The US established empire following WWII. Before then, it was an autonomous country with no tertiary interests outside of its borders. That all changed after WWII, when America began to occupy vast swaths of the world with its military.
It is through the US military that Pax Americana was achieved, so that the US has achieved empire is not necessarily a pejorative as is commonly associated with contemporary usage of the word.
Even some of the most patriotic people i know say the war in Iraq is un-just and un-constitional and i agree my fellow muslims being invaded than killed and bein call calteral damge wtf and in Afghanistan there trying to remove the "Taliban Held Government" well 1st of all the US had no reason to depoly over there other than remove the very government they put in from the 80's its a clean up team for a new leader so they can remove Karazi when there done with him and Eygpt if the US "helps" it will end up just like afghanistan so yes it is a empire
If Britain could imperialize and get called an empire than so could the US. The US has expanded so much and owns lots of overseas territories like Puerto Rico and Guam. The US is bigger than most countries in the world and some historical empires. I don't see how the US isn't an empire.
Politically, an empire is a geographically extensive group of states and peoples united and ruled either by a monarch.Well in understanding that we have no monarch but we do have a president in some form caliber, but i would like to say that even though now it may not seem like a empire but before we had a conquest or a imperial establishment to take over the North American because remember we weren't the first to be on this land that was the native Americans of which we pushed out into reservations .So in some terms it may be related as empire of which states oblige to the laws of the supreme cabinet of the president.
The past forty to fifty years the United States has used war to gain geopolitical favor and natural resources like oil. They have interrupted in civil wars like the Vietnam War and the Korean War because they wanted to extended the long arm of the capitalist grip of the world to an unwilling region.
In the true sense of the word, 'empire' has become obsolete. We operate more on unseen forces, and diplomacy, whereas empires typically display dominance by brute force. Also the fact that we are a democracy put a tamper on the possibility, since empires are controlled by one emperor. Therefore it is very unlikely.
A kingdom is ruled by a king. A duchy is ruled by a duke. A caliphate is ruled by a caliph. In this line of reasoning, many people, very logically, argue that an empire is, by definition, ruled by an emperor. If "empire" is defined as a state ruled by an emperor, then the U.S. Is obviously not an empire. However, fore more than one hundred years, there has been a different usage and definition of empire that no one has as yet acknowledged.
It is often said (by one of the "yes" responders for example) that an empire is a state that uses war to expand. However, this is not at all how the word is used. In historical and modern usage, an "empire" invariably refers to a state that controls other states and uses them for its own benefit. Think about it. The Roman empire existed for the glorification of Rome. The British empire existed for the benefit of Britain. Now Britain is an important example because we should note that it is the BRITISH empire, not the ENGLISH or SCOTTISH one. England and Scotland were on an equal footing. Neither controlled the other, and they both benefitted from the possessions of the BRITISH empire. Japan, although it was ruled by an emperor for centuries during the medieval period, was not called the Japanese empire until it started taking over other countries and using them in the twentieth century.
Now look at the U.S. It is true that the U.S. Is made up of land conquered from Native Americans, and it is true that the U.S. Owns Puerto Rico, but neither of these things make the U.S. And empire. As I have stated, the fact that the land was conquered is irrelevant. All countries conquered their land from somebody at some point in history. Puerto Rico is a different issue.
Puerto Rico has been offered statehood by the U.S. Statehood would mean that Puerto Rico would be on an equal footing with the rest of the U.S., much like England and Scotland. It would not be any more subject to the "American empire" than Ohio. With an empire, the holdings of the empire are subjugated against their will, but Puerto Rico has voluntarily turned down the offer for statehood. Thus, Puerto Rico does not make the U.S. And empire.
Most people who claim that the U.S. Is an empire point to the many U.S. Military interventions. However, this also does not make the U.S. An empire. The purpose of these military interventions is to put U.S. Friendly leaders in power, but that is in the context of geo-political manuevering. When a U.S. Friendly leader is put in power, the U.S. Gains a strategic ally, but not control over that country. The U.S. Does not gain any control over natural resources or trade agreements that are the hallmarks of empire.
America could arguably be called an empire, if we were to base our description off of events during the 19th century. However, in the past century it has hardly proven itself to be imperialistic at all. In most cases, the United States has fought for the defense of its people, allies, and values.
The USA has its fair share of land gotten from indpendence. The USA is a country, and most definitely not an empire. The definition of 'empire' is, "An extensive group of states or countries under a single supreme authority, formerly esp. An emperor or empress".
Yes, the USA is a group of states, but it is not under a single authority. The USA is governed by the president, congress, senate, the house, and more. None of these authorities are "supreme" and no position is or has ever been called "emperor or empress".