Friday, March 18, 2011

The World After America

It's here.  Look around.  France is taking the lead in establishing the Libyan no-fly zone, from Italian bases. 

I posted last month that the rest of the world is saying, "America has lost it", and America is done. 

Could it be that at least one reason why the world is on fire now is that Pax Americana is gone?  There are no adults in charge now, and they know no one will do anything about them?  Even the European leaders look at us and wonder what happened to us.  I'm sure anti-American countries and their leaders are celebrating the end of "American Hegemony", but the best explanation of Pax Americana I heard was something along the lines of "think of it as your older brother kicking the shit out of you for hurting the cat". 

Frankly, I don't want US planes covering a civil war in another version of Douchebagistan.  I sure don't want ground troops in another pointless war.  I have to say, though, I think doing this helped aid global stability - at the terrible cost of American lives.

The world is now aligning itself into how it will be arranged after we collapse.   

3 comments:

LeverAction said...

Drat!!!! Blogger ate my comment again!!!

Okay, it went something like this


Without the US to play the "big bad guy" who is willing to use force to maintain peace for them, European countries will be forced to step up their own military to fill the role. They will soon discover that their grand experiments in democratic socialism are far to expensive to maintain in the face of the necessary military spending. And necessary it is - they have neighbors in the Middle East and in North Africa who are willing and eager to take them back to the 14th century should they show sufficient vulnerability or unwillingness to resist. (European birth rates say its going to happen sooner or later anyway, but being bred out of your own country may be preferable to being conquered)

And it might be interesting to watch the heads explode amongst the pacifist intelligentsia as they are forced to take their own military actions. Instead of hating the American "imperialist pigs" they'll have to hate themselves - or will they dance around and find ways to justify it like they have accused us of doing for 40 years? This could be fun, in a macabre sort of way...

Reg T said...

Imagine my surprise to discover we are launching cruise missiles at Libyan air defenses. I read that the Brits supposedly launched one or two, but the other 110 or so came from us.

Didn't think our military would be getting involved. For all of Obama's apologies to the rest of the world for American "Imperialism", here he is interfering in the functioning of a sovereign nation. I haven't decided whether that is good or bad, although I would have come down on the side of "good" if he had done this for the Iranians who truly wanted to regain possession of their own country from the man who fraudulently usurped control of it.

This leaves me with more questions than answers: have we responded too late to help the Libyans who are fighting to overthrow Gaddafi? Will the Muslim Brotherhood or its clones attempt to control what happens once Gaddafi is overthrown? Will someone take the opportunity offered by all this unrest to go in and whack the Lockerbie Bomber? I don't care if he is lying in bed hooked up to life support waiting to die (which I really doubt - that was a ruse. Most prostate cancer is very survivable), someone needs to pull his plug.

Finally, what kind of screams and wailing and gnashing of teeth will we hear from Pelosi and the far left now that The One is acting like Bush? Or will we hear nothing but the silence of their consent?

LeverAction said...

On the wailing and gnashing of teeth, I suspect the latter. Its different when their guy does it because he's not a "war hawk" and is only doing what he "has to do" - not because he wants to.

On a more disturbing note - our executive has now once again committed our military to action against a sovereign foreign power, as part of a UN action, without a declaration of war by the Congress. If I read the Constitution correctly, only Congress has the ability to declare war (initiate military action against a sovereign foreign power) - not the executive and certainly not a body outside of our government. But in spite of that - Bush the lesser did it, as did Billy Bob Clinton, and Bush senior as well. Reagan did it, Ford did it, Nixon did it, Kennedy did it, Eisenhower did it, even Truman did it. Every president (with the possible exception of Jimmy Carter) since the US joined the UN has committed our military against a sovereign foreign power as part of a UN "action" without a declaration of war from congress.

The march toward "world governance" continues...