## Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Moderator: Uccisore

## Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Yes.
11
52%
No.
9
43%
I don't know.
1
5%

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

LaughingMan wrote:Africa and Latin South America is China's playground. Might as well revise that chart.

Africa and Latin America are the prey of the others anyway. They have been being it since the 15th/16th century.

That chart refers to the Trilateral Commission.

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5581
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

As I see it, there cannot be any full scale war not only in Europe but anywhere in the world between major countries. Yes, that may happen to smaller level in some areas. For the rest, threatening and posturing is the name of the game now, as so will be in the future too.

The wars have been changed shape from the past. It is more like tension and tussles than ful scale military operations, unless the scenario is something like that US is attacking Iraq of Afghanistan.

We are now in the era of cultural, political and economic wars, not a military one. There are far too many power centres now in the world than the past. And, their number will only grow, not decline. That will lessen the possibility of any military was continuously. China has been emerged as a new power centre, and India is on its way, though behind by 10 years or so.

As per predictions of IMF and all other major institutions, the power scenario is going to change quite upside down merely in next five years. By 2020, China will replace US to become no 1 and India at no 3. The only European country within top five would be Germany.

Growth of the present non-OECD economies will continue to outpace that of the present OECD countries, driven primarily by catch-up in multi-factor productivity, but the difference will likely narrow substantially over coming decades. From over 7% per year on average over the last decade, non-OECD growth may decline to around 5% in the 2020s and to about half that by the 2040s. Until 2020, China will have the highest growth rate among major countries, but could be then surpassed by both India and Indonesia. Fast growth in China and India will take their combined GDP, measured at 2005 purchasing power parities (PPPs), from less than half of the total output of the major seven OECD economies in 2010 to exceeding it by around 2025. China’s GDP is projected to surpass that of the United States in 2017.

And realize, that I have quoted only European studies.

The one and only reason of all confrontations is gaining power or supremacy. And, that leads war to power centres, because that is the only place where one can get something by winning. There has to some prize for a winner, otherwise why he will fight in the first place?

The situation is such that European countries will loose their present status. Their leaders are well aware of that too. That is precisely why they are trying to form a singular, unified and powerful Europe, which would be able to withstand the future challenges. They know that they cannot compete with Asian nations like China, India and even Indonesia by size. They have to as big as US and these Asian countries. That is why they cannot let Grece out at any cost, though their ways of helping are not helping much.

Though, i cannot predict 2050, but keeping all that in the mind, it looks to me that there will be no war in Europe, because there would be nothing much to fight.

The only possibility of military war lies in North Korea. But, not for long but for some years only, a decade at a maximum. As the things are going there, the present leadership will not last long. And, the war has to happen before that fall, or the war may cause that fall.

With love,
Sanjay

zinnat
Philosopher

Posts: 3501
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Economic wars lead into hot active wars.

Never underestimate full blown idiocy and greed backed by thermonuclear retaliation.

That whole human collective hubris thing.
Coming Out Live Streaming Online From The Global Gulag, Asylum, Police State, And Oligarchical Plantation Near You.

LaughingMan
Cynical Asshole

Posts: 2712
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:47 pm
Location: FEMA Region V, U.S.S.A.

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

This is the current top 5 rank of GDP:

1) US.
2) Japan.
3) Germany.
4) China.
5) UK.

If the EU were considered, then it would be: 1) EU.

And this is the current top 5 rank of of GDP PPP:

1) China.
2) US.
3) India.
4) Japan.
5) Germany.

If the EU were considered, then it would be: 1) EU.

------------------------------------------------------------

Please do not confuse the GDP with the GDP PPP or even the growth with the GDP or with the GDP PPP.

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5581
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

zinnat wrote:The situation is such that European countries will loose their present status. Their leaders are well aware of that too. That is precisely why they are trying to form a singular, unified and powerful Europe, which would be able to withstand the future challenges. They know that they cannot compete with Asian nations like China, India and even Indonesia by size. They have to as big as US and these Asian countries.

Economically Europe is still much bigger than US, China, India, Indonesia (cp. my last post).
Demographically Europe (750 millions) is much bigger than US (317 millions) and Indonesia (238 millions) but much smaller than China (1370 millions) and India (1210 millions).

zinnat wrote:That is why they cannot let Grece out at any cost, though their ways of helping are not helping much.

The main reason why the EU does not let Greece out of the Eurozone is angst: if Greece gets out of the Eurozone, then it is very probable that the Eurozone or even the EU will collapse, at least the Euro will lose its worth, and the EU will lose its reputation.

zinnat wrote:Though, i cannot predict 2050, but keeping all that in the mind, it looks to me that there will be no war in Europe, because there would be nothing much to fight.

