spot;1508386 wrote: Not a word, no.
He's doing what I wanted him to do. He's completely destroying any pretension that the US is a superpower. That's all President Trump is about. The USA is not the Roman Empire reborn, the USA is an embarrassing laughing stock of would-be bully-boys who can't take life in the real world. Yankee go home.
The Roman Empire was a bunch of Bully Boys. The US, especially under Trump, is a bunch of Bully Boys. What makes you think it isn't the Roman Empire reborn?
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
The Roman Empire lasted 1400 years, the American Empire might stagger toward 200 but I doubt it will get there. I expect to outlast it.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
spot;1508401 wrote: The Roman Empire lasted 1400 years, the American Empire might stagger toward 200 but I doubt it will get there. I expect to outlast it.
It was in 1776 we declared independemce, 241 years ago.
In 1787 we adopted our Constitution, 230 years ago.
It was in 1776 we declared independemce, 241 years ago.
In 1787 we adopted our Constitution, 230 years ago.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
spot;1508401 wrote: The Roman Empire lasted 1400 years, the American Empire might stagger toward 200 but I doubt it will get there. I expect to outlast it.
Where dop you get 1400 years from? Unless you hold to tge notion that the catholic church was a continuationm of it.
Where dop you get 1400 years from? Unless you hold to tge notion that the catholic church was a continuationm of it.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
tude dog;1508403 wrote: It was in 1776 we declared independemce, 241 years ago.
In 1787 we adopted our Constitution, 230 years ago.
You didn't run an Empire back when you founded your nation. Neither did the Romans when they founded their city.
The Roman Empire started around 500 years later, somewhere near 200BCE, and for the first 160 years the Roman Empire was run as a Republic. After that it adopted an unelected Emperor.
The American Empire dates from annexing the Philippines around 115 years ago, when the nation went gung-ho into acquiring foreign territory they could American-govern, American use and American tax without allowing any representation in American government. That's what we call an Empire. Your founding fathers disapproved of such antics which is why the American Empire does not date from 1776. By 1900 you'd collectively forgotten the principles on which your country was founded.
Here's a simple test. Do you allow it to choose its own foreign policy? Do you allow its citizens representation in the government of the USA? If you hear two "no" answers, that's part of the American Empire. Ohio, no/yes, not part of the Empire. Malaysia, yes/no, not part of the Empire. You finally got pushed out of the Philippines, so that's not part of the Empire any longer.
Ask the exiles of Diego Garcia whether they even have access to their homeland. Their entire country is a US Air Force base these days and the islanders are banned from setting foot on it.
Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa and Puerto Rico? Where's the representation? Where's the independent foreign policy?
I don't think Japan or South Korea have a choice in foreign policy either, but that might just be me. Haiti and Panama certainly don't. All four are obliged to host an unwelcome permanent US military occupation or to remember the invasions which happen if they fail to toe the line on command.
Iraq quite definitely doesn't. If it did it would be solidly allied with Iran by the end of the week. Iran successfully threw out the American Imperialists in 1979 by popular insurrection, Iraq hasn't yet managed to.
Would you like to pretend Afghanistan has an independent foreign policy?
gmc;1508405 wrote: Where dop you get 1400 years from? Unless you hold to tge notion that the catholic church was a continuationm of it.
The Roman Empire adopted multiple Emperors from around 200CE onward, and in 330CE the Emperor Constantine moved the seat of the Roman Empire to Constantinople. The Western Roman Empire fell in 410CE, the Eastern Roman Empire flourished for another thousand years, falling in 1453CE. That gives a continuous Roman Empire of 150 years under the Republic followed by 1500 years under the Emperors, which you may if you like call 1650 years. I called it 1400 because I wasn't doing mental arithmetic, I was writing a sentence.
In 1787 we adopted our Constitution, 230 years ago.
You didn't run an Empire back when you founded your nation. Neither did the Romans when they founded their city.
