Originally Posted by
unblestdevotee
I can get behind the big stick policy policy. I just don’t see how allowing help softens the idea of our power there. I mean we’ve been doing this whole event with kid gloves on so far. It seems to me that taking down the whole country why creating issues for two other aggressors while using a minuscule, by our stature, amount of resources.
Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe we have more money in the first month of Ukraine than what we’re putting into this fight.
props to the recent Posters who got this thread back on track.
The market response both yesterday and today basically suggest to me (imo only) that the conflict is cooling. The strait is still risky to navigate. And Yes there will likely be more sensational drone or missile strikes and I’d expect LOTS of subsequent images and pearl-clutching commentary, but those are secondary weapons to try and shape minds rather than to dictate the options of great powers. As one who lived through the effects of the years of threats and chants and occasional military strikes I’m willing to wait another 2-3 weeks to see how the administration completes its plan. Have there been errors? Sure, welcome to conflict where the enemy gets a vote. But the overall losses are MUCH LESS than I think we’d see if we keep waiting and hoping for the best rather than taking action and influencing the situation.