Political Posts

[james22]

2 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

You can do that on your own.

 

This.

 

What you read outside or/after school should vastly dwarf what you read inside/during anyway.

[John Hjorth]

Reuters [March 17 2023] : ICC judges issue arrest warrant for Putin over war crimes in Ukraine .

 

The article mentions :

 

Kremlin says arrest warants 'outrageous und unacceptable'

Putin is third serving head of state to get ICC arrest warrant

 

Yes, it places the man in a certain leage, almost of his own. However not like getting an Oscar for best permance or Nobels Prize for Peace.

 

Mr. Browder must be overjoyed.

[John Hjorth]

On 3/16/2023 at 5:52 PM, Xerxes said:

is this a deleted scene from Top Gun 2?

We have been betrayed !! It seems that Paramount has been keeping a hidden Extended Edition version of Top Gun (ala Peter Jackson LOTR) to double-dip our pockets 

 

@Xerxes,

 

This tweet is for you.

[patience_and_focus]

On 3/16/2023 at 9:07 PM, Dinar said:

 

Well, that's unfortunate.  There is something to be said for core curriculum and being well-rounded.  I think physics majors should read Plato and philosophy majors should know who Emmy Noether and Paul Dirac were, as well as be familiar with Rontgen

+

Well rounded is squarely what Charlie has in mind when he talks about using breadth of knowledge for building mental models and applying them.

 

 

 

[patience_and_focus]

On 3/17/2023 at 5:45 AM, rohitc99 said:

Cannot speak for Mexico, but can for India. Its tough to compare and its changing very rapidly in India. some of the indicators are changing and quality of life is improving a lot. In the next 5 years a lot of social indicators will be much better

 

Its difficult to say what is better ? having freedom, but worse economic indicators, or the other way around. The ideal would be both, but nothing is ever ideal

 

In Urban India, a lot of social and economic indicators are above world average. Its the rural areas where a lot of catch up has to happen

It depends on what people want (when given a choice - autocracies don't count). Part of Western bias (in middle east) was assumption of wanting western style democratic states.

 

As for India, I have been told by numerous immigrants that people there are very independent minded in the sense that they don't like being told what to do and there is also huge diversity of language (> 25) and culture (like Europe). That is why it's like herding cats. But all in all people prefer their way / subcultures and are allowed to practice that. That is what matters.

Edited March 18, 2023 by patience_and_focus

[rohitc99]

2 hours ago, patience_and_focus said:

It depends on what people want (when given a choice - autocracies don't count). Part of Western bias (in middle east) was assumption of wanting western style democratic states.

 

As for India, I have been told by numerous immigrants that people there are very independent minded in the sense that they don't like being told what to do and there is also huge diversity of language (> 25) and culture (like Europe). That is why it's like herding cats. But all in all people prefer their way / subcultures and are allowed to practice that. That is what matters.

Exactly and also a lot of social issues like casteism as not imposed top down. Does not mean its acceptable or fair, but it a feature of the society and the government has been fighting it for the last 75 years with some success and progress.

 

that said, the level of freedom is very high (maybe too high sometimes). What prem has been pointing out in his letters is not hyperbole, there is a lot change happening in the country. he referenced this video ..worth watching especially from an investing standpoint too

 

India has leapfrogged a lot of western countries from a digital infrastructure standpoint

 

 

[Xerxes]

On 3/18/2023 at 4:15 AM, John Hjorth said:

 

@Xerxes,

 

This tweet is for you.

 

Looks like the internet community have it beyond doubt that it was NOT from a Top Gun deleted scene, with Tom Cruise flying a stolen Su-27. Now if the same internet community can put their effort and intellect to solve an actual mystery (Nord Stream pipelines) that would be great. 
 

This “T1000 drone Terminator vs. Su-27 Flanker” episode I think would be classified under cat-and-mouse game that always been there but now running with more threshold for risk. Perhaps to “normalize” of military engagements/contacts between the two nuclear powers. The more you blur the line the more you can leverage your hybrid warfare.
 

I think there will simply be more of these pushes by the Kremlin. But nothing consequential will come of it. That said listening to news reporter asking Pentagon officials in press conference if the drone incident was an act of war was hilarious. These silly reporters seem to forget that NATO led by U.S. is actually at war with Russia. However it is a war were both sides have decided to fight within a certain framework of containment. 