The Roman Empire started around 500 years later, somewhere near 200BCE, and for the first 160 years the Roman Empire was run as a Republic. After that it adopted an unelected Emperor.
The American Empire dates from annexing the Philippines around 115 years ago, when the nation went gung-ho into acquiring foreign territory they could American-govern, American use and American tax without allowing any representation in American government. That's what we call an Empire. Your founding fathers disapproved of such antics which is why the American Empire does not date from 1776. By 1900 you'd collectively forgotten the principles on which your country was founded.
Here's a simple test. Do you allow it to choose its own foreign policy? Do you allow its citizens representation in the government of the USA? If you hear two "no" answers, that's part of the American Empire. Ohio, no/yes, not part of the Empire. Malaysia, yes/no, not part of the Empire. You finally got pushed out of the Philippines, so that's not part of the Empire any longer.
Ask the exiles of Diego Garcia whether they even have access to their homeland. Their entire country is a US Air Force base these days and the islanders are banned from setting foot on it.
Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa and Puerto Rico? Where's the representation? Where's the independent foreign policy?
I don't think Japan or South Korea have a choice in foreign policy either, but that might just be me. Haiti and Panama certainly don't. All four are obliged to host an unwelcome permanent US military occupation or to remember the invasions which happen if they fail to toe the line on command.
Iraq quite definitely doesn't. If it did it would be solidly allied with Iran by the end of the week. Iran successfully threw out the American Imperialists in 1979 by popular insurrection, Iraq hasn't yet managed to.
Would you like to pretend Afghanistan has an independent foreign policy?
gmc;1508405 wrote: Where dop you get 1400 years from? Unless you hold to tge notion that the catholic church was a continuationm of it.
The Roman Empire adopted multiple Emperors from around 200CE onward, and in 330CE the Emperor Constantine moved the seat of the Roman Empire to Constantinople. The Western Roman Empire fell in 410CE, the Eastern Roman Empire flourished for another thousand years, falling in 1453CE. That gives a continuous Roman Empire of 150 years under the Republic followed by 1500 years under the Emperors, which you may if you like call 1650 years. I called it 1400 because I wasn't doing mental arithmetic, I was writing a sentence.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
spot;1508409 wrote: You didn't run an Empire back when you founded your nation. Neither did the Romans when they founded their city.
Whatever that means?
spot;1508409 wrote: The Roman Empire started around 500 years later, somewhere near 200BCE, and for the first 160 years the Roman Empire was run as a Republic. After that it adopted an unelected Emperor.
My calculator is blowing up.
spot;1508409 wrote: The American Empire dates from annexing the Philippines
HMM
spot;1508409 wrote: around 115 years ago, when the nation went gung-ho into acquiring foreign territory they could American-govern, American use and American tax without allowing any representation in American government. That's what we call an Empire. Your founding fathers disapproved of such antics which is why the American Empire does not date from 1776. By 1900 you'd collectively forgotten the principles on which your country was founded.
ZZZZ:-2
spot;1508409 wrote: Here's a simple test.
image upload freecertificity.com
Whatever that means?
spot;1508409 wrote: The Roman Empire started around 500 years later, somewhere near 200BCE, and for the first 160 years the Roman Empire was run as a Republic. After that it adopted an unelected Emperor.
My calculator is blowing up.
spot;1508409 wrote: The American Empire dates from annexing the Philippines
HMM
spot;1508409 wrote: around 115 years ago, when the nation went gung-ho into acquiring foreign territory they could American-govern, American use and American tax without allowing any representation in American government. That's what we call an Empire. Your founding fathers disapproved of such antics which is why the American Empire does not date from 1776. By 1900 you'd collectively forgotten the principles on which your country was founded.
