Jump to content

The future of NATO post Afghanistan disaster.


17thfabn

Recommended Posts

The thing with deadlocks is, they appear immutable and then change quickly and drastically, but it's impossible to predict when it happens. You recognize the forces behind the shift only in the rearview mirror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

21 hours ago, sunday said:

Germany used the transition to the Euro as European currency to put herself as dominant economy, doing a not-so-stealth devaluationĀ of the Deutsche Mark.

I think you are missing cause and effect. As BansheeOne pointed out, Germany joining the Euro was a condition by the French for German reunification and was meant to limit the economic power of Germany. Italy or Spain were also very eager for Germany to join, because it meant that they could borrow money at much lower interest rates than before. But it also meant the Germany could devaluate their currency and thus become more competitive as an export nation, while not feeling the devaluation for imports from within the Euro zone. So, yes it was a big advantage for Germany, but hardly one Germany organised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, yes, the perfidious countries of the rest of Europe wanted Germany to enter the Euro with a devaluated currency.
Ā 

Anyway, that happened, and the expansiveĀ European monetary policy to bring Germany up during the not so good Schrƶder government, that brought the reheat of other economies of the Euro zone,Ā also happened, even if you do not realize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sunday said:

Oh, yes, the perfidious countries of the rest of Europe wanted Germany to enter the Euro with a devaluated currency.
Ā 

Anyway, that happened, and the expansiveĀ European monetary policy to bring Germany up during the not so good Schrƶder government, that brought the reheat of other economies of the Euro zone,Ā also happened, even if you do not realize.

Well, the Euro is a symptom of the underlying problem, which is different tax systems. Had they converged at the same time, much pain would have been avoided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, RETAC21 said:

Well, the Euro is a symptom of the underlying problem, which is different tax systems. Had they converged at the same time, much pain would have been avoided.

It could have been helped that convergence of tax systems would not automatically imply a generalized raise of taxes.

But perhaps there are more differences between national economies apart from tax systems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sunday said:

It could have been helped that convergence of tax systems would not automatically imply a generalized raise of taxes.

But perhaps there are more differences between national economies apart from tax systems.

There are but once you make a level playing field, other factors come into play to improve efficiency or else. Luxemboug didn't have ny factors other than taxes to become the place were funds are managed in Yurrop, but now they have attained economies of scale because lax taxation allowed them to attract banks, for example.

The downside is that the old way of doing things goes out of the window, generating rust belts where people are adamant against change, but even this process is unavoidable mid-term, just by market pressure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Around here, a major driver of industrial decline after EC membership were bigoted labor unions, so many business owners preferred to sell the business to some foreign corporation, and look for other ways to make money that made them something else than "pig capitalists class enemies". Of course, the foreign corporation in question usually kept the market share, but producing the goods in, for instance, its home country, and closed the factories.

Then there is the particularly suicidal Spanish energy policy.

Edited by sunday
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RETAC21 said:

There are but once you make a level playing field, other factors come into play to improve efficiency or else.

Agree. Understanding thisĀ is how nations and corporations make itĀ to (and at)Ā the first-world level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/7/2021 at 1:22 AM, KV7 said:

NATO is a way for Europeans to remain locked into and subsidising US hegemony. Many Europeans like this, for reasons I have discussed elsewhere.

One thing they like is the theatrics of some wars to defend liberal fundamentalism, but they can get that without having sizable capabilities. E.g. they can send 100 special forces to Afghanistan, maybe fund a school somewhere, and this is enough to keep the PR operation going. The US obviously would like more than that.

The additional problem for the US now is that the PR exercises are not so compelling anymore, though even earlier Afghanistan and Iraq were contentious domestically.

And so we may well in the future see sizable European expenditures and capabilities, but I suspect they are going to increasingly be there for European geopolitical ends. The major plausible driver of this is German concerns for 'stabilising' it's periphery. But a European army under effective German control would be a defeat for the US, as it would be another step towards a multi-polar world and away from US hegemony.

Ā 

I agree with this post in the sense that (like you said)Ā a lot of USAians donā€™t really understand that our reasons for dominating NATO were largely out of self interest. We couldĀ Ā afford the investment and it made us able to call the shots, it wasnā€™t like we were naive about it.Ā 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, sunday said:

Oh, yes, the perfidious countries of the rest of Europe wanted Germany to enter the Euro with a devaluated currency.
Ā 

Anyway, that happened, and the expansiveĀ European monetary policy to bring Germany up during the not so good Schrƶder government, that brought the reheat of other economies of the Euro zone,Ā also happened, even if you do not realize.

How do you come to the conclusion that the Schrƶder government was not good? In fact they made the necessary adjustments to the social security systems, that Germany still benefits from today. Although the SPD still hates themselves for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, seahawk said:

How do you come to the conclusion that the Schrƶder government was not good? In fact they made the necessary adjustments to the social security systems, that Germany still benefits from today. Although the SPD still hates themselves for it.

During the Schrƶder government the Spanish economy was in a better state than Germany's. That should be enough to arrive at a conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point here is the European Central Bank taking policy decisions to favor Germany, in spite of negative effects in other Euro economies.

How Germany arrived to that poor economic state is not relevant in this discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, sunday said:

The point here is the European Central Bank taking policy decisions to favor Germany, in spite of negative effects in other Euro economies.

How Germany arrived to that poor economic state is not relevant in this discussion.

Well, but that is not something Germany could control on its own - is it? If the PIGS did not leave the shackles of the Euro, it is their fault. The UK showed the benefits of becoming sovereign again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Well, but that is not something Germany could control on its own - is it? If the PIGS did not leave the shackles of the Euro, it is their fault. The UK showed the benefits of becoming sovereign again.

Well, one could not leave the EU in one day, and that was the first time a clearly asymmetric monetary policy was implemented.

Of course, if Germany feels so bad about NATO, you could leave also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Well, but that is not something Germany could control on its own - is it? If the PIGS did not leave the shackles of the Euro, it is their fault. The UK showed the benefits of becoming sovereign again.

The Euro is not necessarily evil, the states had sufficient tools to avoid the bubbles, first by controlling their expenditure, second by restricting credit through banking controls (and Spanish private banks didn't collapse precisely becuase the central bank was inflexible in demanding provisions), but free credit fueling a building bubble that reduces unemployment and makes everyone feel rich... which politician can not like that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, sunday said:

Well, one could not leave the EU in one day, and that was the first time a clearly asymmetric monetary policy was implemented.

Of course, if Germany feels so bad about NATO, you could leave also.

Why should Germany feel bad about NATO, it provides security for very little German contribution and even a place to tell others what to do. Germany is a useless country, it would be great if others would see this and act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...