Well, Ronnie, we've since had 9/11, which was the result of prior interventions, and then we had 20+ years of useless money-burning and life-destroying wars which just created more and more tyrants. Afghanistan gave us Osama bin Laden: destroying Iraq gave us ISIS. DC has the Midas touch: everything it touches abroad turns to crap. Time for the rest of the world to begin stepping up, because the American people as milk cow are died up and staggering toward death. We're paying a trillion dollars in interest per annum ALONE, let alone the actual debt. Europe should step up now because when DC goes bankrupt, it will be alone anyway.
So, Isolationism then? Historically that always works well. On the upside China and co will be pleased, but I'm a little old to start learning Mandarin. My niece speaks it though... Interesting times.....
Oh, on the *other* plus side... will that mean that the US will stop interfering with Democracies around the world too and actually let a countries people decide their OWN form of government even if they pick one that does not favour the US - even in South America? That'd be quite positive - and quite a change of direction!!
Non-interventionism is not "isolationism". That's been Wilsonian propaganda since 1916, as is waving around the corpse of poor Chamberlain. Arguably if DC had not gotten involved in WW1, there would have been a juster peace in western Europe, probably something close to status quo ante bellum. Not sure what would've happened in the east with the Bolsheviks.
At any rate, soon people's opinions won't matter: finances (and debt, more specifically) will dictate the future.
I don't think that America entering the war in 1917 had much impact on the outcome. Probably the thing it did do was to cause the German offensive in 1918 in the west in the hope to knock out France (or Britain) before the Americans *could* have an impact. But, its arguable that without that threat the Germans - now with their additional troops from the East - would've gone full defensive mode in the hope of a negotiated peace. But the Allies were planning a truly **massive** tank attack in 1919 which would've crushed the Germans and decisively ended the war in their favour. Not an armistice but a defeat for the Central Powers. So, no 'knife in the back', no myth of being 'undefeated' on the battlefield, maybe even no Nazis going forward? How that would have played out after the Wall Street Crash etc... is anyone's guess....
Your National Debt does look like its going to *balloon* in the next 4-10 years if plans go ahead as expected and various Nobel Prize winning economists are correct...
I can't see Germany going defensive when it has so many fresh troops relieved from duties in Russia. No America, I see.... spring offensive that hits Paris and we get a repeat of 1871. Alsace-Lorraine stays German, France pays reparations. No idea about terms for Britain and Belgian neutrality, though.
On the next four years, I have no idea. Problem is you've got Trump wanting to raise tariffs, which is bad for trade and econmic growth, but Musk and Ramaswamy want to radically reduce government spending (AFUERA!!). It's going to be interesting to see how protectionist and libertarian sensibilities bounce off each other in the next admin. Ramaswamy declares himself a 'national libertarian', which -- I don't know. That's a difficult spot to be in, and I say that because I'm in the same spot. Like, I GET why people resent free-trade ideology while at the same time believing it's inevitable in the long run. Import substitution is an consistent economic loser as far as I can tell.
Completely disagree on WW1. The 'fresh' troops were anything but - they'd been fighting on the Russian Front and then transported half-way across Europe, plus they'd already started suffering from the Spanish Flu (to say nothing of poor nutrition etc..
The failed Ludendorff Offensive of 1918 was a last desperate throw of the dice in the vain hope that they could overwhelm the Allies before the Americans gained their full expected strength. Although it did manage to retake hundreds of square miles of territory it never once broke through the French or British lines - not once. The Germans were exclusively a force of footsloggers with almost no air support. The Allies had recently perfected combined arms warfare and had *thousands* of tanks. When the offensive inevitably stalled the Germans had wasted all of their resources and had nothing left. Once the retreat started it never stopped until the Armistice in Nov 1918. It was impossible for them to win - with or without the Americans either in 1918 or, if they had held a reinforced defensive line, in 1919.
As to the NEXT 4 years etc.. I'm predicting 10 years of chaos. Not sure how much of Project 2025 will, or can, be implemented. I guess we'll see. Its going to be fought tooth & nail though so I expect lawyers will be coining it going forward. I do think though that a few will make LOTS of money and most will get shafted. How the disappointed MAGA crowd will react when things don't go anywhere near what they expected... Well, from past evidence, that's not going to go well.... It's going to be interesting to watch from a few thousand miles away though....
Project 2025 was created by another party and has no connection to Trump -- and he's not the sort of person who takes other people's policy platforms, at any rate.
We can agree to disagree on the western front. ;) Entente forces were equally wore out, and from my reading of the papers at that time there were SERIOUS concerns Germany would actually break through. The ones I've seen (via Newspapers.com) border on hysterical.
We'll certainly see history unfold in the US.... I might get some popcorn ready & invest in a lawn chair... [grin]
Oh, there certainly were *serious* concerns about a possible breakthrough! Panic even in some sectors. But the plan failed and resulted in, or at least accelerated, Germany's demise - not unlike the 1944 Ardennes offensive/Battle of the Bulge which was equally desperate, equally foolhardy and equally pointless.
Once again, don't believe the misinformation - which I know you probably don't, but it is always worth repeating. Some of trump's nominations are literal authors of Project 2025.
11 comments:
Well, Ronnie, we've since had 9/11, which was the result of prior interventions, and then we had 20+ years of useless money-burning and life-destroying wars which just created more and more tyrants.
