saw the article.

Kinda hard to imagine him without one though, isn't it?

I have heard that it was because he is paranoid about the US attempting to assassinate him with an exploding one...

Having been to Cuba, and having studied Latin American politics all my life, I would not call this a dictatorship. Dissent is allowed, political prisoners are freed, though they are exiled, and a private market, though technically illegal, is allowed to thrive, and all Cuban citizens are trained in firearms and have access to weapons. To quote a Cuban citizen:

'We put him in power, we can take him out again if we want.'

If that is not democracy, I don't know what is. I can think of other countries where a candidate may win the popular vote, but have the presidency given to the other candidate because of voting irregularities.

This whole thread, except one or two posts, seems to perpetuate the illusion that Cuba is a communist dictatorship, while my empirical perspective views it as more of a socialist one-party democracy.

Having said that, I think his brother Raul will take the reins. Meanwhile, the USA will do everything it can to control the econmy and political situation. I would not be surprised if they attempt to invade again. And I would hazard the guess that this time, though they may be more succesful, they will have the same problems they did last time with respect to the Cuban people not supporting the US 'liberators'.

Hasta la victoria siempre.

Having been to Cuba, and having studied Latin American politics all my life, I would not call this a dictatorship. Dissent is allowed, political prisoners are freed, though they are exiled, and a private market, though technically illegal, is allowed to thrive, and all Cuban citizens are trained in firearms and have access to weapons. To quote a Cuban citizen:

'We put him in power, we can take him out again if we want.'

If that is not democracy, I don't know what is. I can think of other countries where a candidate may win the popular vote, but have the presidency given to the other candidate because of voting irregularities.

This whole thread, except one or two posts, seems to perpetuate the illusion that Cuba is a communist dictatorship, while my empirical perspective views it as more of a socialist one-party democracy.
You call a country a democracy where people have the choice between one party and nothing.
That is bizarre to say the least. Dissent is not allowed. Dissenters are imprisoned or forced out of the country.
Castro may be less unpopular than Honecker was in East Germany. He is and remains a dictator. He was never democratically elected. And he rules autocrtically (one-person rule). That is a dictatorship.

And as for an Empire, we never had an empire in the normal sense of the word.

all land west of the appalachians is the american empire. independent political and ethnic groups were conquered and placed under the rule of others from a distant and central source of power. it doesn't matter that they killed off enough of the original inhabitants and have held the things long enough that those areas consider themselves core members of the state. there were very large areas of the roman empire that considered themselves roman after they'd been held for awhile too, and yet nobody claims that they weren't part of the empire.

I am pretty sure Fidel will actually never die. Seriously. Not that I wish for that, but that is what i think will happen.

all land west of the appalachians is the american empire. independent political and ethnic groups were conquered and placed under the rule of others from a distant and central source of power. it doesn't matter that they killed off enough of the original inhabitants and have held the things long enough that those areas consider themselves core members of the state. there were very large areas of the roman empire that considered themselves roman after they'd been held for awhile too, and yet nobody claims that they weren't part of the empire.

Dude, to constitute an Empire, you must have foreign Territory. Guam, American Samoa, and Puerto Rico are our only possessions. Yea there are other islands that we have but they are insignificant.

After the Spanish American War, we gained the islands of the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Cuba. Puerto Rico is still American Territory. The Philippines and Cuba are independent nations.

We do not hold what we conquered. Afghanistan was taken over and now they have an elected government. Iraq was taken over and the Iraqis are incharge. They are NOT American territories.

Are we an Empire? No we are not an Empire.

I am pretty sure Fidel will actually never die. Seriously. Not that I wish for that, but that is what i think will happen.

Let us hope. :D

The US install vicerois - governors of their foreign possessions - Afghanistan (karzai), Iraq (allawi) are merely US puppets who must make sure that the countries always stay in line with the wishes of the US - resources or political demands. These countries are under influence of foreign will by having extensions of the White House on their helm to rule benevolently in the best interest of the US to further expand the US "cultural" and economical empire.

The US install vicerois - governors of their foreign possessions - Afghanistan (karzai), Iraq (allawi) are merely US puppets who must make sure that the countries always stay in line with the wishes of the US - resources or political demands. These countries are under influence of foreign will by having extensions of the White House on their helm to rule benevolently in the best interest of the US to further expand the US "cultural" and economical empire.

Believe what you will Gigatron. Obviously you have no experience in how Foreign Affairs work.

We do not hold what we conquered. Afghanistan was taken over and now they have an elected government. Iraq was taken over and the Iraqis are incharge. They are NOT American territories.

Err... California?

Err... California?

