I agree with your post but do take minor exception to the "empire." We have a lot of trappings -- and habits -- of an empire but really are not nor will likely be one. To rule or guide and empire, a nation has to be willing to be ruthless on occasion and we just are not so inclined. As Bill M. has said, we aren't mean enough...
The size and wealth factor is a near equivalent. I've herd folks from South America, several nations, different times, refer to us as "El monstruo del Norte." The tones used implied size, not a monster per se but were still not complimentary. Colussus of the North.
South and Central America are good examples of the foreign policy problems of the US. Several Presidents, FDR, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Nixon, Reagan all tried to patch things up and pay as much attention to South and Central America as I and others think we should -- all got interrupted with other things in other places and the priority accorded to the South dissipated.
Pete:
I think you're right. Hopefully, anyway. What we've been doing hasn't worked too well.
The Troops are always willing to give it a shot and give it their best but a lot of flawed policies and idea have been forced upon them. Not to mention the costs. No single war or operation has cost us that much but maintaining the force eats a big whack of dollars. We will not be able to afford too many interventions.
A Viet Nam era troopie cost about $500.00 bucks to clothe and equip -- today, it's pushing $25K. Everything else has gone up accordingly...
Bookmarks