NationStates Jolt Archive


Why is it so important for America to be the world leader?

UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:11
Why is it so important for the US to lead the world? Why not let Europe, Asia and all them peoples just collapse into anarchy and wacko religious dictatorships and famines and stuff like that?
What harm would it do to us to turn our backs on them?
Why not let Russia take over Eurupe, China take over Asia and Venezuela conquer South America and let North Korea annex South Korea and Japan? After all none of this is any of our business?
And why are we bailing out Mexico and other failed economies of foreign countries that have nothing to do with us? They sure don't impact our way of life here in America.
Prekkendoria
29-12-2006, 20:13
Why is it so important for the US to lead the world? Why not let Europe, Asia and all them peoples just collapse into anarchy and wacko religious dictatorships and famines and stuff like that?
What harm would it do to us to turn our backs on them?

Do you actually believe that Europe and Asia could not hold cvilisation together? We've been doing it a lot longer than the US, and achieved greater results.
Pyotr
29-12-2006, 20:14
When did we become the world's government?

China, India, Russia, and the E.U. are more than capable of sustaining civilisation.
RLI Rides Again
29-12-2006, 20:14
Why is it so important for the US to lead the world? Why not let Europe, Asia and all them peoples just collapse into anarchy and wacko religious dictatorships and famines and stuff like that?
What harm would it do to us to turn our backs on them?

Since when has Europe been collapsing into a 'wacko religious dictatorship'?
The SR
29-12-2006, 20:14
Why is it so important for the US to lead the world? Why not let Europe, Asia and all them peoples just collapse into anarchy and wacko religious dictatorships and famines and stuff like that?
What harm would it do to us to turn our backs on them?

apart from WW2 which was a global stand against tyranny, when have you used your foreign reach for anyone elses good?

are tou trying to say if you weren't turning iraq into 'anarchy and wacko religious dictatorship' europe and asia would disentegrate?

get a life kiddo. the world was a far safer place before the monkey started this 'war on terror'
Hydesland
29-12-2006, 20:15
This thread is retarded.
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 20:15
Why is it so important for the US to lead the world? Why not let Europe, Asia and all them peoples just collapse into anarchy and wacko religious dictatorships and famines and stuff like that?
What harm would it do to us to turn our backs on them?
Why not let Russia take over Eurupe, China take over Asia and Venezuela conquer South America and let North Korea annex South Korea and Japan? After all none of this is any of our business?
And why are we bailing out Mexico and other failed economies of foreign countries that have nothing to do with us? They sure don't impact our way of life here in America.

How else will you demonstrate to the world the huge impressiveness of your genitals?


Oh, and what makes you think it's America that's stopping all the other countries from invading everyone and not the other way around?
Neo Kervoskia
29-12-2006, 20:15
I guess Europe's governments went down the shitter...
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:16
When did we become the world's government?

That's what I want to know?
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 20:17
Since when has Europe been collapsing into a 'wacko religious dictatorship'?
Around the start of the Dark Ages. Things have improved since then, fortunately.
This thread is retarded.

QFT
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 20:18
That's what I want to know?

You didn't, nobody expects America to be the glue that holds civilisation together(not that it is).
The SR
29-12-2006, 20:18
That's what I want to know?

you choose to stomp around the world 'defendng your interests'. your choice, we would much rather you got back in your box and stopped provoking people and starting wars on lies etc.

would 911 have happened if the US hadnt such an appaling track record in global meddling?
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:18
What would happen to Europe if the US stopped all trade with Europe?
Fartsniffage
29-12-2006, 20:19
What would happen to Europe if the US stopped all trade with Europe?

We'd have to trade more with other people.
Pyotr
29-12-2006, 20:20
That's what I want to know?

No, that's what your saying; that if America ceased all of its foreign policies, the world would descend into Anarchy and/or dictatorship. Kindly explain how you think that would happen because I'm not seeing it.
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 20:20
What would happen to Europe if the US stopped all trade with Europe?

I imagine we'd cope. Europe is a big place, if we can't make it ourselves chances are we can buy it off someone in Asia.
RLI Rides Again
29-12-2006, 20:20
What would happen to Europe if the US stopped all trade with Europe?

We'd trade more with China and your economic collapse would be hastened?
Glorious Heathengrad
29-12-2006, 20:21
What would happen to Europe if the US stopped all trade with Europe?

