To: JohnM who wrote (92839 ) 4/12/2003 3:32:14 PM From: Jacob Snyder Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500 Yes, I see a close between the US today, and Napolean's Empire a few years before Moscow. Both Empires: 1. have a sense their military totally outclasses all potential opposition, so there are no limits to what they can do. This attitude inevitably leads to overreach. 2. their success has led to a feeling of innate cultural superiority, and a program of imposing their culture everywhere. Napolean's imposition of his Code, all over Europe, is very similar to the NeoCon program of democracy following our conquests to the most unlikely corners of the planet. 3. both Empires, the more successful they are, the more they lose all their natural allies, and create an opposition alliance that eventually includes all other powers. A siege mentality develops, "us against the world". For instance, Napolean's loss of Spain as an ally, is analagous to the U.S. inability to get Canada in our "coalition of the willing/billing/bribed/bullied". Spain had already submitted to Napolean, but Napolean's arrogance and insistence on total control (replacing the Spanish King with one of Napolean's relatives), led to a Spanish revolt, and an intractable guerrilla war. Napolean and Bush are both control freaks. 4. both Empires, at the height of their power, had a long list of formal allies that are unreliable. When Napolean went to Moscow, he had a long list of allied armies, of nations who he had forced to submit to French alliances. But these allies melted away when real opposition happened, and France ended up fighting alone in the end. Much like so many of our crucial client states, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and Pakistan, have no real affinity with us, and governments there are likely to be overthrown or abandon us, as soon as the American aura of invincibility wanes. Much like Jordan and Russia say they are our allies in the WarOnTerror, but sell weapons to Iraq and nuclear plants to Iran.