…in an effort to balance its budget stopped all overseas aid and disbursements to organisations what might the result be? And take it as read they would also refuse to send in military. Basically an isolationist America.
AwesomeO said:
…in an effort to balance its budget stopped all overseas aid and disbursements to organisations what might the result be? And take it as read they would also refuse to send in military. Basically an isolationist America.
We’d all be rooned!
sibeen said:
AwesomeO said:
…in an effort to balance its budget stopped all overseas aid and disbursements to organisations what might the result be? And take it as read they would also refuse to send in military. Basically an isolationist America.
We’d all be rooned!
I cannot understand why they do not do it. They get no thanks. Hell if I was a president elect I would be proposing an isolationist America and tallying up all the cuts to aid.
AwesomeO said:
…in an effort to balance its budget stopped all overseas aid and disbursements to organisations what might the result be? And take it as read they would also refuse to send in military. Basically an isolationist America.
Unless the US military was to withdraw from all its international operations, I think there would be little difference between what influence the US has now.
Witty Rejoinder said:
AwesomeO said:
…in an effort to balance its budget stopped all overseas aid and disbursements to organisations what might the result be? And take it as read they would also refuse to send in military. Basically an isolationist America.
Unless the US military was to withdraw from all its international operations, I think there would be little difference between what influence the US has now.
Indeed this action would reduce its influence. Intentionally. Now what do you think the results might be.
AwesomeO said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
AwesomeO said:
…in an effort to balance its budget stopped all overseas aid and disbursements to organisations what might the result be? And take it as read they would also refuse to send in military. Basically an isolationist America.
Unless the US military was to withdraw from all its international operations, I think there would be little difference between what influence the US has now.
Indeed this action would reduce its influence. Intentionally. Now what do you think the results might be.
Hell in a hand basket, and quite rapidly.
AwesomeO said:
Indeed this action would reduce its influence. Intentionally. Now what do you think the results might be.
Witty Rejoinder said:
AwesomeO said:Indeed this action would reduce its influence. Intentionally. Now what do you think the results might be.
I think the EU would take on a greater role in international affairs.
I doubt it. But this is a subject of hypotheticals so build your case. Me I reckon they are struggling for a dollar anyway and removing the American dollar will reduce them further.
sibeen said:
Hell in a hand basket, and quite rapidly.
I dunno. I can see foreign countries expanding their spheres of influence but I don’t foresee a return to mass conflict as was experienced in both world wars
AwesomeO said:
I doubt it. But this is a subject of hypotheticals so build your case. Me I reckon they are struggling for a dollar anyway and removing the American dollar will reduce them further.
Who are you saying is struggling?
Witty Rejoinder said:
AwesomeO said:Indeed this action would reduce its influence. Intentionally. Now what do you think the results might be.
I think the EU would take on a greater role in international affairs.
The first major flashpoint would be Israel…quell surprise.
Do you really think that the EU would go into bat to support them if the eagles were circling?
Within a year of the USA going batshit crazy and withdrawing from the world I suspect Israel would no longer exist, and there would be quite a few glowing craters where major middle eastern cities used to be.
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:Hell in a hand basket, and quite rapidly.
I dunno. I can see foreign countries expanding their spheres of influence but I don’t foresee a return to mass conflict as was experienced in both world wars
Well Israel would be gone in a year and most of the worlds marginal nations will be in anarchy and led by warlords. Middle East would be even more of a shitfight than it currently is.
America would be safe though and could spend funds on building a better border with Mexico.
AwesomeO said:
Well Israel would be gone in a year
Says who?
:)
Witty Rejoinder said:
AwesomeO said:I doubt it. But this is a subject of hypotheticals so build your case. Me I reckon they are struggling for a dollar anyway and removing the American dollar will reduce them further.
Who are you saying is struggling?
Everyone except for Germany. Europe is not in goof financial shape.
You two are a lot more pessimistic about post US affairs than I am. For one I think Israel can look after itself and I still think the EU will find itself compelled to take on a greater role in global affairs.
