Why?

[st_swithin]

Originally posted by elijah
Good TV

But ratings are down everywhere, even in the midst of a new season.

We gotta start another war. Let's go back to Vietnam and surprise the phuq outta those people.

"You make a movie?"
"Not this time, pal."

[Drake Tungsten]

as an element of the fading power of the US

You don't really believe this, do you? Face it, the world is America's ***** and will be for a long time to come. Fading power my ass...

At least the Japanese have the decency to admit it. Some guy told me the other day that "America is the father and Japan is the child". I protested at first, but it really made sense when I thought about it. Throw in Europe as the prodigal son and you have a good metaphor there.

[Dis]

America is fading in power, just get used to it.

I think we should invade Vietnam again. The more I think of it, the more I think Bush is crazy enough to do this his second term.

He already fixed one past mistake with Saddam. He will now correct another past mistake by the U.S.

Invade Vietnam!

[Spiffor]

I do believe it Drake. I'm not saying the US will stop being the hyperpower anytime soon (actually, I expect the world to stop being unipolar in less than 20 years, but that's hardly tomorrow). I'm just saying the time of power expansion has come to an end, and the US power is now slowly shrinking.

Face it: you have now an equal partner when it comes to trade negociations, and the Euro become a more worthy competitor of the Dollar evey day. Unless an accident happens, the Chinese are en route to have a really huge economy, and they may very well use it for their diplomatic aims.
The days where the US determines the international climate alone aren't over, but they are counted.

[Drake Tungsten]

Well, if economic dominance is your criteria for determining whether American power is "fading" or not, then American power has been in decline since 1945. Why would we get a bug in our ass and attack Iraq in response to a trend that has been around for 50+ years?

[Spiffor]

Drake:
Since the end of WW2, you were the absolute boss of the West, but you had very little influence on countries of the East bloc. The collapse of the USSR made yourself the hyperpower watching the whole world, and you determined the rules of the New World Order (the countries that don't follow the rules are tagged 'Rogue Nations')

Your status as a undisputed hyperpower is fading away. For the first time since the fall of the Societ Bloc, you must negociate as an equal with a partner -the EU- albeit it is in the restricted area that is trade. Your previous wars needed some sort of local support, as showed by Kosovo and Bosnia, whose success needed the massive participation of the Euros in the peacekeeping forces. You couldn't act alone as the big guy anymore, but you were rather the "Sheriff of the posse".

Unfortunately, after the initial hype following Sept. 9, the Posse was less and less willing to be under your command. France has always been a pain in the ass, but the behaviour of Germany and Russia is new. China hides not its hostility to your policies, even though it can't afford to act on them for now. The massive worldwide wave of opposition to your international policies (this has never been seen to such extent) may lead more and more countries astray to what you decide.

The whole UN farce, and the pathetically small "coalition of the willing" showed that your wishes aren't always followed anymore. And this is new. So far, the opposition to the US is unorganized, and plagued by the delusions of grandeur of Chirac and the Chinese, but it may structurate into a cohesive understanding.
And that's why the US needs to show who's the boss. Because it's not as obvious today as 10 years ago.

[Tripledoc]

BTW. The Russians are currently thinking very hard about converting their oil revenues into Euros.

I do think that our dear euro-bureaucrats are pushing the envelope. I mean what if some psycho pervert is going to be president of the US, what will they do then?

And all it is going to do is that now it will be the rich in Europe sitting on their asses doing nothing, while the American workers will have to slave away even more. Christ all mighty.

The whole solution must be that the US simply jump bail and join the Euro. We salute you.

[Drake Tungsten]

For the first time since the fall of the Societ Bloc, you must negociate as an equal with a partner -the EU- albeit it is in the restricted area that is trade.

What are you talking about? I hate to burst your arrogant EU bubble, but the Japanese were a bigger and better economic threat to the US long before the Euro was even conceived. You guys aren't special in any way.

Your previous wars needed some sort of local support, as showed by Kosovo and Bosnia, whose success needed the massive participation of the Euros in the peacekeeping forces.

Wars fought on the behalf of European countries incapable of solving the problems themselves. What did we get out of it? Not gratitude, at the very least.

Unfortunately, after the initial hype following Sept. 9, the Posse was less and less willing to be under your command.

Hence the "prodigal son" comment. It seems that Old Europe is so desperate to escape the shadow of the American hyperpower that they are willing to ally with thuggish countries like Russia and China. I say go right ahead, but I can't help but think you're going to look back on this period of your history with shame. You should be used to that by now, though.

The whole UN farce, and the pathetically small "coalition of the willing" showed that your wishes aren't always followed anymore. And this is new.

It's not new and anyone who thinks so is deluding themselves. I can think of countless examples of America's wishes not being followed long before the present day.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
The whole solution must be that the US simply jump bail and join the Euro. We salute you.

Yeah, the Yanks should drop the Fledgling Dollar and join the mighty Euro before it is too late for their economy

Tripledoc, you should know that we are still on the weak side for now. The immense majority of international transactions are paid in dollars, and the Euro only has a small share. Its growth doesn't mean that we have a better money than them. We're still far from it.

[st_swithin]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
I mean what if some psycho pervert is going to be president of the US, what will they do then?

I don't think Larry Flynt has a chinaman's chance at public office.

[Drake Tungsten]

I don't think Larry Flynt has a chinaman's chance at public office.

I'm so jealous that you're allowed to use that phrase.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
What are you talking about? I hate to burst your arrogant EU bubble, but the Japanese were a bigger and better economic threat to the US long before the Euro was even conceived. You guys aren't special in any way.

