C Johnson: The US Global Empire -1/6

[oooshitman9]

Good thing I'm not in charge..Iran would have been nuked, then N. Korea, then whoever fucked with us. I would not think twice about dropping nukes on any country. That would need the problem and people would live in fear of the USA..and that's my goal. China would be a memory....a faint memory.

[MusicIsMySustenance]

@oooshitman9

Ignorance is bliss right?

[Goohuman]

Johnson sounds like a typical intellectual who believes he knows what is right because he has so much knowledge on the subject. As always, he fails to understand that he has intellectualized himself right out of reality. He now dwells in a fantasy world where people will listen to him and take his advice.

Johnson! See that guy with the gun? One word from him is worth more than all your books. Get a clue.

[kinginyellow7]

Johnson advised the CIA during all of the Cold War. The CIA put guns in people's hands and taught them how to use them. Johnson's ideas have had infinitely more influence than any individual with a gun because his ideas helped dictate who held the guns.

[mavinga]

goohuman, can you explain..i am interested in your opinion. of course he is overwhemingly over intellectualizing, the whole play on roman gods and goddess, but to his actual points, do you think he just doesnt get it and if so how, or do you think he goes get it, he just shouldnt be so cryptic about it....what role does the guy with the gun play it this (suppose you mean american soilders overseas), i will assume that you mean with the gun he is insuring our higher standard of living..

[MrtvaPriroda]

what a fool u just made out of yourself, u uneducated moron...

[stealthpakfa]

america = enemy of humanity.

[TommyNawrocki]

@stealthpakfa = MORON

[TheHarlequin13]

Johnson is dead wrong about the British Empire. Britain didn't choose to reliquish it's empire because it wanted to safeguard democracy at home. After two devastating World Wars Britain could no longer afford to dominate the territories it had previously controlled, particularly not with the renewed resistance it experienced post-WWII, nor resist American takeover. The only choice British leaders really made was to become the US' lieutenant, shifting from a traditional empire to a modern one.

[amhaun01]

i think what he's suggesting is that they *could* have afforded to continue domination, but only through near-genocidal violent suppression. this could not have succeeded given free media and the knowledge on the part of the population of what had just happened in europe - so, it would have required severe repression at home, something far beyond what the USA had to tolerate during the vietnam war. it is correct that the british did attempt to bestow aspects of the empire to the USA...

[KashifHKhan]

PART II:

Johnson is also correct to note that: (a) "war on terror" is an oxymoron, and (b) US strategy in Iraq belies understanding of its society. There cannot be a "war" against "terror". 9/11 was a criminal attack and would have been best handled via criminal proceedings against all those involved. Regarding Iraq, it was known that the country was a Shiite majority state ruled by a Sunni minority. Introduction of "democracy" could only result in a pro-Iran, pro-Hizbollah regime.

-Kashif

[KashifHKhan]

PART I:

I agree with Johnson's core assertion that the US has to decide between domestic democracy and a foreign empire. (The British chose the former while the Romans chose the latter.) The US foreign policy is exceedingly militaristic and backed by the powerful military-industrial complex. Military presence in foreign countries as well as intervention in their internal affairs via clandestine operations generates resentment that often translates into terrorist "blowback" against US.

-Kashif