ZZZZ:-2
spot;1508409 wrote: Here's a simple test.
image upload freecertificity.com
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
If you can't follow the points that's your problem. Your country did not begin as an Empire, okay? Neither did Rome. They became Empires when they started acquiring foreign territory. Look up "Empire" in a dictionary if you can't grasp that bit.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
gmc;1508475 wrote: I'm quite well aware the british empire was bigger but that was due due to our dominance at sea
It was?
We were certainly dominant at sea by, say, 1800, but not much before then I'd have thought. Dominant means we didn't have to keep fighting set-piece hundred-ship battles against the French. But by 1800 we already had the Empire. The rise of the Royal Navy was to protect trade generated by the Empire, I can't see that it was a cause. By 1800 we already owned Canada and Australia and India and all those slave-serviced plantations in the West Indies, we'd owned and already lost the American Colonies. The maritime aspect of the British Empire before the 19th century was mercantile. Every inch of conquest had been by land-based foot soldiers, a few overpaid upper-class officers on horseback, as many civil administrators as were needed and ambitious lower-class emigrants making their fortunes.
It was?
We were certainly dominant at sea by, say, 1800, but not much before then I'd have thought. Dominant means we didn't have to keep fighting set-piece hundred-ship battles against the French. But by 1800 we already had the Empire. The rise of the Royal Navy was to protect trade generated by the Empire, I can't see that it was a cause. By 1800 we already owned Canada and Australia and India and all those slave-serviced plantations in the West Indies, we'd owned and already lost the American Colonies. The maritime aspect of the British Empire before the 19th century was mercantile. Every inch of conquest had been by land-based foot soldiers, a few overpaid upper-class officers on horseback, as many civil administrators as were needed and ambitious lower-class emigrants making their fortunes.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
spot;1508477 wrote: It was?
We were certainly dominant at sea by, say, 1800, but not much before then I'd have thought. Dominant means we didn't have to keep fighting set-piece hundred-ship battles against the French. But by 1800 we already had the Empire. The rise of the Royal Navy was to protect trade generated by the Empire, I can't see that it was a cause. By 1800 we already owned Canada and Australia and India and all those slave-serviced plantations in the West Indies, we'd owned and already lost the American Colonies. The maritime aspect of the British Empire before the 19th century was mercantile. Every inch of conquest had been by land-based foot soldiers, a few overpaid upper-class officers on horseback, as many civil administrators as were needed and ambitious lower-class emigrants making their fortunes.
Because we are an island we didn't have the expense of large standing armies and resources and research went in to the navy in particular developing metallurgy and making cannon - henry the eigth in particuar spend a lot of time working out the best way to cast iron cannon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_navy
The Navy yards were leaders in technical innovation, and the captains devised new tactics. Parker (1996) argues that the full-rigged ship was one of the greatest technological advances of the century and permanently transformed naval warfare. In 1573 English shipwrights introduced designs, first demonstrated in the Dreadnought, that allowed the ships to sail faster and maneuver better and permitted heavier guns.[4] Whereas before warships had tried to grapple with each other so that soldiers could board the enemy ship, now they stood off and fired broadsides that would sink the enemy vessel.[5] When Spain finally decided to invade and conquer England it was a fiasco. Superior English ships and seamanship foiled the invasion and led to the destruction of the Spanish Armada in 1588, marking the high point of Elizabeth's reign. Technically, the Armada failed because Spain's over-complex strategy required coordination between the invasion fleet and the Spanish army on shore. But the poor design of the Spanish cannons meant they were much slower in reloading in a close-range battle, allowing the English to take control. Spain and France still had stronger fleets, but England was catching up.[6]
coal and iron ore we had in abundance outnumbered the concentration on building ships that stood off and outysailed and fought with cannon firing through ports in the side ended up giving us a tachnological edge. By 1800 we mass produced cannon and muskets of a consistent quality and gunpowder also of a consistent quality that gave british ships an edge. We had the empire but it wasn't accidental.
Bit off topic though.
