Can the United States regain its superpower status?

Why is B92 so concerned about the US and its international standing? Shouldn't you be writing this for an American newspaper/web site?

Regardless, it's easy to blame Bush administration for your current position when you should be looking back a little further.

What about Clinton and his illegal, immoral bombing of Serbia in the guise of "humanitarian intervention." The truth is, when American politicians (you included) open their mouths and discuss issues that do not concern them, the only thing you can do is shake your head and wonder what world they live in. People around the world are tired of this.

The US establishment is corrupt to the core and until major changes are made (which look incredibly unlikely), America will continue on its deteriorating path.

"Democratic contenders Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have each already raised about $60 million"

- one has to question whether the American system is actually democratic when there is a clear and corrupt barrier to democracy through the huge money dominated by lobby groups.

There are clear incentives to get your 'guy' or 'gal' in - one only needs to consider the excess profits of Haliburton in recent years who won a large proportion of the contracts in Iraq yet who happens to be a major share holder? Answer - Vice President Dick Cheney!

America's democracy is corrupted by huge sums of money and the sign is that it will continue and as such democracy in the US no longer exists beyond the piles of $'s which run into the billions for an election. Makes you wonder how many starving chldren could have been fed with such sums of money!

In the 2000 elections one qoute stond out;
"The depressing thing about American democracy is I can check the fund-raising balances at the Federal Election Commission and tell you what the election results will be before the election" said Larry Makinson, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that studies money and campaigns. Successive campaigns are no different.

I am certain that Montgomery himself is only too aware that "American democracy" as labeled by the U.S. Government as a "model of democracy" is but a myth and "a rich man's game" and unsurprisngly less then "democratic".

"The irony is that all of these highly talented individuals are fighting so hard for a job, which is going to bring with it a set of complex, intractable, and dangerous problems unique in our history. The primary job will be to deal with the problems largely created, made worse, or ignored by the current Administration."

WRONG. The primary job of these so called talented individuals will be to pay back the individuals and special interest groups that have contributed up to $60 million SIXTEEN months before the election.

"The United States spends almost half of the total world expenditures on defense."

And yet it has the gall to complain about other countries' military expenditure!

The greatest irony must be that despite spending so much on its military, the US is unable to contain the little countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. Sure waste of money. High time the American taxpayers wake up!

I am not sure how many of you have read articles on a recent trial of Conrad Black in Chicago. Conrad Black is a man “consumed by ambition and greed” His arrogance [---] [is only surpassed by his] disdain for mere mortals”. His associates include Clinton, Blair, Margaret Thacher, and who’s who of the corporate underworld who only care about power . We know about Clinton’s White Water deals and Margaret Thatcher bending the rules so that her playboy son was able to make millions selling jets to African dictators. American democracy is not “a nice man’s game” as Princip writes but “is corrupt to the core” as Marko writes. American democracy a euphemism for dictatorship of two political parties who every four years change places but continue to do more of the same. Barack Obama the only black candidate and the only candidate with CIA protection is my hope for American democracy but even he will toe the line if elected I remember this quote from Sophocles’s Antigone from my high school literature class “No man can be truly known in heart and hope and purpose until the test of power and government make manifest his nature” . Obama’s true nature will surface in the pre-run to the 2008 election. His support comes in twenty dollar bills from common people but if that nature is to give power back to the people billions will be spent to discredit him or those who guard him now will plan his exit. Carol Warner Christen writes about American Democracy in an article “System Can Measure itself” [http://www.swans.com/library/art13/carenc12.html] “When we choose to torture or to imprison a human being without a just trial of the facts with a jury of peers, we refuse to measure our crimes against humanity with the means our forefathers gave us. There is no excuse. We signed treaties and now pretend we can ignore them when we choose to profit. There's that word again: profit. Is the opposite of profit fairness? “

"…one has to question whether the American system is actually democratic when there is a clear and corrupt barrier to democracy through the huge money dominated by lobby groups…."

US system is not democracy at all, it's a typical oligarchy or plutocracy - .All power is concentrated within a small, elite segment of society

And elections - there is very little to choose with only two, (almost identical) parties.