Would you mind going into details, Zinnat?

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5581
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Arminius wrote:This is the current top 5 rank of GDP:

1) US.
2) Japan.
3) Germany.
4) China.
5) UK.

If the EU were considered, then it would be: 1) EU.

And this is the current top 5 rank of of GDP PPP:

1) China.
2) US.
3) India.
4) Japan.
5) Germany.

If the EU were considered, then it would be: 1) EU.

------------------------------------------------------------

Please do not confuse the GDP with the GDP PPP or even the growth with the GDP or with the GDP PPP.

Arminius,

I am well aware of the difference between the two. That is why I said that India will be at 3 by 2020, not before that. Otherwise going by ppp, it is there even now.

And, European countries can be in that race only as a Eurozone, not individuals. There are many new such entrants, which are very eagar to make a cut: Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico and South Korea.

With love,
Sanjay

zinnat
Philosopher

Posts: 3501
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

zinnat wrote:Arminius,

I am well aware of the difference between the two. That is why I said that India will be at 3 by 2020, not before that. Otherwise going by ppp, it is there even now.

But nevertheless: we should not forget that it is based on abstraction, that the link to the real world is not always given.

zinnat wrote:And, European countries can be in that race only as a Eurozone, not individuals.

The European Union (EU) and the Eurozone are also obstacles for some countries, for example for Germany, Austria, Holland. In other words: there is also a brake in the EU and in the Eurozone, and this brake brakes as a motor brake, and the motor of the EU and Eurozone is Germany. So Germany could probably do better without any EU and Eurozone. Like Japan, and Japan is economically comparable with Germany. The EU and especially the Euro is a huge burden for Germany. From the German point of view the EU and the Eurozone have never been economically necessary. The EU and the Eurozone were politically forced - by dictatorship, thus without any democratic processes. Until the early 1990s the economical rank of the top 3 was: 1) US, 2) Germany (until 1990: only West Germany), 3) Japan. And it was not Germany's so-called "reunion" but the EU that forced Germany into that huge burden. This burden grows and grows, and there is no other country in Europe or elsewhere that is capable of bearing this burden. But some states, especially the United States, are interested in the economical destruction of Europe.

zinnat wrote:There are many new such entrants, which are very eagar to make a cut: Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico and South Korea.

Yes, and most of them are banded together.

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5581
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Arminius wrote:Economy and military are very closely connected with each other. So I think that this subforum is the right one for this thread: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Between whom?

"Science is entirely Faith Based.... Obama is Muslim....Evil is the opposition to life (e-v-i-l <=> l-i-v-e ... and not by accident). Without evil there could be no life.", James S. Saint.
"The Holocaust was the fault of the Jews; The Holocaust was not genocide", Kriswest
"A Tortoise is a Turtle", Wizard
" Hitler didn't create the Nazis. In reality, the Judists did ... for a purpose of their own. Hitler was merely one they chose to head it up after they discovered the Judist betrayal in WW1, their "Judas Iscariot";James S Saint.
These just keep getting funnier.

Lev Muishkin
Philosopher

Posts: 4037
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2014 9:58 am

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

zinnat wrote:As I see it, there cannot be any full scale war not only in Europe but anywhere in the world between major countries. Yes, that may happen to smaller level in some areas. For the rest, threatening and posturing is the name of the game now, as so will be in the future too.

The wars have been changed shape from the past. It is more like tension and tussles than ful scale military operations, unless the scenario is something like that US is attacking Iraq of Afghanistan.

We are now in the era of cultural, political and economic wars, not a military one. There are far too many power centres now in the world than the past. And, their number will only grow, not decline. That will lessen the possibility of any military was continuously. China has been emerged as a new power centre, and India is on its way, though behind by 10 years or so.

As per predictions of IMF and all other major institutions, the power scenario is going to change quite upside down merely in next five years. By 2020, China will replace US to become no 1 and India at no 3. The only European country within top five would be Germany.

Growth of the present non-OECD economies will continue to outpace that of the present OECD countries, driven primarily by catch-up in multi-factor productivity, but the difference will likely narrow substantially over coming decades. From over 7% per year on average over the last decade, non-OECD growth may decline to around 5% in the 2020s and to about half that by the 2040s. Until 2020, China will have the highest growth rate among major countries, but could be then surpassed by both India and Indonesia. Fast growth in China and India will take their combined GDP, measured at 2005 purchasing power parities (PPPs), from less than half of the total output of the major seven OECD economies in 2010 to exceeding it by around 2025. China’s GDP is projected to surpass that of the United States in 2017.

