tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post2088460676547792151..comments2024-03-27T03:19:11.216-04:00Comments on Assistant Village Idiot: Tea Party Foreign PolicyAssistant Village Idiothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-5479142708041032032010-09-27T23:39:38.509-04:002010-09-27T23:39:38.509-04:00Predominantly dependent upon a nation's wealth...Predominantly dependent upon a nation's wealth and status, that is.<br /><br />The reasons for the initiation of an attack can be many, since we are dealing with human subjective issues. But the success of an attack is objective and can be rated according to a standard, regardless of which side it is from.<br /><br />A vibrant and young nation, like Rome, could absorb increasingly brutal setbacks, yet come back for the kill-win.<br /><br />But a rich nation that was slowly but irrevocably sliding into decadence and status quo protection of the rich/powerful, like Carthage, didn't make a comeback. Even when they were handed victory on a platter. Perhaps precisely because they were handed a victory they had not earned. They as a nation did not earn it with sacrifice and determination.<br /><br />Another issue is that rich but weak nations tend to like paying Danegeld. They like bribing threats away, perhaps because they got rich using bribes in the first place. Those are not nations that need to be attacked, per say, since they will give free money away just like that. At the drop of a hat, aka spear butt.<br /><br />It's the rich nations that will fight that tend to be hard shells to crack. And the success rate (of defense) for those nations tend to be greater than the success rate for poor nations that have the heart for war.<br /><br />Which brings us to the low hanging fruit truism. Given a choice between poor people to bully, rich people to extort, and rich but powerful warriors to die fighting with, people normally choose the weakest of the lot. Not the strongest.<br /><br />Of course, what tends to happen is that the conqueror gets fat on the bones of the weak and eventually he decides to try for greener pastures. And when he does, he will do filled with additional resources, manpower and wealth, to sustain his next attack.<br /><br />The US is not so much in danger of a direct attack that cracks the last or even second to the first defense wall. The US is in danger, right now, of allowing neutrals or allies that are too weak to defend themselves to be conquered and eaten by an enemy. Growing that enemy such that the enemy will now think to attempt to attack the US, regardless of how many walls they have to scale.<br /><br />What happens next is perfectly predictable. Rich and powerful nations are a hard target but the rewards are often worth the risk for the victor. Esp. when the resources of the whole world is arrayed against only one such nation, bereft of its allies, it's only a matter of time before the rich and powerful nation falls.<br /><br />A side factor is that US recessions automatically affect the world, making it a world wide recession. This increases the clout of criminal organizations and anti-American tyrants in control of oil and other natural resources. It gives them more clout and influence, which concurrently means that they have a greater desire and a greater ability to strike at America.<br /><br />With the globe weakened, many nations would prefer to pay ransom and bribes to the evil than actually get to work improving things for their people or training an army to protect their nation with. To bureaucrats, a substantial, but still small in comparison to the defense budget, bribe can be a very useful promotion ticket if it accrues temporary safety from the barbarians.Ymarnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-50374953673323792292010-09-27T23:13:32.967-04:002010-09-27T23:13:32.967-04:00The rate at which nations get attacked increases w...The rate at which nations get attacked increases with rich, up to a certain point and then gets squashed by the security variable at a certain point.<br /><br />It is only the success of an attack that is dependent upon a nation's wealth and status.<br /><br />Nations that have stagnancy issues, are more likely to fall to attacks that pierce the outer defenses. While growing nations that are self-confident and willing to work and fight for greater gains, those don't tend to lose until their inner walls are breached.Ymarnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-77619552206010946972010-09-25T12:32:31.144-04:002010-09-25T12:32:31.144-04:00Exactly right. This concept, writ small happens a...Exactly right. This concept, writ small happens all the time with smallish people - that radiate "don't mess with me" - and larger bullies who mostly attack those who act fearful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com