"a lot of world to subjugate" (from www.maxspeak.org)

[Peter K.]

MaxSpeak, we listen:
In short, imperial overstretch is now on the agenda. I heard one
commentator suggest that going by historic ratios, it would be
reasonable for the U.S. to have thirty million persons under arms, as
opposed to one and a half million. There's a lot of world to
subjugate.

What the empire builders fail to appreciate is the dissent of the
governed, here and abroad. Encouraged by the newest generation of
weapons, they reduce everything to military force. They think a
compliant press, a cowering UN, and 52 senators are a lever that can
move the world. I think not.
-----
This maybe true, but I doubt it. If it is it would be thanks to Osama.
People seem to forget that Bush repeatedly said he was against
nation-building during the 2000 campaign and Rumsfeld echoed
this up until September 2001. Also, I'm skeptical of those
who once predicted either that Bush was going to starve Afghanistan into
submission or that the heroic Afghan fighters would do unto the
Allies what they did to the Soviets.

Speaking of the Soviets, since the Cold War is over
maybe the hyperpower can risk a little overreach.

Peter