And realize, that I have quoted only European studies.

The one and only reason of all confrontations is gaining power or supremacy. And, that leads war to power centres, because that is the only place where one can get something by winning. There has to some prize for a winner, otherwise why he will fight in the first place?

The situation is such that European countries will loose their present status. Their leaders are well aware of that too. That is precisely why they are trying to form a singular, unified and powerful Europe, which would be able to withstand the future challenges. They know that they cannot compete with Asian nations like China, India and even Indonesia by size. They have to as big as US and these Asian countries. That is why they cannot let Grece out at any cost, though their ways of helping are not helping much.

Though, i cannot predict 2050, but keeping all that in the mind, it looks to me that there will be no war in Europe, because there would be nothing much to fight.

The only possibility of military war lies in North Korea. But, not for long but for some years only, a decade at a maximum. As the things are going there, the present leadership will not last long. And, the war has to happen before that fall, or the war may cause that fall.

With love,
Sanjay

You assume larger more successful economic nations are more rational. Huge assumption.
Coming Out Live Streaming Online From The Global Gulag, Asylum, Police State, And Oligarchical Plantation Near You.

LaughingMan
Cynical Asshole

Posts: 2712
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 11:47 pm
Location: FEMA Region V, U.S.S.A.

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Arminius wrote:
zinnat wrote:The situation is such that European countries will loose their present status. Their leaders are well aware of that too. That is precisely why they are trying to form a singular, unified and powerful Europe, which would be able to withstand the future challenges. They know that they cannot compete with Asian nations like China, India and even Indonesia by size. They have to as big as US and these Asian countries.

Economically Europe is still much bigger than US, China, India, Indonesia (cp. my last post).
Demographically Europe (750 millions) is much bigger than US (317 millions) and Indonesia (238 millions) but much smaller than China (1370 millions) and India (1210 millions).

zinnat wrote:That is why they cannot let Grece out at any cost, though their ways of helping are not helping much.

The main reason why the EU does not let Greece out of the Eurozone is angst: if Greece gets out of the Eurozone, then it is very probable that the Eurozone or even the EU will collapse, at least the Euro will lose its worth, and the EU will lose its reputation.

zinnat wrote:Though, i cannot predict 2050, but keeping all that in the mind, it looks to me that there will be no war in Europe, because there would be nothing much to fight.

Would you mind going into details, Zinnat?

That is true that Europe is not small but it is Europe that is not small, individual European countries are small. And, even having EU and Eurozone, Europe is far away from being a singular entity, at least for now, though that may happen.

War needs reasons to happen. It cannot happen out of the blue. And, I do not see any reasons whatsoever in Europe. Social unrest can cause only rebellion in that country. It cannot be enough reason for manifesting full scale military war.

Can you tell me any reason why Europe will have to face wars?

With love,
Sanjay

zinnat
Philosopher

Posts: 3501
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

LaughingMan wrote:
zinnat wrote:As I see it, there cannot be any full scale war not only in Europe but anywhere in the world between major countries. Yes, that may happen to smaller level in some areas. For the rest, threatening and posturing is the name of the game now, as so will be in the future too.

The wars have been changed shape from the past. It is more like tension and tussles than ful scale military operations, unless the scenario is something like that US is attacking Iraq of Afghanistan.

We are now in the era of cultural, political and economic wars, not a military one. There are far too many power centres now in the world than the past. And, their number will only grow, not decline. That will lessen the possibility of any military was continuously. China has been emerged as a new power centre, and India is on its way, though behind by 10 years or so.

As per predictions of IMF and all other major institutions, the power scenario is going to change quite upside down merely in next five years. By 2020, China will replace US to become no 1 and India at no 3. The only European country within top five would be Germany.

Growth of the present non-OECD economies will continue to outpace that of the present OECD countries, driven primarily by catch-up in multi-factor productivity, but the difference will likely narrow substantially over coming decades. From over 7% per year on average over the last decade, non-OECD growth may decline to around 5% in the 2020s and to about half that by the 2040s. Until 2020, China will have the highest growth rate among major countries, but could be then surpassed by both India and Indonesia. Fast growth in China and India will take their combined GDP, measured at 2005 purchasing power parities (PPPs), from less than half of the total output of the major seven OECD economies in 2010 to exceeding it by around 2025. China’s GDP is projected to surpass that of the United States in 2017.

And realize, that I have quoted only European studies.

