# Farewell to Pax Americana



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

Robert Samuelson, writes:

"Given the rampant anti-Americanism abroad today, the fading of Pax Americana may inspire much glee. The United States is widely regarded as an arrogant source of instability, blamed for many global woes -- from greenhouse gases to Islamic militancy to unpopular globalization. No one can know what will replace Pax Americana, but with time, the people who now celebrate its decline may conclude that its failures were mainly those of good intentions and that its successes were unwisely taken for granted."


----------



## A Questionable Gentleman (Jun 16, 2006)

That was doom and gloom the likes of which even Oswald Spengler would be proud of.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I hope it's not true. We do need to become smarter about the fights we pick, both internally and externally.


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

Gawd, how depressing.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Picking the precise moment when vitality leaves anything is a dangerous occupation. There was this 34 year old, one eyed appaloosa stallion at my boarding ranch. His days of breeding long gone, only an experienced eye of horseflesh could appreciate what he once was. He mostly stayed under this big old California peppertree half asleep, surveying the generations of spotted horses he fathered.My equally old Hackney was his pasture buddy. Then one day some idiot put a 3 year old arabian stallion in the same pasture. He was sleek, black, dish nosed with the arched neck that makes horsey girls weak in the knees. He pranced over to the peppertree like a ship of the line under full sail and colours. A few minutes later the arab was OUTSIDE the pasture,bloodied and feeling the effects of those striped hooves on his ribcage that put him through the equally seasoned fencing.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Ask anyone who's not a U.S. citizen about "pax americana" and you'll get a very confused expression. Why? Because beyond the arrogant, Americentric pea brains at the PNAC, and the political machine responsible for our current White House, pax americana has never existed, doesn't exist now, nor could it ever exist.

One of the few facts cited in the article is that strength does not directly translate into power. File that one under D for DUH.

The people who believe pax americana does (or ever did) exist are the same morons who believe Ronald Reagan had something to do with the fall of the USSR, that we could have won the war in Vietnam if only we had thrown another 50,000 or our kids in harm's way. Etc. Simply pathetic.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

FrankDC,

Yes, lets ask someone who lived in the Fulda Gap during the Cold War about Pax Americana. Perhaps someone who grew up in West Berlin during the Cold War (Albert this is your clue to chime in!) as well.

You also claim that Reagan had nothing to do with winning the Cold War or the fall of the Soviet Union. Thatcher, Kohl, Gorbachev, Walesa, Havel and the late Karol Wojtyla all think he did. They must be mororns too.

FrankDC I hope Santa brings you a clue for Christmas as you are a late contender for the silliest poster title on Ask Andy for 2006. 

Karl


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

I can manage to post without making ad hominem attacks on fellow members.

As for your post, Gorbachev explains Reagan's grandstanding very clearly in his book, while Thatcher, Kohl etc credit Reagan simply for political expediency.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

FrankDC,

Perhaps you are a wonderful guy - we know you dont beat your kids - but in the corporal punishment thread and now in the this thread you have said some pretty silly things. 

But it is you sir who launched an ad hominem attack against the "morons" (a list that includes Gorbachev, Thatcher, Kohl, JP2, Walesa, Havel, myself and many other members of this forum)who don't subscribe to your less than insightful analysis. I once again invite you to ask Cold War residents of the Fulda Gap about Pax Americana.

So again here's hoping Santa brings you a clue.

Karl


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

No Karl, an _ad hom_ is the tactic of last resort...when it is premature. So when it is last, it is premature, but if used intelligently, you are a Dem. So you vote for the War before you vote against the War and then try a reformulation as an _ad hoc_ rescue to cover what you think is a straw man.

Got it?


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

I am optimistic this will be a great country again, and that it will regain the world's respect, although not universally because we never had that. How long did it take Japan to recover from its stigma as a force of evil? We can undo this, too.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Crs,

FrankDC owes you big. With your above post I think you have an insurmountable lead as silliest poster of the year. Congrats!

FYI:

This still is a great country.

And whatever mistakes you think the US has made in Iraq and its war against terrorism they hardly compare to the Japanese record during World War Two. I would suggest you take a look at Iris Chang's The Rape of Nanking (for starters) so that your avoid such mistakes in the future.

Karl


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Karl89 said:


> Crs,
> 
> FrankDC owes you big. With your above post I think you have an insurmountable lead as silliest poster of the year. Congrats!