It must be remembered that neither the UK or the USA envisioned their greater role in world affairs before they found themselves as a global hegemon during the 19th and 20th centuries respectively
Would China challenge Japan and South Korea?
AwesomeO said:
Everyone except for Germany. Europe is not in goof financial shape.
The EU is in no worse shape than the US. It won’t take long for the EU nations to be back on their feet. I may be wrong but I think the US budget deficit is comparable to whatever budget crisis European nations are suffering. Spain and Greece are very small parts of the European economy.
party_pants said:
Would China challenge Japan and South Korea?
Why not. Who would stop them?
Taiwan would find themselves a suzerainty quick smart.
party_pants said:
Would China challenge Japan and South Korea?
One yes, both…no. I suspect that SK and Japan would very, very quickly become best of mates. Throw into the mix Vietnam, The Philippines, and India, and you’ve got China rooted. China would then over a few years split up.
sibeen said:
party_pants said:
Would China challenge Japan and South Korea?
One yes, both…no. I suspect that SK and Japan would very, very quickly become best of mates. Throw into the mix Vietnam, The Philippines, and India, and you’ve got China rooted. China would then over a few years split up.
OK, I’ll prevaricate that on the fact that North Korea doesn’t immediately go for the madman option. If NK goes postal on SK, then anything could happen. Although I do believe most of the medium level players would gang up to restrict China. I also suspect that China would quickly fragment.
AwesomeO said:
Taiwan would find themselves a suzerainty quick smart.
pity, they’ve got such lovely trains.
AwesomeO said:
Taiwan would find themselves a suzerainty quick smart.
You started this thread just so you could use the word “suzerainty”, didn’t you!
I think the one certain outcome of US isolationism would be an unrestrained China.
sibeen said:
party_pants said:
Would China challenge Japan and South Korea?
One yes, both…no. I suspect that SK and Japan would very, very quickly become best of mates. Throw into the mix Vietnam, The Philippines, and India, and you’ve got China rooted. China would then over a few years split up.
Yeah expect china to break up as well, I don’t reckon its empire is sustainable. Plus it is looking down the barrel of some awful population demographics due to its one child policy. I predict china in 20 years will be a basket case.
It is not that rich in resources, it is a an empire and presiding over unhappy people, and the only resource it has which is young intelligent people will soon be employed looking after the old.
China has long lived geriatrics and is heading into the mother of all unbalanced demographics.
sibeen said:
sibeen said:One yes, both…no. I suspect that SK and Japan would very, very quickly become best of mates. Throw into the mix Vietnam, The Philippines, and India, and you’ve got China rooted. China would then over a few years split up.
OK, I’ll prevaricate that on the fact that North Korea doesn’t immediately go for the madman option. If NK goes postal on SK, then anything could happen. Although I do believe most of the medium level players would gang up to restrict China. I also suspect that China would quickly fragment.
I can’t see China splitting up. China is a very homogeneous country. India on the other hand…
Witty Rejoinder said:
I can’t see China splitting up. China is a very homogeneous country. India on the other hand…
Witty, I’d see the ‘balkanisation’ of many of the world’s largest countries. Chinese Generals (warlords) would be the major issue for that country.
As for homogeneous, the southern part of the country can’t even converse with the north.
sibeen said:
AwesomeO said:Taiwan would find themselves a suzerainty quick smart.
You started this thread just so you could use the word “suzerainty”, didn’t you!
No, but I do feel a bit smartarse. It comes up a lot if you read lots of history.
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:I can’t see China splitting up. China is a very homogeneous country. India on the other hand…
Witty, I’d see the ‘balkanisation’ of many of the world’s largest countries. Chinese Generals (warlords) would be the major issue for that country.
As for homogeneous, the southern part of the country can’t even converse with the north.
The south may have a different mother tongue but all education is taught in Mandarin.
And as for the Balkanisation of China, what role does the US now play that prevents this happening right now?
Witty Rejoinder said:
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:I can’t see China splitting up. China is a very homogeneous country. India on the other hand…
Witty, I’d see the ‘balkanisation’ of many of the world’s largest countries. Chinese Generals (warlords) would be the major issue for that country.
