USA collaps in how many years

We all know that empires collaps eventualy its just matter of time, we also know that USA is number 1 military oil empire, and that theirs freedoms and democracy r false and rotten values, we also know that american dream is false machinery and that workers r modern slaves, so i predict collapsing is already began, but USA will crush in 50y as world Empire, we see already making military blocks against them

I'm waiting for flame wars to start...

What was your question/statement in the first place?

كتب بواسطة MURAD IV, 01.03.2017 at 04:22

Neagu Djuvara, philosopher of History, gives 100 more years of military supremacy to USA. But the future its unpredictable...
I think you don't understand the concept of American dream.

Cheers

What are they doing wrong?

Collapse? Probably not, but over taken definitly. I imagine it would be similare to the uk.

كتب بواسطة Guest, 01.03.2017 at 04:44

كتب بواسطة MURAD IV, 01.03.2017 at 04:22

Neagu Djuvara, philosopher of History, gives 100 more years of military supremacy to USA. But the future its unpredictable...
I think you don't understand the concept of American dream.

Cheers

i guess modern slavery pijama and work suit its not my view of amer dream

Does bosnia have running water?

كتب بواسطة Helly, 01.03.2017 at 05:12

Collapse? Probably not, but over taken definitly. I imagine it would be similare to the uk.

Over taken by whom? I'm assuming you mean by foreign immigrants of sorts?

كتب بواسطة Mr_Own_U, 01.03.2017 at 12:26

Does bosnia have running water?

^

كتب بواسطة Mr_Own_U, 01.03.2017 at 12:26

Does bosnia have running water?

I'm sure you can find a little somewhere...

كتب بواسطة Mr_Own_U, 01.03.2017 at 12:26

Does bosnia have running water?

yea we do why, i was talking about collapsing as world empire, i would agree with Hellykin similar to UK empire collapse i guess

كتب بواسطة MURAD IV, 01.03.2017 at 16:18

كتب بواسطة Mr_Own_U, 01.03.2017 at 12:26

Does bosnia have running water?

yea we do why, i was talking about collapsing as world empire, i would agree with Hellykin similar to UK empire collapse i guess

USA is not an empire, yet. So if the american republic collapses it will collapse outwards and expand its size until it reaches critical mass. This can be seen in history by observing how large states turn to imperialism during times of instability.

كتب بواسطة Tundy, 01.03.2017 at 18:26

كتب بواسطة MURAD IV, 01.03.2017 at 16:18

كتب بواسطة Mr_Own_U, 01.03.2017 at 12:26

...

USA is bigger than the Roman Empire concerning surface and it it has all the characteristics of an empire, only it's named United States of America. China is an empire too, but it's named Popular Republic of China, the same with Russia, Russian Federation or India, Republic of India. The term "empire" is outdated, the classical empires fell after WW1 and an extension of this can be observed in the 3rd Reich. So after WW2, no more Empires. Another term was coined which could express the new realities better: superpower. (even though this is not official)

كتب بواسطة Guest, 02.03.2017 at 01:03

كتب بواسطة Tundy, 01.03.2017 at 18:26

كتب بواسطة MURAD IV, 01.03.2017 at 16:18

كتب بواسطة Mr_Own_U, 01.03.2017 at 12:26

...

USA is bigger than the Roman Empire concerning surface and it it has all the characteristics of an empire, only it's named United States of America. China is an empire too, but it's named Popular Republic of China, the same with Russia, Russian Federation or India, Republic of India. The term "empire" is outdated, the classical empires fell after WW1 and an extension of this can be observed in the 3rd Reich. So after WW2, no more Empires. Another term was coined which could express the new realities better: superpower. (even though this is not official)

well was about to write same, its just change of name

كتب بواسطة Pheonixking929, 01.03.2017 at 13:07

كتب بواسطة Helly, 01.03.2017 at 05:12

Collapse? Probably not, but over taken definitly. I imagine it would be similare to the uk.

Over taken by whom? I'm assuming you mean by foreign immigrants of sorts?

As in politically declining from global leader, to a global member similare to the english did to the americans after world War 2.

The prospect of a global conflict - World War III if you like - appears somewhat unthinkable. Since the Second World War, there has been no major war between the great powers. The original post-war European project was based around peace, social justice and harmony. The unravelling of this project, accompanied by rising nationalism, is likely to exacerbate the dangers of war on a continent with a fraught history of bloody conflict.

