Raptors Forum | Toronto Raptors Forums & Message Boards

Raptors Forum | Toronto Raptors Forums & Message Boards (http://www.raptorsforum.com/f/)
-   The Podium (http://www.raptorsforum.com/f/f23/)
-   -   Is the United States of America imperialist? (http://www.raptorsforum.com/f/f23/united-states-america-imperialist-1995.html)

Dr. J. Naismith 05-15-2008 11:16 AM

Is the United States of America imperialist?
 
The United States of America is in the process of staking out not just the globe but also the last unarmed spot in our neighbourhood - the heavens - as a militarised sphere of influence. Our earth and its skies are, for the US administration, the final frontiers of imperial control. More and more people speak English and the American way of life has become the best export article of the US. The country's research and development is still the world leader in every field. Its international policies have recently become more unilateral. However, all these phenomena are not necessarily enough for us to say that the US is an empire; it is a mistake to mix primacy with imperialism. The USA, for now, has no formal political or economic control over other countries and denies any imperial impulse which might motivate it to acquire new territory overseas.

Benzo 05-15-2008 11:22 AM

Crazy talk.

The USA is the most benign superpower in the HISTORY of civilization.

We would be speaking German without them.

Everytime the world is in trouble...where does it turn? France???

They are critizised for going into Iraq, and trying to bring it too democracy, and in the same breath the people who make those critizisms ask them to go into Somalia, and intervien.

Its silly and the Hate on for America is ahuge pet peeve of mine.

JayJayW 05-15-2008 12:01 PM

look regardless if you like america or not...the global market relies on them

when the us market crashed due to the sub prime mortages issue...every country in the world saw economic fall back...if you wanna talk about american foreign policy of course we are gonna show them disrespect and hate...America is a hegemon they have to interviene in world problems...and whenth ey do that...u think they do it out of goodwill? HELL no...there are agendas as in oil...building pipelines..stopping revolutions that may keep a country from growing economically...

Benzo 05-15-2008 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayJayW (Post 31376)
look regardless if you like america or not...the global market relies on them

when the us market crashed due to the sub prime mortages issue...every country in the world saw economic fall back...if you wanna talk about american foreign policy of course we are gonna show them disrespect and hate...America is a hegemon they have to interviene in world problems...and whenth ey do that...u think they do it out of goodwill? HELL no...there are agendas as in oil...building pipelines..stopping revolutions that may keep a country from growing economically...


See I was with ya up till then.

Before we throw out, accusations, I would like an example please.

JayJayW 05-15-2008 12:27 PM

lol umm Iraq was in the middle of a oil surge and if continued iraw would if gone through a drastic commidity revoloution where Bcf where being aprraised at around 7 bucks a barrel for extraction...who would that have helped...not only iraq to become more economically stable...but countries like pakistan, and other middle eastern countries..but since they did not want that happen due to the fact that if middle eastern countries became more lucrative in terms of oil and then it caused more influence to look at oil sands as sources of energy and allowed these countries to continue digging then the states wouldnt have as much control over oil prices and its demand as they do today.

Benzo 05-15-2008 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayJayW (Post 31380)
lol umm Iraq was in the middle of a oil surge and if continued iraw would if gone through a drastic commidity revoloution where Bcf where being aprraised at around 7 bucks a barrel for extraction...who would that have helped...not only iraq to become more economically stable...but countries like pakistan, and other middle eastern countries..but since they did not want that happen due to the fact that if middle eastern countries became more lucrative in terms of oil and then it caused more influence to look at oil sands as sources of energy and allowed these countries to continue digging then the states wouldnt have as much control over oil prices and its demand as they do today.

So the Iraq'i people would have got richer???

The would have built great universities, invested in social programs?

They would have becaome a world leader and leveraged the oil to become a consious trader with the free world??

NONSENSE....Saddam would have built a bigger castle.

JayJayW 05-15-2008 01:05 PM

lol stop watching CNN...i dont agree with Saddam obviously, IRAQ wasnt as unstable as people made it seem...life was prosperous...for the suni's at least and alot of money was invested in iraqi social systems, schools where being built, Saddam made his money from war profiting not from oil. Gettin rid of him was only a an extra benefit the u.s faced. now is the country any better.. a major religous group now controls their senate and now the country is at the brink of cival war...
democracy isnt the best form of politics...unfortunatly it works the best. but in a country like Iraq based on religous values it wont work...Iraqi's went to school and had health care for free before the states came into the picture...now privitazation and higher taxes are being implmented in a country that was beat up after the war that was supposedly suppose to liberate them....

Aar_Canada 05-15-2008 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benzo (Post 31371)
Crazy talk.

The USA is the most benign superpower in the HISTORY of civilization.

We would be speaking German without them.

Everytime the world is in trouble...where does it turn? France???

They are critizised for going into Iraq, and trying to bring it too democracy, and in the same breath the people who make those critizisms ask them to go into Somalia, and intervien.

Its silly and the Hate on for America is ahuge pet peeve of mine.

Hitler's war was lost by 1941, thanks to the Soviets.

JayJayW 05-15-2008 01:09 PM

dont forget the canadians :D

Benzo 05-15-2008 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayJayW (Post 31394)
lol stop watching CNN...i dont agree with Saddam obviously, IRAQ wasnt as unstable as people made it seem...life was prosperous...for the suni's at least and alot of money was invested in iraqi social systems, schools where being built, Saddam made his money from war profiting not from oil. Gettin rid of him was only a an extra benefit the u.s faced. now is the country any better.. a major religous group now controls their senate and now the country is at the brink of cival war...
democracy isnt the best form of politics...unfortunatly it works the best. but in a country like Iraq based on religous values it wont work...Iraqi's went to school and had health care for free before the states came into the picture...now privitazation and higher taxes are being implmented in a country that was beat up after the war that was supposedly suppose to liberate them....