"Begin a search for new international institutions to replace, supplement or reform those set up at the end of the Second World War........One change to consider is the elimination of the veto in the UN Security Council. Another is to set up an organization of genuinely democratic states around the world to deal with world problems in a united way"

Am I in other words hearing, create an ALL POWERFUL institution which the ALL POWERFUL nation will rule, the USA. The hell with the other voices in the world, the US must have things their way. And who will decide who these genuine democratic countries are, the US? They are surely always right in what is best for all the peoples of the world. We see that by all the various projects they are involved in today.

Here is the veto use by UNSC permanent members since 1983: China, two; France, three; Russia, four; the United Kingdom, 10; and the United States, 43. Are you sure you want to take that little perk away from the Americans, Mr. Montgomery. But then again, vetos can always be ignored for reasons of humanitarian intervention, who's appropriatness the USA will decide.

I admired some of your points. However, I think that at the moment the US is its own biggest enemy. Policy is too much determined on a case-by case base by big business interests what means that the country as a whole loses its sense of purpose.

I am afraid expanding the army will not help - the US will use the opportunity only to get involved in even more conflicts.

Just look at the recent remarks by Rice about Kosovo's independence. What does she want to achieve? Where is the US interest? The only argument I have seen was about not giving in to Russia, but this is a rather weak argument given the policy goal of friendly relations with Moscow.

I have mixed feelings about McCain. He made a fool of himself by stating while in Baghdad that there was no security problem. But I admire his guts for keeping to an impopular policy that he believes is right. So please don't discard him yet.

The United States can't regain something that it has never even lost.

Wlater,
I completly agree and saddly wish to correct you that I said "rich" not "nice" - we the plebes will never be allowed the opportunity to show are true worth in such a system as espoused by the current "western" approach - like Orwell said "some are more equal then others".

The sad case is that this is not just a US phenomena but a sign of the Western decadence or as some suggest its demise. Moreover much of the foundations of the "western" approach were actually based on greater equality and meritocracy but in the persuing years since the 40's & 50's the "more equal" inequality has taken hold and is now set it would seem to continue to diverge. In the UK it was reported yesterday that the wealth gap is at its widest as it has been for 40 years.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6901147.stm

Princip I apologize for my error it was clerical and due to not wearing my glasses rather than intent to misrepresent. In order to make ends meet Canadians work to live and live to work. In Canada, both political and economic democracy is under attack by the Harper conservatives who use non debatable orders in council and “non-governmental working committees and groups advising cabinet and government between elections, and implementing massive restructuring of Canada” in order to bring Canada into a North American Union, “a North American entity ruled by unelected, unaccountable corporate/financial/military elite”. Our social programs are under attack by the corporate sector, and public property transportation, energy, and natural resources are sold off to US corporations which threatens our independence. In a recent front page article in McLean’s (our Time magazine which I only read in some waiting room) they wrote about the decline of British society. They mention that Britain leads Europe in crime, teen pregnancy, STD’s, and illiteracy so I can see this decline that you write about. Many of my friends feel helpless because we have no voice but we do read, think and question.

Walter,

apology accepted - as I stated I completly agree with your sentiment. The irony of the Montgomery post is that very few will read and see what crock of... he writes and be able to provide critique to so many of the glaring contradictions. The only real factual point of this article is the acceptance that the US has clearly lost it's superpower status - Montgomery may accept it but much of the administration and who ever replaces Bush are likely to be still living in lala land - seeing as they all eminate form the same circles of the rich and educated in the same way and insitutions with little critique or understanding.

The US can regain its superpower status, the only thing is that it will be only one of at least three superpowers. China and Russia at the moment hold greater moral authority than the US and likely greater economic + military power than ever before. Lets just see the US try to throw its weight around now with Kosovo.

Make no mistake about it...the U.S. government is very worried that their claimed rightious monopoly on power and "virtue" is being threatened by the assent of Russia and China on the world stage. When Mr. Mongomery writes that current international institutions are not "solving problems", it is code for other countries around the world are not obedient to us; and the U.S demands obedience. Attempts to eliminate the veto at the UN or create new institutions to replace the UN in favor of an organization of "democratic" nations to supercede the UN, are all attempts for the US to dominate the world stage, and minimize Russia and China from influence. It is an openly imperialistic manuever. The US does not want recognize that we live on one small planet that needs a globally representative UN organization for uniform international law. What Mr. Montgomery is proposing, as a proxy to US foreign policy asperations, would be very destablizing to say the least, and clearly imperialistic.

