NationStates

Ethel mermania wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:No it won’t. The US debt is held primarily by Americans. The debt means nothing to us

China owns a trillion dollars in us debt. Interestingly enough japan has 1.3 trillion

And we can just selectively default on that debt. Besides trade with the US is more important to the PRC than Russia.

Japan is sanctioning Russia and has a major territorial dispute with Russia anyways. So no need to worry about that.

Stratocratic-Anarchy Oceanic Empire wrote:

Shekelesh wrote:Ukrainian special forces apparently captured the invasion plans and goals. Apparently Putin wants to create two Ukraines ala West and East Germany.

If this is true, then bruh. Putin is a madman.

didn't already know that

Ethel mermania wrote:

Stratocratic-Anarchy Oceanic Empire wrote:
If this is true, then bruh. Putin is a madman.

Why?

He's a madman for invading Ukraine in the first place.

However, the "Two Ukraines" goal is classic Putin's foreign policy bucket list.

Ethel mermania wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:No it won’t. The US debt is held primarily by Americans. The debt means nothing to us

China owns a trillion dollars in us debt. Interestingly enough japan has 1.3 trillion

Oh so Japan is now the largest foreign holder interesting. Anyway some 15 trillion is held by Americans

Thermodolia wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Not so much. There is a saying if you owe the bank 10k you are screwed. If you owe the bank 1,000,000 the bank is screwed. We can and in that case should selectively declare the money we owe the PRC is void.

Besides most the debt is actually held by the federal reserve. Yes it basically lends money to itself. Which makes it basically illusory. It is writing yourself an IOU.

Besides the US is always going to be the preferable market over Russia.
3 US states EACH have economies bigger than the entirety of Russia.
Let them choose.

Also most of that debt is held by the American people and not China. China is only the largest foreign holder and they don’t hold that much overall

Right. And we can just tell the PRC to suck it if the choose Russia over trade with us anyways. Selective default is quite a useful tool.

Ethel mermania wrote:

Stratocratic-Anarchy Oceanic Empire wrote:
If this is true, then bruh. Putin is a madman.

Why?

Look at North and South Korea. Look at how East and West Germany were. By dividing Ukraine in two it's basically a start-up of another Iron Curtain in Europe.

Stratocratic-Anarchy Oceanic Empire wrote:

Shekelesh wrote:Ukrainian special forces apparently captured the invasion plans and goals. Apparently Putin wants to create two Ukraines ala West and East Germany.

If this is true, then bruh. Putin is a madman.

That’s probably the most predictable outcome for what would Russia do if they win.

Stratocratic-Anarchy Oceanic Empire wrote:

Ethel mermania wrote:Why?

Look at North and South Korea. Look at how East and West Germany were. By dividing Ukraine in two it's basically a start-up of another Iron Curtain in Europe.

Which is exactly what Putin wants. So it is likely Putin’s goal.

Kasase wrote:support the invasion of Ukraine, the annexation of belarus, and the fall of the west

getting someone to respond angrily to me speedrun

Well, you certainly speedrun a *** warning for trolling *** as you so neatly stated your intentions for us.

Balheim wrote:Two Ukraines makes sense. One for LPR/DPR puppetry, the other for non-LPR/DPR puppetry.

Traitors who support oppression and suffering are the last kind of people who deserve their own country. Sherman would be displeased.

Diarcesia wrote:

Ethel mermania wrote:Why?

He's a madman for invading Ukraine in the first place.

However, the "Two Ukraines" goal is classic Putin's foreign policy bucket list.

pov Reagans brain in 2058 talking through a machine:

Supreme Chancellor Putin, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Almighty Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Putin, open this star-gate!

Shekelesh wrote:

Novus America wrote:
The other alternative to consider is leaving the UN.

I see no reason not to. If Russia and China want to destroy the current world order so much then by all means let us leave the UN and let the chips fall.

I think it should be on the table. Why chain ourselves to a corpse? We could and should create an alternative from which Russia and the PRC would be excluded.
The UN really does nothing but enable dictatorships anyways.

Maybe time to let it die like the League of Nations.

El Lazaro wrote:

Balheim wrote:Two Ukraines makes sense. One for LPR/DPR puppetry, the other for non-LPR/DPR puppetry.

Traitors who support oppression and suffering are the last kind of people who deserve their own country. Sherman would be displeased.