The one and only reason of all confrontations is gaining power or supremacy. And, that leads war to power centres, because that is the only place where one can get something by winning. There has to some prize for a winner, otherwise why he will fight in the first place?

The situation is such that European countries will loose their present status. Their leaders are well aware of that too. That is precisely why they are trying to form a singular, unified and powerful Europe, which would be able to withstand the future challenges. They know that they cannot compete with Asian nations like China, India and even Indonesia by size. They have to as big as US and these Asian countries. That is why they cannot let Grece out at any cost, though their ways of helping are not helping much.

Though, i cannot predict 2050, but keeping all that in the mind, it looks to me that there will be no war in Europe, because there would be nothing much to fight.

The only possibility of military war lies in North Korea. But, not for long but for some years only, a decade at a maximum. As the things are going there, the present leadership will not last long. And, the war has to happen before that fall, or the war may cause that fall.

With love,
Sanjay

You assume larger more successful economic nations are more rational. Huge assumption.

No, not at all. I never said that larger or more successful nations would be more rational by default. If that was true, US would have been the most rational nation since last 100 years but it has not behaved in that way at all.

Secondly, the elevation of counties like China and India does not entail that their citizens also become richer and more prosperous that their western counterparts. That is not going to happen, at least in next five decades.

But, we are not discussing that but only who will be bigger to whom. It is the matter of individual countries only, not individual citizens. The fate of the two could be quite different quantatively, though both will be in the same direction quality wise.

Means, if Chinese economy becomes no 1, it does not mean that the life or living standard of all Chinese citizens also become the best in the world. No, not at all. But yes, elevation of Chinese economy to certainly affect its all citizens also in positive way to some extent.

With love,
Sanjay

zinnat
Philosopher

Posts: 3501
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Arminius wrote:
zinnat wrote:Arminius,

I am well aware of the difference between the two. That is why I said that India will be at 3 by 2020, not before that. Otherwise going by ppp, it is there even now.

But nevertheless: we should not forget that it is based on abstraction, that the link to the real world is not always given.

zinnat wrote:And, European countries can be in that race only as a Eurozone, not individuals.

The European Union (EU) and the Eurozone are also obstacles for some countries, for example for Germany, Austria, Holland. In other words: there is also a brake in the EU and in the Eurozone, and this brake brakes as a motor brake, and the motor of the EU and Eurozone is Germany. So Germany could probably do better without any EU and Eurozone. Like Japan, and Japan is economically comparable with Germany. The EU and especially the Euro is a huge burden for Germany. From the German point of view the EU and the Eurozone have never been economically necessary. The EU and the Eurozone were politically forced - by dictatorship, thus without any democratic processes. Until the early 1990s the economical rank of the top 3 was: 1) US, 2) Germany (until 1990: only West Germany), 3) Japan. And it was not Germany's so-called "reunion" but the EU that forced Germany into that huge burden. This burden grows and grows, and there is no other country in Europe or elsewhere that is capable of bearing this burden. But some states, especially the United States, are interested in the economical destruction of Europe.

zinnat wrote:There are many new such entrants, which are very eagar to make a cut: Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico and South Korea.

Yes, and most of them are banded together.

I think that you slightly tapped the crux of the issue.

I may be wrong, but as I see it, the real issue is neither economical nor even political. The roots lies somewhere else.
And, that is human psychology, to be precise, frustration and ego.

As we know that US was basically formed by European immigrants some centuries ago and was also a colony of UK initially. Those colonies later not only freed themselves but united and made progress even faster than the parent countries.

Perhaps, some posters disagree or even may not like it, but If you look at the polital history of US, and the behavior of its leaders especially after ww2 and when it got elevatedelevated to no 1, you will find a kind of arrogance, which persisted throughout its history till Obama. Things have changed slightly since then, but not much. That arrogance is still very much there in bureaucracy too, though has been lessened quite a lot in citizens now. But, one can still see its hints here and there.

US leaders and top administration have been provoking or rather bullling its European counterparts since long with its activities. Though, no political leader from either side will accept that.

Take spying. It is understable that one country may spy on its enemy. But, when a country spies on the leaders of friend countries, it is a sign of dominance and arrogance, not mere intelligence gathering.

This feeling of getting bullied slowly creeped up in the mind of European leaders. Secondly, it must have crossed in their minds at some point of time that the migrants from their countries are now bullling their own parent countries.

EU and Eurozone are the reaction of these two basic reasons, besides the challenge coming from China and India. They want to create and establish a second US, both economically and politically. And, they can do it too, if done wisely, which is not the case so far.