 

 

Edited March 19, 2023 by Xerxes

[shhughes1116]

On 5/18/2022 at 9:05 PM, shhughes1116 said:

A few weeks ago, I said to expect the Fourth Battle of Krakiv, which would blow open the Russian flank in the Donbas and lead to an encirclement of Russian troops.  That is now happening in Izyum - the Ukrainians are starting to pinch that salient, while at the same time Ukraine troops are threatening Vovchansk.  This will suck Russian troops from other areas to protect the railroad lines between Belgorod and Donbas.   And they are being sucked into their rear areas to defend against partisans, especially in the South.  
 

With the growing manpower advantage and with an unending stream of weapons from the West, I suspect we are going to see Ukraine sever the land-bridge to Crimea this Summer by attacking towards Melitpol.  This would expose the flank of Russian troops in Kherson and likely cause them to fall back into Crimea, rather than hold Kherson and die like the Ukrainian soldiers in Mauriopol.  That opens up numerous possibles for Ukraine to finish the war on their terms. 
 

Plenty more bleeding and death to come, sadly.  But I think we are going to see the Russian army routed in the field.  

 

For those of you that still follow this war closely, there have been some interesting actions recently, which lead me to believe the Ukrainian counter-offensive is coming soon, maybe late Spring.    

1. A handful of Russian mil-bloggers have been reporting Ukrainian attacks near Polohy.  From what is described, the Ukrainians are conducting reconnaissance in force.    

2. The most recent aid package from the United States contained fuel trucks designed to support heavy tanks and mechanized infantry in the field.

3.  Recent aid packages have included a lot of bridging and engineering equipment.    

4. Over the past few months, it looks like the Ukrainians have been reinforcing Bahkmut with Territorial Defense Forces and existing Brigrades (i.e. 80th, 92nd, 93rd).  Clearly things are tough in Bahkmut, but it doesn't look like they've been sending new units that have been recently trained by the West.  And I don't see any of the new vehicles they've been getting from the West (i.e. AMX-RC10s, Leopard 2s, Marder IFVs, Bradley IFVs). 

5.  Ukraine is forming 28,000 volunteers into Assault Brigades - that's about 10 brigades.   

 

By my estimation, Ukraine has another 5-6 undeployed brigades and support units trained by the West that have not been deployed yet.  Add in the Assault Brigades and you get a force of 15-16 Brigades.  The Challenger II and Leopard II tanks that they get this Spring, along with the Strykers, Bradleys, and Marders, will enable Ukraine to create from these brigades two armored brigades and a handful of mechanized brigades.  This is a pretty formidable force, especially with the Leopard IIs and Challenger IIs in the van. 

 

I continue to think the main thrust happens through Polohy, with subsequent thrusts to Berdyansk and Melitpol.  I think there will be a Dnipro River crossing - maybe a feint -  to keep Russian forces fixed along the river.  If the Russians remain fixed to the river, I'll bet we see a thunder run by the ex-French AMX-RC10s towards the Crimean Isthmus to prevent Russian forces from retreating into Crimea, which might cause a rout amongst the Russian forces that are currently along the Dnipro River.    

 

I think Ukraine gets one chance at a counter-offensive.  If this fails, I think they are pushed by the West to sue for peace.      

 

 

 

 

[Xerxes]

Not exactly related but informative 

 

 

[ValueArb]

On 3/23/2023 at 1:13 PM, shhughes1116 said:

 

For those of you that still follow this war closely, there have been some interesting actions recently, which lead me to believe the Ukrainian counter-offensive is coming soon, maybe late Spring.    

1. A handful of Russian mil-bloggers have been reporting Ukrainian attacks near Polohy.  From what is described, the Ukrainians are conducting reconnaissance in force.    

2. The most recent aid package from the United States contained fuel trucks designed to support heavy tanks and mechanized infantry in the field.

3.  Recent aid packages have included a lot of bridging and engineering equipment.    

4. Over the past few months, it looks like the Ukrainians have been reinforcing Bahkmut with Territorial Defense Forces and existing Brigrades (i.e. 80th, 92nd, 93rd).  Clearly things are tough in Bahkmut, but it doesn't look like they've been sending new units that have been recently trained by the West.  And I don't see any of the new vehicles they've been getting from the West (i.e. AMX-RC10s, Leopard 2s, Marder IFVs, Bradley IFVs). 

5.  Ukraine is forming 28,000 volunteers into Assault Brigades - that's about 10 brigades.   

 

By my estimation, Ukraine has another 5-6 undeployed brigades and support units trained by the West that have not been deployed yet.  Add in the Assault Brigades and you get a force of 15-16 Brigades.  The Challenger II and Leopard II tanks that they get this Spring, along with the Strykers, Bradleys, and Marders, will enable Ukraine to create from these brigades two armored brigades and a handful of mechanized brigades.  This is a pretty formidable force, especially with the Leopard IIs and Challenger IIs in the van. 

