As surely as day follows night, the election of a Democrat President in USA, and the possibility of war becomes a probably.
Add the massive accumulation of world debt and war becomes a safe bet.
DEMOCRATS as the catalyst.
In the 20th century, it was the Democratic party that was the more aggressive pursuer of foreign wars. Make whatever claim you like about historical contingency or necessity, no one should claim that the Democrats, as a party, are opposed to war. They are a party of warmongers. (1)
All of the major U.S. wars in the 20th century—World War I, II, Korea and Vietnam—were entered by Democratic administrations. Harry Truman, a Democrat, is still the only world leader to use a nuclear bomb on a population.
With the exception of World War II, where almost all anti-war sentiment collapsed after Pearl Harbour, these wars were entered over the objections of the left wing of the Democratic Party. But this ‘left wing’ has not yet stopped a Democratic administration from going to war.
One exception was Jimmy Carter – a Democratic president who pardoned Vietnam draft dodgers in his second day in Office and later, approved the return of the Panama Canal Zone to Panama. These “pacifist policies” (among others), have him rated by polls of historians and political scientists, as a below-average president. (2) The penalty perhaps, for principles?
It was Republican President Nixon who extracted America from the Vietnam war, which had been fostered by Democrat President Kennedy and exponentially elevated by President Johnson – another democrat.
And, whereas it was Republican President Bush who invented” Weapons of Mass Destruction” to justify the (now deemed by UN as unlawful) Iraq invasion, it was Democratic President Obama who failed in his promise to extract America from the cauldron of Middle East chaos.
DEBT as a contributor to chaos.
The Treaty of Versailles didn’t just blame Germany for the war—it demanded financial restitution for the whole thing, to the tune of 132 billion gold marks, or about $269 billion today. Combined with the arrival of the Great Depression, German rebellion manifest in in the form of WW2.
WAR as a remedy for Debt
When world war finally broke out in both Europe and Asia, the United States. … Mobilizing the economy for world war finally cured the depression. Millions of men and women joined the armed forces, and even larger numbers went to work in well-paying defence jobs. (3)
DEBT as a contemporary weapon.
In contemporary times; by his publication: “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”, American merchant banker/author John Perkins produces a precise chronology of beneficial economic outcomes to America, following CIA “dark interventions”, in poor and developing countries coercing them to accept huge loans to repair damaged infrastructure, so that they are forever in debt to US organisations. (4)
IS WAR GOOD FOR ECONOMIES?
America’s greatest contribution to the Allies winning WW2 was not in military heroes killed in battle. Military losses (not civilian) were: Russia (USSR) 9 million, Germany 5 million, China 4 million, Japan 2 million, and UK, Yugoslavia and USA half a million each.
America’s major contribution to WW2 was Lend Lease (take now pay later mate) military equipment manufactured in USA i.e. jobs to help USA out of the Great Depression, and supplied to Allies troops in Europe i.e. Lend Lease pay later = revenue.
What grew out of the economic benefits of war to America, such as jobs back home and arms sales, has mushroomed beyond Truman’s wildest expectations. As Republican President Eisenhower included in his last speech:
“This conjunction of an immense military establishment and large arms industry – the total influence – economic- political and even spiritual – is felt (across the country); we must not fail to comprehend its grave implication”. (5)
With America facing massive debt; the Military Industrial Complex demanding a war to generate jobs back home in the munitions sector and cash in the kitty, and now with a Democrat President; what are the chances of WAR?
South China Seas? China too powerful. Move on.
Belarus? Without Russia buying its production, Belarus would be another basket case like Ukraine – which once upon a time foolishly believed America (via Biden’s son) would save them.
Crimea is the evidence that the World understands: Don’t cross this line.
Which brings me to Ukraine. Will America help Ukraine try to recover its eastern provinces of Maidan, which have already effectively seceded? Will America risk an all-out rumble with Russia?
Again, the Crimea outcome (I suggest), provides the answer here.
Iran could have a problem. Jewish connections between the Biden camp and Israel at the same time that China is too focused on its regional power base to help, and that Russia has made it clear in the case of Iran: “We are not a fire response truck”?
Venezuela? President Trump’s interference, was not enough to tumble the incumbent president and recent consolidation of Venezuela with Bolivia may be sufficient to save them from physical invasion by US military?
Wow! Maybe I was wrong in my thesis above?
Maybe this time, in spite of having a Democrat President and heaps of debt, America will not start a war, but will turn inwards and seek to heal the enormous divisions President Trump created back home?
As President elect Biden said on Thanksgiving Day:
“It’s divided us, angered us, set us against one another. I know the country’s grown weary of the fight, but we need to remember – we’re at war with the virus, not one another. (6)
Ross Meurant, graduate in politics both at university and as Member of Parliament; formerly police inspector in charge of Auckland police spies; currently Honorary consul for an African state; Trustee and CEO of Russian owned commercial assets in NZ and has international business interests.
(4) Perkins, John. Confessions of an Economic Hitman, Eubury Press, 2016.