What would happen to The US of if the US stopped all trade with Europe?
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:22
you choose to stomp around the world 'defendng your interests'. your choice, we would much rather you got back in your box and stopped provoking people and starting wars on lies etc.

would 911 have happened if the US hadnt such an appaling track record in global meddling?

Yes it would have. Cause the terrorists are not fighting globalization. They are fighting to create a global Islamic Caliphate.
Pyotr
29-12-2006, 20:22
What would happen to Europe if the US stopped all trade with Europe?

the U.S. and Europe would have to trade with China, India, or Russia. Perhaps having to loot Africa for resources, again.
Minskia
29-12-2006, 20:23
another big depression.
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 20:23
Yes it would have. Cause the terrorists are not fighting globalization. They are fighting to create a global Islamic Caliphate.

More than one flavour of terrorist my friend.
Pyotr
29-12-2006, 20:24
Yes it would have. Cause the terrorists are not fighting globalization. They are fighting to create a global Islamic Caliphate.

The terrorists are not a monolithic group, Al Qaeda might want to start a Caliphate. But Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. don't.

Besides, the islamists would not be capable of militarily conquering Europe, not by a longshot.
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:24
No, that's what your saying; that if America ceased all of its foreign policies, the world would descend into Anarchy and/or dictatorship. Kindly explain how you think that would happen because I'm not seeing it.

Can you say that civilization does not need democracy in order to survive. The civilization would still be there but the democracy probably would not last long. There would be civil war as people struggle for lacking resources.
Can Europe sustain itself without trade from other nations?
Can any country?
Minskia
29-12-2006, 20:25
What would happen to The US of if the US stopped all trade with Europe?

The United States could support its self.
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:26
another big depression.

based on what?
Prekkendoria
29-12-2006, 20:26
What would happen to Europe if the US stopped all trade with Europe?

European countries would suffer the economic damage of losing one trade partner, the US would suffer the loss of many.
Fartsniffage
29-12-2006, 20:26
Can you say that civilization does not need democracy in order to survive. The civilization would still be there but the democracy probably would not last long. There would be civil war as people struggle for lacking resources.
Can Europe sustain itself without trade from other nations?
Can any country?

There have been plenty of civilisations not based on democratic rule that have done very well for themselves.
The SR
29-12-2006, 20:27
What would happen to Europe if the US stopped all trade with Europe?

you buy much more of our stuff than we do yours....

bear in mind most American products we buy are made in China while almost all of our produce you buy are made right here. You and your trade balance need us more than we need your rapidly depreciating dollars. Not to advocate trade war, but be clear who would lose most.
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:27
More than one flavour of terrorist my friend.

True that is. But the ones who attacked on 911 were of the Islamic "lets impose Islamic rule on the world" type.
Pyotr
29-12-2006, 20:28
Can you say that civilization does not need democracy in order to survive.
Civilization was around a long time before democracy.

The civilization would still be there but the democracy probably would not last long. There would be civil war as people struggle for lacking resources.
Can Europe sustain itself without trade from other nations?
Can any country?

India, China, Russia, the Asian Tigers, Africa. Resources are limited, they will always be limited, scarcity will always exist, regardless of U.S. involvement.
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 20:28
Can you say that civilization does not need democracy in order to survive. The civilization would still be there but the democracy probably would not last long. There would be civil war as people struggle for lacking resources.
Can Europe sustain itself without trade from other nations?
Can any country?

Yes, and democracy can only come from America, for no other "democratic" nation in the world has a real democracy of their own, they're all just copying America.

And Europe probably couldn't sustain itself with no trade from outside Europe. But that's not the issue here. Europe could sustain itself without America trade.
The SR
29-12-2006, 20:29
True that is. But the ones who attacked on 911 were of the Islamic "lets impose Islamic rule on the world" type.

but they arent.

they attacked US symbols of capital and power over your mid east policy and military prescence in Saudi.

they want christians to stay in their lands and them to rule theirs. read any of their material
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 20:31
True that is. But the ones who attacked on 911 were of the Islamic "lets impose Islamic rule on the world" type.

And what does that have to do with your mistaken idea that the world needs America?
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:31
The terrorists are not a monolithic group, Al Qaeda might want to start a Caliphate. But Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. don't.

Besides, the islamists would not be capable of militarily conquering Europe, not by a longshot.