In the 20th century, both world wars were unanticipated. Christopher Clark's much acclaimed The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914 - published in timely fashion for the centenary of First World War - charted Europe's unexpected descent into war. First World War had been preceded by a prelude of serenity - the long 19th century of relative peace and stability. The great powers of Edwardian Europe had been engaged in diplomacy and trade prior to the onslaught of carnage.

During the 1930s, the major powers were keen to avert another war hence the policy of appeasement, the initial reluctance of the US to become involved and the Nazi-Soviet pact. Neville Chamberlain's ill-fated announcement of "peace for our time" should be viewed in this context. Throughout the Cold War, the concept of a third world war was inextricably associated with nuclear war and the MAD doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction.

Yet it is possible that future conflict between the great powers may take the form of another cold war or even a conventional (as opposed to thermonuclear) hot war. In the 21st century, there are three key fronts emerging as the loci for future wars. The first is the Europe-Russia front with a new cold war triggered by the Ukrainian conflict. The second is the Middle East cauldron centred around Isis and the Syrian war. The third is the Asia-Pacific front with a face-off between the United States and China.

Cold War II

Time magazine - the original Cold War mouthpiece of the American establishment - trumpeted the start of Cold War II in 2014. Western powers have characterised Vladimir Putin's incursions into Georgia in 2008 and lately Ukraine as aggressive expansionism. Evidently the irony of the US casting aspersions around violation of national sovereignty, in light of the folly of the Iraq war, seems to have been lost. The realist perspective - as articulated by John Mearsheimer in the pages of US foreign policy bible Foreign Affairs - is that the Ukrainian crisis was preceded by two decades of NATO expansionism up to the borders of Russia. This was in contravention of promises made to respect these boundaries at the end of the Cold War.

cold-war-2.jpg
Time trumpeted the start of the second cold war in 2014
In this view, events in Ukraine have merely been the endgame of this process. It is worth recalling that the United States did not respond amicably to Soviet interference in Cuba in the 1960s. Such arguments have been rendered somewhat academic as they are overtaken by events. Increasing deployments of troops by both Nato and Russia, dangerous confrontations and massive war games are being played out.

The European Leadership Network (ELN) think-tank produced a 2015 report entitled Preparing for the Worst: Are Russian and Nato Military Exercises Making War in Europe more Likely? The report analysed recent war games including a Russian exercise involving 80,000 military personnel and a set of Nato war games comprising 15,000 personnel.

It went on to say that, "Both exercises show that each side is training with the other side's capabilities and most likely war plans in mind... Whilst spokespeople may maintain that these operations are targeted against hypothetical opponents, the nature and scale of them indicate otherwise. Russia is preparing for a conflict with Nato, and Nato is preparing for a possible confrontation with Russia."

gorbachev-reagan.jpg
Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan were able to improve US Russia relations but will the same be able to be said of Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump? (Getty)
Recently, the US has stationed troops in Poland in the largest deployment of American troops in Europe since the end of the Cold War. As reported, these US troops will also, "fan out across other eastern European states, including Estonia, Bulgaria and Romania". Russia alarmed the Baltic states by, "moving nuclear-capable Iskander-M missiles to its naval base at Kaliningrad in the autumn".

According to the New York Times, an American missile shield is, "to be built in Poland mirroring one already in place in Romania". Whether Trump's attempted rapprochement with Russia defuses the situation remains to be seen. If the cold warriors in the Atlanticist defence establishment and hard-liners on the Russian side have their way, then tensions are only likely to be ratcheted up.

Middle East geopolitics

The intrepid German author Jürgen Todenhöfer took the concept of embedded journalism to a whole new level by holing up with Isis. He points out that in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, there were only a few hundred Islamist fighters in the Hindu Kush mountains. Fast forward through 16 years of the war on terror costing some $4,000bn (£3,300bn) and leaving 1.3 million dead, according to Physicians for Social Responsibility, and the number of terrorists is currently about 100,000. Even on its own terms, the war on terror has been an abysmal failure. How on earth did this happen? Retired US General Wesley Clark revealed that, in the wake of 9/11, the Pentagon drew up plans to attack 7 countries.

