pull down to refresh
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @Hamstr 10 May freebie \ on: Wars between countries with Fiat vs Bitcoin? bitcoin
This is a very interesting article!! And now you're my favorite to subscribe to posts.
To answer this. I somewhat disagree.
Fiat may have 2 trillion to use to spend on war efforts, but wars could still be won with fewer means. To translate that as an example, the Korean War was won by using half the force that the North had. Terrible and stupid war regardless. Imagine fighting a war with 2-3 more solders per solder on the opposing side. It is possible. And I know this is well over a year later, but I saw a post somewhere I forgot the site, darn me. That $500 Russian drones are bombing and wrecking havoc on 10million dollar armored tanks. I cannot say if this is source is true, but it was disturbing. Because it also said the Ukrainian solder that tried to flee the burning tank were shot while running out.
Thanks!
You make a good point. There have been wars throughout time where the underdogs won for various reasons. As in, one side is fighting for something - often religion, freedom, or some cause the soldiers believe was noble. And, I could see the money printer weakening citizen's resolve (causing a weakened army).
It'd be interesting to see if there have been any books or studies that tracked wars and how often the side with the least money won. Maybe money has much less to do with it then one would think.
reply
You know, what. I think you're on to something.
I think this study should be conducted regardless because if we look at Afghanistan/IRAQ war, the Taliban are the CLEAR winners while the USA pumped trillions in. Obviously, it would be considered anti-American, but I see this as something to be studied as something neutral to see its impact of how money(used in war for tools, planes, tanks guns etc) isn't the tool that should be used to resolve conflicts. Or even argue that money won't buy it even.
reply