California is a state in the USA. It is not foreign territory.

Believe what you will Gigatron. Obviously you have no experience in how Foreign Affairs work.
I don't? I rather think Dubya "The Shrub" Bush has no clue how foreign relations work.

I see that the leaders of Afgh. and Iraq have ties to the CIA/MI6 or are otherwise U.S.-hand-picked puppets who are kept in power by giving their governements the air of being democratically elected.

I don't? I rather think Dubya "The Shrub" Bush has no clue how foreign relations work.

I see that the leaders of Afgh. and Iraq have ties to the CIA/MI6 or are otherwise U.S.-hand-picked puppets who are kept in power by giving their governements the air of being democratically elected.

As I said, believe what you will. I won't be able to change your mind and you are entitled to your opinion. Our opinions are different but that is ok.

The US install vicerois - governors of their foreign possessions - Afghanistan (karzai), Iraq (allawi) are merely US puppets who must make sure that the countries always stay in line with the wishes of the US - resources or political demands. These countries are under influence of foreign will by having extensions of the White House on their helm to rule benevolently in the best interest of the US to further expand the US "cultural" and economical empire.
Like France, Germany, most other West European countries and Japan? They not only seem to be independent countries. They are independent countries.
Afghanistan and Iraq are going to grow to that one day. No doubt about that.
The United States is not an empire of the evil - that was the USSR who conquored and repressed people.
The US brought democracy to Western Europe and West Germany and fought in the Cold War also to bring it to Central and Eastern Europe.
And they prevailed - together with us.
And now we all face a new challenge: radical islamicism. A threat to our freedoms. And I think we will prevail in this fight under American leadership. America must lead - because it is the most powerful.
I believe in freedom and democracy. I think that free socities are peaceful societies and that like the free Japan and Germany a free Iraq is going to develop into a more peaceful society. That is going to spread and to pacify the hole region in the long-run.
Despair, underdevelopment and dictatorships are the breeding ground of radical ideologies and terror. The removal of one of the worst dictators in the Middle East has opened the opportunity for a better Iraq and a better future for that country and for the region. This opportunity should not be shmached, regardless of how we stood on the question of war.
It is for the sake of Iraq, for the sake of the region, for the sake of the security of Europa and for the sake of the West in general and of course also for the sake of the United States that this mission is going to successful.

You call a country a democracy where people have the choice between one party and nothing.
That is bizarre to say the least. Dissent is not allowed. Dissenters are imprisoned or forced out of the country.
Castro may be less unpopular than Honecker was in East Germany. He is and remains a dictator. He was never democratically elected. And he rules autocrtically (one-person rule). That is a dictatorship.

Democracy is what people will make of it. Look at it this way, in the US you have your choice between one of two parties that are pretty much the same or nothing. For third parties it's almost impossible to have access to real power.

And yet it's generally considered a democracy because there is still the reasonable chance for citizens to have their voice heard and laws passed based on that.

In Cuba, although there is a single party, people can choose whoever they want to represent them in their parliaments (local to national) and have their voices heard. Sure, general lines and overall policies are still dictated by Castro and his close circle, but it's far from being a militarily controlled dictatorship like it was before Castro.

Like France, Germany, most other West European countries and Japan? They not only seem to be independent countries. They are independent countries.
Afghanistan and Iraq are going to grow to that one day. No doubt about that.
The United States is not an empire of the evil - that was the USSR who conquored and repressed people.
The US brought democracy to Western Europe and West Germany and fought in the Cold War also to bring it to Central and Eastern Europe.
And they prevailed - together with us.
And now we all face a new challenge: radical islamicism. A threat to our freedoms. And I think we will prevail in this fight under American leadership. America must lead - because it is the most powerful.
I believe in freedom and democracy. I think that free socities are peaceful societies and that like the free Japan and Germany a free Iraq is going to develop into a more peaceful society. That is going to spread and to pacify the hole region in the long-run.
Despair, underdevelopment and dictatorships are the breeding ground of radical ideologies and terror. The removal of one of the worst dictators in the Middle East has opened the opportunity for a better Iraq and a better future for that country and for the region. This opportunity should not be shmached, regardless of how we stood on the question of war.
It is for the sake of Iraq, for the sake of the region, for the sake of the security of Europa and for the sake of the West in general and of course also for the sake of the United States that this mission is going to successful.
Hahaha... that Iraq becomes an obedient puppet of the U.S. is required so they get cheap oil. And if you thought Iraq was the last country to be invaded in such an arrogant and illegal fashion, just wait if Bush gets re-elected. God help us if the U.S. attack Iran!