We were certainly dominant at sea by, say, 1800, but not much before then I'd have thought. Dominant means we didn't have to keep fighting set-piece hundred-ship battles against the French. But by 1800 we already had the Empire. The rise of the Royal Navy was to protect trade generated by the Empire, I can't see that it was a cause. By 1800 we already owned Canada and Australia and India and all those slave-serviced plantations in the West Indies, we'd owned and already lost the American Colonies. The maritime aspect of the British Empire before the 19th century was mercantile. Every inch of conquest had been by land-based foot soldiers, a few overpaid upper-class officers on horseback, as many civil administrators as were needed and ambitious lower-class emigrants making their fortunes.
Because we are an island we didn't have the expense of large standing armies and resources and research went in to the navy in particular developing metallurgy and making cannon - henry the eigth in particuar spend a lot of time working out the best way to cast iron cannon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_navy
The Navy yards were leaders in technical innovation, and the captains devised new tactics. Parker (1996) argues that the full-rigged ship was one of the greatest technological advances of the century and permanently transformed naval warfare. In 1573 English shipwrights introduced designs, first demonstrated in the Dreadnought, that allowed the ships to sail faster and maneuver better and permitted heavier guns.[4] Whereas before warships had tried to grapple with each other so that soldiers could board the enemy ship, now they stood off and fired broadsides that would sink the enemy vessel.[5] When Spain finally decided to invade and conquer England it was a fiasco. Superior English ships and seamanship foiled the invasion and led to the destruction of the Spanish Armada in 1588, marking the high point of Elizabeth's reign. Technically, the Armada failed because Spain's over-complex strategy required coordination between the invasion fleet and the Spanish army on shore. But the poor design of the Spanish cannons meant they were much slower in reloading in a close-range battle, allowing the English to take control. Spain and France still had stronger fleets, but England was catching up.[6]
coal and iron ore we had in abundance outnumbered the concentration on building ships that stood off and outysailed and fought with cannon firing through ports in the side ended up giving us a tachnological edge. By 1800 we mass produced cannon and muskets of a consistent quality and gunpowder also of a consistent quality that gave british ships an edge. We had the empire but it wasn't accidental.
Bit off topic though.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
gmc;1508481 wrote: We had the empire but it wasn't accidental.The Tudors had neither an Empire nor a dominant navy. We seem to agree on 1800 for naval dominance, however far back it might be underpinned.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
spot;1508467 wrote: If your point is that America was an empire either in 1776 or in 1889 then I'm not surprised. You know it wasn't, I know it wasn't, but it's what you claimed at http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/curre ... ost1508403.
Such a great empire we had.
First, we pass a law to for self-government.
Philippine Organic Act (1902)
Then we pass a law for Philippine independence.
Jones Law (Philippines)
Long story short, we were a benevolent empire for 48 years.
I would say that is a first in empire nation history.
Such a great empire we had.
First, we pass a law to for self-government.
Philippine Organic Act (1902)
Then we pass a law for Philippine independence.
Jones Law (Philippines)
Long story short, we were a benevolent empire for 48 years.
I would say that is a first in empire nation history.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
That's the state of American education Dawg...................we got the same BS here too......and we really had an empire........many of them still like us too.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
spot;1508482 wrote: The Tudors had neither an Empire nor a dominant navy. We seem to agree on 1800 for naval dominance, however far back it might be underpinned.
I never said they did - read the article, arguably henry set us on the way when he put so much emphasis in to developing the technology to make better cannon and ships- our naval dominance would never have happened without what he started. We had an edge because we didn't have tp keep large armies in the field more money for the navy. It's also an accident of history that we started industrialising first empires don't happen overnight.
Now we're back to being a pimple off the shore of europe.
I never said they did - read the article, arguably henry set us on the way when he put so much emphasis in to developing the technology to make better cannon and ships- our naval dominance would never have happened without what he started. We had an edge because we didn't have tp keep large armies in the field more money for the navy. It's also an accident of history that we started industrialising first empires don't happen overnight.
