@Dr Guy

You are looking specifically for definitions that require "territorial acquisitions"...words are not defined by words, they are defined by concepts, connotations, and ideas...there is also no one definition, but many for any given word...looking at several definitions of imperialism, they do not all require a "flag to be planted" so to speak...

Imperialism is about dominance, not your narrow focus on "territorial acquisitions"...you can argue the definition of imperialism, but it is obvious you are really arguing that America is either not imperialist, or that we are all "technically" imperialist (which essentially is saying America is not "imperialist" in the manner most people are speaking off)...

You are correct in that America is a nation of man...but America is different because it IS a superpower while no other nation is...it has more responsibility because of its power, and it is more important that America is "right" (whatever that may be) because of the influence it has...I will criticize America for its wrongs as much as I will criticize any country for its wrongs...

America had slavery...so did a lot of nations...America killed natives...so did a lot of nations...the issue is not how America and the rest of the world acted decades and centuries ago, but how America and the rest of the world have changed..

A large portion of Americans look down (if ever so slightly) on the rest of the world...America doesn't understand WHY its hated by large portions of the world...there are very good reasons for the mid-east, or Russia, or China, or south and central America, or Europeans to despise America...but Americans don't understand why the hate is there, and therefore instead of the mid-east being a bunch of real people with real pasts and real feelings, the mid-east is a bunch of muslim fanatics just asking to be glassed...

A lot of Americans still heavily support the war in Iraq and are now advocating direct military action against Iran...the rest of the Western world has come to a consensus that Iraq was a mistake....not because Saddam shouldn't have been removed, but because of how the war was handled and why America went there in the first place....

America is looking for a fight with Iran...I don't see the rest of Western civilization so eager...

Every nation has an inglorious part of its past...the problem is, America overlooks its mistakes and repeats them while the rest of the world seems to be moving forward...

The last tussle apparently rattled the invincible Israel myth.

From what I know its fair to say that the Republicans seem more eager to pursue a tough-line stance against Iran (and everybody). It all goes back to oil and a document published years ago by one of these "think-tanks" on US strategic aims. Of much importance is to secure the oil as the economy and military run on it.

John Stewart was funny last night, he showed Obama saying something like "We need to make USA not dependent on foreign oil reserves and I will get it happening", and then showed US presidents all the way back to Nixon saying exactly the same thing. Nixon said by the 1980's the US would not be dependent on foreign oil reserves. Bush Jr said by 2025.

Obama and Congress are certainly not looking for a fight with Iran, and that's what matters since they're the ones with the powers to wage and declare war respectively.  And Obama and the rest of Western civilization are morons if they honestly believe Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, and not to make weapons they can use to wipe entire countries off the map in a matter of hours.

Obama has been vacillating with Iran, and Brazil and Turkey (a NATO member by the way) are starting to realize that siding with America in this matter is not smart, as revealed by their new nuclear exchange program with Iran.  Obama has also handed off Eastern Europe to Russia with the cancellation of the missile shield, which would have been a statement by America that Russia was to leave Europe alone.  Right now we are giving up our influence for some vague sense of global togetherness, and Russia and China are picking up all the influence and power we're throwing away.

Obama's America is weak, and our allies that aren't in Western Europe are realizing we aren't there for them like we used to be.  Under Bush, the world didn't like us, but they respected us since they knew where we stood; under Obama, the world likes us, but they have no respect for us since Obama doesn't stand for much of anything.  It is better to be respected than liked, since respect gets you influence and attention while being liked gets you only vague promises and empty words.

Mao said political power comes from the barrel of a gun, and while saying something positive about a mass-murdering bastard like him leaves a bitter taste in my mouth, he was right since as long as the final arguments of governments are tanks and troops, political power in the world will be measured by how much ass you can kick, how quickly you can kick it, and whether or not the world believes you are willing to start kicking it.  We can do the first two extremely well, and have always been able to since our independence, but the third isn't always so reliable, especially with our current government.

Both valid points...but if the Iran situation heats up, the conservative element of America is going to push for action against Iran...once Americans are filled with fear, military action against Iran will be supported by many Americans, not just Republican hardliners...

That right there sounds a lot like Machiavelli...but anyway...being respected is important, this is true, but at what cost?  Nazi Germany was respected, the Soviet Union was respected, the People's Republic of China is and was respected...power brings respect, but should a nation really be aiming just for respect? 