As for homogeneous, the southern part of the country can’t even converse with the north.
The south may have a different mother tongue but all education is taught in Mandarin.
And as for the Balkanisation of China, what role does the US now play that prevents this happening right now?
They could save some shekels in not providing China with 65 million a year. I know its chicken feed.y feed but it all adds up. And to my mind a nuclear powder getting intro space needs no foreign aid.
Witty Rejoinder said:
And as for the Balkanisation of China, what role does the US now play that prevents this happening right now?
External and internal influences.
It already borders some of the most fractious countries in the world, and especially up around its north western provinces isn’t exactly the most conducive to internal stability. The Stans would probably kick it off, and the southern regions would be telling the north to shove your problems. Qucickly break down as the mayors of Shanghai, Hong Kong etc decide not to play ball with the central government.
How the fuck do I disable this piece of crap autocorrect. It is frigging hopeless.
AwesomeO said:
How the fuck do I disable this piece of crap autocorrect. It is frigging hopeless.
I was just about to check my ipud to show you how to do it. The sprogs have been at it and it’s completely flat.
AwesomeO said:
How the fuck do I disable this piece of crap autocorrect. It is frigging hopeless.
You gotta go the Bear Gryll rehydration technique, and then send the photo to Apple for them to unlock it.
party_pants said:
AwesomeO said:
How the fuck do I disable this piece of crap autocorrect. It is frigging hopeless.
You gotta go the Bear Gryll rehydration technique, and then send the photo to Apple for them to unlock it.
Nah
ignore, ignoreAwesomeO said:
…in an effort to balance its budget stopped all overseas aid and disbursements to organisations what might the result be? And take it as read they would also refuse to send in military. Basically an isolationist America.
the idea of the wars and “aid” is to give big profits to the people running America, billions of dollars just went missing in Iraq, people like cheney made millions from the companies that they chose to sub contract the war out to as they had substantial interest in those companies
the tax payer pays for the wars and “aid” (like 500 million “aid” to various terrorist/ jihadi groups in Syria) and the people giving the aid indirectly earn money from it – no aid, no profit for the people at the top.
sibeen said:
Witty Rejoinder said:
AwesomeO said:Indeed this action would reduce its influence. Intentionally. Now what do you think the results might be.
I think the EU would take on a greater role in international affairs.
The first major flashpoint would be Israel…quell surprise.
Do you really think that the EU would go into bat to support them if the eagles were circling?
Within a year of the USA going batshit crazy and withdrawing from the world I suspect Israel would no longer exist, and there would be quite a few glowing craters where major middle eastern cities used to be.
Israel wouldn’t use nuclear weapons on lands promised to them in the old testament
all the land from the nile to the Euphrates was given to them by Jehovah – this area would be a major umbrella against nuclear attack thanks to the old testament.
chemical weapons would most likely be used by Israel against major cities in the middle east to clear the land for new settlers
that was the great mistake of Syria to give up its ace card – giving up chemical weapons or any advantage only makes them weaker
saddam gave up what he had and was attacked immediately
Syria gave up their weapons and now face 500 million dollars aid from America , plus all the weapons given to ISIL in Iraq
Israel is now waiting for the warring parties to exhaust themselves so they can capture more land for Jehovah when they choose to go to war.
sibeen said:
Within a year of the USA going batshit crazy and withdrawing from the world I suspect Israel would no longer exist, and there would be quite a few glowing craters where major middle eastern cities used to be.
You almost make it sound like a bad thing.
AwesomeO said:
…in an effort to balance its budget stopped all overseas aid and disbursements to organisations what might the result be? And take it as read they would also refuse to send in military. Basically an isolationist America.
What proportion of the US’s economy goes to overseas aid?
I think the world gets value for money from the US, on the other hand I doubt we get value for money from the UN.
No blue helmets around much these days, the UN and the EU parliament are probably the two largest troughs ever invented.
Peak Warming Man said:
I think the world gets value for money from the US, on the other hand I doubt we get value for money from the UN.
No blue helmets around much these days, the UN and the EU parliament are probably the two largest troughs ever invented.