These plans have been adhered to with remarkable fidelity with Western involvement in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. The pretext may have been terrorism but the intention was to guarantee economic and military supremacy in the region. Many critics argued that the Iraq war was fundamentally about the opening up of state assets to global capital. Naomi Klein reported that the reconstruction of Iraq was estimated to have been worth about $100bn to the US economy. In the process, Iraq was transformed from a secular dictatorship into a Jihadist safe haven. Donald Rumsfeld's decision to disband Saddam Hussein's Baathist army led to chaos and now makes up a significant component of Isis.

iraq-war.jpg
Intelligence predicted that the Iraq war would lead to the amplification of Islamist terrorism (Getty)
The deliberate stoking of tensions through a US sponsored sectarian Shia-led Iraqi government was notable. This ultimately led to the Sunni backlash and the spawning of al-Qaeda in Iraq. This is a hallmark of colonial-era tactics of divide and rule. In fact, British and American intelligence predicted that the Iraq war would lead to the amplification of Islamist terrorism.

Back in 2007, the veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh posited in an extended New Yorker essay, The Redirection, that US Middle East geopolitical strategy was directed against the regional superpower of Iran and its Shia sphere of influence extending through Syria and to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hersh has since elaborated, in a series of controversial London Review of Books essays, that the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad would have severed this Shia sphere. Following the destruction of Iraq, this sphere remained the only obstacle to US full-spectrum dominance of the world's largest oil fields.

The Syrian war has seen allies - Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey - arming and funding radical Jihadist groups, such as the al-Nusra front. Former Vice President Joe Biden - renowned for bloopers - frankly admitted as much to a Harvard audience. The Wikileaks disclosures of Hillary Clinton's emails revealed that she too was aware of Saudi and Qatari governments arming Isis. In realpolitik, the ends apparently justify the means.

Hersh elaborates on how British and American intelligence have been enmeshed with the use of CIA front companies in an arms pipeline from Libya to Syria dubbed the "rat line". It was under these conditions that the mutation into the Frankenstein monster that is Isis took place. In fact, a 2012 Defence Intelligence Agency memo had anticipated the rise of Isis and its establishment in Syria in order to "isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion".

The terrorist attacks in Europe have demonstrated the difficulty in containing the spill-over from these policies. The Syrian war has seen the return of great-power politics with the involvement of Russia. This contamination has the potential for a wider conflict in which western countries could be drawn in. One possible trajectory is that a Sunni-Shia war along the Saudi-Iran axis looks increasingly likely. Yet this destabilisation of Iraq and Syria may well have been engineered deliberately.

isis-suicide-bombing-al-bab.jpg
A recording of an Isis suicide bombing in al-Bab was sent out on propaganda channels last week
According to Nafeez Ahmed, documents from the Rand Corporation and US private intelligence firm Stratfor confirm this picture. An incendiary report, authored by no less than former Bush Vice President Dick Cheney and former deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, envisioned ethno-sectarian partitioning of Iraq. All in all, this could represent a new Sykes-Picot (the post Ottoman empire settlement) or redrawing of the Middle East carving it up into smaller, weaker territories, which are more pliable.

Back in the 1990s, the political scientist Samuel Huntington made some dire predictions of a clash of civilisations. Even in the wake of 9/11, such apocalyptic theories appeared quaint; now they no longer seem absurd. Isis directives aim to create more violence and chaos with the obliteration of the "grey zone" of multicultural societies, in which non-Muslims and Muslims live side by side, forcing Muslims to join the "caliphate". Ironically, US policy is doing Isis's work for them and, in another bizarre twist, it seems that Isis is aiding US geopolitical strategy.

Asia Pacific

Ghost Fleet: A Novel of the Next World War is an intelligent thriller written by PW Singer and August Cole, both of whom have national security expertise. Ghost Fleet imagines what a 21st century world war might look like pitting the US, China and Russia against each other complete with cyber-warfare, robotics and drones. But could this nightmarish fiction turn into dystopian reality?

south-china-sea.jpg
China's Liaoning aircraft carrier conducts a drill in the South China Sea (Reuters)
During the Obama administration, the Pentagon pursued the pivot to Asia aiming to transfer 60 per cent of naval bases to Asia. The US also strengthened alliances with Japan and other Far East partners to "contain" China. Economically, the US pursued the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) - a massive trade agreement, which would have deliberately excluded China. Admittedly, a Trump executive order indicates imminent withdrawal from TPP. In recent years, tensions have been mounting between China and Japan.