 

I continue to think the main thrust happens through Polohy, with subsequent thrusts to Berdyansk and Melitpol.  I think there will be a Dnipro River crossing - maybe a feint -  to keep Russian forces fixed along the river.  If the Russians remain fixed to the river, I'll bet we see a thunder run by the ex-French AMX-RC10s towards the Crimean Isthmus to prevent Russian forces from retreating into Crimea, which might cause a rout amongst the Russian forces that are currently along the Dnipro River.    

 

I think Ukraine gets one chance at a counter-offensive.  If this fails, I think they are pushed by the West to sue for peace.      

 

 

 

 

 

Ukraine isn't going to ever sue for peace and it's never going to be abandoned by most of Europe, esp UK and US. This is at least a 3-5 year war, and we need accept that and start training and supplying them with more modern weapons, including Abrams, F-16 and ATACMS. 

 

Russian's cannot fully replace modern equipment losses and won't likely ever be able to during duration of war. Their tiny economy was already in sad shape before the war. They couldn't build anything more than a handful of T-14 Armatas, or SU-57s in the last decade. Now with sanctions instead of having an Italy size economy they might be half that. And with much more diminished access to modern computer chips. They'll keep pouring in sacrificial troops and using massive amounts of ammunition, artillery and dumb munitions, but over time as the costs of war hit more and more families in Russia proper the inevitable mass street protests will begin.

 

All the Ukrainians have to do is take back Melitopol and take out the Kerch bridge, and Crimea falls as trapped and unsupplied Russian troops panic and try to flee on the few available ferries.

[Dinar]

4 hours ago, ValueArb said:

 

Ukraine isn't going to ever sue for peace and it's never going to be abandoned by most of Europe, esp UK and US. This is at least a 3-5 year war, and we need accept that and start training and supplying them with more modern weapons, including Abrams, F-16 and ATACMS. 

 

Russian's cannot fully replace modern equipment losses and won't likely ever be able to during duration of war. Their tiny economy was already in sad shape before the war. They couldn't build anything more than a handful of T-14 Armatas, or SU-57s in the last decade. Now with sanctions instead of having an Italy size economy they might be half that. And with much more diminished access to modern computer chips. They'll keep pouring in sacrificial troops and using massive amounts of ammunition, artillery and dumb munitions, but over time as the costs of war hit more and more families in Russia proper the inevitable mass street protests will begin.

 

All the Ukrainians have to do is take back Melitopol and take out the Kerch bridge, and Crimea falls as trapped and unsupplied Russian troops panic and try to flee on the few available ferries.

I wish that you were right, but I am afraid that your support for Ukraine blinds you to how unpopular supporting Ukraine is in Europe and US.  I cannot imagine for a moment that the French who are protesting the increase in the pension age or Germans who are on strike today would be willing to sacrifice E 100bn to support Ukraine for the next 3-5 years.  What gives you that confidence?  In the US, I have not seen any reliable poll done of what support for Ukraine is.  I can promise you that the support Ukraine gets in my circle of Ivy League educated friends is  matched by visceral opposition to helping Ukraine from far more numerous porters, doormen, supers, barbers and other working class folk.  

[cubsfan]

^^^ That's an interesting response. Of course, the Germans and France are going to be the key, if Ukraine is going to be saved. I have no idea how to handicap it - but they would be nuts to let Ukraine go.  You can talk about $100B here and there - but pretty much the future of Europe is at stake.  

 

Are they really that stupid?

[Dinar]

22 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

^^^ That's an interesting response. Of course, the Germans and France are going to be the key, if Ukraine is going to be saved. I have no idea how to handicap it - but they would be nuts to let Ukraine go.  You can talk about $100B here and there - but pretty much the future of Europe is at stake.  

 

Are they really that stupid?

Why would they be nuts?  They are all NATO countries....

[ValueArb]

4 hours ago, Dinar said:

I wish that you were right, but I am afraid that your support for Ukraine blinds you to how unpopular supporting Ukraine is in Europe and US.  I cannot imagine for a moment that the French who are protesting the increase in the pension age or Germans who are on strike today would be willing to sacrifice E 100bn to support Ukraine for the next 3-5 years.  What gives you that confidence?  In the US, I have not seen any reliable poll done of what support for Ukraine is.  I can promise you that the support Ukraine gets in my circle of Ivy League educated friends is  matched by visceral opposition to helping Ukraine from far more numerous porters, doormen, supers, barbers and other working class folk.  

