You're the apologist here. If US wished, there are far more aggressive actions it could take to secure its interests, often at lower costs than "police action."
Poli Sci and IR weren't my majors technically speaking but I had enough credits to graduate with a poli sci major if I so desired. My bet is I read more journals and studies than you did. Let's say it's true I somehow read only studies in journals in orbit around the foreign service profession (wtf?), do you really think the guys in orbit would all (mostly at least) avoid the terms favored by mainstream academics?
It is true if you define empires as great powers with high degree of control and influence over the relevant theatre, then yes, US is an empire. But when you put US up against old empires like Athens/Sparta, Germany, Napoleonic France, Spain, Britain, China and many others in history, it's pretty clear the level of territorial ambition and willingness to exercise power (military and otherwise) are not even in the same neighborhood.
If America is an empire, (semantics) it's by far the most restrained one in human history, with the exception of some Chinese empires with emperors too busy with their harems to do anything of value. (check out Cao Rui.)
Did you go to school in the U.S.? If that is true that is a sad commentary on our educational system.
There is no debate that America is an empire. As I said before, it always has been an empire and was founded as an empire. Trying to show how America is an empire is like trying to show how a dog is a dog. America is reflexive with empire.
If you want to talk about what kind of empire or how it affects the world well that is something debatable. But if you can't say that America is an empire then you can't see the simplest thing that is open to easy inspection. You can't match definition to outcome. Nothing else you say has any merit.
I have never claimed America is not an empire. I recognize and have conceded it is in colloquial understanding of empire today. I said if it is, it is significantly different from all other empires in history.
Different enough, many, though not all, academics in IR (including those from the Ivys, not just those "in orbit") are reluctant to use "empire" to describe USA. The word is too loaded and it makes it too easy to gloss over the differences that make USA unique.
Everyone who's paid attention to Chinese posturing in south east Asia saw it coming. It's really a matter of time. If China ever manages to pacify Tibet, it's a pretty good bet Vietnam will make it easier for Americans to build a base there.
One of the most interesting things to look is admissions of foreign students at our training facilities and top academies. This is often precursor to much longer and closer relations.
Vietnamese officers have been training with the US military, on American soil for nearly a decade (if not more.) At the top level we have guys like Taiwan (not diplomatically recognized, technically), sending officers to our top academies like US Naval Academy.
Another wow. I didn't know we let foreign nationals study at our military academies.
What kind of posturing is China doing in SE Asia other than Taiwan? Do you know of any links or books that I could read to get up to speed on this?
Just check any Asian newspaper really. Every week China (or someone else) does something on/near some random island (usually near fishing/petro areas) and make frontpage news. Firing guns, landing troops (then leaving usually), telling fishing boats to leave contested areas, and just basically asserting their authority until they get pushed back.
China has actually been pretty silent on Taiwan. Probably because it's so sensitive and US actually has responded before (7th fleet down the Taiwanese strait).
You are about 26? I've been reading about empire for longer than you've been alive.
Bill,
If we're running an empire, we haven't learned the concept very well. We invade France and immediately give it right back to the French. We invade Italy and give it back to the Italians. We invade Germany an give it back , too. Then we spend untold billions rebuilding them.
We run the Japanese out of their Pacific conquered territories, smack the **** out of them at home and give their conquered territories back to their indigenous populations with the exception of a few strategic volcanic islands. We oversee the conversion of Japan from a monarchy to a real democracy.
We invade Korea and give it back to the Koreans. We invade Kuwait and give it back to the Kuwaitis. We invade Iraq twice and give it back 2 times setting up another democracy.
If we're running an empire, we haven't learned the concept very well. We invade France and immediately give it right back to the French. We invade Italy and give it back to the Italians. We invade Germany an give it back , too. Then we spend untold billions rebuilding them.
We run the Japanese out of their Pacific conquered territories, smack the **** out of them at home and give their conquered territories back to their indigenous populations with the exception of a few strategic volcanic islands. We oversee the conversion of Japan from a monarchy to a real democracy.
We invade Korea and give it back to the Koreans. We invade Kuwait and give it back to the Kuwaitis. We invade Iraq twice and give it back 2 times setting up another democracy.
Are we seeing a trend yet?
You are missing a step in between the invasions and the giving back and it involves international institutions. You also ignore the concept of critical leverage and energy resources along with the threat of force against nations that oppose the "overall framework of order" etc.
Two Plus Two
Linear Mode
