@RichardHaass The parallel holds beyond the choice to go in.
Both lacked defined objectives. Both underestimated costs. Both damaged their country’s credibility in ways that will outlast the conflict itself.
The difference is Putin had no allies to lose. We did. And we’re losing them.
$9 billion to degrade our biggest geopolitical rival, without a single American casualty, while strengthening NATO and signaling resolve to Beijing. That’s not waste. That’s the best return on a defense dollar this century.
Radio Free Europe isn’t a Cold War relic. It’s $250 million for soft power infrastructure in a region where we’re actively losing the information war to Russia and China. Cutting it now is what losing looks like.
Pax Americana kept us wealthy and made the world more prosperous than any previous hegemony. Soft power maintained that. Walking away from soft power is walking away from the order that made America what it is.
Is that the trade you want?
@Concernedc81459@mfa_russia I know. He managed to waste through quite an inheritance and lose every core strength Russia gained from the Soviet legacy.
All for his own benefit. Biggest traitor to his nation.
@NancyMace Wow, congratulations!
Vladimir Putin’s legislature also has his back 100% of the time.
Maybe Trump should auto pen your vote going forward? Why go to work at all, right?
@WhiteHouse Saving America from what?
-The Iran war you are losing?
-The Venezuela situation you cannot follow through on?
-The deal Iran is winning?
Pick one.
@M_Simonyan А средств (и ума) обогнать Португалию у этого Цахеса не хватает?
Инфраструктуру построить? Экономику дифференцировать?
Пупок не порвите, вы с Димой сегодня разогнались, притормозите с водкой.
I’ve posted too cautious and boring posts about utility rates and mag-7.
Let me be blunt and short.
Utility rates are rising and the grid can’t keep up with what we’re building. Seven companies are 30% of the S&P 500. They added $4.8 trillion in market cap two months ago. Brighter people noticed this pattern before me. I’m not the first one calling it.
Could I be wrong? Yep. Maybe AI delivers everything the valuations are pricing in and we get away with it. If so, great. I’ll be glad to be wrong.
But as it sits, I’m smelling dot-com bubble.
Calling it now so the receipt exists later.
Western analysts consistently overlook the Tsar-Serf dynamic that survived Soviet flattening and revived in the 90s when Russia became a criminal enterprise.
Терпилы - those who endure, a population conditioned across centuries to accept extraction from above. And be quiet about it.
Putin operates within Third Rome framework. Kirill anointed him as historically chosen and spoke about this. Losing invalidates the theology that justifies the regime.
So, like a gambler facing growing losses, he’s likely to bet it all on zero. NATO is about to be tested. We can’t rely on his rationality. There is none.
@makkaraaaaa@BohuslavskaKate Sorry. We don’t. You really do have a wonderful country, I liked the vibe in Helsinki for a calm, midnight stroll.
But I highly doubt he goes against Finland. Although, he threw out rationality out of the window, at least, back in 2022, so I could be wrong.
At least the military is paying attention.
On Putin’s 70th birthday in 2022, Kirill said: “God put you in power so that you could perform a service of special importance.” Putin believes it. He can’t be the autocrat who lost - losing invalidates the theology that justifies him.
Weak leaders reaching for redemption is how miscalculations happen. The Baltic states are the available redemption arc.
Three months of bombing produced leverage. For Iran.
How do you topple a mountainous nation with 90 million people by air? The only path was organic regime change. February 28 closed that door.
We chose brute force when we needed patience.
Now we’re negotiating with a weak hand and demanding the strong one to pretend surrender.
Brains over brute force. Every time.
Saying it again for the people in the back: how do you obliterate knowledge?
Sounds great. Doesn’t work in practice. The knowledge is in people, not buildings.
Take the peace deal.
Yes, it favors Iran. They have the upper hand on terms. Take it anyway.
February 28, we had the option for a covert operation to help organic regime change. We chose brute strength. Every bomb we’ve dropped since then handed the regime a rally-around-the-flag moment that delayed exactly what we said we wanted. Three months later the regime is still in power and the deal is on Iran’s terms.
Escalation gets us nowhere. I stated why in prior posts.