America has defended itself successfully from the British Crown, the Fascists and the Soviets without ever having to resort to a global hegemony as envisioned by the Neocons. And we shall continue to do so without their help.

I think we're a bit past the Revolutionary War as a valid analogy for world politics. As for WWII, I could make a good case that the reason we had to fight it was because one group of nations had pretty much given up the idea of global hegemony, while another group decided not to.

I'd like to see you views of how the Cold War would have turned out if we had just decided to sit it out. After all, the Soviets never actually attacked the U.S.

First of all, read that paper and see where the actual positions are, not what people are telling you about them.

Second, my point--and it was important--was that we don't get a choice between "U.S. superiority" and "no superiorities."

Personally, I think life would be great if our security was insured by all-powerful, incorruptible robots from "The Day The Earth Stood Still." I don't get that choice, either.

As just one example, somebody's Navy is going to be patrolling critical points like the Persian Gulf. You just have to decide whose it's going to be.

Japan gets 70 percent of its oil from the Persian Gulf area, and even Europe still gets 20 percent of its oil from there. Europe imports about half its energy needs, and about half of THAT comes from Russia--another in the list of powerful nations that has no problems with "stranglehold" issues.