The American Empire

[Duke Malcolm]

I'm sure that there has been a topic of this ilk previously, but nevertheless...

After watching an interesting BBC documentary last night Boris Johnson and the Dream of Rome, where the much loved Tory Member of Parliament and soon-to-be Rector of the University of Edinburgh discussed how Rome held its Empire, and compared it to the European Community -- showing where Rome succeeded where Europe fails, essentially.

But there was one point in the program, where he discusses how the Romans conquered their Empire (It was not him telling us this, by-the-by: he had professors to tell us this, he just summed it up and compared). The Expert folk told us of how the Romans would export their culture, their products, their way of life, their economic system before finally getting round to invading so the natives would be more willing to accept Roman rule -- the natives would be used to the system and products and habits already and it would simply be a change of ruler. This was then compared to the United States of America -- not just by Boris Johnson, but also the Experts, public folk, and French farmers. We all use products from the U.S. -- Coca-cola; their Fast-food chains; their films and television programmes; that detestable American whiskey and their lager; their cars; and much much more besides. The U.S. Dollar is an international currency -- my brother in the Merchant Navy takes a few hundred dollars for use in Africa, Singapore, Arabia, South America; much trading is done in dollars; oil prices are in dollars; and so on.


This morning, I was reading another chapter of the latest book on my shelf, Empire: How Britain Made The Modern World, written by a Kenyan born Scot. the book discusses the rise and fall or the British Empire and the effects thereafter. The chapter was entitled Empire for Sale. And in it was discussed the American influence in the dismemberment of the British Empire. The Americans sought not to stop all imperialism. They did not press any other empire as much they did the British. They even did a little imperialism themselves and had Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and many miscellaneous islands. They even wanted some British Pacific and Atlantic territories of strategic important.

Everyone uses American products, uses the dollar in one way or another, many countries have had democracy enforced by the United States. So, is the United States on the path to taking over the world proper?

[doc_bean]

Everyone uses American products, uses the dollar in one way or another, many countries have had democracy enforced by the United States. So, is the United States on the path to taking over the world proper?

Europe is a protectorate isn't it ? :oops:

[Slyspy]

Empires are gained by accident and lost by incident.

[Don Corleone]

Hmmm, if the USA is an autocratic empire that enforces it's will at swordspoint, kindly explain:

-Venezuela
-The victory of the Hamas in Palestine
-The whole steel import squabble in the summer of 2004.

Look, I'm not going to argue that the USA always plays by the rules or even that we're always benevlent to other countries. But calling us an empire is a bit much. Do you really think W tells Chirac anything?

If your point is that the US dollar is a corrupting influence and should be stamped out as an international currency, what would you have it replace it?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The £. Seriously though, America is the last surviving Colonial Power. Most of the continant still belongs to the Natives as most of it was settled in violation of treaties, after said natives were almost wiped out.

As far as now, yes, the US is an ecenomic Empire, since their military is largely good for nothing except massed tank assaults in Central Europe or the desert. When the US doesn't like someone they slap trade restrictions on them, which hurts. The fact is though that the US lacks the military clout to back up its ecenomic clout, which is why countries like Iran can still defy them.

Not to mention Rome was defied fairly often in the Early and Late Empires.

[Tachikaze]

Hmmm, if the USA is an autocratic empire that enforces it's will at swordspoint, kindly explain:

-Venezuela
-The victory of the Hamas in Palestine
-The whole steel import squabble in the summer of 2004.

Look, I'm not going to argue that the USA always plays by the rules or even that we're always benevlent to other countries. But calling us an empire is a bit much. Do you really think W tells Chirac anything?

If your point is that the US dollar is a corrupting influence and should be stamped out as an international currency, what would you have it replace it?
No one has said the empire is complete yet. They said it is in development.

[Devastatin Dave]

USA!!! USA!!! USA!!! We rule bitches!!! It could be worst, but atleast all of you under our oppressive yoke can come to this site and whine about it. :laugh4:

[Sjakihata]

It is YOU who live in the oppressive breath of your own country - and see you are here, whining. Just because you are too scared to write in the news papers of your country... :idea2:

[Devastatin Dave]

It is YOU who live in the oppressive breath of your own country - and see you are here, whining. Just because you are too scared to write in the news papers of your country... :idea2:
What? Who's whining? Which country on this forum is constantly complained about? One minute the US is an Empire and the next it is insignificant. Make up your mind.

