[danans]

> We are more or less retracing the path of Rome as the Republic expanded militarily until it was no longer practical to run it as a republic and it transitioned to empire.

The current military "excursion" seems to be transitioning the US out of being an empire.

[rayiner]

Rome took some unexpected Ls against the barbarians too. Didn’t change the trajectory of the empire.

[marcus_holmes]

The "trajectory of the empire" is that it became the Roman Catholic Church. Rome still rules a sizable portion of the world's population.

I wonder if the USA is going the same way. Democratic Church of America?

[shakna]

The failure to integrate the barbarian Goth refugees is generally marked as the beginning of the fall - and absolutely changed the trajectory of the empire.

[rayiner]

“Failure to integrate” is one way to describe the Goths sacking Rome. But I agree the barbarians did them in at the end. My point was that the Iran fiasco is more like the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest, where Rome backed off after taking a beating. That didn’t mark a transition away from Empire, simply a retreat after a military loss.

[shakna]

And my point, is the current administration is closer to Caligula and Nero, than they are to Varus. You see this as nothing more than another blip in a long history. I see unstable and dangerous individuals getting standing ovations for failure.

"I don't care if they respect me so long as they fear me." - Caligula.

[Terr_]

Either way, I'd just caution that the empire-ness of a country's military or diplomatic reach doesn't necessarily tell us what to expect in terms of its internal hellhole-ness of authoritarianism.

[rayiner]

The two things are related because maintenance of the empire imposes demands on the domestic political and economic structure. Look at the domestic politics during Vietnam and the GWOT.