Alaric wrote:NeilW wrote:When the country needs to deploy its real resources to defend itself suddenly the issue of money disappears.
Not totally. The UK would have been unable to continue in 1917 and 1940 had American credit not been available. The USA pulled out the financial support plug to stop the 1956 Suez intervention.
Much earlier the Stuart kings were always running out of money to fight wars in the 1600s, whilst the opposition to Napoleon elsewhere in Europe was only kept going by UK financial support.
That again is a misconception - much the same as the usual tropes about Zimbabwe.
You can command your own resources indefinitely. It's when you want somebody else's resources you have to exchange something you have for something they have.
But you cannot run out of something you create and can enforceable require other people to obtain to give to you.