quote:

Over the past two decades it had become fashionable to lambast American hegemony, to speak derisively of “American exceptionalism,” to ridicule America’s self-arrogated function of “world police” and to yearn for a multipolar world. Well, congratulations, now we have that world. See if you like it better.

--Noah Smith

https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/...g-to-like-what-comes


Don

I think it's a little early to be predicting the demise of US influence and power in the world. Things were much much worse in the decade following the end of the Vietnam War and the Iraq debacle wasn't exactly our finest moment.

Hamas will be a shit-stain on the bottom of Israel's shoe shortly and the United States will make certain that Israel has everything it needs to accomplish that goal.

quote:

Originally posted by DRG:

quote:

Over the past two decades it had become fashionable to lambast American hegemony, to speak derisively of “American exceptionalism,” to ridicule America’s self-arrogated function of “world police” and to yearn for a multipolar world. Well, congratulations, now we have that world. See if you like it better.

--Noah Smith

https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/...g-to-like-what-comes


Don

While like Mike above…I believe it still too early to count America out…I have been stating the gist of that article for a few years now. I believe the guy is spot on…just hope his pessimism about America is untrue.

quote:

Things were much much worse in the decade following the end of the Vietnam War

Please elaborate on how?

Think rampant inflation, sky high interest rebates, divisive American politics/ideologies.

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
Think rampant inflation, sky high interest rebates, divisive American politics/ideologies.

Iran hostage crisis, Beirut barracks bombing, and per Dr. Dollar....insane inflation, terrible economy, interest rates were running 13%....go watch the Jimmy Carter malaise speech. The country was having a crisis of confidence and an awful lot of it was related to the political debacle that was the Vietnam War and the way it ended.

The tragedy of Viet Nam is that we quit backing the right horses — IE: Rhodesia.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
Think rampant inflation, sky high interest rebates, divisive American politics/ideologies.

Iran hostage crisis, Beirut barracks bombing, and per Dr. Dollar....insane inflation, terrible economy, interest rates were running 13%....go watch the Jimmy Carter malaise speech. The country was having a crisis of confidence and an awful lot of it was related to the political debacle that was the Vietnam War and the way it ended.

Albeit winning the cold war in that time.

Well, it's all gonna boil down to how we handle the situation when China tries to take Taiwan, and the outcome of that. That's assuming Putin doesn't nuke us and Europe.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Well, it's all gonna boil down to how we handle the situation when China tries to take Taiwan, and the outcome of that. That's assuming Putin doesn't nuke us and Europe.

There's a very good chance that Putin's strategic forces are in even worse shape than Ukraine has demonstrated his tactical forces to be in.

Nuclear weapons, and the systems that deliver them, require a LOT of maintenance that is susceptible to being faked with the funding siphoned off.

Whattt? Putin fake?

I think underestimating Putin is about as dangerous as underestimating Trump.

One thing Trump has proven is that lies work, as if we didn't already know that from Putin's example.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Whattt? Putin fake?

I think underestimating Putin is about as dangerous as underestimating Trump.

One thing Trump has proven is that lies work, as if we didn't already know that from Putin's example.

We have a verification process where we randomly select a missile, remove all warheads and pull it out of the silo, then haul that sucker to a test range and light the fuse just to make sure they work.

They always do.

Russia does not do this.

If "the balloon goes up" I am quite confident that something north of 95% of our warheads would reach their targets and no other spot on the surface of the Earth.

I would not bet anything important to me that 50% of Russia's would leave the ground.

quote:

I think it's a little early to be predicting the demise of US influence and power in the world

Sorry, it's been happening for decades now.

Grizz

I read the article and it is disturbing in several ways.

This excerpt:

Real or potential conflict with this New Axis, as I’ve been calling it, now basically absorbs all the military attention of the U.S. and its allies. The Ukraine War is tying down almost all of Europe’s military potential and diverting some U.S. resources as well. The threat of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is so huge and catastrophic that it will absorb all of the American military attention and resources that aren’t going to Ukraine — and even that may not be enough to win.

