reply to post by Blanca Rose
I think that whether a war may be economically or politically attractive to a government is quite a complex issue.
For instance, poor, devastated by sanctions, and nearing the natural end of a leadership/vision, North Korea may find that a full scale war, or even a
staged set of actions followed by a pre-determined surrender or coup/transfer of leadership could be in their interests, as it could open up access to
vast sums in the form of foreign aid and rebuilding, very attractive for an elite that may be begining to smell weakness in their aging dictator -
they may hope to follow the Germany/Japan path to prosperity?
Now, the USA is a different matter, as you infer, I think some kinds of engagement could do nothing than accelerate the current economic decline -
perhaps another smallish scale debacle with a single nation, where the USA finds itself isolated or with a disproportionate share of the burden.
However, different kinds of engagement, with carefully chosen theatres, networks of adversaries and allies, probably implying larger scales, could
provide a game changing move for the USA, presenting all kinds of options such as: drafting, rationing, intervening in the progress of other competing
nations, obtaining 'treasure' in the form of foreign resources that would not be an option after the decline in economic terms....all kinds of
I am very worried that we are looking at a USA that may decide it is now under pressure to 'utilise' its military might/lead/prowess as some form of
desperate attempt/reaction to both its own decline and the rise in power of other nations.
If for example the USA economy carries on as is, there is a strong possibility that we could see a chain of significant negative steps for the economy
(bad data, increased deferrals, loss of default reserve currency status by the US dollar, riots as per Greece - but with firearms - etc...) within the
next year or so. In those circumstances choices will need to be made about military spending, as were done in Russia in the nineties, etc....
So therefore, you could argue that this may be the last year at which the US military may expect to have such a clear investment lead over other rival
powers...and be seen by other powers as having that 'strength'.
However, if a world-scale conflict were instigated, under ANY pretence (perhaps excepting a foreign troop invasion of the USA) I think the rest of
the world will see it as a desperate and rather selfish attempt by the USA to either stop it's own economic decline, or interfere with the recovery
and possibly ascendence of other nations....although the MSM and governments may not reflect that?
I think that China, India and also Russia/Brazil...? all of them could probably wait thi sone out and have shown some signs that they may attempt to
work around the USA decline. I think there are very few signs they would initiate a military offensive against the USA [edit: I don't see any
invasion on the cards, thinking more of challenging USA defended outopsts/obstacles such as Taiwan/China...], at least not whilst it is still so
strong, they would be best placed to wait, see a USA collapse, wait a few years and then make their moves. So I think all eyes are on the USA
(military) at the moment?
[edit on 29-7-2010 by curioustype]