Americans and non-Americans: Would you like to see more, or less, US leadership on the world stage?

[Caveat Emptor]

Charles Krauthammer and the "Unipolar Moment" proclamation in the aftermath of the end of the Cold War, in 1990 has basically declared the US as a hegemonic power with no parallel in the world that is able to execute a total war on all fronts simultaneously and still win by maximizing all of its resources, even if hypothetically the entire world was against us (an imbalance of power so great that it dwarfs the Roman Empire or the British Empire in comparative real terms).


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoAeAHFh8q8

Emphasis should be put on the word 'moment'. Critics have since argued that we are now past the unipolar moment and instead live in a multipolar world; other critics actively advocate for the establishment of multipolarity.

However, with the most recent military budget proposed by the Trump administration and agreed upon by the Democrats, as well as with the agreement of NATO allies to commit between 2-4% of their respective GDPs to defense spending, NATO as a collective can still be considered an unironic global hegemony for decades to come.

The question is - would you like to see more of an active and assertive US leadership on the world stage, or would you rather see us withdraw from the world stage?

Do you see the US as an exceptional force for good in the world - a benign hegemon? A Shining City Upon a Hill? Perhaps even the pinnacle of Western civilization, as many do? Or do you hate our guts and would gladly see the rise of multipolar world? Perhaps something in the middle, like a more democratized decision-making on the world stage?

Any opinion is welcome (especially the critical ones).

[Blondie]

Please americans get out of Europe :)

[Papastratosels26]

Equal.

Στάλθηκε από το G3311 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Caveat Emptor]

Please americans get out of Europe :)

Thank you for making your point of view explicitly clear :D

I am not revealing my personal opinion and beliefs in my threads but rather provide platform for people to express their opinions. Have you heard of the phrase that "Europe is from Venus and America is from Mars"? Here's an article from Politico on this https://www.politico.eu/article/time-to-face-reality-americans-come-from-mars-europeans-are-from-venus/

It refers to the idea that European lack of militarism and pacifism requires American protection and masculine energy for our collective defense :D


Equal.

Στάλθηκε από το G3311 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

So a kind of status quo?

[jötunn]

It refers to the idea that European lack of militarism and pacifism requires American protection and masculine energy for our collective defense :D

no, we don't need to be dominated by some savages, who themselves would blow up the entire world to gain immortality, powerful magic and whatever.

White Americans are a lot less civilized than Europeans, that's for sure.

Black Americans vs Africans? Not sure about those that can't afford to visit Europe, but black African tourists/immigrants are definitely more civilized than black American tourists/immigrants.

[Teutone]

I would prefer only a limited role of the US and NATO, limited to collective defense rather than interventionism.

100% signed

[Caveat Emptor]

I would prefer only a limited role of the US and NATO, limited to collective defense rather than interventionism.

100% signed

Thanks Teutone I was especially curious about your opinion on this matter. I've now concluded that you're far more tolerant of the US leadership than our colleague The Lawspeaker :D

[jötunn]

I would prefer only a limited role of the US and NATO, limited to collective defense rather than interventionism.

100% signed

the thing is, what would America get in return? America defends us, OK. But why would America care about Europe defending them, if they can defend themselves?

[Georgia]

Thank you for making your point of view explicitly clear :D

I am not revealing my personal opinion and beliefs in my threads but rather provide platform for people to express their opinions. Have you heard of the phrase that "Europe is from Venus and America is from Mars"? Here's an article from Politico on this https://www.politico.eu/article/time-to-face-reality-americans-come-from-mars-europeans-are-from-venus/

It refers to the idea that European lack of militarism and pacifism requires American protection and masculine energy for our collective defense :D



So a kind of status quo?
How Americans protect Europeans?By wreaking havoc on the Arab World and flooding us with refugees?

[Teutone]

Thanks Teutone I was especially curious about your opinion on this matter. I've now concluded that you're far more tolerant of the US leadership than our colleague The Lawspeaker :D

he just has a emotional breakdown because of this silly ww1 parade. Normally hes alright.

[Teutone]

the thing is, what would America get in return? America defends us, OK. But why would America care about Europe defending them, if they can defend themselves?

Influence and a capable ally, UK and France are nuclear powers with awesome armies.

Germany also could have a leading military role if wanted.

[jötunn]

Influence and a capable ally, UK and France are nuclear powers with awesome armies.

Germany also could have a leading military role if wanted.

yes, like back then in early 1940s. :D

[Ülev]

the expansion of the European Union towards a greater Mediterranean Union, dream project which would encompass all major ancient religious places within a new Roman empire
(inspired by ©Bosnensis)

[Ryujin]

The US leadership is not stable, so I'm confused here. If they've kept electing leaders such as John F. Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, Bill Clinton etc. I'd be in favour of more US influence over the world. But they elect bad leaders which is a trouble for the world.

