> Doug (quoting Carrol and commenting):
>
> The most ruthless empire the world has ever known?
>
> Really? The Brits were no slouches. Nor were the Romans. What a weird
> form of braggadocio.
>
> ....................
>
>
> The United States does not command the "most ruthless empire the world
> has ever known."
>
> It just has better kill toys and enjoys the logistical benefits of an
> age in which the planetary map is nearly complete (the better to
> project power upon).
>
>
> Compared to Augustus, even that sneering cardiac experiment and war
> criminal Cheney is little more than a mean-spirited jackass.
>
>
>
I think you are wrong about Augustus, specifically. Augustus was relatively benign, except perhaps during his ascent to power.
The Roman Imperial system was oppressive, no doubt, but after its initial phase of conquering its most oppressive aspects were not actually the aspects we refer to as "the empire," but rather the "normal" aspects of the social system... slavery, disenfranchisement of land workers, etc.
In some respects it is amazing how "inclusive" the Roman Imperial system became from the time of the Late Republic to around 300 CE. If you were a member of one of the ruling classes whether in Gaul or Spain or North Africa or in the Western Mediterranean, you would eventually share in all of the "benefits" of Roman citizenship as held by the ruling classes on the Italian peninsula. Augustus in as much as he created the foundation of the lasting imperial system was probably quite far-sighted in realizing that the only way the whole mess could hold together was by granting Roman citizenship rights wholesale.
One can hardly imagine the U.S. granting the rights of U.S. citizens to the whole middle class of Mexico and Central America but it might be something to consider in the administration of the empire.
Dwayne wrote: " It just has better kill toys and enjoys the logistical benefits of an age in which the planetary map is nearly complete (the better to project power upon)."
In general this is probably correct. But it should also be taken into account how total some aspects of modern capitalism are. The Romans simply had no need to change local methods of production in Spain, for example. U.S. corporations in Central America in order to produce simple commodities like bananas and coffee had to change everything about the way of life of those Central Americans, completely dispossess them and murder hundreds of thousands when they tried to organize for themselves.
By contrast when Marius, Sulla, Pompey & Caesar when they were expanding the imperial holdings of the Republic engaged in vast campaigns of slaughter and destruction. But if a city surrendered it was pretty much left alone. The way of life didn't change that much. This cannot be said for capitalist style imperialism. Both Dwayne and Carrol know this so I am not stating this by way of correction but simply as contrast.
I tend to agree with Carrol about the ruthlessness of the current imperial system, but I think the increase in ruthlessness is not simply a matter of more murderous technology but rather is more systematic and "necessary" in order to "integrate" today's imperial system.
Jerry