\"A War like no other\"; by Victor Davis Hanson

[Paralus]

The obervations upon Rome making itself into a virtual factory of warfare and destructions and this having parallels with the U.S. in recent decades are not inappropriate. Our president Dwight Eisenhower, a man very familiar with both war and politics, saw dangers in his country following a similar path and warned against the "military-industrial" complex turning us into a virtual factory for conflict.

The US, like Rome in Republican times, found itself a taking a more active, if not aggressive, profile in the wider world through a combination of "invitation"/circumstances and the men leading it. The original foreign policy stance was "isolationist" and intervention in the wider (European) world was actively discouraged. Rome was somewhat similar: it saw to its own area of concern in Latium and that gradual expansion and consolidation inevitably saw friction with other neighbours including the Sammnites. Having secured its position it might well have simmered within its bounds for sometime without the incessantly belligerent and childish Greek states tossing invites its way.

The US plugged along consolidating its own identity and position with no great desire to involve itself in the old word belligerence of Europe and its competing colonial states. That began to change toward the end of the 19th century as some decided the US had a role to play in the wider world. Thus we see renewed butting with Spain and not only in the "New World". The "Great White Fleet" was born out of this drive and Roosevelt was its "Pericles".

Afterwards Woodrow Wilson, not content with the US part in WWI, saw himself as the peacemaker in Europe. The Europeans, not so behind closed doors, took him with a pound of salt and several shots of decent whisky. They were, though, the recalcitrant last of a withering group: in thirty years they would be asking for loans to by the salt and whisky.

All of which is to say that Rome found itself in the eastern Mediterranean as much for the invites as the men who would pursue them. The US found itself in the position post WWI as much for the invite as it did those who would take or drive it. That position was doubly re-enforced after WWII when a destitute Europe – and more so England – left a vacuum filled, almost by default as much as policy, by the US. If the bitter pill hadn’t already been swallowed by Britain, it was muzzle loaded down her throat after her last imperial folly: the Suez Cannal.

The "American Century" (or empire of economy and ideology) came about as much by circumstance as deliberate policy. Much as did Rome.

Don’t be too concerned Fred: the “military-industrial” complex is staring at something Britain stared at in 1946: the reservoir of endless money is rapidly evaporating. Circumstance - not controlled by the US - was an enabler over the last 100 years; her other face may now be showing itself. The US needs to pay the rent before much anything else…