Why is B92 so concerned about the US and its international standing? Shouldn't you be writing this for an American newspaper/web site?

Regardless, it's easy to blame Bush administration for your current position when you should be looking back a little further.

What about Clinton and his illegal, immoral bombing of Serbia in the guise of "humanitarian intervention." The truth is, when American politicians (you included) open their mouths and discuss issues that do not concern them, the only thing you can do is shake your head and wonder what world they live in. People around the world are tired of this.

The US establishment is corrupt to the core and until major changes are made (which look incredibly unlikely), America will continue on its deteriorating path.

"Democratic contenders Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have each already raised about $60 million"

- one has to question whether the American system is actually democratic when there is a clear and corrupt barrier to democracy through the huge money dominated by lobby groups.

There are clear incentives to get your 'guy' or 'gal' in - one only needs to consider the excess profits of Haliburton in recent years who won a large proportion of the contracts in Iraq yet who happens to be a major share holder? Answer - Vice President Dick Cheney!

America's democracy is corrupted by huge sums of money and the sign is that it will continue and as such democracy in the US no longer exists beyond the piles of $'s which run into the billions for an election. Makes you wonder how many starving chldren could have been fed with such sums of money!

In the 2000 elections one qoute stond out;
"The depressing thing about American democracy is I can check the fund-raising balances at the Federal Election Commission and tell you what the election results will be before the election" said Larry Makinson, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that studies money and campaigns. Successive campaigns are no different.

I am certain that Montgomery himself is only too aware that "American democracy" as labeled by the U.S. Government as a "model of democracy" is but a myth and "a rich man's game" and unsurprisngly less then "democratic".

"The United States spends almost half of the total world expenditures on defense."

And yet it has the gall to complain about other countries' military expenditure!

The greatest irony must be that despite spending so much on its military, the US is unable to contain the little countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. Sure waste of money. High time the American taxpayers wake up!

I am not sure how many of you have read articles on a recent trial of Conrad Black in Chicago. Conrad Black is a man “consumed by ambition and greed” His arrogance [---] [is only surpassed by his] disdain for mere mortals”. His associates include Clinton, Blair, Margaret Thacher, and who’s who of the corporate underworld who only care about power . We know about Clinton’s White Water deals and Margaret Thatcher bending the rules so that her playboy son was able to make millions selling jets to African dictators. American democracy is not “a nice man’s game” as Princip writes but “is corrupt to the core” as Marko writes. American democracy a euphemism for dictatorship of two political parties who every four years change places but continue to do more of the same. Barack Obama the only black candidate and the only candidate with CIA protection is my hope for American democracy but even he will toe the line if elected I remember this quote from Sophocles’s Antigone from my high school literature class “No man can be truly known in heart and hope and purpose until the test of power and government make manifest his nature” . Obama’s true nature will surface in the pre-run to the 2008 election. His support comes in twenty dollar bills from common people but if that nature is to give power back to the people billions will be spent to discredit him or those who guard him now will plan his exit. Carol Warner Christen writes about American Democracy in an article “System Can Measure itself” [http://www.swans.com/library/art13/carenc12.html] “When we choose to torture or to imprison a human being without a just trial of the facts with a jury of peers, we refuse to measure our crimes against humanity with the means our forefathers gave us. There is no excuse. We signed treaties and now pretend we can ignore them when we choose to profit. There's that word again: profit. Is the opposite of profit fairness? “

Wlater,
I completly agree and saddly wish to correct you that I said "rich" not "nice" - we the plebes will never be allowed the opportunity to show are true worth in such a system as espoused by the current "western" approach - like Orwell said "some are more equal then others".

The sad case is that this is not just a US phenomena but a sign of the Western decadence or as some suggest its demise. Moreover much of the foundations of the "western" approach were actually based on greater equality and meritocracy but in the persuing years since the 40's & 50's the "more equal" inequality has taken hold and is now set it would seem to continue to diverge. In the UK it was reported yesterday that the wealth gap is at its widest as it has been for 40 years.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6901147.stm

"Begin a search for new international institutions to replace, supplement or reform those set up at the end of the Second World War........One change to consider is the elimination of the veto in the UN Security Council. Another is to set up an organization of genuinely democratic states around the world to deal with world problems in a united way"

Am I in other words hearing, create an ALL POWERFUL institution which the ALL POWERFUL nation will rule, the USA. The hell with the other voices in the world, the US must have things their way. And who will decide who these genuine democratic countries are, the US? They are surely always right in what is best for all the peoples of the world. We see that by all the various projects they are involved in today.