Thus it’s little surprise that the threat of interstate conflict is starting to reemerge in Europe and the surrounding regions. The world is a more ungoverned, lawless place than it was 20 or even 10 years ago. I think Zheng Yongnian of the Chinese University of Hong Kong put it best last year:

“The old order is swiftly disintegrating, and strongman politics is again ascendant among the world’s great powers,” wrote Mr. Zheng of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen. “Countries are brimming with ambition, like tigers eyeing their prey, keen to find every opportunity among the ruins of the old order.”

Like tigers eyeing their prey. The world is starting to revert into a jungle, where the strong prey upon the weak, and where there is a concomitant requirement that every country build up its own strength; if your neighbor is a tiger, you should probably grow some claws of your own. Old scores that had to wait can now be settled. Disputed bits of territory can now be retaken. Natural resources can now be seized. There are many reasons for countries to fight each other, and now one of the biggest reasons not to fight has been removed.

======

Anyway, Pax Americana always had an expiration date. If the U.S. had avoided the Iraq War and maintained its defense-industrial base, it could have prolonged its hegemony by about a decade, but ultimately the rising power of China would have ensured the return of the multipolarity that existed before World War 2. In any case, it’s over now, and until and unless a new dominant global coalition of nation-states can be forged — either a Chinese-led global order or some kind of expanded democratic hegemony that includes India and large other developing nations — we’re going to have to re-learn how to live in the jungle.

Over the past two decades it had become fashionable to lambast American hegemony, to speak derisively of “American exceptionalism”, to ridicule America’s self-arrogated function of “world police”, and to yearn for a multipolar world. Well, congratulations, now we have that world. See if you like it better.

===================================================

I have long felt that Nationalism, anti-globalism, and other worldviews had undesirable consequences. When Trump started attacking NATO and the UN, cheered on by the GOP, to me that was really cringeworthy. I also have believed in the phrase "mind your own business", personally and nationally. I'm also a Viet Nam vet who learned too late to oppose the war, and it affected my worldview thereafter. That was one place we nor I didn't belong. So, I have some personal contradictory opinions about this topic.

Another thing is global warming. It's happening. So what does that add to the conflicts and competitions between nations problem? It certainly can't help, especially when the problem is just denied and not figured in.

===================================================

BTW:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Sunday he has ordered the Ford carrier strike group to sail to the Eastern Mediterranean to be ready to assist Israel after the attack by Hamas

AP news

https://apnews.com/article/isr...b931f684f758c9b6f628

I dunno. I don't think there is much risk that the Chinese are going to invade Taiwan. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has shown how risky such adventures can be. And, the US has sold a shit-load of arms to Taiwan over the years.

Plus, what's the upside to China versus the risk?

quote:

Plus, what's the upside to China versus the risk?

I think we will know the answer to that question after the fact, not before, and when we know the answer, it will be from their POV whether they are successful or not.

The same question could be asked regarding Putin's invasion of Ukraine. If Putin could miscalculate, so can China, and so can we.

Did Hamas miscalculate the upside and risk?

Did Israel miscalculate?

We don't know yet.

Calculations of these sorts carry factors we can't know, can't understand, objectively, such as ideology, religious zeal, extremism, quest for power regardless of underling minion fodder life, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
I dunno. I don't think there is much risk that the Chinese are going to invade Taiwan. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has shown how risky such adventures can be. And, the US has sold a shit-load of arms to Taiwan over the years.

Plus, what's the upside to China versus the risk?

China can't invade Taiwan. They could essentially destroy it but an invasion would involve moving troops across perhaps the most heavily-armed strait on the planet, and China doesn't (yet) have the amphibious capability to move large formations.

They could attempt an airborne assault but they would lose a substantial portion of their force in the air and what they managed to land would be lightly armed and quickly chewed up.

Supposedly the big upside for China (and probably Russia) is/was domestic distraction from internal issues. Wars do tend to concentrate concern on your foreign enemy.

The Chicoms have domestic economic issues and to some extent they are falling into an aristocracy (familial party affiliation that equates to social and economic status) that is not very popular with the rank and file Chinese citizen. It’s why Mao won, after all.

The issue being distraction of the populace so that the leadership continues in place.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Supposedly the big upside for China (and probably Russia) is/was domestic distraction from internal issues. Wars do tend to concentrate concern on your foreign enemy.