Interesting you said that.

It wasn't Hamas or Hezbollah who attacked the US on 911 was it?

I am not so certain of Europe's ability to prevent an Islamic take over of their countries. Aren't they already making themselves felt in France, Britain, and Germany and Italy? (Germany to the lesser extent and France to the greatest extent) How many attacks by Islamists been able to committ in Europe compared to the US?

I think the fact the US has had only 2 attacks is a miracle considering that a lot of people here care more about privacy rights than they do about preventing people from being killed by fruitcakes.
Dobbsworld
29-12-2006, 20:32
This thread is retarded.

Too true.
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:33
The United States could support its self.

How can the US support itself? If it didn't trade with anyone, wouldn't that create a national depression and cause everyone to lose their jobs and their homes and most cases their cars?
Pyotr
29-12-2006, 20:35
I am not so certain of Europe's ability to prevent an Islamic take over of their countries. Aren't they already making themselves felt in France, Britain, and Germany and Italy? (Germany to the lesser extent and France to the greatest extent) How many attacks by Islamists been able to committ in Europe compared to the US?
Attacks are a lot different from military conquest.
Northern Borders
29-12-2006, 20:36
Yes, this topic is totaly retarded. Dont they teach anything worth in schools anymore?
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:37
you buy much more of our stuff than we do yours....

bear in mind most American products we buy are made in China while almost all of our produce you buy are made right here. You and your trade balance need us more than we need your rapidly depreciating dollars. Not to advocate trade war, but be clear who would lose most.

I was unaware that we imported produce from Europe. Everything I see at the store says it either grown in the phillipines or in some South American country like Chile or Argentina or Mexico.
Neo Kervoskia
29-12-2006, 20:38
-500 posts penalty.
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 20:40
I was unaware that we imported produce from Europe. Everything I see at the store says it either grown in the phillipines or in some South American country like Chile or Argentina or Mexico.

Cars, wine, furniture, other such things that are presumed to be luxury items because they're from Europe.
The SR
29-12-2006, 20:40
I was unaware that we imported produce from Europe. Everything I see at the store says it either grown in the phillipines or in some South American country like Chile or Argentina or Mexico.

most of the luxury goods Americans consume from chocolate to watches to clothes to high end cars are European.

you are clearly a peasant. :D
Andaluciae
29-12-2006, 20:41
Well, there's a couple of reasons.

It's widely believed that in order for a global economic order to develop, it must be shaped and protected in its infancy a hegemonic state must act as a unipolar power. Through the leadership of a unipolar power, the global economic order can develop according to its desires.

Of course, the reason for wanting to develop a global economic order involves our intrinsic desire to make money. It's easier for a lot of people to make a lot of money in a larger market.

Beyond that, the US also perceives there as being grave potential security threats to the US, and to pre-empt them, the US keeps potential enemies from rising to power with action abroad. Unfortunately, we've learned our lesson about foreign powers all too well in the last century, both with Imperial Germany, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. The old "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me" thing is floating around in the American foreign policy elites manner of thinking. We're pissed at the rest of you (save for Britain and Australia, our anglophonic chums), and we're just a tad hyper-reactive because of it.

There's also other factors involved, including prestige issues and an occasional Wilsonian streak, but these are the two primary motivators for continued US involvement in the rest of the world.
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 20:56
most of the luxury goods Americans consume from chocolate to watches to clothes to high end cars are European.

you are clearly a peasant. :D

the chocolate I eat is either made in New Hampshire or in Mexico.
The SR
29-12-2006, 20:57
the chocolate I eat is either made in New Hampshire or in Mexico.

probably. you are a peasant.
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
29-12-2006, 21:00
I've tried European chocolate, the only brand that is sold over here, and it was simply too bitter for consumption. The stuff they make in New England is sweeter and goes down better.
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 21:01
the chocolate I eat is either made in New Hampshire or in Mexico.