 

In Europe it's been made perfectly clear how tenuous their future is if Russia wins in Ukraine. That would increase the size of Putin's military by a third, Russia's economy by a similar amount, allow them to dominate the Black Sea and put a ton of Russian divisions and air crews 400 miles closer to western Europe.

 

And Ukrainian aid passed overwhelmingly in both houses by roughly 80% yes votes. Some americans don't understand how critical this conflict and our future geopolitical costs that will increase if Ukraine loses (and how much better and safer the world will become when Ukraine takes back all of its territory). But I remain confident that most americans will understand this. Even DeSantis came around.

[cubsfan]

11 hours ago, Dinar said:

Why would they be nuts?  They are all NATO countries....

 

France & Germany are the defacto leaders of Europe. If they throw Ukraine to the wolves, it just invites Russia to take any of his European neighbors he wants. They would be nuts to let $100B 

stand in the way of the defense of Europe.

Edited March 28, 2023 by cubsfan

[Dinar]

10 hours ago, ValueArb said:

 

In Europe it's been made perfectly clear how tenuous their future is if Russia wins in Ukraine. That would increase the size of Putin's military by a third, Russia's economy by a similar amount, allow them to dominate the Black Sea and put a ton of Russian divisions and air crews 400 miles closer to western Europe.

 

And Ukrainian aid passed overwhelmingly in both houses by roughly 80% yes votes. Some americans don't understand how critical this conflict and our future geopolitical costs that will increase if Ukraine loses (and how much better and safer the world will become when Ukraine takes back all of its territory). But I remain confident that most americans will understand this. Even DeSantis came around.

So what?  Russia + Ukraine + Belarus would still be weaker than the European members of NATO.

Again, Germany and France are NATO countries, so US is obligated to defend them and so is UK.  You still have not explained why even if Russia wins in Ukraine, it can threaten NATO countries!

 

What gives you the confidence that an average American will prefer to help Ukraine rather than have an extra $1000-$2000 in his family's pocket?  By the way, again, please explain why Russia's victory in Ukraine is a threat to US interests? I do not understand why this is so!  Just because something passes Congress does not mean man on the street supports it, and if the people do not support it, Congress will follow the people.  

@cubsfan  Please explain how Russia can take any of its European neighbors even if it wins in Ukraine?  All of them, except for Moldova are members of NATO, so you see Russia able to defeat NATO?

[Pelagic]

15 hours ago, Dinar said:

I wish that you were right, but I am afraid that your support for Ukraine blinds you to how unpopular supporting Ukraine is in Europe and US.  I cannot imagine for a moment that the French who are protesting the increase in the pension age or Germans who are on strike today would be willing to sacrifice E 100bn to support Ukraine for the next 3-5 years.  What gives you that confidence?  In the US, I have not seen any reliable poll done of what support for Ukraine is.  I can promise you that the support Ukraine gets in my circle of Ivy League educated friends is  matched by visceral opposition to helping Ukraine from far more numerous porters, doormen, supers, barbers and other working class folk.  

 

The German government said a couple days ago they expect the war to last several years and want to increase their support from around 3B per year to 15B.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/germany-hoping-increase-military-aid-174914484.html

 

Meanwhile France is considering buying back Mirage fighter jets it sold to UAE to send to Ukraine. 

 

What governments end up spending a couple percent of their defense budget on and what a vocal portion of their constituency want them to do are often very different things.

 

I think better framing and more accurate accounting of aid provided would help supporters case, at least among those who are undecided or supportive of the current level of aid but wary of additional aid. For example almost everyone I've talked to who is against supporting Ukraine thinks the US is simply giving them cash which is then lost to corruption. That the vast majority of aid comes in the form of actual military supplies, a lot of which are past their prime, is lost on many of those opposing further aid. There's also an incentive structure at work that makes inflating the cost of materiel provided beneficial, both for those providing it as a show of support and a way to flex their soft power to other countries - China mainly, and for Ukraine as a way to play supporting countries against each other and encourage them to provide more.

[Dinar]

6 minutes ago, Pelagic said:

 

The German government said a couple days ago they expect the war to last several years and want to increase their support from around 3B per year to 15B.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/germany-hoping-increase-military-aid-174914484.html

 

Meanwhile France is considering buying back Mirage fighter jets it sold to UAE to send to Ukraine. 

 

What governments end up spending a couple percent of their defense budget on and what a vocal portion of their constituency want them to do are often very different things.

