Bitcoin countries will tend to be neutral like Switzerland and avoid conflict. Mutually beneficial trade will be the primary interaction with foreign powers and whatever few belligerent states try to cause trouble will feel pressured to behave by the international community.

Just because the Fiat country printed an extra trillion does not mean that that trillion is in fact worth a trillion.

You're not missing anything. Bitcoiners like to talk about how fiat is unilaterally awful and only used by imbeciles. The truth is that fiat has conferred certain 'advantages' to its users, at least for a time. One of them has been the ability to mobilize the nation in different ways, including the one you've described. (It goes without saying that the ability to mobilize for endless war is not great for the actual people in those countries.)

Literally nobody knows how the scenario you've described would shake out, because it's never happened, and beyond that it's hard to reason about. In a world where btc had achieved enough success for your scenario to be plausible, what else would be true? What would the larger state of the world be like? Who are these countries trading with? What kind of economic interdependence do they have? Those things would probably have a lot to do with the ultimate fate of these countries.

But yeah, I've thought of this too. It is a massive advantage to the existing power structures to be able to control money, which is why they do it. Historically, it turns to tragedy in the end, as we know. In the meantime, though, total warmaking capacity would seem to be a giant advantage.

Please watch this amazing talk about Bitcoin vs wars... with Stefan Molyneux. https://www.bitchute.com/video/AWGB6rfMmYKt/

TLDR: it is NOT possible. End of story. No debate.

This is a very interesting article!! And now you're my favorite to subscribe to posts.

To answer this. I somewhat disagree. Fiat may have 2 trillion to use to spend on war efforts, but wars could still be won with fewer means. To translate that as an example, the Korean War was won by using half the force that the North had. Terrible and stupid war regardless. Imagine fighting a war with 2-3 more solders per solder on the opposing side. It is possible. And I know this is well over a year later, but I saw a post somewhere I forgot the site, darn me. That $500 Russian drones are bombing and wrecking havoc on 10million dollar armored tanks. I cannot say if this is source is true, but it was disturbing. Because it also said the Ukrainian solder that tried to flee the burning tank were shot while running out.

Countries with bitcoin standards don't just happen overnight. They all start with their own fiat currencies (or at least dollars in reserve) that they have more control over and start stacking corn on the down-low. Even gung-ho El Salvador didn't stack a bunch of BTC at once, they're buying 1 BTC a day or something for their reserves. Most countries will do so far slower.

Luckily for Bitcoiners, fiat isn't dying 1 country at a time... ALL fiat currencies are growing more weak simultaneously. That means that the world is giving up on fiat all at once and although some smaller fiats may bow out first, most will go into hyperinflation at the same time the dollar does. At that time ALL countries will be competing to get their hands on whatever bitcoins they can.

Therefore, a scenario where a healthy fiat currency is at war with a bitcoinized country has the exact same problem as a scenario where Dinosaurs fight a war against mankind... They simply won't exist at the same time.

I think there will be war for gold and silver and maybe bitcoiners will just be sitting back and watching the show. Sad?

It's a too simplistic view about a complex situation.

Strictly about economic terms...

A simple answer: These circumstances certainly gives the edge to the country using FIAT currency.

Close to reality answer: Both countries will end up using FIAT and Bitcoin in order to take advantage of both currencies.

IMO, as soon we reach a moment where most of the countries starts adopting bitcoin, Governments as we know will fall. Most of people will simply skip taxes. That would mean large scale/long term wars will not exist anymore, it's simply too expansive.

Soldiers on the fiat side will fight by compulsion... soldiers on Bitcoin's side will fight by their own volition. Who's going to win? Might I suggest you have a peek at Afghanistan.... hmmmm?

Yeah, you are missing a couple things.

When I think about the impact of a hard currency on war I think of the change in incentive structure. It takes away a tool the state uses to hide its war spending. It forces the state to tax which gets more attention of the citizens.

There's another aspect to this. In bitcoin land I suspect it might not be a democracy. Or at least not as centrally controlled. I also suspect it would be so much more prosperous that it would have better defenses than fiat land. I suspect there would not be a war. If there was it would be shorter than fiat vs. fiat.

It's true that fiat is much more convenient (actually it was built) for controlling a population and using it in military operations.

What are they fighting over BTW?

If pressed, I believe any government will resort to theft (debasement) to ensure their continued survival.

Just because a country uses a Bitcoin accounting standard, does not make it impossible for them to fractionally reserve or print paper bitcoins, or to loot the banks and exchanges that custody bitcoins.

At some stage people who are soldiers decide it's not worth risking their lives for fake money