>> From: Brian Siano <siano at mail.med.upenn.edu>
>>
>> Carl Remick wrote:
>>
>>> War is the most brutal face of the system. Res ipsa loquitur. The
>>> sight of flag-draped coffins; crippled, blinded or brain-damaged war
>>> veterarns; and, yes, slaughtered, beaten or humiliated civilians --
>>> these things bring home the inhuman cost of maintaining the US
>>> empire more directly than any other evil associated with the
>>> system. Focusing on these particular aspects of this savage society
>>> seems sensible to me.
>>
>>
>> True! After all, War never existed under any _other_ system!
>
>
> Am not saying the US invented war or has a monopoly on its practice.
> But Yankee ingenuity has made some impressive contributions to the
> state of the art. How many other hyperpowers have you met?
So far one, but how many "hyperpowers" have there _been_?
And I'm still unclear on why this "hyperpower" business is supposed to mean. For one thing, how did the U.S. become a "hyperpower" when it was previously a "superpower?" And exactly how has this status changed war? Apart from some relatively minor technological tweaks, there doesn't seem to be much difference at all (I mean, beyond the collapse of the Saddam regime within a month and a half). I see no need to work up this neologism of "hyperpowers" unless one is a Jean Baudrillard fan. If war isn't awful enough to get people motivated, then dressing it up with cutesy words ain't going to help much.