You are right in claiming that Germany could have done better alone. There is no doubt about it. But, the issue is that major European countries, especially their leadership, want to be bigger more than the better, thus the compromise.

Ideally, the unification of the Europe should have started with three countries only, Germany, France and UK, by opening their borders, both economically and politically, and accepting a single currency. Such arrangement would have played as a backbone of the unification and served the purpose more. Then, they can include more adjoining countries like Holland, Belgium, Finland, Norvey, Austria, Poland and so on.

There is one very basic contradiction in the unification of the Europe. The problem is that European countries want to be one, but at the same time, they also want to maintain their personal identity alive. But, both of these things cannot get along. If they want to be one, they have to lose personal identity, both politically and economicaly, just like the different states of America. Yes, they can maintain cultural identity.

But, UK is not only not the part of Eurozone, it had faced the near possibility of spilt of late. With this mentality, the future of Eurozone is bleak. UK must be in the Eurozone to make it successful but its leadership is under the influence of US, and it will never let UK to be a part of Eurozone.

The case of Japan is different. It has reached to its maximum potential long ago. It cannot grow futther on its own, unless it looks for some kind of arrangement with its neighbors and try to form a regional allience like Eurozone, acting as the centre of it.

On the other hand, other Asian countries like China, India and Indonesia are far far away from reaching their potential. Besides that, they have size in their favor too. That is why they will continue to go up and up. This list includes Brazil and Russia too.

But, I do not agree with that Germany is forced to bear the burden. It willingly bore that. If you want to be leader, you should be ready to pay the price. It is as simple as that.

With love,
Sanjay

zinnat
Philosopher

Posts: 3501
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

With "banded together" I meant that they are not merely economically but also militarily banded together, for exanple in the so-called "Shanghai Cooperation Organisation" which is a political, economic and military organisation and was founded in 2001 in Shanghai:

zinnat wrote:You are right in claiming that Germany could have done better alone. There is no doubt about it. But, the issue is that major European countries, especially their leadership, want to be bigger more than the better, thus the compromise.

Ideally, the unification of the Europe should have started with three countries only, Germany, France and UK, by opening their borders, both economically and politically, and accepting a single currency. Such arrangement would have played as a backbone of the unification and served the purpose more. Then, they can include more adjoining countries like Holland, Belgium, Finland, Norvey, Austria, Poland and so on.

There is one very basic contradiction in the unification of the Europe. The problem is that European countries want to be one, but at the same time, they also want to maintain their personal identity alive. But, both of these things cannot get along. If they want to be one, they have to lose personal identity, both politically and economicaly, just like the different states of America. Yes, they can maintain cultural identity.

But, UK is not only not the part of Eurozone, it had faced the near possibility of spilt of late. With this mentality, the future of Eurozone is bleak. UK must be in the Eurozone to make it successful but its leadership is under the influence of US, and it will never let UK to be a part of Eurozone.

The case of Japan is different. It has reached to its maximum potential long ago. It cannot grow futther on its own, unless it looks for some kind of arrangement with its neighbors and try to form a regional allience like Eurozone, acting as the centre of it.

On the other hand, other Asian countries like China, India and Indonesia are far far away from reaching their potential. Besides that, they have size in their favor too. That is why they will continue to go up and up. This list includes Brazil and Russia too.

But, I do not agree with that Germany is forced to bear the burden. It willingly bore that. If you want to be leader, you should be ready to pay the price. It is as simple as that.

With love,
Sanjay

Germany is the leader - it did and does not want to be the leader but had and has to be it because of the economical and political facts (that is what I meant by the word "forced"). But okay, now we have this facts that have been making and leading to the scapegoat role for so long.

The "price" you mentioned could be paid in another, namely a better way. That was my main point. No EU, no Eurozone, no NATO but nonetheless a powerful political, economic and mliitary organisation of European countries without any influence of the USA. It is namely a contradiction that there is a military parrtnership with an economic enemy ("competitor") like the USA, because this means the contradictional politics between Europe and the USA.

zinnat wrote:War needs reasons to happen. It cannot happen out of the blue. And, I do not see any reasons whatsoever in Europe. Social unrest can cause only rebellion in that country. It cannot be enough reason for manifesting full scale military war.

Can you tell me any reason why Europe will have to face wars?

First of all, the reasons for wars to happen are always given just because of the nature of living beings in general and of human beings in particular. Secondly, econimical wars as several forms of extreme "competitions" are typical doe the modern "humanity" and always accompanied by media wars (you can even see it here on ILP). Thirdly, the kind of war I am most afarid of is the so-called "civil war", and this kind of war is what Europe will probably have to face. The contradictional politics between Europe and the USA are one of the main reasons why Europe will probably have to face a civil war. I just said "probably", thus not "certainly". But the probability is not low.

