Wyrdness said:
EricHiggin said:
Not all deals are always in place. Many countries, like the US in the past, would threaten using leverage, but then fold and offer money instead, if they even threatened in the first place.
If the UK would have remained hard and kept it's foot on the gas, it would 'own' NA. They went soft and ever since they've paid the price, yet the world looks at leaders like Trump and wonders why he's such a hard ass. Collective strength because people somehow think wanting more for doing less is a good idea. Problem is it comes with consequences that are worse than the benefits.
That's like saying the 'relationships' within the US haven't been abusive, and that Trump became President solely because... Russia? 'Nobody' saw that coming, just like 'nobody' saw Brexit coming, just like 'nobody' could have predicted what's going on in France right now.
How leaky does the faucet need to get before someone realizes that means there's a problem and it needs to be solved sooner than later or it'll just get worse?
|
UK didn't get soft the rest of the world caught up and became just as hard trust me NA would have destroyed us regardless because one it costs a lot of resources to maintain an empire and two no nation will ever have enough to maintain and keep hold of empires that's why so many countries rapidly obtained independence as it was costing far more to have and maintain the empire than to not have it, the UK would have collapsed trying to keep it running so the same outcome would have happened if the UK tried to be hard as you put it only the nation would be in a much weaker state today than it is. Collective strength isn't about doing less it's accepting that in the long run you have more relevance than trying to go it alone.
Brexit had clear signs because for years parties like the BNP and UKIP have blamed the EU for the UK's problems when many of them were our own design and fault the Tories further added to this with the referendum as a gamble to beat Milliband while using the EU as a negative against Labour, our media for years have also been blaming the EU so the seeds were already sown it's no different to Trump getting elected as Hilary wasn't a popular choice either so the Democrats actually gave Trump the best chance he had by backing her. EU is not perfect but it's far from abusive.
You don't solve a leaky facet by smashing the sink with a sledge hammer and having no idea on how to repair it, you need an actual plan.
|
It costs a lot but that never stopped them before for the most part. They made it to the White House and then basically backed off because they felt they proved their point. Did they?What's the greater cost now? Taking the easy route back then so they have to cave due to weakness now, or fighting back then so their stronger now? Team America, world police? Collective strength in war maybe, but not in business and politics. That's where collectively you do less and make more.
"Abusive" was the analogy but isn't exactly the best word to describe the political issues at hand, but I think you get the point.
If an electrician tells you that you have a problem with your sink, you should get a second opinion from an actual plumber. If the plumber tells you it needs to be fixed, hiring anyone but a plumber isn't the greatest idea. Hiring a cheap plumber will likely get you a cheap temporary fix. Hiring Trump as your 'plumber' will fix those problems but create new one's.