Where did I insult you or even mention you, you horse's patootie?

You know that thread you started about choosing an NYC restaurant to dine with friends? My immediate thought was, no way this Karl has friends. Hostages, maybe. Friends, I doubt it.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Crs,

Just another thing you are wrong about but that's not a surprise, is it? 

Karl


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

People with zero social skills, such as you, tend to live lonely lives.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Crs,

If you want to insult me then fair enough but try and insult me in a way that bears a remote relationship to the truth. One shudders to think of the inaccuracies in your "objective" work over the years.

Karl


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

It's a riot watching the same sheeple falling for the same Pentagon scam over and over and over again since WWII. Let's recall, shall we? Korea, McCarthyism, the Domino Theory, Vietnam, Panamanian War Lords, Nicaraguan rebels, Kosovo, and the current Threat du Jour is a few dozen Arab boobs with box cutters.

Look people, al Qaeda can't destroy our way of life. Our own government can.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

I observe your interactions here and find it hard to believe you are only an ass when you type on a computer. Unless it is only your fingers possessed by evil spirits.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

FrankDC,

Amazing! You have topped the lunacy of Crs! Strong work indeed. 

Karl


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

FrankDC said:


> It's a riot watching the same *sheeple* falling for the same Pentagon scam over and over and over again since WWII.


Tuning out now. This sheep has some shirts to wash with Tide.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Crs,

You maintain that I am an ass yet retain the possibility that I am not always an ass. I don't think such a possibility exists for you. But I could be wrong, in which case I would share something in common with you. Now, enough of the name calling. Get back to insulting the US and comparing current policy to Japanese war crimes.

Karl


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

FRANKDC, A word of advise offered. Karl and I came very close to internet blows once, something about as silly as the old Batman POW! CRUNCH! SMACK! Karl posted I must hate him. I was to say the least taken aback. How do you 'Hate someone' for exercising the right to post opinions subject to the same vulnerability of debate as your own? I consider Karl a friend. In fact, with rare exceptions I treasure the association and input of every member of this community. Heated debate is easy. Knowing how to invite the participants to the bar for halftime is an art.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Kav, advice noted. For the most part I've learned to steer clear of political or religious discussions, because they inevitably degrade into ad hominem attacks, and when all's said and done they're pointless. I mean, how many times have you ever heard a person say, "Gee, that really is a good point. I'm going to change my position" on _any_ political or religious issue?

So my parting shot in this thread is, Mr. Bush is very adept at sending other people's children to fight and die in Iraq. You suppose he's asked his own kids to do the same? You think he ever would? If a law existed which required our Congress and president/VP to send their own eligible children to war when deploying our armed forces, we would not have invaded Iraq. Nor would we have gotten involved in Korea or Vietnam, or engaged in any of the other obscene military adventurism since WWII. And as far as I'm concerned THAT is the bottom line. U.S. defense spending since WWII represents the largest squandering of wealth in human history, all to support the machine Eisenhower warned us about in 1961. The only winners in the Iraq mess have been Halliburton and Israel.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

crs said:


> I observe your interactions here and find it hard to believe you are only an ass when you type on a computer. Unless it is only your fingers possessed by evil spirits.


Crs, come now - you are among the most dyspeptic posters on this forum. Many, if not most of your posts figuratively drip with bile.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> If a law existed which required our Congress and president/VP to send their own eligible children to war when deploying our armed forces, we would not have invaded Iraq. Nor would we have gotten involved in Korea or *Vietnam*....


Come now, surely you are not suggesting JFK would have had to send JohnJohn to Vietnam?


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Rocker said:


> Crs, come now - you are among the most dyspeptic posters on this forum. Many, if not most of your posts figuratively drip with bile.


I doubt you can find even one instance when my response was unprovoked, you cretin.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Crs,

What a way to prove Rocker wrong!

Karl


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

I consider Rocker's post an attack. I never fire the first shot. Until people like you and Rocker learn some basic manners, you'll be responded to in kind.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Crs,


Lets recap shall we?

- You post that the US is no longer a great country and compare our current actions to Japanese war crimes.

- I write that your post is silly and that your understanding of the Japanese during World War Two is suspect and suggest a book that might help you in that regard.

- You reply by saying I am an ass with no friends.

- Rocker notes that your posts tend towards the nasty side.

