posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 08:13 PM
Oh, I agree. And I don't believe the U.S. should be able to control everything from Venezuela to Georgia, which are continents, not to mention oceans
apart. The largest powers should have a say in their own sphere of influence. Russia should take offense at the prospect of a missile defense shield
on the Russo-Polish border. China should be able to determine the state of Tibetan independence, especially if millions of ethnic Chinese live in that
province, and the economy of that region is an integral component of that country.
I agree with you, Maxmars, in the sense that the only way the U.S. can evade the increasing tension between them and these new and growing foreign
economies and political powers, is the total redevelopment of its defensive stratagem, to you use your words. They can't be passive aggressive
either. They have to back off. Although when I say this I don't mean to say that I oppose the war in Iraq; but they should leave the Middle East,
forget about Georgia, and be satisfied that the Monroe Doctrine was successful for the 176 years that it was alive for.
But where does this all end? The problem is that the spheres of influence of all these great powers only seem to radiate. They radiate until war hits
and then they recede temporarily. But they always strive for that ideal 4πr^2 kilometers of political, economic and ideological influence.
[edit on 26-9-2008 by cognoscente]
[edit on 26-9-2008 by cognoscente]