[Don Corleone]

Sjakihata, the LA Times carried an editorial calling for all citizens of conscience to scorn and withold support for the ground level GIs, let alone the leadership (political or military). Does that sound like our press is afraid to say things?

What you call whining, I would call dissent from your dissent. Freedom of speech means others have the freedom to disagree with you, no?

I simply asked how we qualify as an empire. We regularly lose trade disputes, border disputes (fishing rights, offshore drilling rights, etc). Our currency is at a relative low compared to others, we regularly face political and economic opposition, through all of which, we manage to slog along. When I point out that all of this indicates something other than an empire, Tachi says "well, the US is on it's way" (paraphrasing) and you accuse me of whining. Aren't your ideas strong enough to hold up to scrutiny and rebuttal?

[Duke Malcolm]

I didn't say that the U.S. is an Empire. I merely showed how it drew parallels to the Roman Republic which was later declared an Empire. And that it wasn't exactly the anti-imperialist that it seemed to be. Not that the U.S. will be declared an Empire any time soon, mind.

[drone]

Everyone uses American products, uses the dollar in one way or another, many countries have had democracy enforced by the United States. So, is the United States on the path to taking over the world proper?
American products?!? We still manufacture goods here? I thought the only thing we actually produced were little tags that say "Made in the USA", which are then stuck on items made in China. :dizzy2:
Hmmmmm, what a minute, does this mean China is going to invade us soon? :inquisitive:

As for the almighty dollar, it has been, up until recently, the most stable currency around. Why use a hyper-inflating local currency when a more stable currency is easily used instead. If the dream of the EU is realized, the euro will have much the same stabilty, and will probably be used in much the same way outside of Europe.

[Duke Malcolm]

American products?!? We still manufacture goods here? I thought the only thing we actually produced were little tags that say "Made in the USA", which are then stuck on items made in China. :dizzy2:
Hmmmmm, what a minute, does this mean China is going to invade us soon? :inquisitive:

While the products may not necessarily be made in the U.S., they are an intrinsic part of U.S. culture -- no-one would deny that Coca-Cola and MacDonald's are American products, they originated in the U.S. but is cheaper to make the products elsewhere. If anything another factor to what I outlined above. They move the factories of the American products elsewhere, further acquainting the natives with American ways...

China may make a lot of products we use, but these are all Western products. They are supplying Western products to the Western World usually on behalf of Western companies. Not like the Americans supplying American products to the Rest of the World usually on behalf of American companies.

[Pindar]

I think the conclusion on Roman expansion is off. The fall of Carthage, the conquest of Numantia (Iberia) and Gaul are three simple counter examples.

[Monarch]

Hmmmmm, what a minute, does this mean China is going to invade us soon? :inquisitive:

.

Interestingly, on a note for the future, China is on it's way to become something of a world superpower. With it;s economy growing so fast and all. (interesting perhaps>>> http://www.garnertedarmstrong.ws/Mark_Wordfroms/manews0015.shtml)

Edit: wow, found that on wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WorldMilitarySpending.jpg

[drone]

While the products may not necessarily be made in the U.S., they are an intrinsic part of U.S. culture -- no-one would deny that Coca-Cola and MacDonald's are American products, they originated in the U.S. but is cheaper to make the products elsewhere. If anything another factor to what I outlined above. They move the factories of the American products elsewhere, further acquainting the natives with American ways...

China may make a lot of products we use, but these are all Western products. They are supplying Western products to the Western World usually on behalf of Western companies. Not like the Americans supplying American products to the Rest of the World usually on behalf of American companies.
The US is a consumer-driven economy. Even if we don't need it, we want it. Sad, but it's just the way it is right now. A side effect of this is wealthy corporations. Wealthy corporations see opportunities in other countries, and expand operations. Something about improving shareholder value. I can't believe that the US gov is actively pushing McDonald's burgers down the throats of Europeans, but it will "protect" McDonalds' rights overseas. Mainly, this is because the McDonalds corporation donates to political campaigns, etc. My opinion here is that this is just a side effect of globalization.