If you can't defeat your enemy economically, then defeat him demographically. And if you will have defeated him demographically, then it will soon be easy to defeat him economically too. This implies the high probability of a civil war.
Again: I am not saying that it is certain but merely probable that there will be war in Europe before 2050. Hence the title of this thread as a question.

By the way the current US debt:
US national debt: $18 320 000 000 000. US debt per taxpayer$ 154 500.
US debt per citizen: $57 000. (Cp. US Debt Clock) Arminius ILP Legend Posts: 5581 Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis ### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050? Destroy the motor of a car, and this car will not function anymore. Destroy Germany as the motor of the EU and the Eurozone, and the EU and Eurozone will not function anymore. Since the wars in Central and Southwest Asia and in Africa that are caused by the USA and Israel the number of immigrants in Germany has increased gigantically. Since the beginning of the huge problems in Greece Germany's debts have also increased gigantically. This obviously never ending demographical and economical war will lead to the fact that the EU and Eurozone will not function anymore. And this can't be in the interest of all Europeans. Arminius ILP Legend Posts: 5581 Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis ### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050? With "banded together" I meant that they are not merely economically but also militarily banded together, for exanple in the so-called "Shanghai Cooperation Organisation" which is a political, economic and military organisation and was founded in 2001 in Shanghai: Banding together is still not unification, though a step towards that for sure. There is long road ahead. If European countries want to unify, the first and foremost thing is to have the lay the foundation right, in order to build the desired onlogy. And, that foundation should be consisted of right mentality of the leading countries, before anything else. Nothing can ever happen without that. But, that does not seem the case so far. In which way to the problem if Greece is handled so far, is the clear cut example of the lack of that intent. Greece is still treated as an outside defaulter by the big European countries, not an integral part of the family, who needs help. Germany is the leader - it did and does not want to be the leader but had and has to be it because of the economical and political facts (that is what I meant by the word "forced"). But okay, now we have this facts that have been making and leading to the scapegoat role for so long. That is not forcing but willingness in order to maintain its place in the new or future world order. Having said that, there is nothing wrong in it. It is quite natural and perhaps desirable too. The "price" you mentioned could be paid in another, namely a better way. That was my main point. No EU, no Eurozone, no NATO but nonetheless a powerful political, economic and mliitary organisation of European countries without any influence of the USA. It is namely a contradiction that there is a military parrtnership with an economic enemy ("competitor") like the USA, because this means the contradictional politics between Europe and the USA. You are not getting it. European leaders have sorted it out. There cannot be another way except something exactly like Eurozone, even EU cannot serve the purpose without Eurozone. The fight is also about establishing Euro at par with dollar as an universal currency, besides the economic size of the Eurozone. Both things are interlinked and cannot happen without each other. Just like the English is almost a world language, US dollar is also the world currency. It is considered as a safe investment, at par or perhaps even better than the gold. Each and every country keeps a huge amount of USD in its foreign reserve, besides gold. Means, there are many times more USD in the world economy than the share of US economy in the world trade. Ideally, both these should be equal. And, the dominance of the US in the world economy cannot be broken without displacing USD from the thrown of world currency. And again, to do that, it is necessary to establish a Eurozone also, where all trade will happen in Euro only. The more Euro will be used, the less USD will come into play. That would devalue the USD because of lessen demand. And, that will also push back the US economy sizewise to some extent, comparing the Eurozone, besides many other negative implications. By the way the current US debt: US national debt:$ 18 320 000 000 000.
US debt per taxpayer $154 500. US debt per citizen:$ 57 000

US debt is well under control its economy. The fearsome thing is external debt, not internal one.

The reason for higher public debt in US is that it's citizens tend to save very less. It is more a domestic consumption type of economy, rather than an export oriented one like China.

US total internal and external debt is almost equal to its GDP, which is not a big issue. Japan has more than double debt to its GDP.

With love,
Sanjay

zinnat
Philosopher

Posts: 3501
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

zinnat wrote:
The "price" you mentioned could be paid in another, namely a better way. That was my main point. No EU, no Eurozone, no NATO but nonetheless a powerful political, economic and mliitary organisation of European countries without any influence of the USA. It is namely a contradiction that there is a military parrtnership with an economic enemy ("competitor") like the USA, because this means the contradictional politics between Europe and the USA.

You are not getting it.

