@APEXENIGMA6@LibertyNews@zerohedge What you mean bout “we” 😂😂
The headlines came from an investigation and they said it because of what I mention on the other reply. Probably is just noise because in effect is all gone, but yeah they are calling it out because “unclear vision”. It’s crazy
@zeromediafeed They Tyler, nice trade. I was aiming to take the sell side on Usdjpy on that intervention area. Would you share some of your mind on why you prefer just to long it? (If the case) I see you have it forecast toward 170.
Would just like to see how you think about it. :) cheers
@Fink_Money As we move towards a more IA dominated space, we are going to see more of this. Because now people replace the basic “knowledge” of a “mentor”
With IA, so the way to close that gap is going to be posting “finance complex lingo and stuff”.
Rubio: "There might be some news (on Iran) later today. There may not be. I hope there will be. I am not sure yet. There has been some progress done. Even as I speak to you now there is some work being done. There is a chance that maybe later today, tomorrow, maybe couple of days we may have something to say, but this issue needs to be solved one way or another. Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. The strait needs to be open without tolls. They need to Give their enriched Uranium. We need to address the issue of enrichment. The president’s preference is to deal with it in a diplomatic way. That is what we are working on right now"
@DoejiStar I’m gonna sit here, imma wait for them to send the dollar towards 98.500, gonna sell that eurusd close to those 1.17 and I’ll be waiting for the next rounds of misiles
@paxtrader777@AnthonyCrudele Pax Thank you so much for taking the time to respond. That sounds so awesome!! “The more things change the more they stay the same”. 🫡🫡 Love yours and Anthony material, always helpful to read. I’m over here dreaming with rising a 100M+ fund. 😁💪🏾
The Two Different Paths: We are about to find out which path we are on. As I said in my last note, from my conversations with a number of world leaders in a number of countries, and as seems obvious to me, there will either be a) a U.S. win over Iran, which will require taking control over the Strait of Hormuz and assuring that Iran's nuclear program is dead—i.e., defanging Iran, or b) a U.S. loss, which is the result if these things don't happen.
Most senior policy makers I speak with believe that we are likely headed down the b) path and that will be made clear soon. It needs to be made clear soon because continuing on the current path or being more forceful will cause sharp increases in oil and gasoline prices and great difficulties during the high travel season, bad political consequences for President Trump, and difficulties in his upcoming meeting with President Xi in China. So, we should have that verdict soon.
The perception that the b) path is most likely is already leading to a view that the United States will not be a reliable protector against possible opponents like Russia in Europe and/or China in Asia, and that is already leading to actions being taken that are sensible in light of that belief, like leaders paying "tribute" visits to China. As explained before, this set of circumstances is likely to have some analogous consequences to Great Britain losing the Suez Canal in 1956. By the way, this is also happening at a time when China is earning huge amounts of money through its very strong exports—so much money that it is difficult for those Chinese earning the money to know what to do with it. This is making China a very important player in world capital markets as well as world trade. In other words, these events are making China geopolitically and financially stronger.