As a side note, if the local culture doesn't want it, the business will fail. You could say that American products appeal to the lowest common denominator, and this is how they infiltrate other cultures. I can't believe how much Hollywood crap gets exported to other countries, if it sucks here it should suck pretty much anywhere else. But apparently there is a market for it, and that market will be filled.

[lancelot]

Lets face facts, America is modeled on the Roman republic (I suppose) that became an empire...you only have to look at all the columns in their government buildings...then more worryingly you have all the fasces symbols inside the senate building IIRC.

[Kralizec]

http://www.slate.com/id/2111504/

Old, but interesting to read in the light of this discussion. We Europeans will reconquer our empires on the basis of drugs and corrupt Russian oligarchs, all thanks to our mighty currency :laugh4:

[drone]

Lets face facts, America is modeled on the Roman republic (I suppose) that became an empire...you only have to look at all the columns in their government buildings...then more worryingly you have all the fasces symbols inside the senate building IIRC.
No, no, no, get it right. The US government is modeled on a satanic Masonic temple. Just look at a map of DC.

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/chapter3/

~D

[GiantMonkeyMan]

Edit: wow, found that on wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WorldMilitarySpending.jpg

wow what do they spend it on.... camo-toilet seats perhaps? or a billion dollar fighter jet they'll only ever use once? but for me it seems their spending is a little over the top.... i also heard that USA spends 399.1 billion and Iran 3.2...... er :juggle2:

[Rodion Romanovich]

So, is the United States on the path to taking over the world proper?

I don't think that's anything to worry about.



But there was one point in the program, where he discusses how the Romans conquered their Empire


They only mention one of many factors why Rome was so successful conquering. All the factors can be summarized in:
1. being able to conquer (military, economy etc.)
2. finding ways of making the people see it as benefitial to be conquered, or not very benefitial to uprise

Just exporting culture alone isn't a very effective method. Plus American culture isn't a single thing, it's a mix of much different types of culture in different parts of America, plus American culture changes a lot over just decades. Finally, the "American culture" concept doesn't include Coca Cola or fast food, that's part of American industry, not American culture. American civil war sites, American jazz, blues and rock&roll music, and Clint Eastwood westerns is American culture. Soap operas are not American culture, it's to films what fastfood is to food. And American cars - General Motors are not doing well and Ford isn't exactly synonym for high quality - Japanese cars who previously had infamous brands for low quality are now producing some of the best quality cars in the world which are unlike many European and American cars not often necessary to recall for emergency repairs to fix some critical explosion-causing error in the computer systems of the car. The only real way in which American "culture"/or "fastculture" is being exported en masse would be the American movie industry, but many non-Americans are successful in Hollywood and many other countries are buying more and more advanced movie technology due to increased demands and markets, so the American dominance there might also be decreasing. Plus finally American culture has as one of it's central parts to import elements from other cultures and combine the parts it finds best from these cultures, unlike many other cultures who bases it's culture on it's very long history - America has a very short commonly known history and will still for many centuries need external influences before really being able to form an own culture which you'd recognize as typically American, rather than a mix of other cultures.



The U.S. Dollar is an international currency


That would be the main strength of America, but again it's not a cultural, but an economical thing.



Everyone uses American products


Most of it is "mass production culture", not real culture. Plus fastfood is declining in many places now that the knowledge of how dangerous it is for causing overweight and heart problems etc. are spreading. The newer generations who haven't grown up being used to it aren't drawn into it as much and can easily go away from it before it's become a habit.



many countries have had democracy enforced by the United States


Many countries have also gotten democratically elected government overthrown by the USA, for example Nicaragua. Many countries have gotten dictators installed, for example Chile and Iraq. This is unlike the roman strategy to try and teach the locals that roman culture was something positive and that they shouldn't be afraid of it but feel safe with it.

Plus China and east Asia is rising in power and Europe through the EU is firmly united, so there's no way the USA could achieve world dominance. If they want to or are trying to is however a very different matter. Let's hope that's not the case. If it is, then we'll realize it soon enough. Achieving cultural world domination by fascistically not accepting other cultures never works, we must all learn accept that some people like different cultures and laws to rule their nations, and give people freedom to join the group with the culture and laws that they prefer. There are no cultures superior to others.

