John,

Again we seem to agree on a lot

>This poses somes interesting questions. Why does this become an adversarial issue - the West versus the East? And, again, Walter, we don't have an empire. Stop saying that.

Well I take the definition that was given in the link I provided you which unambiguous is based on the definition that the US is an empire. Also the book of paul kennedy describes the US as the ruling empire. Therefore I think it is fait to say your country is an empire.

>I know this: If the world continues to prosper - East or West - the odds of conflict decline. If the dollar declines and the Euro becomes the currency of choice, so be it. Frankly, as long as needs are met and everyone enjoys personal freedoms, I don't care. The ideals are what's important - that all men are created equal and have a right to chose their own destinies. If that becomes the standard worldwide then it's irrelevent who the big dog is. If our values triumph then we've accomplished our mission.

Amen... I hope for that too, but I very much doubt that. For the world to progress we seem to need War, empires vs the suppressed and poor. It is a way of evolution whether we like it or not.
Again, I cannot push enough to read the book "The rise and fall of great empires". It really explains how humanity has progressed through struggle and victory. HOw to break that, I don't know. The hunger for power and money is to big to avoid that: it is our nature.