- You respond by calling him a cretin.

- When I mention the irony of your response to Rocker you merely reply that we need to learn manners.

Are you really this clueless? Is your reading comprehension that poor? Another member of the forum suggested to me that CRS stood for Can't Recognize S***. I think they were right.

Karl


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

That's revisionist, Karl. This is what you wrote:



Karl89 said:


> Crs,
> 
> FrankDC owes you big. With your above post I think you have an insurmountable lead as silliest poster of the year. Congrats!


So don't try to lie your way out of it. It's unmanly. You took the first shot and then cry like a little girl when someone strikes back. Have some integrity.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

crs said:


> I consider Rocker's post an attack. I never fire the first shot. Until people like you and Rocker learn some basic manners, you'll be responded to in kind.


I rest my case. Thanks for proving the point.

And I never said anything about provocation - whether your comments were provoked or not is irrelevant. I said "you are among the most dyspeptic posters on this forum. Many, if not most of your posts figuratively drip with bile" and your response to that was not to deny it, but to say such responses were provoked.

You aren't by chance under say 5' 5" are you - because you have that kind of little man attitude/defensiveness.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Crs,

How did I lie? I freely admit that you are silly though FrankDC's latest post seriously jeopardizes your chance at being silliest poster of the year.

Once again your sloppy grasp of the facts and your toxic nature have led you to embarass yourself. You really don't know how spot on Can't Recognize S*** is.

And the only one whining is you but you have a track record for that, don't you? 

So since you seem to always need to have the last word why don't you make a feeble attempt at insulting me in your next post and we shall call it a day, ok? 

Karl


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Karl, you try to bully people online. You can't seem to disagree with anyone without getting in that dig.

Well, here's a little dig for you. I think that like all bullies, you are a coward.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Crs,

Got it. I am a lying coward with no friends and a bully to boot. Feel better now?

Karl


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

crs said:


> Well, here's a little dig for you. I think that like all bullies, you are a coward.


You know, I have always doubted the veracity of that thought. Some bullies just like to hit people and do not care if they get hit back. I figured that out the day I got a black eye and split lip fighting a bully....however, I did knock out one of his teeth and crack his ribs...at the cost of breaking one of my knuckles. He never quite swinging though, I give him that. Ah to be young and foolish.....

Anyways guys, this thread is the best Xmas present ever for me


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Rocker said:


> I rest my case. Thanks for proving the point.
> 
> And I never said anything about provocation - whether your comments were provoked or not is irrelevant. I said "you are among the most dyspeptic posters on this forum. Many, if not most of your posts figuratively drip with bile" and your response to that was not to deny it, but to say such responses were provoked.
> 
> You aren't by chance under say 5' 5" are you - because you have that kind of little man attitude/defensiveness.


I am 6 feet even. I just refuse to take crap from ******** like you, that's all.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

crs said:


> I am 6 feet even. I just refuse to take crap from ******** like you, that's all.


:icon_smile: That's a hoot - thank you! I've never in my life been called a *******. I've lived in Georgia 9 years - but now I really feel at home; I've got a pseudo-sophisticate from New Jersey calling me a ******* all because he got called (politely) on his hypocrisy. I can't wait to tell my friends that I am now an honorary southern *******.

Again, CRS, do tell - exactly which portion of the line "you are among the most dyspeptic posters on this forum. Many, if not most of your posts figuratively drip with bile" did you find inaccurate or objectionable?

P.S. I'd love to know your definition of a *******.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

I think your notion that provocation is irrelevant is among the dumbest things I've ever read. You find me dyspeptic only because I retaliate against people whose political views you share. You are the hypocrite. Some of the conservatives here apparently believe it is OK to suspend all social graces when interacting with people of different viewpoints. I don't know where that comes from, Rush Limbaugh perhaps? But it's not OK. If you want to be treated with respect, you have to show some.

We have ******** in New Jersey, too. They are not limited to the Deep South. I grew up among them in a rural part of the state. You seem to qualify.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

crs said:


> I think your notion that provocation is irrelevant is among the dumbest things I've ever read. You find me dyspeptic only because I retaliate against people whose political views you share. You are the hypocrite. Some of the conservatives here apparently believe it is OK to suspend all social graces when interacting with people of different viewpoints. I don't know where that comes from, Rush Limbaugh perhaps? But it's not OK. If you want to be treated with respect, you have to show some.
> 
> We have ******** in New Jersey, too. They are not limited to the Deep South. I grew up among them in a rural part of the state. You seem to qualify.