When Al Gore's deserved presidency was seized from him by Bush in 2000, it had a destructive effect on the world... The world could have been a better place if they didn't allow Bush to be the President.

[StonyArabia]

Less of course

[Joso]

less

[jötunn]

There is an old saying
Nuke America great again

[Caveat Emptor]

How Americans protect Europeans?By wreaking havoc on the Arab World and flooding us with refugees?

Who else if not us? :D

http://lehigh.happeningmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/david-hasselhoff-3.jpg

https://images.amcnetworks.com/blogs.amctv.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/chuck.norris.gun_.jpg

https://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/full/public/2018/01/23/gettyimages-528523806.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/236x/ab/76/45/ab7645952f98b2ba89e64980dad500cd--united-we-stand-marvel-dc.jpg

https://media.giphy.com/media/fnmAwlhGDriaQ/giphy.gif

We're socialized into being the main hero characters of the world

[Odin]

How Americans protect Europeans? By wreaking havoc on the Arab World and flooding us with refugees?

Nope.

https://i.imgur.com/pmCDJYc.jpg

[Pavl7]

US has lost credibility, and even power, in the last few years. It should focus on rebuilding international relationships and fixing the damage it's done. The Cold War is over... nobody is racing to the moon. Nations that can foster positive relationships on a global scale will be the new leaders.

[The Lawspeaker]

I would prefer only a limited role of the US and NATO, limited to collective defense rather than interventionism



And with NATO I mean (mainly) Western Europe, but I would like to see this NATO reformed to a "Global NATO" which encompasses America's allies in other areas as well (mainly Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Singapore but, perhaps, also Colombia and India).

[Óttar]

I support the US scaling back its military presence and investing in education and infrastructure. The US isn't number 1 in anything except for military bases and exporting shitty pop culture worldwide. We should model ourselves on the Canadians, tbh. We should still have an effective and powerful military presence, but what we have currently is overkill.

I chose the limited NATO option because I'm not entirely certain about the implications of a multipolar world, but ideally, Turkey should be ejected from NATO as a terrorist-sponsoring, backwards state.

[luc2112]

American international politics are better than many people think, but always end up going through "evil". In my opinion U.S should decrease its participation.

[sean]

America is an offshoot of the Anglo hegemony. They are our best shot to secure our hegemony against the EU and China which are starting to challenge us for dominance, though I'm a localist and detest most aspects of globalisation.

The EU is trying to become one entity to challenge Anglo hegemony. I suspect that there are no shortage of people in France and Germany whose only gripe in regards to Anglo internationalism is that it's not French/German internationalism.

Russians make a good show of making independent decisions that are contrary to the historically Anglo/EU-centric planning, but part of the planning has always been to find a way to merge Russia in. Merely the attempt to create closer ties between the Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches should be a dead giveaway. The EU's existence itself is an anathema to a American/British hegemony.

[tipirneni]

It costs heavily in terms of Money & Resources in International territories. Moderation should be shown when dealing with new issues that require lot of money from American banks. The world is not heavily bipolar or unipolar like before. There are more players willing to bet money & lives now

[Zeus]

I would prefer for us to just become non interventionist and focus on ourselves tbh. The us did fine in the 19th century and the interwar period when we were isolationist. the fact that we spend so much on our military to maintain our informal empire is just absurd to me - I’d rather invest In home than Afghanistan, Europe, or the Middle East.

[JosephK]

Much less. I can't believe people still ask for our help.

[JosephK]

It refers to the idea that European lack of militarism and pacifism requires American protection and masculine energy for our collective defense :D



So a kind of status quo?

I know this is an old post, but I've always found it funny that there's a stereotype that the US is very militaristic and belligerent.

There is not now nor has there ever been a time when Americans would accept the show of force and militarism of European police and security forces within their own borders, or the patriotism shown throughout Europe and the UK on certain times of the year, during parades, etc.

I have known loads of Australian and Canadian guys who were part of a military cadet corps and spoke of it with pride when, in the US, if you were part of something like that (almost no one is) it would be something you hide.

It was always with embarrassment that I, as part of the National Guard, had to wear my uniform in public (with the exception of 'miltary towns', of course, which, like the handful of White Supremacists in the US, are the ones you always see being exploited as 'typical' US values).

[Smeagol]

There is not now nor has there ever been a time when Americans would accept the show of force and militarism of European police and security forces within their own borders, or the patriotism shown throughout Europe and the UK on certain times of the year, during parades, etc.

Maybe not in your lifetime, but there were such military parades in the US from Washington's day until Eisenhower's and Kennedy's inaugurations which had tanks, nuclear missiles, military planes and long lines of marching soldiers and patriotic fanfares. Even today, American Southerners are more nationalistic than any western Europeans.

[PrettyFarFromOkay]

With the priorities the American elite have now? Total isolation. It’ll never happen but it should. Of course, if America lost the ability or will to be the muscle for the globalist agenda, the globalists would move on to somewhere else. But at least we’d be rid of them.