...the most powerful, capable, and unbeatable armed forces in the history of civilization, which in turn gives us the ability to secure the largest and most extensive international trade network in the history of civilization (what Democrats derisively dub "globalization"). The subsequent free flow of ideas, materials, and dollars has created more prosperity (both for Americans and the world) in the past 50 years than anyone previously could have ever even imagined, and this economic fuel has in turn kept the fires of global progress and innovation burning - bringing the world more food, medicine, shelter, and leisure than any amount of government "social safety net" spending could have hoped for (this is simple economic reality - governments redistribute existing wealth for zero net-gain, while free trade fueled economic progress creates new wealth).

What a travesty!

Why, just look at what might have been accomplished, had we invested instead our half a trillion in, say, the social safety net, like our infinitely superior master race European neighbors!

Half a trillion dollars bought them....

An economic failure of continental proportions, with out-of-control inflation, rising unemployment, declining GDP, and enormous individual tax burdens, and a complete loss of international power and prestige, to the point that the continent has become the laughing stock of the United States and the easy pickings of the Middle and Far East.

All of this, yet still Europe manages to do OK - because of defense spending in the United States, ironically enough, which serves to both protect it from foreign looters and to foster the global economic climate touched on above that keeps the self-destructive euro-state afloat (much as the global capital markets keep the self-destructive nations of Venezuela, India, and Russia relatively afloat).

So, what have we learned?

If the United States acted less like the US, and more like Europe, the globalization phenomenon would fall apart very rapidly as local regional conflicts boiled over without American containment and international trade would be stifled in the ensuing chaos. Europe, without the globalization teet to feed from, would destroy itself rather quickly in its embrace of suicidal socialism. The Democrats, disarmed of the image of a relatively-sustainable Europe to point at as a model for America, would be completely farked politically.

My goodness. Slate was right, for a change.

Actually, what got us there was the creation of an a well educated, healthy, and secure middle class. That was only made possible in a climate where the robber barons of industry were prevented from looting the treasury....the exact opposite of what we are seeing now.

And yet the dollar is far weaker than the euro and continues to fall...

The math does not quite agree with you.

quillsinister:

And yet the dollar is far weaker than the euro and continues to fall...

The math does not quite agree with you.

The relevance of the value of the dollar relative to the value of the euro is wholly irrelevant to the point. England "enjoys" one of the most individually valuable (as measured relative to the dollar) currencies on the planet. This doesn't change the fact that the pound sterling is an globally irrelevant and, in professional economic circles, much mocked unit of currency.

The dollar is weak relative to the euro because it is cheap (see the federal funds rate), nothing more.

The media likes to run arbirtrary and meaningless stories touting the dollars relative value to, say, the euro not because it offers any insight into the general health of the domestic economy, but because it offers easy and sensational headlines (which sells papers).

A weak dollar is in fact a good thing for the United States, at least in the here and now, precisely because:

1) The financial markets need a lot of cheap liquidity to minimize the ripples of the subprime mess.

2) The prices of domestic goods needs to be lowered in foreign markets in order to enable US competition with China and India and help to correct some of the trade imbalance.

These two things are both of great value to the American economy at the present point in time, much moreso than any effort to avert inflation (the most signifigant threat of a weaker currency) given that inflation has remained (inexplicably to many economists) largely stagnant until only very recently, and even than well below the "danger" zones of growth. And as a Democrat, I'd think you'd be jumping up and down at the opportunity to get back at those dirty, job-stealing Chinese by lowering the costs of American goods abroad while increasing the costs of Chinese goods here.

Spend a half-trillion (plus supplementals) on Defense, or spend it on "the social safety net"?

How about a quarter-trillion spent intelligently on Defense (which would be more than enough), and the other quarter-trillion not spent at all (by the govt., I mean)

Could you be more specific about the regional conflicts the US military is containing that would otherwise kill global trade?

See the Middle East, for starters. We all know Iraq was about oil. No, not about oil for Haliburton (for the liberal and morons of the group), but about a stable, apolitical oil supply for the free world. It is this cheap and free supply of petroleum which drives global production. And the Europeans are far more dependent on Middle Eastern oil than we are, so once again our military is bailing their helpless asses out. We get most of ours from Canada and Latin America, a fact conveniently ignored by conspiracy theorists and the media.

Then theres the Soviet Union and the Far East. It was contained and ultimately defeated by a strong NATO front (ie, the United States), which saved the economies of all of Europe, and much of Asia and Latin America, as well as opening up the largest new market in global history to Westernization and globalization (China). More new wealth was created in the two decades following the fall of the Berlin wall than in any other period of human history.

And let's not forget Latin America. Today, thanks to the American power hegemoney over the much of the continent (established by that vile CIA and sheltered by an agressive USN during the 70s and 80s), we are seeing some massive economic growth in the non-communist countries (Brazil and Mexico really stand out here) which has brought immense benefits to the countries, the continent, and the United States.

Every region on the planet except Africa, really, owes much if not all of its post-WW2 success to the America supower (the so-called Pax Americana). It's really too bad about those Africans, though. The one region in which America has shown little imperial interest, insteading leaving it to the liberals and progressive bureacrats at Brussels and the UN, has languished stagnantly and been utterly passed up by the rest of the world.

Getting it yet?

sounds like a good mission. The other stuff is history. I was wondering about current missions.