[lordmandeep]

True, I think people fail to realize in history it usually takes a very long time for a dominate power to fail, or a emerging power to become the next dominate power. It may actually cause a period of great instability in between.


However, imo the Bush administration for its failure will be one of the most consequential since Truman.

 

[kEiThZ]

True, I think people fail to realize in history it usually takes a very long time for a dominate power to fail, or a emerging power to become the next dominate power. It may actually cause a period of great instability in between.


However, imo the Bush administration for its failure will be one of the most consequential since Truman.

Time will tell. We will only know the final story once Iraq plays itself out. It may turn out to be the start of the end or it may turn out to be a stroke of strategic genius. On the economy though, his legacy will be a lump of coal for laid off workers.

 

[lordmandeep]

Imo Iraq's legacy is that its easy to invade a country, but to rebuild and change a country to a functional democracy is much much harder.

Also, I think we can abandon the idea that democracy fits everywhere in the world. I wish it did, but imo it does not. Russia is a great example.

 

[kEiThZ]

Imo Iraq's legacy is that its easy to invade a country, but to rebuild and change a country to a functional democracy is much much harder.

The legacy is that the Bush administration did not understand the importance of nation building and pliant policy advisors, military officers and intelligence analysts refused to dissuade them from their ignorance.

One has to look no further than the British effort in Iraq to see a markedly different experience. Or our own effort in Afghanistan. For all the carping by the anti-war crowd about how Canada should return to peacekeeping, it is ironically our peacekeeping experience that has enabled us to have the successes that we've had in Afghanistan so far.

Also, I think we can abandon the idea that democracy fits everywhere in the world. I wish it did, but imo it does not. Russia is a great example.

Most folks fail to distinguish between democracies and liberal democracies. Establishing the former does not take much. The latter, however, is far more challenging. While the majority of the developing world maybe far from liberal democracy, democracy is taking root. Latin America is an excellent example. And Russia notwithstanding, the colour revolutions have strengthened democracy in the former Soviet states. In the end, encouraging democracy remains a worthwhile goal for many, many reasons.

 

[lordmandeep]

Yes places with some stability can have and support the basic forms of democracy. Even in very corrupted democratic countries like India, if the people speak out in anger, it leads to results. A ton of ministers had to quit in India over the bombings.

I doubt Russia can have a democracy, its like that nation must be ruled by a single man (or by a puppet and the Supreme Master standing behind). Imo I think its the Russian version of democracy, if you call it "democracy". \

About liberal democracies, Canada for its rather pathetic political situation, its remarkable the opposition launch a coup of some sort, and the PM ask an appointed person to suspend Parliament and she does and there is no real chaos. It either shows how bored we are in Canada, or how accepting we are of the way things are set by law.

For all the carping by the anti-war crowd about how Canada should return to peacekeeping, it is ironically our peacekeeping experience that has enabled us to have the successes that we've had in Afghanistan so far.

I think we are successful in bettering the lives of Afghan's but to suggest we are winning the war against the Taliban is not true. They are strong and practically sitting calmly in the border area's, stocking up and recruiting.

You know I actually support expanding the war to actually go after the Taliban properly and end the war. With the new US troops coming this can happen. If we cannot weaken the Taliban, all our sacrifice and work is for naught.
As it may be true that very few Afghans support the Taliban, the Taliban easily out power the government in Afghanistan and would take control of a wide part of the country if we left right now.

That is why I hate the NDP and have really distanced myself from the left. They care so much others, but they are very cold hearted when it comes to the rest of the world.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I think we're entering a period like the early 1900s, when there were several Great Powers. The post-war, and especially post-Cold War period of having only one military/economic power is unusual. Even Rome had to worry about the Persians.

In the early 1900s Britain ruled the waves, but the Germans ruled the battlefield and the USA was already the world's industrial leader. Even the French were thought to be strong, having not yet solidified their culture of military defeat and surrender.

Into the mid-21st century, I think we'll see China, India and the EU, plus some South American nations reaching the Great Power status. That doesn't mean the US has declined, only that the others have caught up.

 

[lordmandeep]

Historians have called the Roman-Persian wars that lasted over 500 years to be the most fruitless pointless wars ever waged.

Interesting History note....
The resources expended by the later Eastern Roman Empire and the Persians (Sassaind Empire) weakened them so much that they easily fell to the forces of the Arab Muslim armies that created the Caliphates to spread easily from Morocco to Pakistan. Of course the Eastern Roman Empire survived. Historians say opened the way for Islam to spread...


I think we are all forgetting that when it comes to army vs army fighting, the US is vastly superior. Its like they said facing a Roman legion head on open combat was just an invitation to disaster. No nation for the foreseeable future will be able to threaten the US with military force.