Here is the veto use by UNSC permanent members since 1983: China, two; France, three; Russia, four; the United Kingdom, 10; and the United States, 43. Are you sure you want to take that little perk away from the Americans, Mr. Montgomery. But then again, vetos can always be ignored for reasons of humanitarian intervention, who's appropriatness the USA will decide.

Princip I apologize for my error it was clerical and due to not wearing my glasses rather than intent to misrepresent. In order to make ends meet Canadians work to live and live to work. In Canada, both political and economic democracy is under attack by the Harper conservatives who use non debatable orders in council and “non-governmental working committees and groups advising cabinet and government between elections, and implementing massive restructuring of Canada” in order to bring Canada into a North American Union, “a North American entity ruled by unelected, unaccountable corporate/financial/military elite”. Our social programs are under attack by the corporate sector, and public property transportation, energy, and natural resources are sold off to US corporations which threatens our independence. In a recent front page article in McLean’s (our Time magazine which I only read in some waiting room) they wrote about the decline of British society. They mention that Britain leads Europe in crime, teen pregnancy, STD’s, and illiteracy so I can see this decline that you write about. Many of my friends feel helpless because we have no voice but we do read, think and question.

Walter,

apology accepted - as I stated I completly agree with your sentiment. The irony of the Montgomery post is that very few will read and see what crock of... he writes and be able to provide critique to so many of the glaring contradictions. The only real factual point of this article is the acceptance that the US has clearly lost it's superpower status - Montgomery may accept it but much of the administration and who ever replaces Bush are likely to be still living in lala land - seeing as they all eminate form the same circles of the rich and educated in the same way and insitutions with little critique or understanding.

I admired some of your points. However, I think that at the moment the US is its own biggest enemy. Policy is too much determined on a case-by case base by big business interests what means that the country as a whole loses its sense of purpose.

I am afraid expanding the army will not help - the US will use the opportunity only to get involved in even more conflicts.

Just look at the recent remarks by Rice about Kosovo's independence. What does she want to achieve? Where is the US interest? The only argument I have seen was about not giving in to Russia, but this is a rather weak argument given the policy goal of friendly relations with Moscow.

I have mixed feelings about McCain. He made a fool of himself by stating while in Baghdad that there was no security problem. But I admire his guts for keeping to an impopular policy that he believes is right. So please don't discard him yet.

"…one has to question whether the American system is actually democratic when there is a clear and corrupt barrier to democracy through the huge money dominated by lobby groups…."

US system is not democracy at all, it's a typical oligarchy or plutocracy - .All power is concentrated within a small, elite segment of society

And elections - there is very little to choose with only two, (almost identical) parties.

"The irony is that all of these highly talented individuals are fighting so hard for a job, which is going to bring with it a set of complex, intractable, and dangerous problems unique in our history. The primary job will be to deal with the problems largely created, made worse, or ignored by the current Administration."

WRONG. The primary job of these so called talented individuals will be to pay back the individuals and special interest groups that have contributed up to $60 million SIXTEEN months before the election.

The United States can't regain something that it has never even lost.

The US can regain its superpower status, the only thing is that it will be only one of at least three superpowers. China and Russia at the moment hold greater moral authority than the US and likely greater economic + military power than ever before. Lets just see the US try to throw its weight around now with Kosovo.

Make no mistake about it...the U.S. government is very worried that their claimed rightious monopoly on power and "virtue" is being threatened by the assent of Russia and China on the world stage. When Mr. Mongomery writes that current international institutions are not "solving problems", it is code for other countries around the world are not obedient to us; and the U.S demands obedience. Attempts to eliminate the veto at the UN or create new institutions to replace the UN in favor of an organization of "democratic" nations to supercede the UN, are all attempts for the US to dominate the world stage, and minimize Russia and China from influence. It is an openly imperialistic manuever. The US does not want recognize that we live on one small planet that needs a globally representative UN organization for uniform international law. What Mr. Montgomery is proposing, as a proxy to US foreign policy asperations, would be very destablizing to say the least, and clearly imperialistic.