Ukraine War... How much will S&P drop this week?

[fatlittlepig]

I’ve always felt that the US should not guarantee the security of any country or state other than itself. Along those lines I don’t think we should be in the nato alliance, why would an attack on a nato country be treated as an attack on us. In addition many of the nato member countries have not lived up to their financial obligations. Doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. With regards to Ukraine, I suppose you have to decide if the sovereignty of Ukraine is enough of a core national interest to the USA to 1. Fund billions of dollars to Ukraine 2. Funnel enough weapons that our own stockpiles are being depleted (in addition recent history in Afghanistan has shown that inevitably these weapons eventually will be misappropriated by bad actors) and most importantly 3. Increase the chance of a miscalculation on either side dragging us into yet another military conflict, the stakes of which would far exceed the recent Middle east misadventures which we have spent decades unwinding ourselves. Yes what’s happening is truly terrible, I would focus on humanitarian aid and a diplomatic solution.

[Max Power]

Our increasing involvement in this war is concerning and troubling to me. I think you can both condemn Russian aggression and also question the wisdom of getting into a proxy war with Russia. It has now leaked that we provided intelligence that assisted Ukraine in sinking the russian flagship and also locations of russian generals for targeting. We just got out of Afghanistan and now we are getting intertwined in a far more dangerous situation.

Whatever do you mean?

Didn't George Washington found this country to get involved in foreign conflicts, take sides, and inflame other more powerful countries? I thought he was all about that stuff.

Didn't those guys come across the pond and charter the USA so they could be much more involved with Euro wars and politics?

...in all honesty, I could care less about giving our older or excess weapons away. The stupid part is that we make no secret of it. We publish widely that our weapons took down Russia warship, tanks, etc. It obviously inflames Russia (and others much more powerful than Ukraine) when there is absolutely no need. It also weakens our economy to print and print to help a foreign land, and we will obviously pay more for oil for awhile. Worst of all, it continues the dumb expectation of USA as World Police. As I said, China is probably the big winner in all of this... near term and certainly long term.

[fatlittlepig]

American mothers are rationing baby formula and the congress with little debate is falling over themselves to approve 40B in aid to a country known for corruption. I’m surprised with the lack of dissenting voices but on the other hand I’m not.

[F0017S0]

Since the onset of this new European conflict, I've kind of wondered what would have happened had Ukraine remained a nuclear weapons state after the dissolution of the former Soviet Union? Would Russia have risked attacking a nuclear state, secured by the power of the atom?

[Jaqen Haghar MD]

The reason you push back now, as distasteful as it is, is because it’s easier and cheaper then trying to push back later.

I have a hard time saying, “Do whatever you want to those young mothers and teenage girls, just don’t devalue my 401K, or take away my lifestyle.” Perhaps you’ve heard about some of the unfortunate reports. The women in the fur coat, the group of held teenage girls. The husbands and fathers that were executed, the wives and daughters who were…. not so lucky.

Isolationist policies don’t work, but denial is a natural tendency, especially when faced with two bad choices. If only there was a third, painless way…. There is not. Problems when ignored, grow.

But it is a dangerous time in the world right now. A time to be wise in our choices, but strong in our convictions. We look weak right now, and as a consequence, darkness stirs.

“Death is a solution to all problems. No man, no problem” -Stalin

[fatlittlepig]

After Vietnam, Korea, Lebanon, Cuba, Somalia, iraq 1 and 2, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria, isolationism all of a sudden looks pretty good.

[Tim]

After Vietnam, Korea, Lebanon, Cuba, Somalia, iraq 1 and 2, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria, isolationism all of a sudden looks pretty good.

Except when it starts coming home. I am not so sure that the blockade of Cuba because of nuclear weapons was a bad choice. I am not so sure crushing ISIS was a bad choice. I’ll let you decide when a use of force is needed to protect our isolation.

