If the US is an empire, then are Islamic terrorists the Barbarians?

[bigbillhaywood]

Please understand that I don't mean to imply that Muslims are "barbarians" in the pejorative usage of the word. I'm using Barbarians in a very specific historical sense, i.e. the Vandals, Visigoths, Goths and other German warrior tribes that brought down the Roman Empire.

I think the neocon/Freeper-types might have a point to an extent about the "War on Terror" really being a cultural war/clash of civilizations. The part that I disagree with them on is that ours is necessarily the "good" side. To be honest, I find both American and Islamic culture aborrhent for many differing reasons. I think American culture is hypocritical, racist, greedy and devoid of morality. I think Islamic culture is intolerant, brutal, sexist and stinks of religious fundamentalism (yes I agree there are overlaps in both cultures, but I'm trying to highlight what I think the worst aspects of each culture are, by matter of degree).

Now, I guess my main question is this: If you do believe that this is a clash of cultures, and if the Islamic terrorists are playing Visigoth to America's Rome, then will the US meet the same fate as Rome? I mean within the next 50 years. The analogy is not even close to perfect, because there is little chance of a full-scale invasion, but do these terrorists (aided perhaps by some Muslim nation-states) have the power to tear down the American Empire within the next 50 years or so?

[stellanoir]

1. one person's freedom fighter. . .

is another's terrorist.

The inhumane torture of Iraqi civilians has proven that we are now the barbarians.

[bigbillhaywood]

2. Again, I'm not using barbarian in that sense. n/t

[kalian]

3. Didn't get the original poster's comments....

The US=imperial Rome. The muslim "terrorists" are the "barbarians",
like the Huns, Vicygoths, Goths, etc that rampaged throughout the
Roman empire.
Even with all the technological know-how, the Romans were eventually
brought down by the invading hordes.

The analogy is there...the outcome still remains to be written in
the history books.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

4. no

its my understanding of history that the Barbarians just kicked the Romans when they were already down, that the Romans were already in heavy decline and the Barbarians just accelerated the process.

The "Barbarians" in your metaphor, the terrorists, didn't attack us when we were in decline - in fact they attacked us when we are perhaps just dipping below the apex of cultural, economic and political dominance globally.

The terrorists have no power to tear down America, but they do (as we've just borne witness to) have the power to trigger a stupid reaction by our LEADERS - who DO have the power to tear down America - in shredding the constitution, in alienating our allies and in amassing incomprehendable costs in life and treasure.

[gold_bug]

5. militarily

I think it's very different.

But the Romans did make use of barbarian armies on occasion -- maybe there's a Reagan analogy in that somewhere. ;)

[eridani]

6. They weren't barbarian at that point in history

They'd been pretty heavily Romanized, and many actually worked for the Roman legions. The ones living in what is now Spain, France and Romania spoke a version of Latin.