It has nothing to do with "getting it", Zinnat. The current situation will not remain the same for centuries. I have children. I know that you have chidren too, by the way, but do not know how many.

zinnat wrote:European leaders have sorted it out. There cannot be another way except something exactly like Eurozone, even EU cannot serve the purpose without Eurozone.

There are other ways. It is possible, for instance, to reform the EU, the Eurozone, and the NATO. It does not have to be much reform in the case of the EU, but in the case of the NATO it has to be very much reform. Think of the competition, Zinnat. The NATO was formed as an alliance of defense, and now it has nothing at all to do with defense but exclusively with aggression.

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5581
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Arminius wrote:
zinnat wrote:
The "price" you mentioned could be paid in another, namely a better way. That was my main point. No EU, no Eurozone, no NATO but nonetheless a powerful political, economic and mliitary organisation of European countries without any influence of the USA. It is namely a contradiction that there is a military parrtnership with an economic enemy ("competitor") like the USA, because this means the contradictional politics between Europe and the USA.

You are not getting it.

It has nothing to do with "getting it", Zinnat. The current situation will not remain the same for centuries. I have children. I know that you have chidren too, by the way, but do not know how many.

zinnat wrote:European leaders have sorted it out. There cannot be another way except something exactly like Eurozone, even EU cannot serve the purpose without Eurozone.

There are other ways. It is possible, for instance, to reform the EU, the Eurozone, and the NATO. It does not have to be much reform in the case of the EU, but in the case of the NATO it has to be very much reform. Think of the competition, Zinnat. The NATO was formed as an alliance of defense, and now it has nothing at all to do with defense but exclusively with aggression.

European countries will come out of NATO when the time will come, as they are mere puppets there. It is only US which calls the shots all the time. Rest do not have much say in decision making.

But, there is no other or better way than Eurozone to compete with US. The basic idea is right but it lacks both of right intent and details, at least as of now.

By the way, I have two children, one daughter(24) and a son(22) and both are in IT jobs now. My son joined just two months back and daughter almost two years ago.

With love,
Sanjay

zinnat
Philosopher

Posts: 3501
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

zinnat wrote:By the way, I have two children, one daughter(24) and a son(22) and both are in IT jobs now. My son joined just two months back and daughter almost two years ago.

That's great, Zinnat. Congratulations.

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5581
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Actually the EU as it turns out was partially set up and used intensively by the US to curb European powers. Europe never was as weak as it is since the EU exists. It has no decision making capacity as a continent and the individual nations lost that capacity too. Best to blow up the union and have some tradewars take the place of stupid compliance to this barely even golden cow.

England saw what was coming.
It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.
~ Владимир Ильич Ульянов Ленин

THE HORNED ONE

barbarianhorde
Thinker

Posts: 905
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:26 pm

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Arminius wrote:
zinnat wrote:By the way, I have two children, one daughter(24) and a son(22) and both are in IT jobs now. My son joined just two months back and daughter almost two years ago.

That's great, Zinnat. Congratulations.

Thanks.

Me and my wife have gone through a lot of difficult times in last 20 years or so, but that is paying now, as we have contributed two skilled and successful citizens back to the society, who also have the right mindset, at least now.

Our job is almost done, except arranging their marriages.

With love,
Sanjay

zinnat
Philosopher

Posts: 3501
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

My take is, that the union is pretty well on it's way, the problems are not yet ironed out, big picture. Correct me if You would, but the watershed was around the turn of the century, the last one that is and in the last millenium, when people actually would
not dare say something as obnoxious as there will no longer be history after the year 2000.

The big change, was 1900, abd between 1900 and
2000, there were 2 world wars, the end of so called
colonialism, the dependence on oil, birth of Israel as a nation, and many smaller wars, usualy fought for domination of disputed areas of interest and land.

That's a lot. But also 1982 , the waning of Marxist-
Leninism, and the upcoming capitalistic one world idea.

Marxism domineered for apprpximately from 1945 to
1982, on a large part of the world, that is less then
40 years. Not even 2 generations. Total laissez faire economy held now for more then 30 years. So we are almost to the point where those people born before at least a generation, have almost forgotten history, as lived under communism, for as long as communism hed presence.

This is important, because prior to and after the
communistic system, (which can be visualized as sandwiched between two types of major world governance :imperial and economic capital ),the main focus of world power was the conflict between that
(communism) and (fascism). Both were ideologically
reduced forms of power entities, with the ideal of fascism at odds with the equally ideological ,but CAPITAL based power sharing system of governance.

