I Call "BULLSHIT!".

Via Instapundit we get a story in the Asia Times Online about how "emergent powers are primed to erode US hegemony, not confront it, singly or jointly." That part I don't disagree too much with. It is, in fact, pretty much inevitable in a world that has competition. The part I call "BULLSHIT!" on is this:

The George W Bush administration's debacle in Iraq is certainly a major factor in this transformation, a classic example of an imperialist power, brimming with hubris, overextending itself. To the relief of many - in the US and elsewhere - the Iraq fiasco has demonstrated the striking limitations of power for the globe's highest-tech, most destructive military machine.

Here's a clue, Hiro: The U.S. is not an "imperialist power." We do not invade nations to make them our vassals and demand tribute. That is what an empire does. Or it decimates the population and takes everything. We go in, liberate populations, try to build democratic structures for the good of the people living there and then we leave. Oh, and then we trade with them, to our mutual benefit.

The only limitations on "the highest-tech, most destructive military machine" in the world is the decency of America and Americans.

We tried the "empire" thing around the turn of the 20^th century, following the major European powers, but it just doesn't play well with Americans. If we were truly an empire, we'd OWN the Middle East, even if that required making glass craters out of some of its major cities, but we don't think that way.

Here's what other countries (and journalists) just don't get about America, as so eloquently expressed by Eric S. Raymond:

I was traveling in Europe a few years back, and some Euroleftie began blathering in my presence about America's desire to rule the world. "Nonsense," I told him. "You've misunderstood the American character. We're instinctive isolationists at bottom. We don't want to rule the world — we want to be able to ignore it."