Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
5. That's an interesting question
Sun Mar 2, 2014, 01:23 AM
Mar 2014

But I think it's better to ask why the ones we've done so far worked - or seemed to work.

it's a question of relative power. In 1953, the Us stood as the one nation in the world with both a powerful industrial base and also had suffered very little in WW2. Only the USSR could serve as competition in power; thus the notion of "superpowers" - it's not that these two nations were enormously powerful on their own... but also that all the other nations were either flattened by war, or former colonies that had been impoverished to pay for that war - and the one before.

The US was so much more powerful than these other "little nations" that it really could just sweep in, throw out the old regime and instal la new one fairly securely - as in Iran. The Soviets were able to do the same thing. However less powerful states - like Britain and France - foundered in the same endeavors, because they were closer to their targets in terms of power.

However, two things happened. First, other nations began to regain some of their lost power - the parity began to shift. Second, alternate methods of establishing and expressing power came into use - through guerrilla or terror methods, mainly, but also in mass civil unrest movements.

As the power began to ebb closer to parity, we found that our attempts at changing and maintaining "favorable" regimes became more fragile, more likely to blow up against us. The clearest lesson for the US was in Vietnam, where pretty much the entire nation participated in a guerrilla war against our soldiers and the installed government they were protecting. It blew up again in 1978 with our attempted counter-revolution in Iran, and then in 1984 when we tried to back up Israel's puppeteering in Lebanon. The Soviets meanwhile lost hard in Afghanistan and were rapidly losing their grip on the Warsaw pact, starting with Poland, and quickly spiraling from there.

Nowadays, we lack the ability to effectively "puppet." Either we destroy these other nations - as in Iraq - or we end up backing blatantly anti-human regimes such as in Honduras and Egypt.

What will it take? Well, it'll take someone in our government realizing that we are no longer staring down Stalin across occupied Berlin; We are long past the era of superpowers. However our foreign policy is still stuck in the Truman administration, and Allen Dulles might as well still be head of our intelligence agencies. The Us is living in a leave it to beaver fantasy land of foreign policy, and so long as that's the case, we'll keep smashing around like bulls in a china shop until either we reach an economic tipping point where the taxpayer can no longer support the military and themselves, as happened in the USSR, or some genius figures out that HEY! 1953 was sixty years ago, time to move on.

Sadly that genius will not be from this generation of politicians, all of whom are still firmly rooted in the concept of "evil empire" and "superpowers"

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Success? jberryhill Mar 2014 #1
How is our gov't baiting the Ukraine? nt babylonsister Mar 2014 #2
we are baiting Russia by backing the right wing coup in the Ukraine yurbud Mar 2014 #6
There was a coup that had to be reacted to. babylonsister Mar 2014 #8
Ever notice we never seek out the peacemakers? Only those who can be bought. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2014 #22
So if a group of diplomats have a phone call, they are directing a coup? stevenleser Mar 2014 #10
a) did you read the call and b) do you know the history of the last 60 years? yurbud Mar 2014 #13
I not only read it, I replayed it on my show and covered it extensively. stevenleser Mar 2014 #14
Its very clear the speakers are either controlling or negotiating with cprise Mar 2014 #17
No, it's very clear the speakers are negotiating with the UN and other world leaders to mediate the stevenleser Mar 2014 #19
Yes, they want the UN to sanction what they're doing cprise Mar 2014 #20
Thank You Yurbud! tech3149 Mar 2014 #34
We exist ergo we are baiting them! whistler162 Mar 2014 #30
Seriously, do you not know? tech3149 Mar 2014 #33
, blkmusclmachine Mar 2014 #3
End government corruption. Clean up elections to get better and more Cleita Mar 2014 #4
That's an interesting question Scootaloo Mar 2014 #5
I agree with most of your analysis except the evil empire stuff yurbud Mar 2014 #7
What I mean by that... Scootaloo Mar 2014 #9
when you read the declassified, behind the scenes stuff, it is surprisingly clear-eyed yurbud Mar 2014 #40
Even the NAZIS could be quite pragmatic in private yurbud Mar 2014 #41
Agreed again but I think you miss an important point tech3149 Mar 2014 #35
Defund the MIC. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2014 #11
how about ,no more wars til they find the last 8.5 trillion they lost? questionseverything Mar 2014 #18
that's a good idea yurbud Mar 2014 #24
Cut their budget substantially. democratisphere Mar 2014 #12
When it's no longer profitable they will stop. n/t defacto7 Mar 2014 #15
When we cease being an empire BainsBane Mar 2014 #16
Easy: End the Cold War Policy of the United States representing, promoting, and IMPOSING Capitalism. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2014 #21
if we could just eliminate the third, that would be great--and get them to actually respect other yurbud Mar 2014 #23
It's like the World Bank - Designed to keep them in debt... Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2014 #27
Just Follow The Money! Preventing multinational wealthy RW 1% corporatists from buying legislators. Zorra Mar 2014 #25
stop voting for the candidates they put forward reddread Mar 2014 #26
Except that there are only two choices at General Election time: Zorra Mar 2014 #28
not true reddread Mar 2014 #29
It's always America's fault. Drunken Irishman Mar 2014 #31
Right Message, wrong message board reddread Mar 2014 #32
The US government has nothing to do with what happened in Ukraine. Spider Jerusalem Mar 2014 #36
LOL! Like hell they didn't! reformist2 Mar 2014 #37
Electing Obama clearly didn't do the trick. He may not be one of "them," but he hasn't stopped them. reformist2 Mar 2014 #38
This overthrow of Yanukovych has the CIA rusty fender Mar 2014 #39
Obama isn't an idiot, so either he's complicit or isn't actually in charge of his own foreign policy yurbud Mar 2014 #42
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What will it take to stop...»Reply #5