I would like to see one example where and Empire was good for the majority of humankind

empires unify people.. if there were no empires there would be tribal warfar.. this is that on a global scale.. empires bring about civilization protect culture and the people of whom belong to these empires... empires create trade and prosperity for its people.. and for other people it deals with..

in all examples you site throughtout history you will find this.

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

you know i was thinking.... empires well they are niether all bad or all good.. it depends on the empire.. empires unify people.. as well as destroy people.,. depending on the empire.. if you conquer a bunch of countries that constantly war with each other.. bring them under your rule.. no more wars right¿  i mean thats how it works with ancient empires..]

the bad empires are the ones that conquer peoples for the sole purpose of power and loot.. now all empires do this.. but there is a difference then say. the roman empire .. and the hunic empire.. the huns were not interested in anything but loot.. romans spread knowledge civilization culture economy to people.. at the same time killing lots.. but huns.. they didn give a shit you know? i am alittle drunk my tpying might be off.. anyways..

so are we a hunic empire. or a roman empire... or not an empire at all.. maybe we just have alot of advantageous alliances.. and diplomatic cunning to get where we are....

also historically empires only fall when there is a rebellion from within.. or when a larger empire conquers it... i think that is a pretty acurate statement.. if you know otherwise speak.

so what would you prefer some larger more powerful empire to come and conquer us.. if so who? or would you prefer a civil war (since the empire is so evil)

also take into account everytime a major empire falls there is a humanitarian disaster and chaos that can last for centuries.... empires organize peoples. if there was a fall endless war famine disorganization.. think about the fall of the roman empire.. .

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

The huns didn't have an empire, they just plundered their way through. Rest of the post doesn't really say anything... I mean, "empires either fall from within or without..."? Of course, how else was they to fall...

__________________
To fill a world with ... religions of the Abrahamic kind, is like littering the streets with loaded guns. Do not be surprised if they are used. - Richard Dawkins

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned

MY CAPSLOCK KEY IS BROKEN LOL - Will be stumbled upon several times on the web.

Clash

well they the huns had territory.. it was kinda of an empire.. and they collected tributes from the people they conquered..


im saying is it worth it? is the american 'empire' worth falling? will the hardships that it will cause be worth it.. especially since historically speaking. when one empire falls another will fill the void.. and if not would perpetual chaos uncheck as in endless local wars without ability to stop be worth it?

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

America will fall wheter they like it of not... if not things are going to seriously have to change immediatly quick. And even that can probably only buy you time. It's not that I want America to fall, as it does come with lots of uncertainties. But will China be better or worse? China has a long history of not invading foreigners, something very few (if any) other nations, especially the powerful ones, can say.

As to the huns, they never really had territory. They were nomads and much less organized than the mongols. The huns didn't have the capability to keep such an empire, in starch contrast to the germanic people, who eventually kicked out the romans and plundered their land. The huns came and went, after Attila they were nothing. It probably lasted as much as the American 'empire' but back then time went by much slower...

__________________
To fill a world with ... religions of the Abrahamic kind, is like littering the streets with loaded guns. Do not be surprised if they are used. - Richard Dawkins

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned

MY CAPSLOCK KEY IS BROKEN LOL - Will be stumbled upon several times on the web.

Clash

So basically you're ok with state sponsored terrorism, i.e. to say you subscribe to the "he's a sunnuvabitch, but he's our sunnuvabitch" doctrine.

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

it depends on the goals .. bad to good ratio.. there does come a point when you are doing to much bad inflicting to much suffering for a good goal but in the end its not worth it... i also would not like to send american soldiers into places that are not necessary to do so.. prefering to use cia and training local forces... these are the kind of tactics i would use against radical islamic governments and countries on the 'brink' of collapsing to radical islam..

the same types of tactics we used during the cold war.. but again i would definently prefer to go into everything case by case to decide whether or not i would do one thing or another.. or whether i think it was worth it.. or whether it was the wrong thing to do..

i do think we must not shy away from being cunning and calculative.. and even abusive when it is absolutely necessary and there is a destinct advantage to do so.

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

the american empire during the cold war.

__________________
Anyone with a vision needs to see an eye doctor. -Helmut Schmidt.

"Mrs. Palin, which specific journals and news sources do you read? (after being asked once)"

"Oh, All of them!"

china would be dangerous.. because they dont value human life as much as we do.. because thier population is so huge.. and if they are not willing to send forces around the world they can not be a major power.. regardless of economy.. thats what makes you the power..

but they wont be an empire i dont think.. historically speaking the huge not as organized countries will always fall to smaller better organized countries.. china has been conquered again and again under same circumstances... despite its wealth and vastness.. same to the romans the persians.. america is a large country but its much more tight nit organized better technology and we know how to wage war in much more organized way.. i think thats the key..

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7

what about east europeans? they seem to be pro US empire. wonder why...

__________________
Anyone with a vision needs to see an eye doctor. -Helmut Schmidt.

"Mrs. Palin, which specific journals and news sources do you read? (after being asked once)"

"Oh, All of them!"

Seems pretty obvious to me that the former Soviet Union was preferable to the animal that has taken it's place. God only knows how much of it's WMD stockpile has been sold on the black market, not to mention that the primary result of the elimination of relative military/political equipoise has been grossly arrogant and ignorant unilateralism.

__________________
Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads? Who among us can be happy and proud of having all this innocent blood on our hands? Who are these swine? These flag-sucking half-wits who get fleeced and fooled by stupid little rich kids like George Bush?

--Hunter S. Thompson

That makes me mildly ill.

__________________
"Jesus said: I have cast fire upon the world, and behold I guard it until it is ablaze."
Gospel of Thomas

With great power comes greater responsibility. As the most powerful country in the world, America wouldnt be very responsible if it only cared about itself.

like it or not but thats how all countries with any sort of significance do things. i just justified our foriegn policy for the past half century plus.

__________________

www.myspace.com/crusade7