I mean, ex communist countries and other countries who want to join Europe work hard to be a part of Europe and are trying to change their system. America was fighting communism with force and they managed nothing, while other countries willingly and freelly follow Europec(accepting democracy and western way of life...)
2006-10-11 07:32:24 · 8 answers · asked by nelli 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
camus0281: well, try it...
2006-10-11 07:35:48 · update #1
Spirit Walker: Americans think they are not, but the world see it differently.
2006-10-11 07:36:36 · update #2
MEL T: There are still communist countries in this world. Take a class for yourself (N. Korea).
2006-10-11 07:37:47 · update #3
MEL T: well, wait for a decade. Europe is spreading.
2006-10-11 07:43:12 · update #4
Your questions is so uneducated I don't even know where to start.
2006-10-11 07:35:05 · answer #1 · answered by camus0281 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Simple view. Ex-communist countries working to be including in the EU are exactly that: Ex-communist. How did they become ex-communist? The collapse of the Soviet Union. How did that happen? Take a history class. Don't get me wrong, Europe is wonderful, but they are not defeating communism in ex-communist countries.
I don't need to. North Korea is not breaking its back trying to get into the EU or become European. Either is China, Cuba or any other current communist nation.
If China ever requests to be part of the EU in my lifetime I'll apologize personally.
2006-10-11 07:35:40 · answer #2 · answered by MEL T 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe, but who in Europe is as strong as the U.S.? America wasn't fighting communism as an ideology as much as it was the governments of communist countries who were agressive towards the U.S. and our allies. Communism in the Eastern Block was bound to fail and it did in just a few generations. If you're not going to be Communist you're still going to be something and it probably going to look a lot like what your neighbors are doing.
2006-10-11 07:38:51 · answer #3 · answered by Spud55 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Europe is a continent. You refer rather to the EU, which is the (supposedly) political, economic, and infrastructural union of countries there.
These days, 'Imperialism' is a pejorative term usually trotted out by socialists when describing Western democracies. However it's used, its inference is conquest. The Brits, French, Germans, Spanish, Italians, Austrians, even the Dutch have all been at one time or another(very successful) imperialists. Their imperialism was founded on conquest. So was American, but to a lesser degree (ever heard of the Spanish-American War?). Then again, the US hasn't been around as long.
As to the relative success of one group over another, your example of fighting communism as proof of successful imperialism is so wrong as to be ludicrous. Sorry. I hasten to inform you that it was not by force of arms the former Soviet Union was brought down, but by the COST of arms. The United States simply bankrupted the USSR by making the cost of keeping up the Arms Race so expensive, they couldn't keep up. The rest is footnotes. There you have it in a nutshell.
As for imperialism generally, it originated in times pre-historical and will continue for as long as man competes against man for resources. In simple terms: forever. If you doubt me... open a history book.
2006-10-11 08:05:45 · answer #4 · answered by DBG 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the two cultures practiced imperlism. to illustrate in Eighties the Europeans had a convention on the thank you to divide Africa up between ecu international locations. on an identical time as, united statesa. had western hemisphere to its itself by Monroe Doctrine. the two ecu and American had there nasty part to them by way of fact they used unfavorable international places for uncooked ingredients, yet they in no way invested instructure for the folk or took culure into consideration. ecu ecomonic equipment is consistent with extra corporatism in fact captailism with a cartel ran by using the state, yet a extra physically powerful risk-free practices internet. on an identical time as united statesa. and Britian had a ecomonic equipment of neo-liberalism meaning darwin capaitalism, "The surival of the Fittest". Anglo equipment is extra effective if ya prefer extra low priced lettuce, eletronics, autos. draw back of Anglo sysrem get ill or unfavorable those structures have a unfavorable risk-free practices internet whilst the goverment stresses comsumption. The Europeans paid by greater taxes get extra social centers for healthcare, pensions, unemployment, preparation. The tradeoff is culutral, and tax fee based. In all, neither equipment is extra effective than the different, yet its the guideline of regulation that determines wealth. the uncomplicated precise to sources, and rights is what seperates Europe, and united statesa. from something of the international.
2016-10-16 02:07:15 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Honestly, if USA were closer geographically, many of them would preffer US Union :-))) US are more pragmatic, anyway.
There is another axioma - european nations started WW twice, and US brought peace twice. And ... I'm European ^!^
2006-10-11 14:11:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anno Domini 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It must be, because America is not an Imperialistic country.
2006-10-11 07:35:27 · answer #7 · answered by Spirit Walker 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes i would agree with you on that factor.
2006-10-11 07:40:16 · answer #8 · answered by gordon_benbow 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