We suck at imperialism ...
A supporter of imperialism?
A supporter of militaristic imperialism?
The US utterly sucks at imperialism, let alone militaristic imperialism. If we wanted to "do it right," we'd label the native populations, get them to fight each other, enslave them and either pay 1/100th the fair market value for resources (or just take them for free).
Instead, we go into former colonies of other nations, try to get their people to stop oppressing each other, or fighting after the oppression is removed -- people who were labelled and/or forced to live together by prior European decision, or newfound Communist oppression (many times the latter as a result of prior, former) -- let alone pay "fair market value" for resources and fund our own logistics/capabilities while we go bankrupt.
That has always been the American folly. One thing I believe the Clinton administration learned early on -- right or wrong (right from an American preservation/interest standpoint, wrong from a genocidal one -- depends on your views) -- is that the US should only get involved in European affairs, not former European colonies that have been completely setup for a thousand-long conflicts.
He only got involved with Bosnia (and even had to drag some EU leaders into that one, sadly enough), while ignoring many other issues. He pulled back from the fully planned out conflicts with North Korea in 1993-1994 and Iraq in 1998, and one might argue that -- sadly enough -- is what is the best thing for everyone. After all, what US intervention outside of Europe has
ever garnered support from
anyone?
Hell, the US is still beat up on how we conducted ourselves in the Pacific theater of WWII by many people, totally ignoring the comparisons that not only could be made in the European theater, but how the Japanese conducted themselves against everyone and anyone. I also found the Tsunami of late 2004 was my "wake up call" that the US will always be trashed when anything goes wrong, regardless of the actual effort (in addition to money) that the US puts forth immediately to save people.
Which is why I'm starting to advocate a very, very strong position of American continent-only policy for the US. That very, scary viewpoint from the standpoint of securing resources the EU needs is why many EU leaders have more recently "warmed up" to the US again. Because without the US military -- ever since the Suez Incident and the corresponding and massive reductions in British, French and other militaries -- securing many resources becomes questionable. Hell, the US has serious issues with Chinese interests in the Americas right now, and we're over-stretched to worry about the middle east anymore.
Just my, very calculated, viewpoint since the mid-'90s (during the Clinton administration, when I was gainfully employed in the defense industry).