 

[kEiThZ]

Yes places with some stability can have and support the basic forms of democracy. Even in very corrupted democratic countries like India, if the people speak out in anger, it leads to results. A ton of ministers had to quit in India over the bombings.

Yet we should note that India remains one of the most stable and vibrant liberal democracies in the region and in the developing world at large. Certainly India is a far better prospect than any of her neighbours.

About liberal democracies, Canada for its rather pathetic political situation, its remarkable the opposition launch a coup of some sort, and the PM ask an appointed person to suspend Parliament and she does and there is no real chaos. It either shows how bored we are in Canada, or how accepting we are of the way things are set by law.

But again, liberal democracy is not being questioned in Canada. This spat is over procedural issues and governance. Despite some dramatic claims by both sides, democracy is not under threat in Canada.

I think we are successful in bettering the lives of Afghan's but to suggest we are winning the war against the Taliban is not true. They are strong and practically sitting calmly in the border area's, stocking up and recruiting.

Nor are we losing. The media does a piss-poor job of communicating the real picture on the ground. How come they don't talk about how the Taliban has largely given up on attacking NATO forces directly? Or how they are only able to exert influence where our military presence in lacking, largely by attacking tribal elders. The problem that we face is a lack of personnel. We have one reinforced combat battalion (800 troops) to cover an area the size of Nova Scotia and another battalion to do reconstruction. We have good control over districts where we have presence. The problem is that we don't have enough forces to do anything beyond that. That will change in a few months when three new American brigades arrive in the South. The Taliban is in for a world of hurt....

That is why I hate the NDP and have really distanced myself from the left. They care so much others, but they are very cold hearted when it comes to the rest of the world.

I may not want them in government but I do appreciate the role they play in our democracy of providing a bleeding heart for some interest groups and causes.

On this topic though, we are talking a 25 year timeline. The likelihood of a significant decline in US power over 25 years IMHO is very, very low. In fact, I would argue that in 25 years the US could well be positioned relatively better than it is today. Iraq and Afghanistan will be behind them. The US military will have modernized and recapitalized. The US economy will have been rebuilt. And the US will be dealing with climate change and environmental issues head-on. Contrast that with its potential adversaries. Climate change and pollution will make China an environmental disaster. That problem will be second to the exacerbated ethnic tensions that arise from China's policies for dealing with it's minorities. And its trade clout will be diminshed by the rise of more democratic, western oriented market economies (India and Brazil). Anyone who has seen the pollution and traffic in a Chinese city will attest to the challenges they have.... And that's just China, it'll be interesting to see how much geopolitical influence Iran and Venezuela can muster as the US becomes less reliant on oil...

 

[Admiral Beez]

How come they don't talk about how the Taliban has largely given up on attacking NATO forces directly? Or how they are only able to exert influence where our military presence in lacking, largely by attacking tribal elders. The problem that we face is a lack of personnel. We have one reinforced combat battalion (800 troops) to cover an area the size of Nova Scotia and another battalion to do reconstruction. We have good control over districts where we have presence. The problem is that we don't have enough forces to do anything beyond that. That will change in a few months when three new American brigades arrive in the South. The Taliban is in for a world of hurt....

If the Afghan people did not want the Canadian or NATO troops there, we'd have been wiped out already, Gandamak-style. In Afghanistan everyone has access to armaments (mostly AKs) and if the will was there, we'd be finished. The very fact that our troops can move about and return for the most part safely shows that there is support for the mission in the country.

 

[Moonmoth]

The US will NOT be the empire any longer in 25 years. It's half gone already. China & India will come to prominence while the US drowns in it's own individualistic, consumer, military-industrial complex, neo-conservative Xtian hell.

The sea level will have risen by a metre decimating places like Bangladesh and many other coastal cities. Black & brown outs will be common occurences in developed 1st world countries, which will suck in the winter, wood burning stoves will come into use again. The polar ice caps will be gone. A black market for converting combustion engines to hybrid electric will emerge because the car companies won't have evolved enough to fill the demand for cheap vehicles that don't run on gasoline. Gasoline will seem cheap at $200 Euros a barrel. US dollar will have bottomed out long ago, the suburbs that plague North America will be the slums of the future.

 

[kEiThZ]

The US will NOT be the empire any longer in 25 years. It's half gone already. China & India will come to prominence while the US drowns in it's own individualistic, consumer, military-industrial complex, neo-conservative Xtian hell.

Wow, envy much?

The sea level will have risen by a metre decimating places like Bangladesh and many other coastal cities. Black & brown outs will be common occurences in developed 1st world countries, which will suck in the winter, wood burning stoves will come into use again. The polar ice caps will be gone.