The ideal communist power sharing was based on social principles (supposedly) of equal distribution,

while fascism was a retro ideal form of it, where the
imperium on top was sustained, in an ideal form of distribution of values, - vesting old patterns and their
inherited worth. This was the basic conflict, and in order to predict, whether these unbalances were, are
or will be equalized,one has to be able to make a

best case probable scenario-on the historically determinant parts of the equation.

The German enlightenment of the Protestant ethic set
the stage, for the sustaining vectors of power sharing all the way from the formation of the Holy Roman Empire, of which Austro-Hungary was, prior to WW2, the pre-emnent seat. The German hegemony

embraced the Austrian/Serbian struggle, triggered by the assasination of the Archduke, the basis of the
pivotal struggle. It's not co-incidental that Hitler was
Austrian.

So these three power motifs were present before,
and sought re-definition of th meaning of capitalism
between the fascist ideal and the Anglo-American
version. So there was a lot of overlap of value, besides the nominal politically colored
pronouncements.

The question is, and remains, in light of what has
gone down, the last generation, (prior 1982) in terms
of how these politically fixed 'isms' have retained their political, social and economic value.

Given, that the terrorists in the Middle East, may feel
that they are the world's movers and shakers, the
fact is, they are but grains of sand on that spectrum, and more objects of manipulation and political projection. Their worth is strictly based on dollars
per gallon, and the moment the wells run dry, their
value will sink as well. The middle East is stricly a kind of computerized chess game, for the major players to diffuse their differences.

If so, it's probably ubfoeceeable that either the Euro,
or the Dollar, will predominate, since this is an area

of common interest. I do not buy the idea that there is much more dissent than agreement.

The same goes for Chinese interests in the Japanese
sphere, or American interest in the Chinese sphere.

The ideal world of national interest is slowly shifting to internationalism, and the big holders of economic
influence have international equality to worry about.

For these reasons there will not be a major upheaval
in the world, but the question of a European struggle

in-it's self, is equally doubtful, IF the union, the Eurozone, and the immigration-social integration go
on without a hitch. Minor skirmishes may occur, but military, police, and political dominance will defeat any such trivialities, whether it's OK or not for Muslim women to wear typical clothing and head gear.

For all practical purposes the ideological struggle has
been basically been resolved, and the social-
psychological ones usually toe that line.

On top of that, conflict resolution is expressible by
new tech, giving impetus to people's feeling that they
are part of something bigger than they are, not puppets of strictly defined and narrowly viewd , alienated sub cultures. Their inferiority is resolved
per nationalistic and internationalistic exchanges,

therefore, another key is turned in favor of a gradual resolution of these types of sub-struggles.

For people who have memories of the last century, a
view such as this is inconceivable, since all they saw
was war, with periods of unnaturally posed peace, with equally tenous treaties, broken as often as re-drawn.

I see peace, as a potential and attainable goal for the
coming generations, with monumental gains in both personal and social progess
Last edited by Orbie on Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance

sincere, the centre of
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers

Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Now, i have to admit, that i don't necessarily believe the above, but the neutralist that i am, based on data i have been able to get myhands on, it can be argued by the other side, and very briefly undermined, as far as the fragility of this whole new world idea may be pointed to. Greece s a good example of a soft underbelly, also the systemic inflationary weakness of a non-fascistic perhaps non workable handle on limits of capital holdings. I feel when capital holdings exceed a trillion units person of major currencies, things may happen to markets, which they may not be able to control or support. The Great Depression, or, The recent Great Recession would, in such a scenario, could not even compare tomth severity of the comsequences, and this could set the stage of cescading events with horrific ends.

So between these two extremes, i probably would lean toward gradual, computerized indexed, data sharing, whereby likelyhood of major trouble could be detected and corrected.

However, never say never.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance

sincere, the centre of
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers

Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

barbarianhorde wrote:England saw what was coming.

Not England but the City of London. The City of London. Do you know what that means?

Arminius
ILP Legend

Posts: 5581
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Now, excuse me for intejecting, but i could not resist.
In addition, absence of reply toward intended within a reasonable time, may invite an answer en-passant, meaning an interjected idea, may not exclude a similar one to the one intended.

The caveat is, the intended writer may not loose
anything bu the interjection.

So here it goes. the City of London knew what was
coming, because.....they had a hand in it. Clever
plot, and if this is what is implied, the next question may be: Why? (or is this off base and again unintended and unwarranted?)
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance

sincere, the centre of
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers

Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

### Re: Will there be war in Europe before 2050?

Or, may the implication may be far more literal, (and simple)in that only London knew the missles were comng, since it was they who got bombed.?
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance

sincere, the centre of
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers

Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

PreviousNext