> Because all the actions that took place "to fix" Greece was in order to fix the problem of the public debt.

That assertion is quite wrong and fly in the face of facts and history.

For example, Greece received a massive debt pardon which whiped out about half the state's debt toward private banks. This alone triggered the bankruptcy of a bunch of private banks, including from other countries also undergoing bailout processes of their own.

Additionally, the bailout process was focused on controlling structural deficit, and not debt. Debt is not the problem, but depending on loans just to keep the state operating is a collosal problem. After Greece's accounting fraud was blown, Greel governments were forced to face the problem of the Greek state enduring double digits deficits. "Austerity" is just a fancy word for "we need to reign in all this overspending", and it boggles the mind how the fact that Greece was routinely spending over 10% of it's fiscal revenue, resorting of loans after loans to cover the difference, is simply omitted or glanced over.

This is exactly why i think the approach taken has been wrong. Austerity was an obvious mistake, it didn't work. What could work was just immediate debt repayment with whatever assets available. Either voluntary like: cutting them off with naval and aerial blockade and making pay for anything including critical imports, only after the debt is repayed, and only in cash, or involuntary say by taking some Mediterranean islands with airborne or sea invasion and selling the land off, deporting the population (obviously compensating the said population at market prices, meaning private entities or persons shouldn't suffer, point is taking sovereign i.e. government land).

I think this isn't going to get fixed until the debt between nations will not be given against some specific collaterial with understood and universally accepted means of taking it regardless of sovereignty. I.e. don't give money to those stronger than you, and be ready to take it back at gunpoint.