Now we're back to being a pimple off the shore of europe.
-
Clodhopper
- Posts: 5115
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
I'm not quite sure where the argument about when Britannia ruled the waves came from or is going. Trafalgar sealed the deal for the next century and a bit. The previous century had been a case of mostly having dominance but suffering disastrous consequences when it was punctured - the loss of the American colonies was a direct result of loss of control of the sea and not even that much of it, just the American coastal waters.
Generally, British trade could flow and French (and Dutch in the early years) mostly could not in time of war. So I suppose the imposition of blockade is as good an indication of gaining control of the sea as any and not just because of the tactical skills needed, but the logistic ability, financing and clerical work needed to keep a fleet fed, watered, repaired and munitioned at sea not to mention the industrial capacity ashore to make the cordage, blocks, cannon and so on. (N.A.M Rodgers is the man to read on the subject. I think his book is called A History of the Royal Navy but it's in a box at present and I can't check.)
The two hundred years before that - say 1500 to 1700 - involved developments of ship design, command structure, financing, in metallurgy and huge failures from Buckingham in Spain to van Tromp sweeping the Thames clean of ships. Charles 2nd and Pepys can probably be called the founders of the modern Royal Navy in that it's with their interest and abilities pulling together the above that the fighting navy first became really distinct from the merchant navy.
Generally, British trade could flow and French (and Dutch in the early years) mostly could not in time of war. So I suppose the imposition of blockade is as good an indication of gaining control of the sea as any and not just because of the tactical skills needed, but the logistic ability, financing and clerical work needed to keep a fleet fed, watered, repaired and munitioned at sea not to mention the industrial capacity ashore to make the cordage, blocks, cannon and so on. (N.A.M Rodgers is the man to read on the subject. I think his book is called A History of the Royal Navy but it's in a box at present and I can't check.)
The two hundred years before that - say 1500 to 1700 - involved developments of ship design, command structure, financing, in metallurgy and huge failures from Buckingham in Spain to van Tromp sweeping the Thames clean of ships. Charles 2nd and Pepys can probably be called the founders of the modern Royal Navy in that it's with their interest and abilities pulling together the above that the fighting navy first became really distinct from the merchant navy.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Lone voice: "I'm not."
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
Clodhopper;1508490 wrote: I'm not quite sure where the argument about when Britannia ruled the waves came from or is going.I've moved it here to keep the original thread on topic, you're the second person to have brought up the diversion.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
What's this? A split thread at FG? It's been ages since anyone with such powers has injected so much decency into a threaded conversation. When was the last time? I wonder!
FWIW, spot, excellent job on the work and title. Bravo!
FWIW, spot, excellent job on the work and title. Bravo!
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
tude dog;1508403 wrote: It was in 1776 we declared independemce, 241 years ago.
In 1787 we adopted our Constitution, 230 years ago.
Well th final draft was proposed in 1787.
It was 1788 that "we" ratified the Constitution of the United States of America. though it actually became effective Mar of 1789 so you're off by nearly two years, there.
While some claimed we were an Empire after the Post Civil War expansion into the West, I doubt we could really claim Empire status until after we thrashed Spain in Teddy's War. And it was not really until we decided to join the fray in Europe a hundred years ago before we began to really throw our weight around on the global theatre.
With the current Nero-esque buffoon at the helm, I fear our designs on Global Domination may quickly fade into the sunset.
In 1787 we adopted our Constitution, 230 years ago.
Well th final draft was proposed in 1787.
It was 1788 that "we" ratified the Constitution of the United States of America. though it actually became effective Mar of 1789 so you're off by nearly two years, there.
While some claimed we were an Empire after the Post Civil War expansion into the West, I doubt we could really claim Empire status until after we thrashed Spain in Teddy's War. And it was not really until we decided to join the fray in Europe a hundred years ago before we began to really throw our weight around on the global theatre.