California is a state in the USA. It is not foreign territory.
It was conquered and not let go. Instead it was annexed and then colonized.

I chose the first option. I have only a very little knowledge of the political situation in Cuba, but I'm fairly certain that Fidel is intelligent enough to have been grooming a successor for many years and making sure Cuba will go on as it has been after he goes into the ground.

I think Cuba will have a civil war and that the US will support the pro-democracy faction.
I woudn't count on that. In such conflicts the US has a history of supporting the dictatorship faction. See Indonesia.

It was conquered and not let go. Instead it was annexed and then colonized.

Actually in a way your right, it was conquered via military during the Mexican War.

People then moved there but there was already people there that were Americans. When we got California, we also gained Arizona, and New Mexico. They all applied to be states in the Union. If they didn't want to be states, they did not have to petition the government to join the Union. They did and Congress approved them.

People then moved there but there was already people there that were Americans. When we got California, we also gained Arizona, and New Mexico. They all applied to be states in the Union. If they didn't want to be states, they did not have to petition the government to join the Union. They did and Congress approved them.
No, the only "Americans" in those territories after the war were the Mexican citizens that, because of the Guadalupe-Hidalgo peace treaty, the US had to take. The population changed with time by migration from other states, especially during the Gold Rush in California, and then these colonizers asked to be considered part of the Union (or metropolis).

No, the only "Americans" in those territories after the war were the Mexican citizens that, because of the Guadalupe-Hidalgo peace treaty, the US had to take. The population changed with time by migration from other states, especially during the Gold Rush in California, and then these colonizers asked to be considered part of the Union (or metropolis).

Hmm actually no! There were americans that were there before the Mexican War broke out. Samething happened in the Texas War of Independence.

Hmm actually no! There were americans that were there before the Mexican War broke out. Samething happened in the Texas War of Independence.
Texas was different. Than happened 10 years before the Mexican-American War. And, although most Texians came from the US, they technically weren't Americans, since they had to give up their citizenship and become Mexicans to settle in Texas.

If there were any Americans in the rest of the Mexican Northern Territories (Alta California and Nuevo Mexico), they were very very few.

Texas was different. Than happened 10 years before the Mexican-American War. And, although most Texians came from the US, they technically weren't Americans, since they had to give up their citizenship and become Mexicans to settle in Texas.

If there were any Americans in the rest of the Mexican Northern Territories (Alta California and Nuevo Mexico), they were very very few.

And I've been saying that.

Despair, underdevelopment and dictatorships are the breeding ground of radical ideologies and terror. The removal of one of the worst dictators in the Middle East has opened the opportunity for a better Iraq and a better future for that country and for the region.
Iraq is much more of a terrorist haven now than it ever was under Saddam. It was not in our best interests to remove him. Well, not at this time at least.

And I've been saying that.
Yeah, but they would have been too few to ask for independence from Mexico and join the US, like Texas did. Or too few for anything else, there were many more Mexicans.

In California colonization only came after military conquest.

EDIT: I reread your posts and I think I know what you mean. You don't consider those parts to have formed part of the US before their statehood. However, they were territories administered by and forming part of the US, they just didn't have the same rights as states, i.e. have their own government, pass their own laws and control their own budget. They had to have a certain population to apply for statehood, but they most certainly were part of the US.

Dude, to constitute an Empire, you must have foreign Territory.

no, that's silly. the point of empire is that the places you conquer are no longer foreign. foreign means a place that is not under the political jurisdiction of your country. an empire takes formerly independent political units and puts them under the control of another state - typically through coercion, though there were many cases of particular areas more-or-less voluntarily joining an empire (for protection from its other enemies or for the tax breaks, or whatever).

on the other hand, maybe you are using the word 'foreign' to mean 'non-contiguous'. but that is also silly. most of the huge empires in human history were largely contiguous. the mongol empire (http://www.bartleby.com/67/images/mongol02.gif), the russian empire (http://editors.sipri.se/pubs/pressre/ptibmap.gif), large sections of the roman empire (http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/corinthians/maps/empire.gif), etc. and all of the earliest empires were entirely contiguous, land-based deals. you only get over-seas imperial holdings much later in the game.


the united states of america is an empire and has been since very nearly the beginning. there is no other word to describe it. the fact that its policy of depopulation, slavery, genocide, colonization, and disenfranchisement worked cannot ever change this.

Today we were reminded that Castro is an increasingly frail old man. He cannot remain dictator for long. He will probably die within the next decade.

What will happen when he dies? Vote in the poll!

I'll cheer in the streets, singing, "Ding dong, the bitch is dead!"