The Chicoms have domestic economic issues and to some extent they are falling into an aristocracy (familial party affiliation that equates to social and economic status) that is not very popular with the rank and file Chinese citizen. It’s why Mao won, after all.

The issue being distraction of the populace so that the leadership continues in place.

I don't see how getting bogged down in a shooting war with Taiwan would be a positive distraction.

quote:

Plus, what's the upside to China versus the risk?

The risk is great now or they would have moved.

But make no mistake, they even state it publicly…China is planning for one world order with they at the helm.

The war in Ukraine, the potential clash in the Balkans and the Hamas assault have one common denominator behind them.

Vladimir Putin. Trump's buddy.

And yet there are Hamas sympathizers and apologists in Congress

quote:

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., ignored questions Tuesday when a Fox News reporter repeatedly asked for comment on a horrific report that Hamas beheaded Israeli babies.


"Congresswoman, Hamas terrorists have cut off babies' heads and burned children alive. Do you support Israel's rights to defend themselves against this brutality?" Vaughn asked. However, Tlaib did not acknowledge the questions.

"You can’t comment about Hamas terrorists chopping off babies’ heads? Congresswoman, do you have a comment on Hamas terrorists chopping off babies’ heads?" Vaugh persisted. "You have nothing to say about Hamas terrorists chopping off babies’ heads? Do you condone what Hamas has done chopping off babies’ heads, burning children alive, raping women in the streets? You have no comment about children’s heads being chopped off?"

,

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
And yet there are Hamas sympathizers and apologists in Congress

quote:

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., ignored questions Tuesday when a Fox News reporter repeatedly asked for comment on a horrific report that Hamas beheaded Israeli babies.


"Congresswoman, Hamas terrorists have cut off babies' heads and burned children alive. Do you support Israel's rights to defend themselves against this brutality?" Vaughn asked. However, Tlaib did not acknowledge the questions.

"You can’t comment about Hamas terrorists chopping off babies’ heads? Congresswoman, do you have a comment on Hamas terrorists chopping off babies’ heads?" Vaugh persisted. "You have nothing to say about Hamas terrorists chopping off babies’ heads? Do you condone what Hamas has done chopping off babies’ heads, burning children alive, raping women in the streets? You have no comment about children’s heads being chopped off?"

,

Ignoring a Fox reporter is one of the smarter things she's done this week.

Notice how quickly other Democrats stomped on her statements and Cori Bush's when Republicans won't even address Santos being indicted for stealing donor's credit cards?

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
I dunno. I don't think there is much risk that the Chinese are going to invade Taiwan. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has shown how risky such adventures can be. And, the US has sold a shit-load of arms to Taiwan over the years.

Plus, what's the upside to China versus the risk?

China can't invade Taiwan. They could essentially destroy it but an invasion would involve moving troops across perhaps the most heavily-armed strait on the planet, and China doesn't (yet) have the amphibious capability to move large formations.

They could attempt an airborne assault but they would lose a substantial portion of their force in the air and what they managed to land would be lightly armed and quickly chewed up.

The Taiwanese military could not wait until China opened that big old dam with hundreds of millions of people in it's deadly zone. It's an easy and fragile target. The Aswan dam is also fragile and a good piece of the reason why they don't want to mess with Israel.

quote:

Originally posted by DRG:

quote:

Over the past two decades it had become fashionable to lambast American hegemony, to speak derisively of “American exceptionalism,” to ridicule America’s self-arrogated function of “world police” and to yearn for a multipolar world. Well, congratulations, now we have that world. See if you like it better.

--Noah Smith

https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/...g-to-like-what-comes


Don

After a time, England was less effective at supplying Indigenous Americans with weapons than their colonists. And at some point, the Indigenous nations spent less time fighting amongst themselves with their new weapons and more time focused on white settlers. Doesn't repeat but does kind-of rhyme...

I found the article to make a lot of sense. I would add the US has given up being the police of the high seas, allowing everyone peaceful trade. I agree with the downward angle of American history. In just my lifetime the US has lost 3 wars (Vietnam, gulf 2, and Afghanistan) and won 1 (Gulf 1). I remember way back when we made fun of the French military. Now it’s the pot calling the kettle black.