caitlyn
Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004 Status: offline
|
I was going to bring up regional conflicts like Vietnam in my original response, but decided to wait until a few people brought it up as a way to illustrate American weakness. Thanks to cloudboy and philosophy. Diplomacy counts for nothing, without, and compared to, military might. I know that isn't popular, but it is, what it is. Ancient Rome was never strong in diplomacy, but had the army, and stood long past it's prime because if it. Even very late in the Empire, it was not diplomacy that gave new life in the early fifty Century, it was Flavius Aeteus and the army. Byzantium was only strong, while they were strong militarily. Justinian and Theodora were successful, because they had Belisarius. In the tenth Century, the resurgence of the empire was not due to diplomatic gains, but rather to the military gains of Basil II. A few hundred years later with the empire ripe for the taking, along comes a Alexius Comnenus with his reporm of the army. The Empire lasted another 250 years after the Comnenan dynasty. Looking at the other side of the coin, the two best examples are the Angevins, who let the army wane after Henry II, and suffered for it, and the Ottomans, who were a diplomatic animal, but couldn't win on the battlefield. The Angevins were short lived, and the Ottomans lasted a long time, but as a second rate power. Now, back to regional conflicts. If we are talking about the projection of power on the global scale, what has or will happen in regional conflicts with limited goals, has little meaning. In a world conflict, there are no limits and no objectives like winning hearts and minds. Nobody tried to win any hearts and minds in the Second World War ... it was simply a projection of global power. In a projection of global power, the United States is the only country that even possesses a modern Navy. For everyone else, it's a long swim. The United States is the only country with a supersonic stealth aircraft, and modern aircraft in large numbers. In a projection of global power, who do you suppose the other Western Democracies will side with? Oh, it's easy to not support the United States on an issue like Iraq, but how much does that REALLY mean, when we are talking about the projection of global power? The final question ... in a projection of global power scenario, who would you bet on, right now? In twenty years? In our lifetime?
< Message edited by caitlyn -- 4/13/2006 12:44:32 PM >
|