Save that we have a similar GDP and market share, something the Japanese never had. And save that many of your products get imported here, unlike the relative closeness of Japan. Japan may have been seen as a threat within the US because of the massive Japanese investments and exports there, but the EU is not a "threat". It is simply an equal partner that can actually defend its interests in trade negociations with as much power as the US. I don't remember anytime when the Japanese had such power on multilateral negociations.

Wars fought on the behalf of European countries incapable of solving the problems themselves.

Since when do you expect your allies to solve problems themselves?

Hence the "prodigal son" comment. It seems that Old Europe is so desperate to escape the shadow of the American hyperpower that they are willing to ally with thuggish countries like Russia and China.

This is indeed why the current situation sucks and is bounded to failure. Instead of having a clear line that has the interests of Europe in mind, Chirac and his Schröder poodle would do anything for his delusions of grandeur.

It's not new and anyone who thinks so is deluding themselves. I can think of countless examples of America's wishes not being followed long before the present day.

Since the collapse of the Soviet empire ? Is there only one moment when you requested international help and did not get it ? I'm curious to hear.

[Tripledoc]

We in Europe are incredibly weak. The whole western hemisphere is weak in fact. The international investors are getting, how you say, scroungy. They don't see any rent coming out of their investments. There is one thing, however, which will let us all out of this incredible mess. Now the Us economy is simply running at full speed, the wheels are falling of, they can't inflate the currency supply one bit more. However the Euro is 'strong' as they say, meaning there is still room for a much greater money supply. So the plan is: America goes bust -Argentina style- then the Euro moves in. Everybody wants a piece of the action - they need that Euro. The European central bank turns the money supply to full steam. Now everybody will need more and more money to make ends meet and work harder and harder. The great supplies of dollars in the European central banks will be worth just about zero, so the Europeans will have to sweat too.

[Drake Tungsten]

Save that we have a similar GDP and market share, something the Japanese never had.

You also aren't nearly as unified as the Japanese economy is, which makes you far less of a competitor. The EU Central Bank can't control the euro as effectively as the Japanese Central Bank controls the yen.

And save that many of your products get imported here, unlike the relative closeness of Japan.

The closed nature of Japan made it more of a threat to US interests, not less. The fact that the EU imports a large number of goods from America gives them less leverage, not more.

I don't remember anytime when the Japanese had such power on multilateral negociations.

You need to read up on trade negotiations between Japan and the US during the 80's.

Since when do you expect your allies to solve problems themselves?

We're doing it in Asia, as the North Korean negotiations show. I guess the Asians are just more self-reliant than you Eurocoms. It's our fault, really; we fought your battles for you for far too long and know we're stuck with dead weight for "allies". Thank god the Brits still have some balls.

Since the collapse of the Soviet empire ? Is there only one moment when you requested international help and did not get it ? I'm curious to hear.

Why the artificial time frame? The time after the collapse of communism was an anomaly in many ways, so I don't think you can draw any conclusions from it. The current rebellion against American power is not a new thing, but merely a return to the status quo of the late Cold War.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Spiffor
There were many motivations to go to Iraq. None would have been enough to go to war by itself, but the combination of them were a good incentive:

- Oil. More precisely: the ability to get a strong oil producer (a "swing producer" who can supply oil when demand rises drastically) that is not Saudi Arabia. The Sauds have funded terrorism bigtime and will continue to do so until they sufeer from a significant pressure from washington. However, until GulfWar2, the US were tied because they needed Saudi oil; and Saddam would have probably been a very insensitive supplier.
To establish a puppet regime in Iraq allowed not to be dependent on the Saudis anymore, and to actually take real steps in the war on terrorism by acting against the House of Saud.

- With several 'rogue countries' (read: countries that do not follow the rules of the New World Order as they have been defined by the US and their friends) beginning to near completion of their WMD programmes, the US had to show its muscle. Since North Korea is already too dangerous to attack, Saddam was the target of choice.
He was the easiest to attack: his army was weakened by the previous war and 12 years of embargo; his population would love to see him gone; his WMD program was stalled for long; and he was already pictured as the big villain in the American public opinion; his country is mostly desert, and it is much easier to do an airborne assault on such terrain than on Iranian mountains. I don't know if the top US officials at the time knew how much the military leaders would suck, but that may enter the equation too.

- All the ruckus about Iraq begun shortly before midterm elections, at a time when Americans wondered why Bin Laden hadn't been founded yet. For a long time, the threat to Iraq (and then the actual war) was a Wag the Dog operation. I personally expect them to "discover" damning evidence of Saddam's HorribleHorribleOMGOMG WMD during the campaign.

- I think the Neoconservative belief of changing the Middle East so that it becomes democratic had something to do with it too. Iraq was weak, and its atrocious regime wouldn't be missed. Besides, Iraq has the potential of being rich, with its sea of oil and with a possibly strong agriculture. Iraq may have been dreamt as the playground of the neoconservative democracy.

- It also was a power play. The New World Order is being discussed more and more, the USA are losing of their relative strength to emerging powers like the EU or China. Doing this war helped showing who's the boss. It went unexpectedly badly on the diplomatic side, when France, Germany, Russia and China kept being opposed. These countries were expected to follow Washington's lead in the end (such expectations were held for every country on Earth). The mere 40ish membership of the "coalition of the willing" shows that DJ Bush Jr. can't have everybody dance on his music anymore. Such diplomatic failure was unexpected.

- Saddam's WMD may possibly have been part of the reasons. US intelligence in Iraq seems to have sucked very much, and we should not rule out the possibility that the White House actually believed Saddam was developing WMDs seriously, and had to be taken out before being too dangerous to topple.

I quote Spiffor since I agree with every one of his points.