Well then I guess there must be no European chocolate in America at all :rolleyes:
The Pacifist Womble
29-12-2006, 21:03
Why is it so important for the US to lead the world? Why not let Europe, Asia and all them peoples just collapse into anarchy and wacko religious dictatorships and famines and stuff like that?
What harm would it do to us to turn our backs on them?
Why not let Russia take over Eurupe, China take over Asia and Venezuela conquer South America and let North Korea annex South Korea and Japan? After all none of this is any of our business?
And why are we bailing out Mexico and other failed economies of foreign countries that have nothing to do with us? They sure don't impact our way of life here in America.
Because it's in the US big business interest to do so. The world is interdependent.
New Genoa
29-12-2006, 21:06
we became world police after WWII. britain can have that title back though.
Wallonochia
29-12-2006, 21:06
Well then I guess there must be no European chocolate in America at all :rolleyes:

None at all. Especially not the Ritter Sport I bought today. Or the Lindt I got for Christmas.

I've tried European chocolate, the only brand that is sold over here, and it was simply too bitter for consumption. The stuff they make in New England is sweeter and goes down better.

Strange, they sell 3 brands at my grocery store and none of them are at all bitter.
RLI Rides Again
29-12-2006, 21:24
we became world police after WWII. britain can have that title back though.

Sweet! Do we get cool hats to go with the title? :)
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 21:27
None at all. Especially not the Ritter Sport I bought today. Or the Lindt I got for Christmas.
Yeah, that's just an illusion. The terrorists did it.



Strange, they sell 3 brands at my grocery store and none of them are at all bitter.
Terrorists
Sweet! Do we get cool hats to go with the title? :)

You get the Team America uniforms from the movie of the same name.
New Genoa
29-12-2006, 21:28
Sweet! Do we get cool hats to go with the title? :)

of course. but there's also a minor detail... [mutters under breath]you have to take care of iraq and pay for it and maintain with your military forces without placing any more responsibility on the united states government *cough* *cough*
Wallonochia
29-12-2006, 21:31
Yeah, that's just an illusion. The terrorists did it.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a353/tuebor/OMGTERRORIST.jpg

I've been waiting for a semi-legitimate reason to use this pic.
Very Large Penguin
29-12-2006, 21:32
we became world police after WWII. britain can have that title back though.
You can keep it, I'm sick of seeing this country always getting dragged into the rest of the world's problems.
Gauthier
29-12-2006, 21:34
Another tool who thinks "America, Fuck Yeah!!" ought to be the new national anthem. Yawn.
New Genoa
29-12-2006, 21:37
Another tool who thinks "America, Fuck Yeah!!" ought to be the new national anthem. Yawn.

And you don't? Dude:

America, Fuck Yeah lyrics (http://www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/teamamericaworldpolice/americafuckyeah.htm)

vs.

US National Anthem lyrics (http://www.lyricsondemand.com/miscellaneouslyrics/nationalanthemslyrics/usanationalanthemlyrics.html)

Which one is cooler?

And if you're not convinced: http://www.funfreepages.com/flash/america_fuck_yeah.php
Greater Somalia
29-12-2006, 21:37
Changing tides, Asian dominance is next and about time!
New Genoa
29-12-2006, 21:40
Changing tides, Asian dominance is next and about time!

Not if we cut off their rice supply.
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 21:44
Not if we cut off their rice supply.

They grow their own rice......
Dragon-hide Sneaks
29-12-2006, 21:49
Wow i don't know if this is serious but if it is the first post is a perfect example of the U.S.'s ignorance. I do know some normal sane U.S. citizens who think differently and try not to be like the wakos that normally get on T.V. or are in the news
New Genoa
29-12-2006, 21:50
They grow their own rice......

Exactly why we poison it.
Eve Online
29-12-2006, 21:50
Well, it's good for several reasons:

1. Other people, when confronted with something like Darfur, can say, "why don't the Americans go?"
2. If the Americans do go, the same people can complain, "the Americans are fucking it up"
3. If there's nothing else to bitch about, you can always deride the Americans for being wasteful or anything else that a superpower should or should not be doing.

It takes all the responsibility off the other nations to do anything.
United Chicken Kleptos
29-12-2006, 21:52
How else will you demonstrate to the world the huge impressiveness of your genitals?

Actually, I believe it may be actually to make up for the lack of genitalia. If you were to, say, invade a country, it would theoretically make people think you have big balls, when in fact, you probably more than likely have a Napoleon complex; you're out to be aggressive because of your lack of genitalia. That's my guess at this odd, arrogant behavior of people.
New Genoa
29-12-2006, 21:52
Well, it's good for several reasons:

1. Other people, when confronted with something like Darfur, can say, "why don't the Americans go?"
2. If the Americans do go, the same people can complain, "the Americans are fucking it up"
3. If there's nothing else to bitch about, you can always deride the Americans for being wasteful or anything else that a superpower should or should not be doing.