America represents about 4.5% of the world population...yet it accounts for over 20% of the global GDP and half of global military expenditures...America has a disproportionate amount of power compared to the rest of the world, and it is only natural that eventually it will lose some of its influence no matter what policies it adopts...America can cling to its power all it wants, but it will inevitably lose its grasp...Americans are going to slowly have to accept their new role as one nation among many instead of sole superpower...the Russian people had to go through the same process when the Soviet Union fell...it sucks, they hated it, but its how things are....the Soviets eventually realized they simply couldn't hold onto everything they had, and so the USSR was dissolved gracefully....

So maybe America is stepping back, but why resist the inevitable?  There are a lot of domestic problems America has to face, and it cannot face both domestic issue and take on the world at the same time...

Respect is nice, but respect doesn't stop terrorists, it doesn't stop immigrants from coming here, it doesn't stop China and Russia from building up their own forces or stop Iran and North Korea from building nuclear arsenals...America needs to regain its trust with Europe and the Americas, needs to make new friends in Africa and the Americas...if it continues to follow the line of "World Police", it will not only be overstretched and fail, it will lose its chance to build up relationships with allies...

In the grand scheme of things, nations like China and Russia are not going to go to war with the US...it simply is not going to happen, at least not anytime soon...rogue states like Iran can be defeated by coalitions, the US does not need to be capable of fighting all on its own...

From both a diplomatic and economic perspective, it is time for America to slowly step back...not step completely away, but step back...

When Russian transports were stopped by the US navy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the transports turned around...they didn't try to run the blockade, they simply turned around....now you could argue they did so because the USSR was afraid of America, was afraid of the consequences...but maybe it wasn't fear that turned them around, maybe the USSR simply realized "What's the point?"

Ghandhi once said "When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall - think of it, always."

You are absolutely right, all three elements of your argument are essential to maintain political power...but I'd argue that political power should not be the goal of any people....

To say otherwise would be to say that the Europeans who subjugated much of Africa, Asia and South America and Australia were not imperialistic and they certainly were.

However, not all nations have been effected by imperialism. Examples include Iceland, Sweden, Bhutan, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Liberia and a few others. Interestingly, Liberia got started by freed black slaves with the help of the American Colonisation Society and this is essentially the opposite of imperialism.

Many countries have been imperialistic in the past, but they were organised and governed in a completely different way so the term cannot apply in a modern context. The US hasn't had such a fundemental change in government.

Actually, it needs to be.  Political power is how a nation's interests are advanced.  This is especially important now where lines are being drawn between the West and the East, between freedom and authoritarianism.

Take a look at what is happening in the world.  China is using its population size and an export-oriented economy to become the biggest economy in Asia.  Russia is using its vast oil and natural gas reserves to become the biggest energy supplier to Eastern Europe.  Russia has always been a thugocracy dating all the way back to the czars, and just because they supposedly have democracy now it doesn't mean thugs aren't getting elected to major political offices (see: Vladimir Putin).  China is China, and always has been.  That means fiercely nationalistic, and its culture has the usual Asian tendency to obey those in authority.  Their economy may be capitalistic, but they still have a Soviet-style government, and one which has the usual tendency of Asian leaders to be arrogant bastards who think everyone is below them.

Do you really want Putin or someone like him to be leading a new Russian superpower?  How about a China puffed up with fanatical nationalism and eyes on Asia?  Those two things are going to happen, and someone is going to have to stand up to them, and tell them "No".  Europe can't do it, so America is going to have to, and it can't act as the guardian of freedom if it isn't a superpower.

How exactly is America going to stand up to China and Russia?  What do you propose that we do?  Bomb them?  Embargo them?  Throw rocks at them and call them dirty names?  So we don't want Putin or Medvedev as President...what are we going to do, assassinate them until the Russians elect someone we like?  So China is nationalistic...what are we going to do, burn every picture of Mao and every Chinese flag?

This is not pre-WWI or pre-WWII...this is the age of nuclear warfare where a conventional military can't just stop a new Nazi-Germany or new-Soviet Union in the making...our "political power" is based on a lot more than military power....we are a superpower because of our military, but being a military superpower is not going to get us everything we want...our economy, the amount of interdependence through trade, the political support we get from our allies...these are the things we need, not military power...

Before the invasion of Iraq, Turkey backed out and decided it would not let us conduct operations that used Turkey as a home-based...Turkey's decision prevented us from flanking Iraqi forces from the North-West...against a powerful enemy, Turkey's decision would have been absolutely devastating to our military success...we need friends, not military power, we need a stronger economy that ties nations together so that they avoid war at all costs because it would be economic suicide...

