Pragmatically Speaking...

[John Kilduff]

Scenario:

U.S. POSITION:

- Ever-rising oil costs with ever-expanding world population which will add to energy pressures

- Increased threat from widening Islamic radicalism

- Future oil supply competition from China; future potential military threat from China (a few decades perhaps)

- Growing frictions with Russia


RUSSIAN POSITION:

- Increased worry over U.S. missile defense shield

- Increased problems with Islamic radicalism

- Internal political difficulties

- Economic challenges

NOW IMAGINE...this is back in the days of Rome perhaps, before such concepts as "today's morality and ethics" became popular.

The obvious self-interested solution would be for the USA and Russia to ALLY and take over key parts of the Middle East and claim its oil and brutally squelch all centres and manifestations of Islamic radicalism.

-The USA could also shield Russia (as was actually once officially offered) under its missile defense shield.

Practically speaking, all of the above would solve many problems:

- Future energy costs: solved for a long time

- Islamic radicalism: slaughtered and crushed except for a few weak and inconsequential sporadic suicidal demonstrations. The coffers of the corrupt oil sheiks and evil mullahs emptied and transferred to better purpose. No longer would the West's money be used against it. No longer would trillions of dollars fund anti-Western jihadism and the spread of jihadi ideology. No longer would corrupt sheikhs import prostitutes to their lavish parties in Europe, all paid for with oil money of the West and stolen from their own Arab constituents. No longer would Mahdi Armies shout their belligerence because as soon as they did a MOAB (or the new Russian version, 4 times as powerful as the American version) would fall on their heads.
No more Hamas, Hezbollah, Mad Mullahs, or any of that other troublesome riff-raff: all MOAB-ed right into oblivion. No longer would the U.S. tell Russias to "take it easy" on the Chechens. Think of the Ancient Romans: they knew how to crush dissent and insurrection.

- The future challenge from China: sharply lessened by the joint shared empire of the USA and Russia

- Europe's security could be assured by the shared empire of USA/Russia, and security is all the Euros really seem to care about anyhow, so they'd cluck disapprovingly a little bit, but deep down they'd be relieved and grateful.

- Internal political difficulties in Russia: reduced, by becoming an even more prominent world power. When Russia does better, Russians smile on the street and in the Kafe-shops [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

- The USA could more openly embrace the Russian model of power-seeking and drop pretenses of being "so concerned" about everyone else in the world. U.S. health care costs would become manageable due to much greater prosperity and cheap fuel and gasoline. The federal deficit could be eliminated in fairly short order.

Sound crazy? Sound barbaric? Sound like a pragmatic idea maybe?

What would the two most powerful nations do in ancient times if confronted by such shared challenges as the USA and Russia are facing today (and in the future)? They'd probably ally, wouldn't they?

Is what seems the moral/ethical path always "right"?

Is it wrong to admit you are facing foes and future challenges and decide to try to win even if it conflicts with how you were raised up to think?

The Roman Empire lasted ~600 years. The way things are going, the U.S. empire won't last nearly that long. Even another 200 years would seem a bargain from where things stand now.

Maybe the Ancients knew something we don't, or that we may have forgotten in our easy lives and speculative philosophies?

You've heard the question, "What would Jesus do?" It's a worthwhile question to ponder sometimes.

Maybe another worthwhile question, at other times, would be to ask: What would Caesar do?

I'm not 100% serious but I'm not 100% kidding, either. I actually think that with the way things are shaping up in the world, the above might at some point (maybe soon) become worth considering.

I'd really like to have Caesar's analysis, or Hannibal's, but for now I'll settle for a few thoughts from you guys. And please leave morals and ethics out of it. I want to know what will be best for us.