Quote:BismillahI don't think that's quite accurate. Colonialism worked for a time, but then the world changed and the entire system collapsed. World Wars I and II loaded the gun that imperial Europe committed suicide with.
O khairan jazakum Allah for explaining, now i understand. u know what? a Slovanian non muslim was visiting me two days ago with a young Slovanaian revert whom I ve know for like 5 years now. The non Muslim told me colonialism now has a new name "democracy". Because nations now cannt openly announce the occupation of another country in fear of the world reaction. They succeeded in giving it a name, democracy, liberation, supporting. But then for example ( im still citing her), when Palestine chose hamas, o no we are not negotiating with Hamas. Thus, u choose whome we see fit or else we are not playing. O democracy.
However, I don't think that what America has done in the last half-century can be called colonialism. It's aims were the same, to be sure: the U.S. sought to increase its power, influence, and income. However, rather than doing so with direct control of countries, the U.S. sought to do something the British pioneered in Asia -- creating spheres of influence. It wanted a political presence, but attempted to save the significant expense incurred by by standing armies and ruling administrations in foreign lands. It is that same expense that crushed Europe in the end, and the U.S. learned the lesson well.
What the U.S. has done has worked well also, but even its time is past. We will, over the next 75 to 100 years, see the reigns of global power pass to India and China. The new age of influence will be through economics, not colonialism. I predict that the U.S. will become like Great Britain is now -- a former world power that is past its prime and which seeks more powerful countries to follow in an attempt to stay on the right side of "influence."
ws