<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: The Resilient Hegemon: Why America’s Global Leadership Endures	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/the-resilient-hegemon-why-americas-global-leadership-endures/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://globalsecurityreview.com/the-resilient-hegemon-why-americas-global-leadership-endures/</link>
	<description>A division of the National Institute for Deterrence Studies (NIDS)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2024 15:28:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Joe Buff		</title>
		<link>https://globalsecurityreview.com/the-resilient-hegemon-why-americas-global-leadership-endures/#comment-1031</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joe Buff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2024 15:28:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://globalsecurityreview.com/?p=29326#comment-1031</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Aaron makes some very valid points. I agree that positivism and optimism now are called for, and are very appropriate. How is Cold War II, now in high gear, different from Cold War I, except to the greatly advancing technologies and the somewhat (but NOT entirely) different geostrategic faceoffs? Answer: It isn&#039;t that different. Once again, at least one other superpower vies with the U.S. for world leadership, and once again the final outcome is not clear. The U.S. does need to be much more cautious this go-round, and act with great urgency and pragmatism on the budgeting and acquisiition fronts, because our defense industrial capacity has been weakened, by years of &quot;peace dividends&quot; and &quot;globalization&quot; and other liberal ideological nonsense. And one more word of caution, if I may, please: Trade/financial ties between adversaries have never prevented war. Look at Germany and the UK in WWI, the North and the South in our War Between the States, and even between the U.S. and the Axis States in WWII. Aaron has as always done a great job with this essay!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aaron makes some very valid points. I agree that positivism and optimism now are called for, and are very appropriate. How is Cold War II, now in high gear, different from Cold War I, except to the greatly advancing technologies and the somewhat (but NOT entirely) different geostrategic faceoffs? Answer: It isn&#8217;t that different. Once again, at least one other superpower vies with the U.S. for world leadership, and once again the final outcome is not clear. The U.S. does need to be much more cautious this go-round, and act with great urgency and pragmatism on the budgeting and acquisiition fronts, because our defense industrial capacity has been weakened, by years of &#8220;peace dividends&#8221; and &#8220;globalization&#8221; and other liberal ideological nonsense. And one more word of caution, if I may, please: Trade/financial ties between adversaries have never prevented war. Look at Germany and the UK in WWI, the North and the South in our War Between the States, and even between the U.S. and the Axis States in WWII. Aaron has as always done a great job with this essay!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