It takes all the responsibility off the other nations to do anything.

You forgot: "The Americans are violating national sovereignty" or "there's worse places the US should be helping in...like the Somalia and Ethiopia conflict!" (change the last bit to whatever is appropriate at the time being)
Ifreann
29-12-2006, 21:55
Actually, I believe it may be actually to make up for the lack of genitalia. If you were to, say, invade a country, it would theoretically make people think you have big balls, when in fact, you probably more than likely have a Napoleon complex; you're out to be aggressive because of your lack of genitalia. That's my guess at this odd, arrogant behavior of people.

Yes, that's what I was subtly implying.
Mikelvania
29-12-2006, 22:24
Really we have our own problems to worry about. Let the rest of the world rely on the UN to settle differences. Since we basically enforce decrees that they make and get flack for it, i say we should withdraw from it and leave everyone alone.
UnitedStatesOfAmerica-
30-12-2006, 00:24
Really we have our own problems to worry about. Let the rest of the world rely on the UN to settle differences. Since we basically enforce decrees that they make and get flack for it, i say we should withdraw from it and leave everyone alone.

I agree. We should cancel all our trade agreements and alliances and seal our borders.
Ifreann
30-12-2006, 00:33
I agree. We should cancel all our trade agreements and alliances and seal our borders.

Please allow me to be the first to suggest you do just that. Leave the rest of us in peace.
Prekkendoria
30-12-2006, 00:47
I agree. We should cancel all our trade agreements and alliances and seal our borders.

How typically American isolationist.
Good luck. You'll need it.
RLI Rides Again
30-12-2006, 00:54
You get the Team America uniforms from the movie of the same name.

YAY! :D

of course. but there's also a minor detail... [mutters under breath]you have to take care of iraq and pay for it and maintain with your military forces without placing any more responsibility on the united states government *cough* *cough*

Oh... :(

But we do get cool hats out of it, right?
Captain pooby
30-12-2006, 00:55
This thread is retarded.

I agree.


However, I do like the fact that we have so much power. Very nice thing to have.
Ifreann
30-12-2006, 00:57
I agree.


However, I do like the fact that we have so much power. Very nice thing to have.

Whatever makes you happy.
Captain pooby
30-12-2006, 00:57
Please allow me to be the first to suggest you do just that. Leave the rest of us in peace.


We tried that once. Then they pissed us off...
JuNii
30-12-2006, 00:59
Why is it so important for the US to lead the world? because eveyone wants someone to blame for all the problems that occure, and since America drew the short straw during the last national meeting... :rolleyes:
Townsburgiatopia
30-12-2006, 01:01
I think he's kinda got a point, it just wasn't stated very well.

Seems to be saying: Since when the hell did it become our job to be the world police.

I tend to agree with that statement. Only problem is, most of the time, the world didn't need policing to begin with.
Rainbowwws
30-12-2006, 01:01
The United States could support its self.

LMAO
Ifreann
30-12-2006, 01:01
We tried that once. Then they pissed us off...

Well you bombed them already, back in your cave.
Prekkendoria
30-12-2006, 01:05
I think he's kinda got a point, it just wasn't stated very well.

Seems to be saying: Since when the hell did it become our job to be the world police.

I tend to agree with that statement. Only problem is, most of the time, the world didn't need policing to begin with.

America could never have hoped to please the world, as the super-power it could either interfere or not interfere and both would anger the rest of the world. The problem is that it has (especially recently) chosen to interfere in many of the wrong ways and disregarded the rest of the worlds opinion, so causng the maximum amount of international displeasure rather than the minimum. If everyone else sees a problem and you do not, then you should stop to re-evaluate.
Greater Trostia
30-12-2006, 01:08
Why is it so important for the US to lead the world? Why not let Europe, Asia and all them peoples just collapse into anarchy and wacko religious dictatorships and famines and stuff like that?

Strawman. The US isn't preventing Europe from "collapsing into anarchy" and we're doing very little in Asia. Oh, but we are helping create anarchy AND wacko religious dictatorships in the Middle East! Maybe that's why it's important that the US assume leadership - we can fuck up other places and thereby make ourselves look superior in comparison.


What harm would it do to us to turn our backs on them?