The era of power through respect is over...having nations respect and fear us isn't going to get us anywhere...having nations need us economically is what will protect freedom and democracy...

If China decides to invade South Korea, the only military option we really have is the nuclear option...if Iran launches nukes at another nation, the only military option we really have is the nuclear option...but, there are other choices that don't cause nuclear winters yet can be just as effective...

If China finds out America will not buy any more Chinese goods, then China is screwed, and it will back down...if Iran finds out it won't be able to export a single drop of oil, then its pitiful economy will be screwed even more, and it will back down...of course, those actions are contingent on the rest of the world also refusing to include China/Iran in the global economy, and the rest of the world isn't going to give a damn how many F-18s and Abram Tanks we have...we need influence that is not based on military power in order to spread our will...as of right now, the American economy is falling behind, and military expenditures are a huge crunch (1/6 of the whole budget)...every time America meddles and lands troops somewhere, more and more people get ticked at us and more nations become unwilling to cooperate with us...

I will repeat what I said earlier, just with a slight twist....if you are really concerned about the power of Russia or China, the solution is not to stand up to them....the solution is to make sure no one else stands with them, and that requires building friendships, not military power...

Nothing lasts forever, even mighty Rome and grand Britannia had their day, and both were laid low. A power may fall to outside interference (this includes outright conquer), may simply decay to its own decadence, collaps under its own weight, felled by its size, and splintered by success (logistics certainly contributed to Rome's demise).

That being said, I hope I am not around for America's, or that I will at least have found an alternative home by then.

What mustn't happen is for America to collapse. If this were to happen, economies would crash, countries would panic, and what better way to get resources when the world market is down than to take them by force. I see it in this way: If one country has too much power, it can't collapse, because if it does, there's a power vacuum.

Well yes it would cause economic chaos but the world is not going to go to nuclear hell because the US can't pay some of its loans. India, China, Russia and the EU, all big economic players and all armed with nukes. I'd like to believe they have sensible heads on their shoulders without US leadership

Unfortunately, it is highly unlikely any of those 'sensible heads' are in government.

No country can win per se a nuclear war...but if it came to that, America would be in the best position...ironically, having so many forces abroad would prevent a complete loss of American military power...America also does not have the population density of areas like Europe, India, or China...

America is less dependent on mass transportation and has a very high rate of civilian gun ownership compared to the other nuclear powers...this means that America could operate much better after a nuclear war than any other nuclear power...

America also is too integral to the global economy...coal, steel...pick any rock or metal other than gold and diamonds, and the US has probably got a lot of it...add on the fact that America is a major buyer of oil and cheap manufactured goods, and nations like China and India will quickly see that killing off America is pretty much economic suicide...

The saving grace of America is food...we produce more of it than any other nation, and radiation tends to be counterproductive towards growing crops...as much as some nations might hate us, nearly every corner of the globe would be much worse off if America collapsed...no nation, even an insane one, would consider trying to attack America...not only would America kick its ass, but the rest of the world would not like their #1 buyer of oil + cheap crap and #1 seller of food going out the wayside...

Other nations may hate us, they may want us out of their lands, they may want us to stop playing world police...but one minute of even half-conscious thought, and they most definitely will realize that destroying America ain't going to help anyone...

The exceptions to this rule are fanatics (which at best pretend to govern ie Taliban) or Kim Jon'il who is under China's thumb...

It also helps that America has more than enough nukes to blow the whole world to hell...and many of them are hidden around the globe in things called Trident submarines...no nation is going to nuke America, none whatsoever...

You do realize America actually has a fair amount of oil?  However, various prohibitions on drilling and exploitation put in place by the greenies mean our stashes in the shallow Gulf waters, Alaska, and off the Pacific coast might as well not exist.

I am aware of this...the US produces about 2/5 of the oil it consumes...but since it consumes far more than it produces, and there are many countries with much larger amounts of oil reserves, if the US were to simply "disappear", the global demand for oil would decrease much more than the global supply...any nation that isn't a major oil producer would benefit from the US being out of the oil market as oil prices would go down...of course, I'm sure OPEC wouldn't be too happy to have their #1 customer gone...

Yeah, we'll never be able to truly match our consumption, which is why trade is awesome.  However, we could help reduce our dependence on foreign oil by drilling our own.  For some reason, I'm not hearing any complaints by American environmentalists about Saudi Arabia and those other nations drilling in their pristine desert environments for oil.