> Soth wrote:

> it's simple truth who better to be subject to than the United States.  I've heard that from my German Political Science professor many times.

You aren't going to AR are you?

My heat is all the way up and it's still below 70 in my apartment, ughr.

Alberta is next door too, lol.

Obey Emperor Justinian I!

Yeah and then they'll all come here...

All you have to do is teach the student body to reduce everything to supply/demand lol, even a couple's bed. Did you know that a couple's bed is divided between supply and demand? ROFLMAO.

That got ears in my econ class.

Consider women depreciating assets. That sort of thing. A great way to love economics is to apply it to a considerable extent. Give everyone Freakonomics!

Black wing,

A balance of power is where a defacto peace results because two or more powers mutually consider that a military conflict is too costly to pursue. If one power decides to go imperialistic or nazi, then obviously peace becomes more costly than war. This Peace > War case occurred in World War II when Germany decided to foolishly attack everybody. At first taking Austria and a few other places didn't mean much and it was too considered too costly, but attacking Poland was the last straw. Then it started to become clear what Germany's intentions were, and the shift of power in Europe compelled France and Britain to act.

But in the case of a Soviet Empire that does not concern itself much with an arms race or expansionism, who cares? It's more beneficial to prop them up and keep the region stable than allow it to collapse in to anarchy and try to fill the void. We have tried doing that, and it's proven costly and alienated us from politically strategic countries (duh!). Being the dude that expands his influence is only going to alarm and antagonize neighbors, whether it's for moral reasons or not. The political stage is about power and nothing else. They don't give a crap about what's right or wrong.

As for Iraq, yes I think we should retreat. It's a matter of cutting costs and restoring our global power. Being the one who is the target of antagonism and proxy wars does not help much with power and influence. Like Machiavelli said. A wise prince must know when to be a lion and when to be a fox, and Bush sadly doesn't know when to be a fox.

Einstein,

Lol. Comparatively speaking, a woman with the same education from a lower class family would not be in the position Chelsea is at her age. Not to say Chelsea is incompetent, but it's unlikely that she merited her position so much that she deserved to be placed where she is above perhaps older and more experienced competition. More than likely she owes her position more so to her family than her merit (which btw is high but not sufficient to justify her position)

And true. Warren Buffet earns a return of $46 million every year from his assets. Those billions he has just aren't accessible for spending.

Schniepel,

You Germans have had a strong economy for centuries, thanks to your infrastructure. While it was badly ruined it WW2, it was rebuilt. Still, Europe isn't a fair example because it has inherited a strong economy from the imperial period. Which is twisted given your anti-imperialist and altruistic attitude.

BW,

Lol filling the power void left by the USSR huh? Ever hear of imperial overstretch? We simply did not and do not have the resources to extend our political influence to fill the power void. As a matter of fact we have ourselves over stretched all ready, which has opened a power void for China to weaken our power and influence in South America. Don't you find it disturbing that a Chinese company is buying the land around the Panama canal even as Bush is president?

Reagan failed in the USSR. You just don't upset the balance of power like that.

Henry Kissinger was a diplomatic genius comparable to Metternich and Bismarck. He focused on detente and maintaining a balance of power, but Reagan was a poop who had to screw it all up. Reagan and his Republican successors are comparable to Wilhelm II. "Yay my country is chosen by God, we shall have a place in the sun whooo hoooo! Arms race baby, lets alienate and push countries around whoooo!"

However, the super rich don't save that much. They invest it. Bill Gates doesn't have his tens of billions at hand. They are tied in his assets.

Funny how Flint attracts all the idiots to post.

You don't. Okay then.

Well Sparta, which had some socialist tendencies, pulled that off. But having a militaristic society is also just not cool.