It'll be chaos in Cuba, forcing US intervention, as it'll threaten the southern US. But that's just my opinion.

the united states of america is an empire and has been since very nearly the beginning. there is no other word to describe it. the fact that its policy of depopulation, slavery, genocide, colonization, and disenfranchisement worked cannot ever change this.Maybe I'm being naive, but does the definition of an empire not include an emperor? And emperors are definitely not elected officials.

Maybe I'm being naive, but does the definition of an empire not include an emperor? And emperors are definitely not elected officials.

And Bush is? ;)

And Bush is? ;)

No, Myrth, Bush is a Fuhrer, not an emperor. ;)

Maybe I'm being naive, but does the definition of an empire not include an emperor? And emperors are definitely not elected officials.

depends on who is doing the defining. i don't because it makes no sense to me to have tsarist russia be an empire but not bolshevik russia. besides, then we just need to come up with new words for "land that used to contain numerous independent political units that is now ruled by just one state, which is headed by (nominally elected officials/dictator that doesn't claim to be an emperor/council of generals/a ruler whose language doesn't include the word empire/etc)". and then the united states would be that.

we could call it a rempire - an empire that allows its holdings to participate in a republican form of government once the conquered population has been sufficiently killed off and repopulated with the conquerer's people or otherwise pacified. but frankly, i don't see the point.

we could call it a rempire - an empire that allows its holdings to participate in a republican form of government once the conquered population has been sufficiently killed off and repopulated with the conquerer's people or otherwise pacified. but frankly, i don't see the point.How about sticking with words we already have, like "imperialistic republic"?

Bush may not have been elected, but he's no emperor. He'll be gone in 4 years one way or another.

Holy crap! I posted more times than Myrth!!!! :eek:

(Not trying to brag, I'm just very, very surprised!)

depends on who is doing the defining. i don't because it makes no sense to me to have tsarist russia be an empire but not bolshevik russia. besides, then we just need to come up with new words for "land that used to contain numerous independent political units that is now ruled by just one state, which is headed by (nominally elected officials/dictator that doesn't claim to be an emperor/council of generals/a ruler whose language doesn't include the word empire/etc)". and then the united states would be that. OK, fun with semantics now! :D

em·pire (mpr)
n.

1. a. A political unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations and ruled by a single supreme authority. b. The territory included in such a unit.
2. An extensive enterprise under a unified authority: a publishing empire.
3. Imperial or imperialistic sovereignty, domination, or control: “There is a growing sense that the course of empire is shifting toward the... Asians” (James Traub).
Defition 1 is the more traditional sense I was thinking of, but by your arguments the US would fit 2 or 3 quite well, certainly being under one unified authority (the feds) and having imperialistic tendencies aimed toward domination or control.

Invading countries at will... imposing its own values... plundering the country's natural resources...
Sure sounds familiar.

How about sticking with words we already have, like "imperialistic republic"?

sure.

but i like the sound of 'empire' better.

the united states of america is an empire and has been since very nearly the beginning. there is no other word to describe it. the fact that its policy of depopulation, slavery, genocide, colonization, and disenfranchisement worked cannot ever change this.

No we have never been an Empire. To be an Empire, you must control the land. Yea we took over Iraq and Afghanistan but we do not hold Iraq or Afghanistan. They are still soveriegn nations. Afghanistan has had their elections and Iraq will have theirs in January.

As for the expansion westward, you can't constitute it as imperialism. Yea we took most of it via the Mexican War but it went on to become members of the Union. Thus negating the term Empire. Therefor, we are NOT an empire.

How about sticking with words we already have, like "imperialistic republic"?

Bush may not have been elected, but he's no emperor. He'll be gone in 4 years one way or another.

Dude, Bush WAS ELECTED or haven't you heard of the Electoral College? Before you bring up Florida, let me pre-empt you.

I can with a couple of clicks of the keys, find the Bush v Gore opinion from SCOTUS. It shows what the Florida Supreme Court was doing.

The US install vicerois - governors of their foreign possessions - Afghanistan (karzai), Iraq (allawi) are merely US puppets who must make sure that the countries always stay in line with the wishes of the US - resources or political demands. These countries are under influence of foreign will by having extensions of the White House on their helm to rule benevolently in the best interest of the US to further expand the US "cultural" and economical empire.

well duh. any country would do the same.

Eh... You've never -been- to California, have you?

Last time I checked they were in the Union. As for being foreign.....

As for the expansion westward, you can't constitute it as imperialism. Yea we took most of it via the Mexican War but it went on to become members of the Union. Thus negating the term Empire. Therefor, we are NOT an empire.


and the nobles of gaul were allowed into the roman senate. still an empire.