Afghanistan gave us Osama bin Laden: destroying Iraq gave us ISIS. DC has the Midas touch: everything it touches abroad turns to crap. Time for the rest of the world to begin stepping up, because the American people as milk cow are died up and staggering toward death. We're paying a trillion dollars in interest per annum ALONE, let alone the actual debt. Europe should step up now because when DC goes bankrupt, it will be alone anyway.
So, Isolationism then? Historically that always works well. On the upside China and co will be pleased, but I'm a little old to start learning Mandarin. My niece speaks it though... Interesting times.....
Oh, on the *other* plus side... will that mean that the US will stop interfering with Democracies around the world too and actually let a countries people decide their OWN form of government even if they pick one that does not favour the US - even in South America? That'd be quite positive - and quite a change of direction!!
Non-interventionism is not "isolationism". That's been Wilsonian propaganda since 1916, as is waving around the corpse of poor Chamberlain. Arguably if DC had not gotten involved in WW1, there would have been a juster peace in western Europe, probably something close to status quo ante bellum. Not sure what would've happened in the east with the Bolsheviks.
At any rate, soon people's opinions won't matter: finances (and debt, more specifically) will dictate the future.
I don't think that America entering the war in 1917 had much impact on the outcome. Probably the thing it did do was to cause the German offensive in 1918 in the west in the hope to knock out France (or Britain) before the Americans *could* have an impact. But, its arguable that without that threat the Germans - now with their additional troops from the East - would've gone full defensive mode in the hope of a negotiated peace. But the Allies were planning a truly **massive** tank attack in 1919 which would've crushed the Germans and decisively ended the war in their favour. Not an armistice but a defeat for the Central Powers. So, no 'knife in the back', no myth of being 'undefeated' on the battlefield, maybe even no Nazis going forward? How that would have played out after the Wall Street Crash etc... is anyone's guess....
Your National Debt does look like its going to *balloon* in the next 4-10 years if plans go ahead as expected and various Nobel Prize winning economists are correct...
I can't see Germany going defensive when it has so many fresh troops relieved from duties in Russia. No America, I see.... spring offensive that hits Paris and we get a repeat of 1871. Alsace-Lorraine stays German, France pays reparations. No idea about terms for Britain and Belgian neutrality, though.
On the next four years, I have no idea. Problem is you've got Trump wanting to raise tariffs, which is bad for trade and econmic growth, but Musk and Ramaswamy want to radically reduce government spending (AFUERA!!). It's going to be interesting to see how protectionist and libertarian sensibilities bounce off each other in the next admin. Ramaswamy declares himself a 'national libertarian', which -- I don't know. That's a difficult spot to be in, and I say that because I'm in the same spot. Like, I GET why people resent free-trade ideology while at the same time believing it's inevitable in the long run. Import substitution is an consistent economic loser as far as I can tell.
Completely disagree on WW1. The 'fresh' troops were anything but - they'd been fighting on the Russian Front and then transported half-way across Europe, plus they'd already started suffering from the Spanish Flu (to say nothing of poor nutrition etc..
The failed Ludendorff Offensive of 1918 was a last desperate throw of the dice in the vain hope that they could overwhelm the Allies before the Americans gained their full expected strength. Although it did manage to retake hundreds of square miles of territory it never once broke through the French or British lines - not once. The Germans were exclusively a force of footsloggers with almost no air support. The Allies had recently perfected combined arms warfare and had *thousands* of tanks. When the offensive inevitably stalled the Germans had wasted all of their resources and had nothing left. Once the retreat started it never stopped until the Armistice in Nov 1918. It was impossible for them to win - with or without the Americans either in 1918 or, if they had held a reinforced defensive line, in 1919.
As to the NEXT 4 years etc.. I'm predicting 10 years of chaos. Not sure how much of Project 2025 will, or can, be implemented. I guess we'll see. Its going to be fought tooth & nail though so I expect lawyers will be coining it going forward. I do think though that a few will make LOTS of money and most will get shafted. How the disappointed MAGA crowd will react when things don't go anywhere near what they expected... Well, from past evidence, that's not going to go well.... It's going to be interesting to watch from a few thousand miles away though....
Project 2025 was created by another party and has no connection to Trump -- and he's not the sort of person who takes other people's policy platforms, at any rate.
We can agree to disagree on the western front. ;) Entente forces were equally wore out, and from my reading of the papers at that time there were SERIOUS concerns Germany would actually break through. The ones I've seen (via Newspapers.com) border on hysterical.
We'll certainly see history unfold in the US.... I might get some popcorn ready & invest in a lawn chair... [grin]
Oh, there certainly were *serious* concerns about a possible breakthrough! Panic even in some sectors. But the plan failed and resulted in, or at least accelerated, Germany's demise - not unlike the 1944 Ardennes offensive/Battle of the Bulge which was equally desperate, equally foolhardy and equally pointless.
I have a few books coming up on both subjects.
Well, here's hoping. He's just appointed a neocon as Sec State, though, so some things will be swamp-state-same-ol-same-ol.
Once again, don't believe the misinformation - which I know you probably don't, but it is always worth repeating. Some of trump's nominations are literal authors of Project 2025.
Yup - FULLY aware, or at least as much as I can be from watching YouTube clips... [lol]
Post a Comment