Definitions
The textbook definition of socialism is "
Ownership of the means of production by government."
A poor definition, because it doesn't strike the major distinction between socialist and capitalist systems, and doesn't evoke the main problem with socialist systems. The main problem: they treat all humans as identical machines. Socialist systems can do this quite easily without claiming ownership of industry.
Nevertheless, people still use such definitions.
All right, so how would we define the American system under Sultan Bush?
"
Ownership of the means of production by governments of enemy nations that attacked us."
Does that count as socialism?
No, it counts as abject defeat and surrender.
Arabia started this war. We have never lifted a finger against Arabia; instead we are supinely allowing Arabia to buy our companies, highways, and properties. China has been running a warlike economic campaign against us for 20 years. We have done nothing to fight back; instead we are supinely allowing China to buy our defense contractors, ports, and highways.
Is there a similar example in history? Sure. Eastern Europe under Soviet occupation.