The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
But furthermore, this rationale that you provide is just not supported by any honest appraisal of world affairs today:
And there is one other vital difference. Whereas before the US was the unrivalled world military, economic and political superpower which could attempt to do more or less what it wanted, now the US is being challenged both economically and politically. What you could get away with before is often no longer possible.
Really? What world are you talking about? In what spectrum is America less dominant today than before the fall of the Soviet Union, for example? All that seems to be the case here is that, because of Bush's mistake of invading the wrong country, social discourse is now a bit more critical of America than it was at its low-water mark at the end of the Clinton administration. But that just means that it's more like it was in the 1980's than the 1990's. Big deal. Especially since Obama opposed the invasion and is, so far, successfully extricating American forces from that country by his own timeline. That's real power at work, so I just don't see the the evidence to back your thesis, and the street chatter, that Obama is an ineffective leader. So, who, if not Obama, would you have for your emperor, given that the world apparently still feels it needs emperors?
by rifek - Apr 7 1 comment
by gmoke - Apr 3
by rifek - Apr 1
by rifek - Mar 30 1 comment
by gmoke - Mar 29
by gmoke - Mar 22 1 comment
by Oui - Apr 12
by Oui - Apr 716 comments
by rifek - Apr 71 comment
by Oui - Apr 6
by Oui - Mar 313 comments
by Oui - Mar 3110 comments
by rifek - Mar 301 comment
by gmoke - Mar 221 comment
by Oui - Mar 17 comments
by Oui - Feb 2810 comments