Gosh, sir, all I did was correctly point out that "you are among the most dyspeptic posters on this forum. Many, if not most of your posts figuratively drip with bile," which you have most assuredly proven in this thread, and you called me a cretin, a *******, and now a hypocrite. I can only aspire to your social graces. I am unworthy of your mentoring.

Becasue you refuse to define *******, I'm going to assume - for you - it means anyone who disagrees with you.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

FrankDC, I actually agree with most of your assessments. I also believe we could have done far worse and also far better. But the article itself seems to have degraded to specifics of our current malais in Iraq. I like to look at the road that got us here, a road navigated by all manner of statesmen and scoundrels. If GWB is our Caligula, he arrived on the roman road of Caesar. CRS, I can only shake my head. You have the diplomatic and debating skills of a Mormon Missionary in a Biker Bar


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Who first accused someone of hypocrisy? You did, Rocker.

Some of you people seem to think people of differing viewpoints ought to just absorb your insults instead of giving it back to you. You are like those hunters who, instead of taking your chances in the wild where you could actually get hurt, want to shoot at creatures kept in enclosures. Not very sporting.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

CRS, instead of recreating the Ape scene in 2001 a Space Oddessey, I suggest the following course of action; 1. Respond to perceived insult as a gentleman and ignore it. This will raise your personal bearing with the forum at large. 2. If you don't want to be held in high esteem, PM a forum administrator and complain within the guidelines of the forum 3. If you must respond in kind, at least show some creativity beyond 7th grade locker room bravado 4. Remember this is a forum with as much import ultimately as the idiot who cut you off on the freeway and gave you the finger because he almost got rear ended. I can assure you there is another one a few miles down the road. So don't get your spincter in an uproar. It's bad for your digestion and blood pressure and your pet cat/dog will begin to pace worriedly or urinate on the carpet.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Kav said:


> CRS, instead of recreating the Ape scene in 2001 a Space Oddessey, I suggest the following course of action; 1. Respond to perceived insult as a gentleman and ignore it. This will raise your personal bearing with the forum at large. 2. If you don't want to be held in high esteem, PM a forum administrator and complain within the guidelines of the forum 3. If you must respond in kind, at least show some creativity beyond 7th grade locker room bravado 4. Remember this is a forum with as much import ultimately as the idiot who cut you off on the freeway and gave you the finger because he almost got rear ended. I can assure you there is another one a few miles down the road. So don't get your spincter in an uproar. It's bad for your digestion and blood pressure and your pet cat/dog will begin to pace worriedly or urinate on the carpet.


Really? Are you a moderator, Kav?

You strike me as one of those types who like to see yourself as a rebel, but when you're outnumbered, you suck up to the majority. Probably you narced on your friends in the 60s.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

crs said:


> Really? Are you a moderator, Kav?
> 
> You strike me as one of those types who like to see yourself as a rebel, but when you're outnumbered, you suck up to the majority. Probably you narced on your friends in the 60s.


I love this guy! He cracks me up! He takes on all comers. Don't ever go away :icon_smile_big:

CRS, you must need a new keyboard every week with all the foaming and frothing at the mouth and such.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Crs,

A good rule of thumb - when in a hole stop digging. 

Karl


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

crs said:


> Who first accused someone of hypocrisy? You did, Rocker.


 I made a statement that you too write very acerbically, to wit "Crs, come now - you are among the most dyspeptic posters on this forum. Many, if not most of your posts figuratively drip with bile. " It's an observation which was really designed to cause you to use more moderate language because you were getting very personal in your attacks (no friends?, lonely lives? zero social skills? an ass? possessed by evil spirits? - Come on!) My accusation of hypocrisy came after you started spewing even more invective at me! All and all, I thought it a moderate rebuke and, all you've done, to any objective observer, in this whole thread is prove my point and rhetorically dig yourself in deeper and deeper.


----------



## malinda (Aug 25, 2002)

Gentlemen - and I use the term loosely:

*From Malinda's Lexicon*

*Approved:*
Horses Patootie
Silliest

*Disapproved:*
Dyspeptic
Ass
Morons
Cretin

Normally, my wonderful, newfound staff would take care of this sort of thing. They've asked me to make an attempt before one of them shuts this down. This is that. The choice is yours.


