Stardate 20030227.1824

(Captain's log): I've received a letter from Dev, mailed from the UK. I will apologize ahead of time for the fact that my response to it will be blunt.

I really say I am disappointed in your perspective on the nations of the world. A great deal of your riposte to notions such as the French response to the UNSC is tantamount to an open declaration for a future American stance for destabilising the very fabric of world politics.

Yup. And your point is?

On the one hand you argue that America doesn't want to be an empire, yet on the other you condone empirical gesturing and are accusatory of the efforts of many countries to slow down the American march to war.

I'm afraid that we are not engaged in Imperialism. I know that it's difficult to believe, but there's a substantial difference. We tried having an empire once; we captured one from the Spanish in 1898. What we discovered was that empires are a pain in the ass, and we soon decided to divest ourselves of as much of it as wanted to go free. The only parts we kept (e.g. Guam, Puerto Rico) wanted to stay, and we don't treat them the way the classic empires treated their colonies.

In any case, we're damned either way. If we refuse to deal with the world, we're accused of being isolationist. If we go out and become active, we're called Imperialists.

The only way we could be praised is by becoming subordinate to others and following their orders. But given that we're not really ready to let the French rule this nation, such praise is a boon we're just going to have to learn to live without.

I think that what you seemed to have missed in a great deal of your eulogising is the most important factor to the hostility that is felt worldwide towards America: apparent lack of regard for culture. Yes we fear your wealth, power, and strength and near 50% of the world's weapons of mass destruction, but more we fear the imposition of your culture. There are many countries that have far greater regard and flexibility with regards culture than America. Indeed it is not often easy or pleasant to manage, police or maintain the divisions between race and culture in European countries for example, and maybe it is fragmented and seemingly disorganised, however it is contained or as you put it "maintained".

Which is to say that we're not paralyzed by the "Mean Green Meme" which says that all cultures must be preserved even when they're vile and cruel. Which is to say that we Americans think that everyone benefits when everyone shares their culture with one another. We eagerly absorb culture from other nations; we don't think it's a problem. We also send our culture out to the world, where many eagerly absorb it and others react to it as an invasion.

There is no doubt a case for war against Saddam Hussein and I fear him also. I also agree with the philosophy that something has to be done about the Arabic states soon and expediency is often a valuable tool in warfare. Yet simply because America has decided in the wake of September 11 to do something about it is NOT a reason to destabilise the UN, NATO or OPEC or any other of the world's governing bodies simply because you are the biggest in the room.

When those organizations are being actively used by enemies to harm us, we'd have to be idiots to accept that damage in the name of "stability". Stability is much over-valued; there are other priorities. (Ralph Peters explains that "Stability is America's Enemy".)

Nor is it the case that it is us who is truly responsible for destruction of, for example, NATO. In the vote over sending defending forces to Turkey, there were 16 votes in favor and 3 against. The US was one of the 16; why are we held responsible for that division?

I will draw an analogy that often is spoken of in Europe, in order to strengthen my case for America's obvious lack of regard for foreign culture:

Often America states that it saved Europe in WWI and WWII. Although it is true that the overwhelming strength in numbers did help end both World Wars, America often doesn't appreciate how much she offends when saying she won the war. Many Europeans were fighting for years before America even decided to get involved and many brave people (American and European, Asian even African) achieved astounding feats of innovation and bravery during WWII particularly(WWI was just a bloody stupid bloodbath, albeit a necessary one), without which America may or may not have drawn the wars to their logical conclusion. When America takes all the glory simply by being bigger, that is plain rude and empirical. Not much has changed.

No less luminary than Winston Churchill wrote that the first point in WWII when he finally felt as if the UK would survive the war was just after Pearl Harbor.

No American will think it wrong of me if I proclaim that to have the United States at our side was to me the greatest joy. I could not foretell the course of