Subj : Russia's Defeat
To : Arelor
From : Kaelon
Date : Tue Aug 01 2023 11:00 am
Re: Russia's Defeat
By: Arelor to Kaelon on Mon Jul 31 2023 05:46 pm
> By the way, I dare say that the existence of the European Union has pacified
> the Eurozone more than, say, the existence of NATO, by virtuoe of a known
> phenomenom: people who trade among each other is much less likely to start
> stabbing each other deliberatedly, because they make more profits from
> trading.
There's no doubt that strong trading ties are a deterrent to war, but by no means are they a guarantee against it. Remember that the Weimar Republic / the Third Reich was linked to global trade networks, and the German Empire before it, but both had strong financial incentives to go their own ways.
Similarly, Russia may have made a financially catastrophic miscalculation in invading Ukraine since it lost access to not only the planet's financial systems, but also to the only major loopholes (Swiss banks). It now relies extensively upon criminal networks and cryptocurrency to survive, but it has achieved / restored economic self-sufficiency relatively quickly. The lesson here is that the financial incentive to avoid war only lasts so long as there isn't an overriding geopolitical incentive.
> On the other hand, despite all the cool advertisements on the
> contrary, it is quite clear that NATO is mostly the US sending soldiers to
> fight and die while the population of the other NATO members scream bloody
> murder because America is an imperialist power that must be destroyed, and
> their respective governments hold Uncle Sam's coat in the process. I dare
> say the push to stop contributing to the NATO in Spain is stronger than any
> Far-Right imaginary threat.
The brilliance behind both NATO and the United States' hyperpower strategy, by and large, is that it has created a largely irreversible global financial system that guarantees the United States' centrality. Europe has largely abandoned the expensive raising and financing of armies in favor of much smaller token and policing forces and a much vaster social safety net. This has the net effect of generally ensuring the United States is responsible for Europe's security, and Europe is on the hook for driving revenue across the U.S. system.
Another key element of how the system works can be traced back to the Marshall Plan that largely rebuilt Europe and the earliest foundations of the EEC and the EU. Deficit spending, for the United States, is always profitable because it is in the form of defense and trade guarantees that are directed back to U.S. global industries that drive innovation and security. For every $1 of deficit spending in the United States, there is around $9 generated in net-new revenue for U.S. coffers in the form of trade. Countries that do not play by these rules - and there are many in Asia where this has become an issue - find themselves quickly losing investment from the United States.
> I don't think this is the foundation of a strong alliance. It is an alliance
> that may hold together but it is feebler than it seems. One of the reasons
> why Trump gathered support was that he dennounced (and rightly so) that
> American soldiers were coming back in plastic bags while everybody else sat
> on their fatasses criticising. I have family in the Spanish army, and I have
> been told that, when they were deployed in the MIddle East, one of the
> directives they got
> was to call for the Americans if anything happened.
NATO works because the world funds its collective security and the United States leads it. For the European Union, or individual European states, to actually spend on their own defense, would absolutely wreck their economies and their social safety nets, which are already unsustainable due to the demographic crises most European countries face (chief of which is the sub-replacement birthrates). I see it remaining impenetrably strong because it has essentially created a symbiotic relationship (to put it diplomatically) whereupon much of the world has become client-states to the United States' geopolitical stewardship.
It isn't a bad deal, so long as the United States maintains its end of the bargain and the rules-based liberal world order continues to create predictability so that economies can scale. But it would be a mistake to think of NATO as a purely defensive alliance. It is a global order that has a vast economic interdependent engine that fuels the American military-industrial complex.
And that's exactly how everyone likes it.
_____
-=: Kaelon :=-
---
� Synchronet � Vertrauen � Home of Synchronet � [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net