[fatlittlepig]

Except when it starts coming home. I am not so sure that the blockade of Cuba because of nuclear weapons was a bad choice. I am not so sure crushing ISIS was a bad choice. I’ll let you decide when a use of force is needed to protect our isolation.

i was referring to the bay of pigs invasion (which helped lead to the missile crisis in the first place), and I never mentioned ISIS in my post.

[Tim]

i was referring to the bay of pigs invasion (which helped lead to the missile crisis in the first place), and I never mentioned ISIS in my post.

Understand. The question still remains, when is it appropriate to protect our isolation with preemptive actions or activities. I don’t know.

I am more concerned with domestically motivated military and industrial interests and political motivations influencing foreign involvements. That is wrong.

[Max Power]

The reason you push back now, as distasteful as it is, is because it’s easier and cheaper then trying to push back later...

...Isolationist policies don’t work, but denial is a natural tendency, especially when faced with two bad choices...

I don't think our chance of USA being invaded by Russia is any higher if we sit idle and let them take Ukraine than if we supply Ukraine with weapons, humanitarian, intelligence forever. If anything, it's lower risk if we had let Russia spread out occupying Ukraine, we don't antagonize them with clearly telegraphed help to Ukraine, etc.

All war machines run out of gas, out of money, out of troops. Look at the UK or France at the peak of their "colonies" empires. The huns. The Romans. The crusades. The USSR. Nobody has ever conquered the world.
...the empires all crumble from within. They run out of money to pay troops, run out of troops to occupy, run out of food and water.

Isolation in military terms can, and does, work. This central North American land (as opposed to central Europe or Asia or Africa) was settled for good reason. America is in a fantastic spot with a highly defensible location, great tech, fantastic natural resources, and strong economy. Anyone who has played RISK game knows it's the best continent to hold. It's ultimately up to us if we want to cede that status with extension to foreign conflicts simply because we "really should help."

[Zaphod]

American mothers are rationing baby formula and the congress with little debate is falling over themselves to approve 40B in aid to a country known for corruption. I’m surprised with the lack of dissenting voices but on the other hand I’m not.

this is dumb holdover policy
biden could cut all the trump tarifs, and that would knock a whole pt plus off inflation
we lack serious people in charge

proxy wars are normal and not new and have rules apparently, it russia wants to grind itself to dust in ukraine fine.

[Jaqen Haghar MD]

The problem becomes, 40 years out, when Russia controls all of Europe, and China controls all of the Pacific, the US becomes pretty small and isolated. But like the environment, and the deficit, that’s the next generation’s problem…. Good luck kids.

When the US defeated Japan, their officers asked why we weren’t treating their population, and especially the women, the way they treated defeated populations and planned on treating our’s.

Only the US and a few western countries practice “gentleman’s warfare”…. In relative terms of warfare, that is. The general US population can be a bit naive.

[fatlittlepig]

Actually, naïveté is making the same mistakes over and over. Naive is thinking there is a military solution to our problems, (the losers end up being our soldiers) We spent the past 20 years and trillion+ dollars in Afghanistan and Iraq and accomplished exactly nothing, and now the cycle continues. It’s disgusting.

[Jaqen Haghar MD]

This isn’t like a nonsense, unilateral US operation in some 3rd world country.

It’s actually more comparable to when Hitler invaded the Sudetenland pre-WW2, then went for all of Czechoslovakia after that. Chillingly comparable. The world’s response is determining global history.

Putin was planning empire-building far beyond Ukraine. It was supposed to be a few day blitzkrieg takeover, then on to the rest. Luckily it turned into a disaster for Russia, so far.

[Sampter]

This isn’t like a nonsense, unilateral US operation in some 3rd world country.

It’s actually more comparable to when Hitler invaded the Sudetenland pre-WW2, then went for all of Czechoslovakia after that. Chillingly comparable. The world’s response is determining global history.

Putin was planning empire-building far beyond Ukraine. It was supposed to be a few day blitzkrieg takeover, then on to the rest. Luckily it turned into a disaster for Russia, so far.

I agree with you....if Ukraine had been a push-over with no response from US and Europe Putin would be marching on to other countries. NATO was formed in part to be strength in numbers against the Soviet Union.