If you imagine that people wouldn't lend BTC to the US, remember that, when Standard&Poor's reduced America's credit rating, US bonds shot up in price (even though technically they were the one asset that S&P's rating was about the most).
You could say that money printing and counterfeiting are similar things on opposite sides of the law. But that is still a shallow, high-school level understanding. When a con artist pays for things with counterfeit money they don't typically invest this back into the economy and produce more value, so counterfeiting is virtually guaranteed to produce inflation if it is not curtailed.
But governments print money in huge quantities all the time with minimal inflation.
This seems like a novel claim: that bitcoin would reduce world conflict.
Ponder, for a moment, the way in which governments use the "printing" of fiat money to fund wars (for private sector profit, revolving back into that private sector's lobbying those governments for even more war and military spending).
Ponder, for a moment, the amount of energy and Earth's resources expended to materialize these wars and military spending.
Bitcoin (or, the proof-of-work cryptocurrency concept as such) by its design prevents (or at least very severely inhibits) this type of governmental hijacking for a mere fraction of the resources spent.
This applies to other heavily-subsidized sectors/areas/industries with a powerful lobbying influence/revolving doors/etc.
Imagine if we could vote by paying our taxes in Bitcoin (in a Bitcoin full-blown, mainstream Bitcoin economy) in proportion to specific Bitcoin addresses/accounts allocated for specific policy issues or target governmental groups, and thus have an actual, real and direct democracy instead of a 4-year theatre of false puppets and promises.