Economically, the US can't live in a bubble. We'd have a collapse of our economy within years at the very most.

Why not let Russia take over Eurupe

Whoa, did I fall asleep and merely dream the whole collapse of the soviet union?

, China take over Asia

Whoa, you mean the US prevented China from dominating Asia? When did that happen? When we stood by and masturbated while they invaded Tibet?

Your argument here is entirely flawed, based on false premises.
Prekkendoria
30-12-2006, 01:18
Strawman. The US isn't preventing Europe from "collapsing into anarchy" and we're doing very little in Asia. Oh, but we are helping create anarchy AND wacko religious dictatorships in the Middle East! Maybe that's why it's important that the US assume leadership - we can fuck up other places and thereby make ourselves look superior in comparison.
The problem with that is that when they turn on America it looks fairly stupid.

Whoa, did I fall asleep and merely dream the whole collapse of the soviet union?
No, you were in a car crash. The brain damage you suffered is causing you to believe in some sort of alternate history.

Whoa, you mean the US prevented China from dominating Asia? When did that happen? When we stood by and masturbated while they invaded Tibet?
I think he means when Superman defeated Dark Lord Mao in personal combat.
Tirindor
30-12-2006, 01:54
I'll agree we shouldn't be bailing out the economies of other nations, but letting them fall to invaders is not good policy. We don't live in a state of nature; as lefties like to say ad nauseum, we are one state in a world full of states, and what happens elsewhere has a nasty tendency to impact us.

Let's imagine, for instance, that North and South Korea had a nuclear exchange. The loss of imports would harm our own economy. Ergo we have a vested interest in maintaining stability in the region. And as we are the only nation in the world apparently both capable and willing to impose order, I see no problem with this. (We have seen the track record of Europe's unceasing drive for appeasement).

I don't, however, think this logically implies things like democratizing nations with no history or tradition of democracy. This also doesn't imply that we are the world's "leaders" or even should be, it just implies actions where other nations are content to let shit fall apart.

Since when has Europe been collapsing into a 'wacko religious dictatorship'?

Well, I can't speak for Europe as a whole, but France's inability to keep its population of Muslim extremists at bay (http://www.washtimes.com/world/20061011-115458-7275r.htm) is certainly a worrying trend for the continent, given the explosive growth of its Muslim population.

apart from WW2 which was a global stand against tyranny, when have you used your foreign reach for anyone elses good?

There are literally dozens every decade, and most involve relatively mundane things like averting genocide, suppressing potentially violent revolutions, etc.

Witness our interventions in Bosnia/Yugoslavia/Kosovo, East Timor, pre-invasion northern and southern Iraq, Macedonia, Haiti, Somalia, Panama, etc. And that was in just the 1990's alone.

the world was a far safer place before the monkey started this 'war on terror'

Hate to break it to ya but he sorta' didn't start it (http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2005/09/27/9_11_narrowweb__200x293,0.jpg).

And dude, be realistic. The fall of tyrannical governments in two relatively unimportant backwater countries is not a danger to the world.

What would happen to Europe if the US stopped all trade with Europe?

(And numerous responses)

I like how everyone thinks China can perfectly replace the void left by the absence of American imports, despite the vast differences between their respective industries. China dreams of having advanced industrial capabilities on par with Japan's, much less America's.

That said, it would be nice if the U.S. would stop gutting its industrial base with worthless sophistries about how we're a "post-industrial society." That's such nonsense. No nation can escape industrialism. Part of the best way to do this to quit glutting our economy with cheap hand labor from Mexico and restart the process of technological innovation. It's no secret that no-immigration Japan is one of the most technologically advanced in the world, and has some of the most vigorous exports.

Besides, the islamists would not be capable of militarily conquering Europe, not by a longshot.

As Muslims in France are proving, they don't need to conquer Europe militarily.

It's widely believed that in order for a global economic order to develop, it must be shaped and protected in its infancy a hegemonic state must act as a unipolar power. Through the leadership of a unipolar power, the global economic order can develop according to its desires.

Sadly true. :( And it represents how deeply both conservatism and liberalism have been subverted by globalism, giving us neocons and contemporary U.S. liberals, respectively.

Changing tides, Asian dominance is next and about time!

False.

Christ, am I like the only articulate conservative here? :headbang: Ah well, I like a challenge. :sniper: