Now, I am afraid I am going to have to burst that particular bubble for our American friends. Europeans are quite happy just where they are.
Just because we adopt the parts of your culture that we like, doesn't mean we are in any dominated by it.
You claim you aren't dominated by it, but many others in this topic have claimed exactly that.
If we talk about economics, it is true that Europeans resent the incroachment of Globalism and it's American Corporate roots. The cloning of
towns and cities across the world by corporations is reaching a saturation point I feel. I can see McDonalds and the like dying off within 20 or so
years.
Wishful thinking, as much of what you claim about the future seems to be. Sorry, but you're not going to see America get humbled by Europe within
your lifetime.
Having said that, economics could be a moot point if the US economy implodes through either a switch to Euros for oil, or the incredible
military spending. The US position is not on very firm ground.
Switching to the Euro at this point seems highly unlikely. It was starting to slide back down even before the whole constitution fiasco. It just keeps
dropping now. Second, our military spending is less per capita then what many nations in Europe spend. Most of Europe, and the EU as a whole, have a
larger debt than America. The entire EU (which includes a number of undeveloped nations which tend to grow at high paces) only sees half the raw GDP
growth America does. At the same time, the top economies in Europe are crumbling.
Take this example. On one hand, the European Governments supporting the current Iraqi adventure were met with fierce public opposition, yet
they were for the most part all re-elected? This only serves to illustrate how little influence America has on European politics.
Who has been re-elected that opposed the war? Schroeder and Chirac have yet to run, and both have a slim chance of being re-elected. On the other
hand, everyone who has supported the Iraq war has been re-elected. More pro-American governments are coming into power in Europe in spite of how the
people feel.
On the music side, the blessing of P2P networks and piracy has spelt the end for the bloated American corporate music industry. No claims to
culture can be made here. It is an industry and the day the final manufactured pop group falls off the bottom of the charts, is the day the whole
world (the US included) will celebrate not having to endure that pap anymore.
P2P had nothing to do with this. They were slipping sales before that. And no one else has, or will rise up to take their place in the near future. No
one is even competing with them still.
In other elements of culture I feel it is vain for the US to claim dominance in any field. Stars of stage, art, opera, sculpting, ballet,
dance, traditional music and performance arts are not exclusive to any one country and can be found most everywhere.
When it comes to the mainstream, it is American dominated.
1. Europe has a collection of modern and well equipped armies. The US has never taken on a proper army since WWII. Of all the small countries
it has taken on since WWII, a number of them have defeated the US.
No nation has actually manged to defeat the American military. The Vietnamese never won a battle. America had some 20:1 kill ratio in our favor. The
Vietcong have a long history of fightin guerilla wars and repulsing large invaders. Considering how long America stayed, and how limited our troops
were, our military performed amazingly well. The reasons for our loss were purely political.
You also have to remember how those Vietcong had over 20 years of experience under their belts, and had already beaten the French. The Vietcong even
had superior or near equal equipment in some cases, such as the AK-47. They were well trained, and experienced troops who really don't get enough
credit.
North Vietnam's
militia would manage to inflict massive casualties to even the Chinese just a few years later while outnumbered and outgunned,
and fighting in the open field for a few weeks. These weren't the experienced soldiers who fought agains America, either. I'll make it as clear as
possible. These were conscripts.
Iraq had one of the largest armies in the world, as well as top of the line Russian material, and Europe would have been unable to deal with Saddam.
Europe lacks the simple logistical capability to deploy the kinds of forces America can. It would take Europe years to put as many men into the Gulf
as America did in months. Not to mention the fact that such one-sided kill figures are unheard of in all of history. We crushed an army of some
500,000 men, with well over 4,000 tanks and artillery pieces in a few hours.
In the Korean War, we kicked the Chinese around, and were getting close to breaking them in spite of being drastically outnumbered and under-equipped
from the start. The only reason for Chinese success was that they launched a surprise attack. We still drove the Chinese back to the original borders,
and were prepared to launch a massive offensive that had a pretty good chance of breaking the Chinese defenders.
America has enjoyed at least a 10:1 kill ratio in every war we've fought since WW2.
On the other hand, Europe has fought just about no body. Their only major experience has been as America's sidekick, and the UK's little battle with
Argentina, in which they took heavier casualties than one would expect. The European forces have also taken heavier casualties in places like Kosovo,
in spite of the fact that Americans flew the vast majority of sorties.
When it comes to facing America in the open field, there is no equal. No one at this time can beat us in a conventional war. No major power should be
able to beat us at all if history shows anything. The only thing that has limited the American war machine in the past 60 years have been politics. It
goes back to WW2 and beyond.
anyone from Europe remember you got a friend in the USA and no matter what your
tabloids say we still love you guys to death.
