Romand Empire and The United States

No, there are no substantial similarities. The Founding Fathers were convinced that a Republic, along Roman lines, was needed to rescue the country from chaos after the Revolution. Consequently, there are some passing similarities in regard to having a representational form of government. The Roman Republic, which died not long after the Rubicon was crossed, was an oligarchy not too different from the Maffia.

Rome totally dominated Europe and the lands bordering the Mediterranean Sea, but was not part of a world-wide concert of political and economic forces. Modern communications and technology have annihilated the barriers of time and distance that presented Rome with the difficult and continuing problems of command, control and communications. The United States is the greatest superpower in the world at the beginning of the 21st century, but the Ancient Romans never had to act in concert with other powers.

Both were the most powerful civilizations the world had yet seen.
Both were insistent upon pax romana/pax americana.
Both fought endless skirmishes with peoples bordering their empire.
Both allowed unsubjugated people to settle within their borders.

Unsubjugated people?

I think we should start a new thread on the subjugation of immigrants, and the salutary effects which we expect to flow therefrom.

One area in which Roman civil society and American civil society resemble one another, though, is that both are hag-ridden by lawyers and lawsuits.

Got that right. "The first thing we do, is we hang all the lawyers".

The best lawyer jokes are told at the Bar.

usa will fall as roman emarier 476 . ther economy will fall, because low fuel. if usa is smart, ther will envesting is tehnologie of new gas to ran massive american industry. if not far east - china, japan will became lider and superpower. rusia will defently return north asia and east europ to ther control. that will be fall of the west, and rise of east.

For paranod fantasy, chauvinistic boasting and near incomprehensible incoherence, you have no peer.

Ibl do nt no, hee sems prty kler 2 mee.

"usa will fall as roman emarier 476 . ther economy will fall, because low fuel. if usa is smart, ther will envesting is tehnologie of new gas to ran massive american industry. if not far east - china, japan will became lider and superpower. rusia will defently return north asia and east europ to ther control. that will be fall of the west, and rise of east."

i didnt wrote that. that say michael doonovan, former cheif of cia, in intervue for nbc.

You can't even spell Donovan's name correctly. Donovan is a native speaker of the English language--do you expect us to believe that he would produce drivel like that? If you claim you are quoting him, give us a source so we can see for ourselves.

Frankly, i think you are lying.

Let's deconstruct what you allege Mr. Donovan said, as well as your claim about Michael Donovan. There has never been a Director of Central Intelligence named Michael Donovan (nor has there ever been a Director of Central Intelligence named Doonavan). All the Directors and Deputy Directors of Central Intelligence are listed on this page. William J. Donovan, known as "Wild Bill" Donovan, was the Director of Strategic Services from 1942 to 1945. The Office of Strategic Services was the "parent" organization from which Central Intelligence was organized in 1945. William Donovan had a law degree from Columbia University, having previously gotten Bachelor of Arts in History from that University in 1905. However, you stated you were quoting "Michael Doonavan," not William Donovan.

The claim that the Roman Empire "fell" in 476 is false. (There is no such word in the English language as "emarier.") The Roman Empire continued to exist, under its own laws and policies, with its own bureaucracy, military and state religion, until the Osmanli Turk Sultan Mehmet captured the city in May, 1453. So if your fictional Michael Donovan had said the Roman Empire fell in 476, he was talking out of his ass. The assumption that industry in the United States would not be possible without petroluem products is false. Where as it is true that many electric generation plants rely upon petroleum, electricity is generated in many, many places in the United States with nuclear power plants, and the possibility of the United States converting entirely to nuclear power in the event of the failure of petroluem reserves is reasonable and very likely--far in the future, when petroleum reserves actually do fail. The assumption that the failure of petroleum reserves would affect the United States, but not China, Japan or Russia is, to say the least, laughable. Japan is far more reliant upon petroleum imports for electric power generation than is the United States. China relies primarily upon large coal reserves. The Russian Federation relies upon petroluem and nuclear power. Were petroleum to fail, none of these nations, other than Japan, would be at risk of economic collapse as a result. The odds are good that Japan would have already switched to nuclear power generation, although Japan has the problem that it does not produce uranium--the United States, however, produces uranium, and would not be threated by the failure of petroleum.

China already is a superpower. Japan will never again be a superpower, unless one alleges that it now is on an economic basis. The claim that Russia would take control of eastern Europe is absurd--they can't even pay their soldiers and sailors now, let alone provide the material resources for the conquest of any portion of Europe. Russia already controls northern Asia, and has done so for more than four centuries.

Even were any part of this silly scenario true, it would not show any corollary with the history of the Roman Empire. This laughable scenario relies upon a contention that the United States will collapse because of a lack of petroleum resources. Apart from that being unlikely, there is no correlative failure of resources which can reasonably be alleged to have caused the final collapse of the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire fell, in 1453, after the rise of the Osmanli Turks, and their seizure of control of Anatolia and the southern Balkan penninsula over a period of more than two centuries. Do you allege that someone will slowly conquer Mexico and Canada, and then take over the United States?

You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

donovan was chief of oss - ofice of strtegic servic - or today cia. 476 is end of west rome emperor. east become bizant.

british emparer was bigest in the world. they have oil, evrything. i do not say that someone will conqer usa, but usa become only power, not superpower.

only for jou, turks was in europe 5 century not 2. i come from nation who defend the europe from turks.

Your communication skills aside, it would appear your reading comprehension could stand a bit of improvement.

I trust you're not expecting to see this member's reading comprehension improving any time soon. "Wild Bill" Donovan died in 1959--but this joker claims to have heard an NBC interview of him. Oh yeah, i'm believin' that . . . (insert appropriate rolly-eyed emoticon here)

I'd say, go talk to the pups about the Roman Empire--you'll get a more intelligent understanding of what you say.

Noting the member at discussion has been taken to task - in considerable detail - for stated misapprehensions and erroneous assertions on a couple other threads, without said member responding substantively thereto, I suspect you're right, Set.

senteta or something are jou saying that i am stuped. how old are jou? ok i was laying because we in balkan are hoping that usa will go away from are politisc. we have enough that usa give orders what we can do, and what we cant do. we have enough turks, germans, british, italian. they did not do enything for as, but we evrything for them. now come usa to comand. one day usa economic will fall. maybe for 1000 years, maybe for 200 years, but ther economic will fall. evry nation have golden age, and evry nation have black age. if that is stuped, jou do not know history. in usa chief of goverment isnt bush. power have big company. company set stuped bush on the governt because to control the goverment. if do not andersted that jou are blind.