SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   The long slow endl of the American era (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=142656)

Rockstar 10-02-08 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky
Nice to see our German friend once more forecasting the end of America.

Anything Der Spiegel says, eh Skybird?


:arrgh!:

lol I remember when he was predicting the fall of Tony Blair. Doomed he was, gonna get booted out two days after the war started, Brits were gonna rise up! noway he could hold on as prime minister. Yep Skybird can certainly call'em, Over here in the colonies I'm going on as usual living a peacable life clinging to my guns and credit cards. Which by the way they just increased my credit from 10,000 to 12,000.

He's just another windbag.

Frame57 10-02-08 07:21 PM

Let me try this again, my last rebuttal did not stick. Webster defintion of an Empire, "A politcal unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations, and ruled by a single supreme authority."

This fits perfectly the Greek, Roman and British empire rule. You cannot change definition to suit personal ideaogogy, then language itself become moot.

CCIP 10-02-08 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Let me try this again, my last rebuttal did not stick. Webster defintion of an Empire, "A politcal unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations, and ruled by a single supreme authority."

This fits perfectly the Greek, Roman and British empire rule. You cannot change definition to suit personal ideaogogy, then language itself become moot.

Actually, by that definition, the US was an empire from its beginning :hmm:

August 10-02-08 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Let me try this again, my last rebuttal did not stick. Webster defintion of an Empire, "A politcal unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations, and ruled by a single supreme authority."

This fits perfectly the Greek, Roman and British empire rule. You cannot change definition to suit personal ideaogogy, then language itself become moot.

Actually, by that definition, the US was an empire from its beginning :hmm:

If so then so would Canada...

CCIP 10-02-08 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August
Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Let me try this again, my last rebuttal did not stick. Webster defintion of an Empire, "A politcal unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations, and ruled by a single supreme authority."

This fits perfectly the Greek, Roman and British empire rule. You cannot change definition to suit personal ideaogogy, then language itself become moot.

Actually, by that definition, the US was an empire from its beginning :hmm:

If so then so would Canada...

Indeed. Then perhaps that's not such a good definition?

August 10-02-08 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:

Originally Posted by August
Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Let me try this again, my last rebuttal did not stick. Webster defintion of an Empire, "A politcal unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations, and ruled by a single supreme authority."

This fits perfectly the Greek, Roman and British empire rule. You cannot change definition to suit personal ideaogogy, then language itself become moot.

Actually, by that definition, the US was an empire from its beginning :hmm:

If so then so would Canada...

Indeed. Then perhaps that's not such a good definition?

Yeah this alone:

"A politcal unit having an extensive territory" is kind of broad.

baggygreen 10-02-08 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August
Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Let me try this again, my last rebuttal did not stick. Webster defintion of an Empire, "A politcal unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations, and ruled by a single supreme authority."

This fits perfectly the Greek, Roman and British empire rule. You cannot change definition to suit personal ideaogogy, then language itself become moot.

Actually, by that definition, the US was an empire from its beginning :hmm:

If so then so would Canada...

blame Canada!!!!:lol:

Oz would also come under that definition... it really is a little too broad

UnderseaLcpl 10-02-08 09:52 PM

Actually I kind of like the sound of "The American Empire"

As long as we stick to free economic principles and dispose of our top-heavy state, we could be an economic empire without peer in a few decades. :D

Frame57 10-03-08 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Let me try this again, my last rebuttal did not stick. Webster defintion of an Empire, "A politcal unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations, and ruled by a single supreme authority."

This fits perfectly the Greek, Roman and British empire rule. You cannot change definition to suit personal ideaogogy, then language itself become moot.

Actually, by that definition, the US was an empire from its beginning :hmm:

Name the territories or nations we ruled over? If you please...:D

CCIP 10-03-08 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Let me try this again, my last rebuttal did not stick. Webster defintion of an Empire, "A politcal unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations, and ruled by a single supreme authority."

This fits perfectly the Greek, Roman and British empire rule. You cannot change definition to suit personal ideaogogy, then language itself become moot.

Actually, by that definition, the US was an empire from its beginning :hmm:

Name the territories or nations we ruled over? If you please...:D

1) The collection of different colonies/states

2) American Indian nations

mrbeast 10-03-08 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:

Originally Posted by Frame57
Let me try this again, my last rebuttal did not stick. Webster defintion of an Empire, "A politcal unit having an extensive territory or comprising a number of territories or nations, and ruled by a single supreme authority."

This fits perfectly the Greek, Roman and British empire rule. You cannot change definition to suit personal ideaogogy, then language itself become moot.

Actually, by that definition, the US was an empire from its beginning :hmm:

Name the territories or nations we ruled over? If you please...:D

Philipines, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico all US colonial possession's

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/3...0kmilesjb3.jpg

Kipparikalle 10-03-08 07:07 AM

I still think we finns should rule the world.

It would be the world of PEACE! (and beer)
We would be spacetravelling in no time!

We are the true aryans! Germans didn't wan't to believe this, so they ignored this whole information totally. But look who prevailed!


WE ARE THE GOD'S TRUE CHILDREN!
WE SHALL CONQUER THE WORLD!

Skybird 10-03-08 07:08 AM

"Rule by a single supreme authority".

Hm. All proxy tyrannies brought into power and supported by Washington. All nations depending on falling into the global rule of trade and finance mechanisms enforced by institutions fou7nded and/or dominated by Washington.
All nations where population live by the rules of a way of life formed and dominated by the american way of life and ameircan modern pop-culture (like Roman citizenship was really cool at it's time, and was desirable for many, due to legal benefits). NATO: since half a century totally dominated and depending on Washington.

As I already said, the historical meaning and defintion of an empire leads far beyond just obvious military occupation. that is far too short-sigthed. But it may be opportunistic to see it like that, if one wants to evade the characterisation of the US as an empire for whatever a reason.

Also, an empire is under pressure regarding what it can alloow to let happen, and what not, if it wants to keep its realm together. there is a centre, and there is a periphery, there is no solid border in form of a line, but a zone at the outer peripohery where the empires influence wanes, and foreign influence fades in. Considering the challenges an empire can afford to tolerate, and what not, if comparing the Us policy with that of the British, the Romans, there are also stunning ammounts of parallels.

Even IF - in a thought experiment - America would not be described as an empire - it still shows the behavior of empires then, and implements the policies and tools of empire, the whole range, from central control of trade flows over enforcing the centre's rules of finances, to military intervention.

DeepIron 10-03-08 07:31 AM

Personally, I like the "Empire of Oz" concept myself... It's already "green"... ;)

Frame57 10-03-08 12:30 PM

Almost every other economic power house has their own stock markets and currency. The dollar has been lower in value than most all other currencies for a long time. How is it you see this myth that America has controlled the worlds economies. It has a big impact, but control to the extent you erroneously label America as an empire. Ridiculous indeed! Right that is why we owe so much monet to other nations. Someone needs an economics 101 course. Come to America Skybird and I will enroll you in a nice community college.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.