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.
---
I agree. The idea that the US is a godlike "hyperpower" is part of the collective delusion that got the Bushies into the whole Iraq mess. The US is good at bombing defenseless countries but that's about it.
By the way the Soviet Army took control of Afghanistan in less than a month and with fewer casualties than the US did in taking Iraq.
_________________________________________________________________ Have fun customizing MSN Messenger — learn how here! http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_customize