[Ferich]

Good Article spam2:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,1 ... 63,00.html

There is a big difference, of course. Apart from the odd Puerto Rico or Guam, the US does not have formal colonies, the way the Romans (or British, for that matter) always did. There are no American consuls or viceroys directly ruling faraway lands.

But that difference between ancient Rome and modern Washington may be less significant than it looks. After all, America has done plenty of conquering and colonising: it's just that we don't see it that way. For some historians, the founding of America and its 19th-century push westward were no less an exercise in empire-building than Rome's drive to take charge of the Mediterranean. While Julius Caesar took on the Gauls - bragging that he had slaughtered a million of them - the American pioneers battled the Cherokee, the Iroquois and the Sioux. "From the time the first settlers arrived in Virginia from England and started moving westward, this was an imperial nation, a conquering nation," according to Paul Kennedy, author of The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers.

[Trunks]

the us does a different type of colnizing IMO... They dont need taxes, or even more money, what they want is something priceless, that something is influence... America invaded and "liberated" Iraq, so Iraq will be morally in debt with the US, and in that way the US will have influence in Iraq... Plus having a second ally in a place where most of the countries citizens burn american flags openly isnt too bad of an idea... Just my 2 cents.

[Jin-Roh]

I wouldn't be surprised if the United States "collapsed".

[Duke_of_Ray]

Originally Posted by Trunks

the us does a different type of colnizing IMO... They dont need taxes, or even more money, what they want is something priceless, that something is influence... America invaded and "liberated" Iraq, so Iraq will be morally in debt with the US, and in that way the US will have influence in Iraq... Plus having a second ally in a place where most of the countries citizens burn american flags openly isnt too bad of an idea... Just my 2 cents.

We needed an ally over the ME besides Isarael, but I doubt Iraq qill turn out to be one.

[rdeyes]

[quote="Duke_of_Ray":c6d3f]

Originally Posted by Trunks

the us does a different type of colnizing IMO... They dont need taxes, or even more money, what they want is something priceless, that something is influence... America invaded and "liberated" Iraq, so Iraq will be morally in debt with the US, and in that way the US will have influence in Iraq... Plus having a second ally in a place where most of the countries citizens burn american flags openly isnt too bad of an idea... Just my 2 cents.

We needed an ally over the ME besides Isarael, but I doubt Iraq qill turn out to be one.[/quote:c6d3f]

how about India or Pakistan ? as an ally

[Innoxx]

They're not in the middle east though.

[ninty]

Interesting article.

[rdeyes]

Originally Posted by Innoxx

They're not in the middle east though.

thats true , but they both are powerful countries.

[Short Hand]

excellent find.

[Machette]

Reminds me of the Chomsky book I finished, Hegemony or Survival.