----------



## Smudger (Jun 11, 2005)

*Dueling*

Good Grief!!! I am glad Kentucky still has a law on its books which prohibits dueling....so you all remember that before coming to this neck of the woods!!
Bill


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Envisions cartoon of Bugs Bunny, carrot in one hand, legs crossed and one hand outstretched holding back a wildly swinging Elmer Fudd by the forehead. We aren't friends? Why, I think I'd die thinking we weren't friends. Taps ivory handled ( enviro friendly alaskan fossil sourced ) computer mouse.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

*Forget Pax Americana*

Here is the real danger!

https://cwd.ptbcanadian.com/

You Yankee dogs shall be sorry! I am merely an advanced scout!

Edit: Make sure to read the hate mail. It really will make you proud to be American.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

In St. Louis, we have both ******** and hoosiers. Hoosiers are the urban ********. I'm not quite sure of the definitions, but I believe both are similar to AmJacks.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Oh great Wayfarer, just great. I've been deploying my defenses like the british general at Singapore in WW2 ( previous field experience dodging I.R. A. snipers in Dublin) and now this. I thought all these snowbirds with their 'ehs' and 'aboots' and whispered comments about les francais were trouble. I suppose I must toss out my Stan Rogers CDs and pick up some Celine Dion, " the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and all that. I do hope the RCMP Musical horse troop doesn't engage the Reconquista bicycle brigada too early in that inevitable clash of wills.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Wayfarer said:


> Here is the real danger!
> 
> https://cwd.ptbcanadian.com/
> 
> ...


I knew it! You've been up there sharpening your skates and preparing for an attack!

Those people writing the hate mail need to get a clue.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Wayfarer,

You want the whole world to know the joys of moose jerky and seal casserole don't you?

Karl


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

I think the Canadians can be appeased. They can have the red states.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

crs said:


> I think the Canadians can be appeased. They can have the red states.


Those are the good states?


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> Those people writing the hate mail need to get a clue.


Yeah, kind of embarassing, isn't it? You can distill them down to a few sentences:

"USA!!USA!!USA!! Canada, like sucks. We like rule! USA!!"

You guys know I love this country but those emails make one cringe.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

crs said:


> I think the Canadians can be appeased. They can have the red states.


Crs, since you made the accusation and I've asked you twice, I think you should define *******. As I said, I think for you it means anyone who disagrees with you. I also suspect in your parlance it means a southern republican. Since you made the accusation, and you deem yourself so incredibly urbane and sophisticated (and living in New Jersey, I can understand why) - I want a definition. Malinda seemed to take exception to "dyspeptic" but not to *******. You accused me of being a ******* and I want to know what your definition is. Given your vitriol, I think you owe this much. Odd that you seem so PC but your OK with this term but given uour appalling liberal hubris I suspect that you beleive racism only works one way. Please define this term - if you have the guts.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Rocker said:


> Crs, since you made the accusation and I've asked you twice, I think you should define *******. As I said, I think for you it means anyone who disagrees with you. I also suspect in your parlance it means a southern republican. Since you made the accusation, and you deem yourself so incredibly urbane and sophisticated (and living in New Jersey, I can understand why) - I want a definition. Malinda seemed to take exception to "dyspeptic" but not to *******. You accused me of being a ******* and I want to know what your definition is. Given your vitriol, I think you owe this much. Odd that you seem so PC but your OK with this term but given uour appalling liberal hubris I suspect that you beleive racism only works one way. Please define this term - if you have the guts.


Ignorant, intolerant of other viewpoints and cultures.


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

crs said:


> Ignorant, intolerant of other viewpoints and cultures.


I think you're assuming, wrongly, that all viewpoints are equally valid and all cultures equally valuable.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

hopkins_student said:


> I think you're assuming, wrongly, that all viewpoints are equally valuable.


That is not my assumption. But they ought to be treated with respect if they haven't disrespected you.


----------



## lovemeparis (May 20, 2006)

*hate emails...*



Laxplayer said:


> I knew it! You've been up there sharpening your skates and preparing for an attack!
> 
> * Those people writing the hate mail need to get a clue*.


Yeah... do you know who wrote those hate e(mail)????

And they are so evil when they use other innocent people to blame...

...from paris


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

Time for a rest I think.


----------