Both sides are now equipped with vertical take-off aircraft. There have also been a series of stand-offs between the US and China in the South China Sea. The US is currently installing a missile defence system in South Korea prompting China to warn of a new atomic arms race in the region. A recent US taskforce report unsurprisingly concluded that America and China are on a dangerous collision course.

The Trump transition is likely to exacerbate US-China tensions. Trump has threatened a trade war with China. While his chief strategist Steve Bannon stated in March of last year that, "We're going to war in the South China Sea in five to 10 years…. There's no doubt about that." If there is a coherent philosophy of Trumpism then it is represented by the ideology of Bannon. Bannon subscribes to the Huntingtonian idea of a coming clash of civilisations between west and east with the Orient bracketing both China and Islam.

Bannon views China and Islam as expansionist threats. He has also stated that the Judaeo-Christian west is, "at the beginning stages of a global war against Islamic fascism" and that, "We're clearly going into, I think, a major shooting war in the Middle East again." China will eventually overtake the US in economic terms but US supreme military dominance is unchallenged. This is a dangerous discrepancy as it means that the US will use this military power to guarantee its economic prerogative - particularly as a massive national security apparatus now seems to dictate US foreign policy. As Obama has put it, the US is exceptional because it acts.

north-korea-nuclear-abilities.jpg
People watch a news report on North Korea's first hydrogen bomb test (Getty)
This would be in keeping with the default operational mode of capitalism. One might even argue that capitalism often resolves systemic economic crises through war. After all, a war economy with militarisation, mobilisation, full employment and jingoism can be viewed as the ultimate solution to economic woes and social unrest. The transition of Western democracy to oligarchy and the descent into soft fascism is under way. Citizens will need to participate actively, rather than as passive consumers, to demand an end to this cycle of violence from governments and to defend the assault on democratic processes. We can only hope that British foreign secretary Sir Edward Grey's refrain on the commencement of First World War - "The lamps are going out all over Europe, we shall not see them lit again in our life-time" - will not be repeated in ours. But the omens are not good. As the late Eric Hobsbawm put it, the old century has not ended well.

Youssef El-Gingihy is the author of 'How to Dismantle the NHS in 10 Easy Steps' published by Zero books

More about: world war 3Obama

كتب بواسطة Mr_Own_U, 01.03.2017 at 12:26

Does bosnia have running water?

We dont have mexicans either.........fair trade

USA too OP we fall when the Earth falls

كتب بواسطة Evic, 12.03.2017 at 18:41

كتب بواسطة Mr_Own_U, 01.03.2017 at 12:26

Does bosnia have running water?

We dont have mexicans either.........fair trade

Kebabs are equivalent to Mexicans

كتب بواسطة Helly, 12.03.2017 at 21:17

Kebabs are equivalent to Mexicans

kebabs are worse than Mexicans, at least Mexicans are Catholic

كتب بواسطة LukeTan, 01.03.2017 at 04:25

my opinion is that you should finally recognize my UK PD den rush i posted in the enigma forums

I would prefer to see all empires as broken up to small countries that world would be better place to live.

Impossible. After this breaking up, some1 will start "uniting" them. Look at Charlemagne example. And even after this breaking up, the little states will non stop war each other, look at the Gauls before Caesar...

كتب بواسطة Guest, 13.03.2017 at 11:35

Impossible. After this breaking up, some1 will start "uniting" them. Look at Charlemagne example. And even after this breaking up, the little states will non stop war each other, look at the Gauls before Caesar...

Look at balkans after yugo

America was smart to aggressively assimiliate immigrants and erase their background thus creating American Nation which only separate on 'states' for admin reasons and not ethnic, linguistic or religious one. In that case, America cannot collapse like USSR which gave freedom to minorities and all ethnic groups to language, religion and culture, creating division for the future collapse.

But America can divide, that won't be collapse as you play apocalypse games, just Americans will have sligthly drop in living standard, for shot time, and then get back again. Point is that America cannot repay its debt anymore, its way past the end date, it will default, that won't necessary mean dissolution of United States, but foreign lenders will ask for it.