Letting you know I meant what I said negatively. I just don't know if you're saying I'm a traitor lol. tbh I could have worded my post better

Spokesland wrote:

Diarcesia wrote:He's a madman for invading Ukraine in the first place.

However, the "Two Ukraines" goal is classic Putin's foreign policy bucket list.

pov Reagans brain in 2058 talking through a machine:

Supreme Chancellor Putin, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Almighty Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Putin, open this star-gate!

These feels like a fever dream vaguely based on a Futurama episode.

Balheim wrote:

El Lazaro wrote:Traitors who support oppression and suffering are the last kind of people who deserve their own country. Sherman would be displeased.

Letting you know I meant what I said negatively. I just don't know if you're saying I'm a traitor lol. tbh I could have worded my post better

I mean the separatists in Donbas, I’m assuming you aren’t a combatant in an active war zone.

If the US does choose to selectively default on that portion of its national debt which is held by a rival great power, honestly I think we should be aligning our economy closer to the Chinese market - it’s just as big nowadays, after all.

The main reason why we haven’t already is because China is run by a bunch of psychotic national-chauvinists who are willing to play political games with economic institutions to force other interests into line, and, well, if the US defaults on its debt to China then that is exactly the description which will also apply to the US government, is it not?

El Lazaro wrote:

Balheim wrote:Two Ukraines makes sense. One for LPR/DPR puppetry, the other for non-LPR/DPR puppetry.

Traitors who support oppression and suffering are the last kind of people who deserve their own country. Sherman would be displeased.

George III would be pleased, on the other hand.

El Lazaro wrote:

Balheim wrote:
Letting you know I meant what I said negatively. I just don't know if you're saying I'm a traitor lol. tbh I could have worded my post better

I mean the separatists in Donbas, I’m assuming you aren’t a combatant in an active war zone.

You'd be correct in that assumption.

Balheim wrote:

El Lazaro wrote:Traitors who support oppression and suffering are the last kind of people who deserve their own country. Sherman would be displeased.

Letting you know I meant what I said negatively. I just don't know if you're saying I'm a traitor lol. tbh I could have worded my post better

also it won't be "people who deserve a country" in terms of East Ukraine, more like "a very small clique who illegally subjugates a hostile population that don't want them, propped by Russian military".

Malaiya Union wrote:

Balheim wrote:
Letting you know I meant what I said negatively. I just don't know if you're saying I'm a traitor lol. tbh I could have worded my post better

also it won't be "people who deserve a country" in terms of East Ukraine, more like "a very small clique who illegally subjugates a hostile population that don't want them, propped by Russian military".

Chances of a West Ukraine joining Poland?

Has anyone got an update on the Chernobyl - Kyiv route (PO2)? That's the shortest road to the heart of Ukraine.

Novus America wrote:

Shekelesh wrote:I see no reason not to. If Russia and China want to destroy the current world order so much then by all means let us leave the UN and let the chips fall.

I think it should be on the table. Why chain ourselves to a corpse? We could and should create an alternative from which Russia and the PRC would be excluded.
The UN really does nothing but enable dictatorships anyways.

Maybe time to let it die like the League of Nations.

Besides it’s not the UN that has kept the peace but nukes

Northern Socialist Council Republics wrote:If the US does choose to selectively default on that portion of its national debt which is held by a rival great power, honestly I think we should be aligning our economy closer to the Chinese market - it’s just as big nowadays, after all.

The main reason why we haven’t already is because China is run by a bunch of psychotic national-chauvinists who are willing to play political games with economic institutions to force other interests into line, and, well, if the US defaults on its debt to China then that is exactly the description which will also apply to the US government, is it not?

Why is neoliberal trade an absolute good, or even good at all?
It is much more than that. It is because the PRC is trying to build a world order of authoritarian oppression. The US is not, or not as much. The US would still be the lesser evil at worst.

You cannot expect the US to keep playing by rules the PRC and Russia already destroyed.

Economics IS politics. I never understood why so many in Germany and Korea think you can separate the two.
You cannot. Never can. Never will.

Diarcesia wrote:

Malaiya Union wrote:also it won't be "people who deserve a country" in terms of East Ukraine, more like "a very small clique who illegally subjugates a hostile population that don't want them, propped by Russian military".

Chances of a West Ukraine joining Poland?

Zero?

Why would they?