You should take a look at a map and see which countries will suffer the impacts of global warming the most. The US might have some challenges. But China and India will face far worse challenges from global warming. They are already seeing the first challenge, the melting of the Himalayan ice caps which provides fresh water to both those countries. As for black outs and brown outs in 1st world countries. Highly unlikely. Most developed countries have been diversifying their energy production portfolios away from fossil fuels for decades and smart grids have come into vogue lately. The likelihood that we'll be experiencing blackouts is pretty slim. It's a pretty apocalytic scenario. And somehow, I think the world's engineers are brighter than that....they happen to have 25 year time plans when planning power plants. They are hardly going to be planning for failure.

A black market for converting combustion engines to hybrid electric will emerge because the car companies won't have evolved enough to fill the demand for cheap vehicles that don't run on gasoline. Gasoline will seem cheap at $200 Euros a barrel. US dollar will have bottomed out long ago, the suburbs that plague North America will be the slums of the future.

In 25 years? Are you kidding me. Every major energy forecaster from the US EIA, to the IEA, to the OECD has no dire scenario as far as yours. And their worst cases don't even take into account US efforts to improve fuel economy. Obama's investment plan for developing alternative fuels and hybrid engines equals the entire amount and more spent by the Japanese to develop hybrid. I think in 5-10 years we are all going to be pleasantly surprised by where the auto industry is. The biggest fallacy in your argument, however, is that the US will not adjust. They are already investing more in transit than we are. And thanks to state tax breaks, they are buying hybrids in huge quantities as well. The US also has government departments dedicated to urban development with mandates to promote smart growth...something we don't.... And lastly, we should look at the impact of high oil prices. Who does it hurt more? The wealthy post-industrial society with the resources to adapt or the developing country that is attempting to industrialize..... It's quite simplistic to say we'll have $200 oil and even more simplistic to say that the Americans would lose the most....

 

[Admiral Beez]

The US will NOT be the empire any longer in 25 years.

The US is not, and never was an empire. It's a democratic republic, always has been from the start, nothing more, nothing less. As for the US being left behind, how come these scenarios never account for the US actually adjusting to the new circumstances, while at the same time showing the competing nations as racing around the blundering US? Assuming the US is a red neck dumb ass country in a party of smarter fellows would be an error.

I am tired of the one sided point of view on climate change. I remember my friends in journalism school back in university telling me about one of their lessons, where the prof drummed into them the idea that when reporting on the weather you must never be subjective, but just say what the weather is, because if it's rainy, you might say that's bad weather, but to a farmer, it might be great. If it's dry and sunny, that might be great for the beach, but not great for firefighters battling a forest fire.

However on climate change we're always doom and gloom, and won't anyone think of the poor Maldivians or Bangladeshis..... But we forget that for every cloud, there is always a sliver lining, and for Canada, climate change may present some real benefits. Longer growing seasons for agriculture, less need for heating oil, new trade routes in the Arctic, more rain may increase our fresh water reserves. Yes, there may be real challenges if the climate change gurus are correct, but let's not only think of the downside of climate change. However, I was reading just last week that the world is heading to another ice age, so maybe it's not rising sea levels we should worry about....

 

[lordmandeep]

People forget how long it took for the British and the Romans to finally come down.
However when the reach a critical point, things can move really fast...


The US is not an empire but it was imperialistic but these views have really gotten unpopular in recent years.

 

[Moonmoth]

its apocalyptic alright!

It's a pretty apocalytic scenario. And somehow, I think the world's engineers are brighter than that....they happen to have 25 year time plans when planning power plants. They are hardly going to be planning for failure.

Yeah just like the Auto makers weren't planning for failure as well. If they weren't so innately blatantly greedy they would have mass produced electric vehicles starting back in the 1970's. You've forgotten human greed, it over powers everything.

In 25 years? Are you kidding me. Every major energy forecaster from the US EIA, to the IEA, to the OECD has no dire scenario as far as yours. And their worst cases don't even take into account US efforts to improve fuel economy. Obama's investment plan for developing alternative fuels and hybrid engines equals the entire amount and more spent by the Japanese to develop hybrid. I think in 5-10 years we are all going to be pleasantly surprised by where the auto industry is. The biggest fallacy in your argument, however, is that the US will not adjust. They are already investing more in transit than we are. And thanks to state tax breaks, they are buying hybrids in huge quantities as well. The US also has government departments dedicated to urban development with mandates to promote smart growth...something we don't.... And lastly, we should look at the impact of high oil prices. Who does it hurt more? The wealthy post-industrial society with the resources to adapt or the developing country that is attempting to industrialize..... It's quite simplistic to say we'll have $200 oil and even more simplistic to say that the Americans would lose the most....

Spoken like a true a status-quo promoting optimist who is in denial about climate change.

 

[Admiral Beez]

You've forgotten human greed, it over powers everything.

And that's exactly what makes economies successful. Sure, capitalism's greed, like socialism's extreme, can go overboard if not reigned in through effective regulation, but greed makes the world go round.