They will use an excuse like 'independent states will have less debt to pay and so it is better to cancel federation', and indeed some states will have debt like $50 billion, but others will have more like $500 billion. Just like EU is forcing Greece to sell islands and privatize railways, airports and seaports in order to collect money to pay debt.

This scenario i support, because it is not violent, civilians still preserve their living standard, their homes(i think) and there won't be physical destruction. Disunited America will be more peaceful as they won't have military power and interest to conquer the world. California and Texas will be like Germany and Japan, large economies and small volunteer armies.

Then we can try if UN works and apply international law equally in every world region, destroy terrorism while cooperating with countries, instead changing regimes and funding extremist groups.

كتب بواسطة Helly, 13.03.2017 at 17:21

كتب بواسطة Guest, 13.03.2017 at 11:35

Look at balkans after yugo

Yugo don't mean much looking at the the history on the long run. But on the short run, yea, it was something, most of the Balkan Slavic states in 1 state, cool, ain't it? A precedent, an idea for the future.
And if we go a bit deeper, we can see things like the Kosovo problem and we realise that there exists some tendencies already of "uniting." I won't point fingers now, because it will prolly start a flame war. But everybody knows it who is acquainted with the matter somehow.

كتب بواسطة Skanderbeg, 13.03.2017 at 17:56

America was smart to aggressively assimiliate immigrants and erase their background thus creating American Nation which only separate on 'states' for admin reasons and not ethnic, linguistic or religious one. In that case, America cannot collapse like USSR which gave freedom to minorities and all ethnic groups to language, religion and culture, creating division for the future collapse.

But America can divide, that won't be collapse as you play apocalypse games, just Americans will have sligthly drop in living standard, for shot time, and then get back again. Point is that America cannot repay its debt anymore, its way past the end date, it will default, that won't necessary mean dissolution of United States, but foreign lenders will ask for it.

They will use an excuse like 'independent states will have less debt to pay and so it is better to cancel federation', and indeed some states will have debt like $50 billion, but others will have more like $500 billion. Just like EU is forcing Greece to sell islands and privatize railways, airports and seaports in order to collect money to pay debt.

This scenario i support, because it is not violent, civilians still preserve their living standard, their homes(i think) and there won't be physical destruction. Disunited America will be more peaceful as they won't have military power and interest to conquer the world. California and Texas will be like Germany and Japan, large economies and small volunteer armies.

Then we can try if UN works and apply international law equally in every world region, destroy terrorism while cooperating with countries, instead changing regimes and funding extremist groups.

The honest truth is though when they come looking for there money there is absolutely no way of forcing the United states to pay it. And asking the states the deunify would never happen. The United states has a superiority complex and don't give a fuck about anyone else's opinion.

كتب بواسطة Helly, 13.03.2017 at 19:44

كتب بواسطة Skanderbeg, 13.03.2017 at 17:56

America was smart to aggressively assimiliate immigrants and erase their background thus creating American Nation which only separate on 'states' for admin reasons and not ethnic, linguistic or religious one. In that case, America cannot collapse like USSR which gave freedom to minorities and all ethnic groups to language, religion and culture, creating division for the future collapse.

But America can divide, that won't be collapse as you play apocalypse games, just Americans will have sligthly drop in living standard, for shot time, and then get back again. Point is that America cannot repay its debt anymore, its way past the end date, it will default, that won't necessary mean dissolution of United States, but foreign lenders will ask for it.

They will use an excuse like 'independent states will have less debt to pay and so it is better to cancel federation', and indeed some states will have debt like $50 billion, but others will have more like $500 billion. Just like EU is forcing Greece to sell islands and privatize railways, airports and seaports in order to collect money to pay debt.

This scenario i support, because it is not violent, civilians still preserve their living standard, their homes(i think) and there won't be physical destruction. Disunited America will be more peaceful as they won't have military power and interest to conquer the world. California and Texas will be like Germany and Japan, large economies and small volunteer armies.

Then we can try if UN works and apply international law equally in every world region, destroy terrorism while cooperating with countries, instead changing regimes and funding extremist groups.