[Rodion Romanovich]

continued from my post above:
plus romans and others also had much success accepting local culture as part of the occupation. The spread-culture thing is an over-simplification or even a lie. Romans incorporated Gods from local religions into their own religious beliefs, for example. The only real attempt to remove cultural diversity en masse came during the late empire, and probably just contributed to the fall, rather than preventing it. There were some other cases of oppressing minority cultures as well, for example Jews, the Isis cult and the Druids, but no full scale anti-cultural-diversity program until in the early 4th century and on.

[Don Corleone]

While the products may not necessarily be made in the U.S., they are an intrinsic part of U.S. culture -- no-one would deny that Coca-Cola and MacDonald's are American products, they originated in the U.S. but is cheaper to make the products elsewhere. If anything another factor to what I outlined above. They move the factories of the American products elsewhere, further acquainting the natives with American ways...

China may make a lot of products we use, but these are all Western products. They are supplying Western products to the Western World usually on behalf of Western companies. Not like the Americans supplying American products to the Rest of the World usually on behalf of American companies.

What's your point, Duke Malcom? That the US should somehow be prohibited from selling items that are viewed as 'American' overseas because they offend your cultural sensibilities? I've been to the UK, trust me, your culture is alive and well. Nobody will confuse Ulverston for Buffalo.

[Duke Malcolm]

I was simply trying to provoke discussion as to whether or not the American Republic has similarities with the Roman Republic.

Above, I was responding to a post made by another gentleman. Perhaps if you read the other post then the reason for my little post there will be clearer...

[Don Corleone]

I read the whole discussion in this thread. My question was a rhetorical one. If you want to talk about a modern, westernized cultural influence spreading worldwide, you might have a point. But that's hardly the same thing as a global American empire. Empires can be militaristic, political, economic or cultural. We all agree that the USA is not a political or militaristic empire. It's debatable, but I would say nor is the US an economic empire (no more say than Japan is, or the EU). That left the possiblity of a cultural empire, which got raised, and I was seeking to point out again, the US does not qualify. Therefore, while the US bears some resemblence to the early Roman republic days (as will all representational democracies), we are hardly a global empire. Sounds like scare language if you ask me... be afraid of the growing American empire.... wooooooohhhhhhh :skull: :skull: :skull: :skull: :skull:

[Tachikaze]

I read the whole discussion in this thread. My question was a rhetorical one. If you want to talk about a modern, westernized cultural influence spreading worldwide, you might have a point. But that's hardly the same thing as a global American empire. Empires can be militaristic, political, economic or cultural. We all agree that the USA is not a political or militaristic empire. It's debatable, but I would say nor is the US an economic empire (no more say than Japan is, or the EU). That left the possiblity of a cultural empire, which got raised, and I was seeking to point out again, the US does not qualify. Therefore, while the US bears some resemblence to the early Roman republic days (as will all representational democracies), we are hardly a global empire. Sounds like scare language if you ask me... be afraid of the growing American empire.... wooooooohhhhhhh :skull: :skull: :skull: :skull: :skull:
I think we need to agree on the word "empire" before this discussion can go anywhere.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

If we were an empire Canada and Mexico would be annexed by now. So we're not, unfortunatly.

[Duke Malcolm]

You seem to have misconstrued what I said. I did not say that the U.S. is currently an Empire...

[Don Corleone]

No, you seemed to be saying that you thought we were heading that way. I think Tachi's right, without some defintions around which we can build a framework, this might be a bit of a pointless debate. One man's success is another man's imperialism, no?

[Xiahou]

No, you seemed to be saying that you thought we were heading that way. I think Tachi's right, without some defintions around which we can build a framework, this might be a bit of a pointless debate. One man's success is another man's imperialism, no?
By a strict Webster's definition, you could say the USA already is an empire- along with most of the other powers in the world....


1 a (1) : a major political unit having a territory of great extent or a number of territories or peoples under a single sovereign authority; especially : one having an emperor as chief of state (2) : the territory of such a political unit b : something resembling a political empire; especially : an extensive territory or enterprise under single domination or control
2 : imperial sovereignty, rule, or dominion

It's really all about the negative connotations people heap on the word isnt it?

