Shipbucket

You can't just divvy it up like that.
If the US collapses it'll take most of the world with it and those markets will be gone.
It'll make the current economic crisis look like a minor fad.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

could you explain why?

Economies don't scale instantly - they are built around predictable demand. If you remove both supply and demand sources, it changes the global dynamic drastically and in very hard to predict ways. Everyone that had invested money in the United States (and that's a lot of people - even with the AA credit rating T-Bills are considered one of the safest investments in the world) suddenly lost all of the money they had invested. That is a multi-trillion dollar crash. As we learned back in '08, it doesn't take much to destabilize the banking system. '08 was a huge hit - you've just removed more than 20 trillion USD from the global market capitalization (in 07 the market cap of the rest of the G8+China-Canada is on the same order of magnitude). The global banking system fails. This means that no one is able to get the capital to re-tool for the post-US economy.

Functionally, the systems needed to cope with the change in the situation (the global banking system) are the very systems that have just imploded in the most spectacular fashion possible. This makes the 1930s look like a picnic. This is because the world today is more, not less reliant on banks (and the banks are more interconnected) than they were in the 1930s, and you've just kicked the base out of the system.

As one side note, because we have SSBNs on patrol constantly, President Spellings* would still have command of a nuclear force. I'd think they would end up at Faslane.

*Selected under the assumption that one of the cabinet secretaries is out of the country.

Edit: Just to be clear - the US doesn't have a single power grid - it has three (Eastern, Western, & Texan). There are fail-safes in place to prevent the entire grid from going down at once.

And if you say anything like HEMP, I will be most disappointed.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

No no to the contrary you have just proven that it is not possible to have America undergo an entire blackout, but I still need a way to let more aggressive countries be more aggressive.

Would it be possible to let the U.S quit NATO? most likely because of ideology reasons?
(altough once again highly unlikely)

This would Isolate the U.S, and more likely to keep to itself and not force the role of "Big Brother" like it is now?

Of course the Economics would become more unstable, bankers drawing money from the U.S could perhaps cause a depression in the U.S, spending's would go down on militairy equipment and personnel, Europe/NPTO/Moscow Pacy will most likely have the opposite, bankers now invest in European/NPTO and Moscow pact, businesses would flourish, Korea could have more investors allowing for a more diverse Military

NATO cannot exist without the US. It's that simple. It provides the majority of the nuclear deterrent and most of the logistics. Without it NATO forces won't be able to support any sort of large scale deployments outside of the North Sea or the Med, and as Libya showed even that is a stretch.
No amount of ideology is going to make the US shut themselves away from the international market. Her economy would implode within a fortnight. Similarly the loss of the US market would cause a massive depression that would make the current crisis look like a rounding error. Places like China would loose something like a third of her export market.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

So what you are saying NATO can exist however large scale deployments would be out of the question? meaning that NATO needs to upgrade their Armory? exactly where I want to go with this AU?


Nothing here says the US will withdraw from the international market, I just figured if the US would withdraw from NATO most likely because of this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... Gates.html
that European bankers wouldn't trust them as much.

Without US there is no NATO, it will cease to exist. It will be dissolve.

_________________

Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!

No, it means that without the US NATO makes no sense.
Why wouldn't they trust them?
While the dissolution of NATO is going to cause quite a stir and quite a bit anxiety in the market, fact is that none of its members face any sort of territorial threat and are unlikely to do so for the foreseeable future. Fact is, NATO is a convenient leftover from the Cold War and while I'm glad it's still here it's not a necessity anymore.
On top of that there's the fact that outside of the defence sector there's little private money riding on it.

In other words there's no reason why European businesses would stop spending money in the US and as I've mentioned before they can't afford not to.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

My apoligies for being headstrong, however I was hopeing that it would spark a discussion, however It did not turn out this way so it's back to the drawing board

I'm sorry to say this but your Heavy Bomber wouldn't be built. Think of the development costs for just 3 aircraft. You would be able to afford a hell of a lot more F-15E class attack aircraft for the cost of just one of them. The economies of scale just don't seem to work....

_________________
Nick

@ashwellkennedy