The man gassed his own people.
Doesn't matter how he got the money, look at how he uses it. People have the right to make free choices, in Iraq they did not.

"For the suni's at least"

Could you imagine if that sentance was

"life was prosperous in the Europe, except for the Jews"

or

"life was very prosperous in Canada, but only for the Catholics"

and then I went on to talk about schools being built etc.....

fact is, things were once like that in the USA.....and guess what it took to make things right.

Civil War.

Benzo 05-15-2008 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aar_Canada (Post 31397)
Hitler's war was lost by 1941, thanks to the Soviets.

Semantics...America has come to the aid of the world a Thousand times.

JayJayW 05-15-2008 01:16 PM

lol well civil war is different when its to nationalities going at each other forexample blue's and red's in America

your talking about the same type of religous group with two different beliefs....

is there a difference u tell me?

Benzo 05-15-2008 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayJayW (Post 31405)
lol well civil war is different when its to nationalities going at each other forexample blue's and red's in America

your talking about the same type of religous group with two different beliefs....

is there a difference u tell me?

No there is not.

Claudius 05-15-2008 01:17 PM

We need to define imperialist firstly. If it is the homegenous sense, then yes and no. Historically speaking, the US has always seen anything in near it's borders as somewhat of a protectorate.

If we're speaking in a social/cultural/economic sense, then well yes and in fact it is quite well documented from both sides (US and non US) that they have "imperialist" views/tendencies. For example, the Coca Cola campaign of the late 1950s was first mandated by Truman then Eisenhower as an example to how American lifestyle was superior to the communist. Also, the pictures of the new suburbs of the 50s and well american cinema itself were all used as cultural imperialist tools. However, this DOES make sense considering they were in a time of war. There are more examples economically and well socially speaking as well. I don't have the time to list them all but they are there.

The question instead should be, is the United States as important or is it something else. Hell, are we giving that state to the south of us too much credit? I would say, yes. Right now, we live in an age of globalization and the question should be, who controls globalization? Is it something that is inherently organic? Or is led by a single country(ies) and then appropriated by other countries and a brand new entity is created? Because right now, the United States is anything but the power house. I believe we have moved entirely away from a two power structure or even a mutli power structure. We've moved into an age where we're all completely dependent upon another (i.e. if Japan suffers an economic set back (see: mid 90s) we all suffer; if Great Britain suffers an economic set back we all suffer and so on and so forth).

And the U.S. has acted as any empire has in the past thousands of years. Indeed it has blood on his hands (far too much for my liking) however the U.S. has not acted unilaterally in any occassion in my opinion. Rather, any action was done as an act to preserve this globalization movement which really began in the late 1870s and was an idea which was supported by Western Europe and North America and the version we see today is one in which has been influenced by not only the U.S. but Canada, Switzerland, Germany, France etc.

This silly talk of "living like France"; "war in Iraq" is just that silly. This isn't simply the United States acting upon its own self, it is the globalization movement itself which is DEMANDING it. And if anyone still believes that the United States is THE world power, then they are living a dream. Sorry.

I hope this made sense.

Aar_Canada 05-15-2008 01:18 PM

I think any country that becomes THE Superpower, naturally has machinations on staying that way. One way to do that is to try and stabilize parts of the world you deem a threat. That's what the United States does and that's where the hate comes from. Some of it is jealousy, but a lot of it is well founded. But it's all so ridiculous. We sit here and debate this and pick sides and a lot of people are chastised for having a belief and a thought. It's an ideological war between the big shots, big mouths and fanatical leaders with a whole lot of innocent citizens (who don't really possess the same hate or fervor) dragged along.

JayJayW 05-15-2008 01:18 PM

America has to come to aid eh....

Japan attacked us...killed some of our soldiers in a surprise attack...fuck them

lets nuke em....and not only take out soldiers but many innocent ccivilians at the same time

gee...i love being american...why become i am a mason loving red neck that is controlled by a minority of intelligent minds and ill let my government do the talking while i sit here and blame immigrants for my fuckin problems....

Aar_Canada 05-15-2008 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayJayW (Post 31399)
dont forget the canadians :D

Yes, the British and Canadians. I still go with the Soviets.

Claudius 05-15-2008 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benzo (Post 31404)
Semantics...America has come to the aid of the world a Thousand times.

Not really. An indepth examination would show that the Germans stationed over 80% of their troops along the Soviet border while only 3% on the coast of Normandy. Had the Soviets not taken up such a huge number of German troops and attention the invasion of Normandy could have been a failure.

And yes, the U.S. has come to the aids of millions, but it has also committed certain blunders that it needs to come to terms with. I think this is what troubles many "outsiders" the refusal to acknowledge blunders (see: My Lai).

JayJayW 05-15-2008 01:21 PM

of course there is a dfiference...as a muslim i understand it....if suni's and shia's go through civil war...it will cause distress all over the middle east...and a huge rip in the islamic community all over the world...iran lebanon, palestine and al'hamza, al qaeda and humas will get involded to proove which sect is more superior

Aar_Canada 05-15-2008 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benzo (Post 31404)
Semantics...America has come to the aid of the world a Thousand times.

Semantics? It's a fact. I remember hearing that from teachers in grade school -- that we'd all be living in Germany if it wasn't for America. Oy!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright RaptorsForum.com 2005-2011


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24