Turn on thread page Beta

America and Imperial Overstretch watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi all, here is a topic for debate and discussion....and lets try and back up any statements made.

    Is America facing in the near or immediate future, what Paul Kennedy has termed 'imperial overstretch'?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    which user?

    Before this topic goes to far off topic, I think there is a danger of the US overstretching if it goes invading to many countries however that is just common sense. I have no reason to believe it will tho so its difficult to suggest in reality whether this will happen as no plans have been released for future invasions.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)

    Before this topic goes to far off topic, I think there is a danger of the US overstretching if it goes invading to many countries however that is just common sense. I have no reason to believe it will tho so its difficult to suggest in reality whether this will happen as no plans have been released for future invasions.
    One thing to remember is that the Us traditionally does not occupy foreign countries. Instead they tend to install a friendly government. Thus unlike Britain and France duringthe imperialism. The US does not try to take over countries, it atempts to turn them into allies.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Just an LSE guy)
    The UK has 1/5th the population of the USA and yet its armed forces are present in more countries than the USA.

    Basically if the Americans want to bomb mosques around the world (and who doesn’t?) then they have to stop being the cowards they are (and have been since the terrorist Washington egged them into open rebellion against our beloved King George) and commit the necessary resources.

    yes, Washington did use guerilla tactics and not normal '18th century war etiquette' but your racism is disgusting yet again, why haven't you been banned yet?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    btw this is the first topic ive started.
    anyway, just to get things moving, here is something which may clarify the question or open up new avenues of thought.

    "Rather than the triumph of a new imperial order, the [iraq] war may actually accelerate the decline of U.S. hegemony. In late 2002, Charles Kupchan, a professor at Georgetown University and a member of the National Security Council in the Clinton administration, released a book titled "The End of the American Era." Cast in mainstream political language, Kupchan argues "Pax Americana" will end due to "the rise of alternative centers of power and a declining and unilateralist U.S. internationalism." Even before France and Germany headed up the Western opposition to the U.S .war in Iraqi, Kupchan asserted that the European Union would be in the forefront of an emergent "multipolar world" that will eclipse U.S. ascendancy in the early part of the twenty-first century."
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    One thing to remember is that the Us traditionally does not occupy foreign countries. Instead they tend to install a friendly government. Thus unlike Britain and France duringthe imperialism. The US does not try to take over countries, it atempts to turn them into allies.
    Yes its actions in Chile and Vietnam certainly back that up :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    Yes its actions in Chile and Vietnam certainly back that up :rolleyes:
    or perhaps he was talking about post-cold war U.S imperialism
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by John Paul Jones)
    or perhaps he was talking about post-cold war U.S imperialism
    yeah no occupation going on in cuba in 1898 or the Philipines in the same year :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    Yes its actions in Chile and Vietnam certainly back that up :rolleyes:
    indeed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    well now i got that out of my system lol

    i belive that america is far from overstreched and has the potential to extend its power and influence further.

    (Original post by nen)
    well now i got that out of my system lol

    i belive that america is far from overstreched and has the potential to extend its power and influence further.
    We dont care nen.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nen)
    well now i got that out of my system lol

    i belive that america is far from overstreched and has the potential to extend its power and influence further.

    perhaps it is streched economically yes,


    i hope you didn't watch that Niall Ferguson documentary - it was so terrible, he compared Francisco "Pancho" Villa to the 19th century Osama Bin Laden lol

    hahaha, he is a terrible historian.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by John Paul Jones)
    perhaps it is streched economically yes,


    i hope you didn't watch that Niall Ferguson documentary - it was so terrible, he compared Francisco "Pancho" Villa to the 19th century Osama Bin Laden lol

    hahaha, he is a terrible historian.

    no i didnt lol
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nen)
    well now i got that out of my system lol

    i belive that america is far from overstreched and has the potential to extend its power and influence further.
    i think the defence expenditure of the US would seem to concur with that assessment. i beleive it now stands at 4% of GDP (correct me if im wrong here, this is from memory) which is still nowhere near the 9% it reached at certain points in the cold war.

    but then imperial overstretch is about much more than power and influence in real terms, what about the rise of other power centres?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    there does apear to be growing threat in asia and a growing backlash against the "american way"
    korea presents a growing threat. china also has the potential of become a super power often eing descibed as a sleeping giant

    however i think that the more america feels threatened as she now does the more she will wish to impose her values as demostrated during the cold war

    i think america will remain the super power for some time yet
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nen)
    korea presents a growing threat. china also has the potential of become a super power often eing descibed as a sleeping giant
    China has been a sleeping power for centuries, Napolean even commented upon this subject.

    (Original post by Shane_Filan)
    Da chinese economy shud become 2nd largest soon and az da potential to overtake America'z.
    For the love of God use english please.

    http://gosh.ex.ac.uk/~osw201/ukl/alt...faq_guidelines
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    China has been a sleeping power for centuries, Napolean even commented upon this subject.

    'Rather 50 years of Europe than a cycle of Cathay' - Tennyson (Locksley Hall)

    but yes, you have to look at the Opium wars and abuse by the Western powers,


    even Sergei Witte, the Russian minister of financer prior to the first world war was obsessed about not becoming 'a European China'
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by John Paul Jones)
    even Sergei Witte, the Russian minister of financer prior to the first world war was obsessed about not becoming 'a European China'
    Interesting fact. On another note i wonder how important the current communist adminstration may be in Chinas long term future as a potential world superpower. I cant see a democracy for a nation of that size and current level of developement being anywhere near efficient enough to fulfill Chinas potential.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nen)
    however i think that the more america feels threatened as she now does the more she will wish to impose her values as demostrated during the cold war
    however, that is the very irony of the theory of imperial overstretch....as a dominant power begins to decline (in real or relative terms) it almost invariably resorts to war and belligerency, thereby accelerating their demise as they waste their national treasuries on military spending to the detriment of their economies and their peoples.

    will america follow the same pattern that most other great powers have followed, or will it adopt another, some would say more successful method of retrenchment....the only example i can think of, and i think the only example paul kennedy comes up with is Great Britain. makes me feel all warm inside
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    China has been a sleeping power for centuries, Napolean even commented upon this subject.
    thats very true but china is rapidly emerging from this slumber and has been since the late 1970s. of course it will take decades for its potential to be truly realised, but that does not mean it is not in the process of doing this at present.

    many economists predict china will be the largest economy in the world, if not by 2015 (the most optimistic estimate), then sometime in the middle of this century. how long this economic power takes to convert into political, diplomatic, military muscle is debateable.
 
 
 
Poll
Do protests make a difference in political decisions?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.