[Lazul]

If we were an empire Canada and Mexico would be annexed by now. So we're not, unfortunatly.

you want to annex Canada and Mexico? haha, you couldnt pull it of anyway :laugh4:

[Kaiser of Arabia]

you want to annex Canada and Mexico? haha, you couldnt pull it of anyway :laugh4:
Give me 45,000 men, 200 M1A1 Abrams, 5 ICBMs, and a squadron of F-16s and I shall.

[Don Corleone]

Why would you want to? All the hot Canadian and Mexican chicks (Elisha Cuthbert, Selma Hyak) migrate here evenutally anyway. They know what's good for them... :2thumbsup:

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Why would you want to? All the hot Canadian and Mexican chicks (Elisha Cuthbert, Selma Hyak) migrate here evenutally anyway. They know what's good for them... :2thumbsup:
Natural resources, draftees, and tacos. :laugh4:

[AntiochusIII]

I might've got a clue before, but I never knew for sure that Kaiser is such a filibuster. :dizzy2:

The American "Empire" is not, in my opinion, a reality. It might be considered moving towards an empire by the 1900s, with all its imperialism going on, but not right now.

I don't see cultural exports -- even domination -- as empires.

Rome would not rule the world without her sword arms.

The American sword arm...erm... :help:

[Don Corleone]

Bah, we already have access to all those things. Guys like Goofball and Beirut are so much easier to govern when they think they call their own shots. :juggle2: Just kidding guys. Seriously though Kaiser, why would you want to occupy anyplace? We have no real need for additional resources. Our econcomy is continuing to dominate, and in today's global marketplace, it's value added, not the resources themselves, that drive GDP growth.

[Soulforged]

United States of America is not an empire, and I can't be bothered in watching their intentions. It's just the result of well managed capitalism, an state who knows their allies and wich are the economic priorities, and a country wich knows how to create debts.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

United States of America is not an empire, and I can't be bothered in watching their intentions. It's just the result of well managed capitalism, an state who knows their allies and wich are the economic priorities, and a country wich knows how to create debts.

Tweeeet! Self-appointed referee calls "unclear" and requires clarification.

1. USA not an empire -- got it.

2. You can't be bothered in "watching" their intentions -- I'm guessing you mean evaluating or trying to determine?

3. Well managed capitalism -- clear.

4. USA knows its allies and its own economic priorities -- clear.

5. USA is a country "which knows how to create debts" -- lots of different possibilities for interpreting this last one. What were you trying to say here?

[Soulforged]

You can't be bothered in "watching" their intentions -- I'm guessing you mean evaluating or trying to determine?Many are pointing out "intentions" of the political and economical figures in this thread, so I only tried to say that they're irrelevant.

5. USA is a country "which knows how to create debts" -- lots of different possibilities for interpreting this last one. What were you trying to say here?Opportunist inversions and war engagement will be what I was adressing. Opportunist invesions to countries in need and war engagement, such as WW II, wich created an economical and a political debt with Europe. Also the ability to respond inmidiatly to any "menace" they encounter around the world by creating a global military distributed in strategic points around the Earth. Of course between that and imperialism there's a line, to take actions and use those centers to battle neighborgs, but USA has not done such thing yet, so I'll not call it empire. Even if it did, there's a terminological problem with the word "empire", wich implies the existence of a central state dominated in absolute form by one man, the emperor.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Bah, we already have access to all those things. Guys like Goofball and Beirut are so much easier to govern when they think they call their own shots. :juggle2: Just kidding guys. Seriously though Kaiser, why would you want to occupy anyplace? We have no real need for additional resources. Our econcomy is continuing to dominate, and in today's global marketplace, it's value added, not the resources themselves, that drive GDP growth.
Oh, I view them (esp. Canada) as occupying rightful American territory! They know they are, that's why they haven't invaded us yet (well that and the fact that they couldn't win if they did *shrug*).

Kinda like why is American oil under Iraqi soil? That rhymed. Cha-ching!

[Papewaio]

Imperialism is not as cost effective as free trade.

Don't own the countries, control the economies.

Get the resources, don't bother with the headaches of ruling the people.