The honest truth is though when they come looking for there money there is absolutely no way of forcing the United states to pay it. And asking the states the deunify would never happen. The United states has a superiority complex and don't give a fuck about anyone else's opinion.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/06/heres-how-the-us-empire-will-devolve-into-fascism-and-then-collapse-according-to-science-2/

Sociologist who predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union and 9/11 attacks warns that American global power will collapse under Donald Trump.

Johan Galtung, a Norwegian professor at the University of Hawaii and Transcend Peace University, first predicted in 2000 that the "U.S. empire" would wither away within 25 years, but he moved up that forecast by five years with the election of President George W. Bush, reported Motherboard.

Now, nearly 17 years later, Galtung predicts that decline could come even quicker under a Trump administration.

"He blunts contradictions with Russia, possibly with China, and seems to do also with North Korea," Galtung said. "But he sharpens contradictions inside the USA."

Galtung's biographer credits the sociologist and mathematician with correctly predicting the 1978 Iranian revolution; China's Tiananmen Square uprising in 1989; the collapse of the Soviet empire in 1989; the economic crises of 1987, 2008 and 2011; and the 9/11 attacks.


Report Advertisement
His predictions are based on a model comparing the rise and fall of 10 historical empires, and decades ago Galtung developed a theory of decline based on "synchronizing and mutually reinforcing contradictions."

For example, Galtung's model identified five key structural contradictions in Soviet society that he predicted would lead to its fragmentation unless the U.S.S.R. completely transformed itself.

Galtung predicted the tensions between the repressed Soviet working class and the wealthier "bourgeoisie" with nothing to buy would lead to economic stagnation, and those economic forces combined with the push for more freedom of expression, autonomy and freedom of movement would — eventually did — pull down the Soviet Union.

He predicted in his 2009 book, "The Fall of the American Empire — and then What?" that the U.S. was plagued by 15 internal contradictions that would end its global power by 2020, and Galtung warned that phase of the decline would usher in a period of reactionary fascism.


Report Advertisement
American fascism would spring from its capacity for global violence, a vision of exceptionalism, a belief in an inevitable and final war between good and evil, the cult of a strong state leading that battle, and a cult of the "strong leader."

Galtung said all of those elements presented themselves during the Bush era, but he fears fascist tendencies could sharpen under Trump as those cultists lash out in disbelief at the loss of American power.

The sociologist identified unsustainable economic, social, military and political contradictions that would eventually topple the U.S. as a world power.

Overproduction relative to demand, unemployment and the increasing costs of climate change would weaken the U.S. economy, according to his model.

Galtung also predicted that rising tensions between the U.S., NATO and its military allies, coupled with the increasing economic costs of war and the political conflicts between the U.S., United Nations and the European Union, would also diminish American power.

"The collapse has two faces," Galtung said. "Other countries refuse to be 'good allies: and the USA has to do the killing themselves, by bombing from high altitudes, drones steered by computer from an office, Special Forces killing all over the place. Both are happening today, except for Northern Europe, which supports these wars, for now. That will probably not continue beyond 2020, so I stand by that deadline."

Rising tensions between America's Judeo-Christian majority and Islam and other religious minorities created cultural contradictions, which are further sharpened by social contradictions between the so-called American dream and the reality that fewer Americans can achieve prosperity through hard work.

The decline of the U.S. as a global power would probably rip apart its domestic cohesion, Galtung said, which could potentially reshape American borders.

"As a trans-border structure the collapse I am thinking of is global, not domestic," Galtung said. "But it may have domestic repercussion, like white supremacists or even minorities like Hawaiians, Inuits, indigenous Americans and black Americans doing the same, maybe arguing for the United States as community, confederation rather than a 'union.'"

That breakup could potentially bring a revitalization of the American republic, Galtung said — if Trump makes a surprising shift in his persona and policies.

"If he manages to apologize deeply to all the groups he has insulted and turn foreign policy from U.S. interventions — soon 250 after Jefferson in Libya 1801 — and not use wars (killing more than 20 million in 37 countries after 1945): A major revitalization!" Galtung said. "Certainly making 'America Great Again.' We'll see."


FacebookTumblrMore251
Report typos and corrections to corrections@rawstory.com

NEXT ON RAW STORY >
Senate Republicans beg Mitch McConnell to save them from constituents by canceling August recess
By commenting, you agree to our terms of service and to abide by our commenting policy.
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION

Nice resurrection, bruh