With the current Nero-esque buffoon at the helm, I fear our designs on Global Domination may quickly fade into the sunset.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
LarsMac;1508498 wrote: Well th final draft was proposed in 1787.
It was 1788 that "we" ratified the Constitution of the United States of America. though it actually became effective Mar of 1789 so you're off by nearly two years, there.
While some claimed we were an Empire after the Post Civil War expansion into the West, I doubt we could really claim Empire status until after we thrashed Spain in Teddy's War. And it was not really until we decided to join the fray in Europe a hundred years ago before we began to really throw our weight around on the global theatre.
With the current Nero-esque buffoon at the helm, I fear our designs on Global Domination may quickly fade into the sunset.
In Teddy's War, we certainly acted like an empire when we refused to allow the Cubans to have the democracy they begged for, out of fear that in a democracy they might choose not to be exploited by US companies, and gave them a dictatorship instead.
It was 1788 that "we" ratified the Constitution of the United States of America. though it actually became effective Mar of 1789 so you're off by nearly two years, there.
While some claimed we were an Empire after the Post Civil War expansion into the West, I doubt we could really claim Empire status until after we thrashed Spain in Teddy's War. And it was not really until we decided to join the fray in Europe a hundred years ago before we began to really throw our weight around on the global theatre.
With the current Nero-esque buffoon at the helm, I fear our designs on Global Domination may quickly fade into the sunset.
In Teddy's War, we certainly acted like an empire when we refused to allow the Cubans to have the democracy they begged for, out of fear that in a democracy they might choose not to be exploited by US companies, and gave them a dictatorship instead.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
Wandrin;1508507 wrote: In Teddy's War, we certainly acted like an empire when we refused to allow the Cubans to have the democracy they begged for, out of fear that in a democracy they might choose not to be exploited by US companies, and gave them a dictatorship instead.
After the war, in 1902 we turned government over to the residents and they attempted a republic. A number of elections were successful in producing some level of democracy for a while. Though we did play a heavy hand in their economy for quite a while.
It was in 1952 that Batista took over the government after his election attempt failed that things really went to crap.
After the war, in 1902 we turned government over to the residents and they attempted a republic. A number of elections were successful in producing some level of democracy for a while. Though we did play a heavy hand in their economy for quite a while.
It was in 1952 that Batista took over the government after his election attempt failed that things really went to crap.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
LarsMac;1508508 wrote: After the war, in 1902 we turned government over to the residents and they attempted a republic. A number of elections were successful in producing some level of democracy for a while. Though we did play a heavy hand in their economy for quite a while.
It was in 1952 that Batista took over the government after his election attempt failed that things really went to crap.
Oops! Pardon my bad memory. You're right.
It was in 1952 that Batista took over the government after his election attempt failed that things really went to crap.
Oops! Pardon my bad memory. You're right.
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
Wandrin;1508513 wrote: Oops! Pardon my bad memory. You're right.
no worries.
An "Oh, by the way." My wife was in Cuba when the Castro brothers took over and booted the Batista regime. She was just fresh out of high school, and definitely in the wrong place with the wrong people. Fortunately, they let her go home.
no worries.
An "Oh, by the way." My wife was in Cuba when the Castro brothers took over and booted the Batista regime. She was just fresh out of high school, and definitely in the wrong place with the wrong people. Fortunately, they let her go home.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Aspects of Empire, split from Will President Trump run for a second term?
LarsMac;1508517 wrote: no worries.
An "Oh, by the way." My wife was in Cuba when the Castro brothers took over and booted the Batista regime. She was just fresh out of high school, and definitely in the wrong place with the wrong people. Fortunately, they let her go home.
That must have been frightening.
An "Oh, by the way." My wife was in Cuba when the Castro brothers took over and booted the Batista regime. She was just fresh out of high school, and definitely in the wrong place with the wrong people. Fortunately, they let her go home.
That must have been frightening.