 

I think better framing and more accurate accounting of aid provided would help supporters case, at least among those who are undecided or supportive of the current level of aid but wary of additional aid. For example almost everyone I've talked to who is against supporting Ukraine thinks the US is simply giving them cash which is then lost to corruption. That the vast majority of aid comes in the form of actual military supplies, a lot of which are past their prime, is lost on many of those opposing further aid. There's also an incentive structure at work that makes inflating the cost of materiel provided beneficial, both for those providing it as a show of support and a way to flex their soft power to other countries - China mainly, and for Ukraine as a way to play supporting countries against each other and encourage them to provide more.

I agree with you, with one caveat.  Germany's military budget is $56bn, so if it increased aid to Ukraine to E 15bn per annum, then it is spending not a couple of percent of its military budget but more like 28-30%.

[ValueArb]

15 minutes ago, Dinar said:

I agree with you, with one caveat.  Germany's military budget is $56bn, so if it increased aid to Ukraine to E 15bn per annum, then it is spending not a couple of percent of its military budget but more like 28-30%.

 

Germany's military budget has to increase, it knows this.

[boilermaker75]

3 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

 

Germany's military budget has to increase, it knows this.

 

And giving to Ukraine's war effort is a very effective way to do this.

Edited March 28, 2023 by boilermaker75

[Pelagic]

16 minutes ago, Dinar said:

I agree with you, with one caveat.  Germany's military budget is $56bn, so if it increased aid to Ukraine to E 15bn per annum, then it is spending not a couple of percent of its military budget but more like 28-30%.

 

Well short of the NATO goal of 2% of GDP but still your point stands, even if it was around 2% of GDP at 85B, 15B would be a meaningful percent. I guess the best explanation is a lot of that 15B would be going to German manufacturers to build modern German equipment for their own military to replace current stock being sent to Ukraine.

[Castanza]

 

Thought this was a pretty good podcast with a few different perspectives from a guy with an interesting background. I'd say approach it knowing that the opinions are anecdotes influenced heavily by real world experiences. But frankly, I'd rather hear opinions from those who have done; over those who sit at desks and form opinions only based on what they read in books. 

 

____________________________

 

Outside of this interview all I will say about this whole situation is that the US is really f%&$ing up by allowing China to potentially broker a peace deal with Russia between Ukraine and other deals with the Saudis. The US Sphere of influence and credibility on a global scale are diminishing. 

[Spekulatius]

3 hours ago, ValueArb said:

 

Germany's military budget has to increase, it knows this.

I think the help to Ukraine is coming from a different bucket than the defense budget.

You can also see that it's likely that Ukraine is going to get fighter planes. the Poles sent the Mig-29 first and later they get the good stuff.

A year in, Ukraine is going to be the largest and best equipped army in Europe coming from and army that was using old Russian surplus mostly. Energy exports to Europe in the toilet with little lasting damage to the economy.

Well done Putin.

Edited March 28, 2023 by Spekulatius

[cubsfan]

9 hours ago, Dinar said:

 

@cubsfan  Please explain how Russia can take any of its European neighbors even if it wins in Ukraine?  All of them, except for Moldova are members of NATO, so you see Russia able to defeat NATO?

 

 You can speculate what's in Putin's mind and what he might do - but you really have no idea. That's the bottom line. The Europeans have constantly underestimated Putin. For years. Even when he took Crimea 9 years ago - they STILL underestimated him.  Now you have this mess. What will Putin do if he is allowed to take Ukraine??   You don't have a clue - only Putin knows that - NATO or no NATO.

 

Putin only understands weak leaders. So you spend the money, stop him now - because he only understands military strength IF someone is willing to use it. That's the language despots understand.

[Spekulatius]

20 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

 You can speculate what's in Putin's mind and what he might do - but you really have no idea. That's the bottom line. The Europeans have constantly underestimated Putin. For years. Even when he took Crimea 9 years ago - they STILL underestimated him.  Now you have this mess. What will Putin do if he is allowed to take Ukraine??   You don't have a clue - only Putin knows that - NATO or no NATO.

 

Putin only understands weak leaders. So you spend the money, stop him now - because he only understands military strength IF someone is willing to use it. That's the language despots understand.

I agree. When has appeasement ever worked against a despot like Putin? I can’t think of a single time. Now that it’s clear he sprung into a bear trap in an Ukraine, this is the best opportunity to defang him and Russia. Never let a mistake of your opponent go to waste.

Edited March 29, 2023 by Spekulatius