[ajaxfetish]

I want to be the first named Emperor of the United States of America. My first act of authority will be to extend some rights of citizenship to loyal Canadians ~:pat:. Then I will solidify my power base by winning a well-publicized campaign in Gaul :surrender:to win the approval of the populace :knight:. I will then disband the senate ~:grouphug: to limit opposition and further centralize power on my own person. After establishing permanent garrisons in Australia, Antarctica, and on the Moon I will have myself named a god ~:joker: and require the worship of my millions of subjects. Then I will conclude my reign by using the technological power of my Japanese Protectorate :computer: and hordes of Germanic mercenaries to take on my one great rival, China:duel: :charge: :boxing:. After salting the ground of a razed Beijing I will rest on my laurels and enjoy the pleasures of office, especially women and wine:knuddel:, before passing on the torch of civilization to my chosen successor.

Ajax

ed: as long as we're going to be an empire, might as well do it in style, eh?

[Samurai Waki]

America isn't an Empire by any lengths, I think at this point in history, no country is an Empire if you define it the same as the British Empire, or the Roman Empire, with the exception of the Chinese who fit the more traditional empire role. America on an economic scale is a super power, which is different in definition than an Empire, and I believe the US will continue to be an economic super power for many years. Whats lost in translation, is that many people think China and the US will both be contending super powers, but if you look at it economically, it's not feasible, or viable for both countries to be enemies. When it comes down to the very basics of economics, agriculture is the number one factor in a successful economy, and American Agriculture has by far way more clout than any country in the world. If American Agriculture were to be withdrawn from any number of European Countries, China, or Japan those countries could be potentially facing a serious famine within a few years (hence China's reasoning for lowering the overall population of China). Even Iran recieves American Agriculture :laugh4:

[Papewaio]

Sounds like a worthy successor for Kim Jong Il...
After establishing permanent garrisons in Australia, Antarctica, and on the Moon I will have myself named a god

[ajaxfetish]

That's it. Australia's going down, too!!!
See how you all like serving in my South African mines. ~:)

Ajax

[Papewaio]

You do realise there are plenty of mines in Australia...

[ajaxfetish]

Hmm . . .
Well, I still can't have you maintaining your national identity, so I guess I'll have to move a bunch of South Africans to Australia to run those mines. Dang, I'll probably have to import a bunch of sheep ranchers, too. Bah, details: I'll leave all that to my ruthless subordinates. I'm the 'big-picture' guy with my face on all the posters and my fancy imperial chariot-of-state. I'll also need to expand the White House into a more luxurious palace. Do you have any good architects and construction workers down under?

Ajax

[Papewaio]

Considering most mines are multinational, and half of the inhabitants in Australian mines are New Zealanders for starters...

Also South Africans, Australians and New Zealanders already have close national identities in the form of sports so no big thing when one goes from one country to another... somewhat like going from one state in the USA to another in some ways :D.

As for architects, nope import those... for they Opera house for instance.

Who needs fancy homes when we have nice beaches. :laugh4:

Oh if you need Uranium for your world conquest:
Australia has the world’s largest resources of uranium in RAR recoverable at <US$40/kg U (equates to EDR), with 40% of world resources in this category. Other countries with large resources include Canada (17%), Kazakhstan (16%) and South Africa (7%).

[ajaxfetish]

Uranium, eh? *taps fingertips together as he laughs wickedly and considers the possibilities*

Maybe I can just transfer the beaches? Take that, Rome! How many of your emperors had Australian beach palaces? Then maybe I can incorporate that national sports identity into some kind of Colisseum Rugby match to the death to distract the masses from my ruinous economic policies and waning grip on the military and my sanity!
:idea2:

Ajax

ed: by the way, sorry for hijacking the thread! I'll stop now and set about making plans.

[Vladimir]

Yes. MUHAHAHAHA!

[lancelot]

Even if it did, there's a terminological problem with the word "empire", wich implies the existence of a central state dominated in absolute form by one man, the emperor.

Er...British Empire?

I would suggest Empire relates to nothing more than foreign policy...hence the roman republic had an empire...Britain- a constitutional monarchy, had an empire.

And as many theorists have argued Empire does not simply concern territory, Roman and US foreign policy in particular have shown that culture and economics are just as powerful tools of imperialism...in the sense of promoting said cultures in other places.




I want to be the first named Emperor of the United States of America.

Sorry, someone beat you to it a long time ago... :oops:

http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist1/norton.html

[ajaxfetish]

Dang. Well, at least I've found a new hero to emulate. And that's such an awesome name for an emperor. I'll have to change mine so I can be Norton II.

Ajax