NATO
Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF
Mentions (24Hr)
80.00% Today
Reddit Posts
Mentions
They've been dangling NATO membership in front of Ukraine since 2008. Will never happen. If they actually wanted it in NATO, it would've happened by now.
We don’t know what it will look like yet but Zelenskyy and the European leaders were upbeat about the security assurances Trump is offering. I’ve seen “article 5 type assurances while not joining NATO” as a possibility for what’s being offered
Well, before P started the war (last few weeks before that), Russia were demanding that Ukraine signs a deal they wont join NATO and Donbas will get autonomy (still under Ukrainian control!!). I recon Zelenskij were willing to sing it, but with pressure from EU (mainly) and Biden he told Putin to bugger off. Now he stands to lose Donbas and still no NATO. But hey, look at the chart of Rheinmetall - and many other EU companies. By all means, I do not defend what Putin did. I think there is SO much more to this story and the war, than people *like* to see. Obviously, it's easier to scream Putin is ahole (which he is), than admit our own govs are just as guilty in all the deaths. As much as I dont like Trump, I do think there would be no war if he was president back than. Thats probably the only think I agree with him on.
I agree. They should declare Ukraine a NATO nation and intervene.
**Russia receives**: territory invaded so far, more territory, Ukraine not in NATO, lifting of sanctions **Taco receives**: Nobel peace price **Ukraine receives**: Not having to come back to the White House and listen to Taco might work?
If i remember correctly the compromise was Ukraine not being admitted to NATO and Putin giving up a huge chunk of conquered territory but both sides have their heads up their asses and said NO to the deal
T̶r̶u̶m̶p̶ Putin tells Zelensky to give up Crimea and never join NATO ahead of White House talks
He gave "security promises" to Ukraine. Exactly what Putin wanted. Putin has been trying to coax NATO, and especially the US into the conflict... now with potential "promises", he can continue hostilities, effectively doubling down on TACO dinner to make the US look bad, pressure Trump to withdraw from NATO (as he has wanted, and stated since his last term), and possibly break up NATO, or make a bigger war for the benefit of his dictatorship, saying "I was right about The West all along". Oh, "Lol".
no. europe will not budge as we are already balls deep into saving ukraine for the future prospect of them joining UE and NATO. and so is USA although its hard to tell if mango is not just a very important traitor. this war will go on and it is Russia who is getting more and more desperate for this war to end even though Putin will not relent, what with being sociopathic KGB despot.
Accept Deal: Ceasefire + U.S. Aid, Loss of Crimea + NATO Freeze Reject Deal: U.S. Disengagement + Strategic Isolation + Prolonged War What do you think Zelensky does?
>The disgusting thing is trying to use it as an excuse to have innocent people killed, tortured, raped, and enslaved. That doesn't make you upset? Then pretending you don't know what's wrong. I clearly said the problem was the illegal destruction of Libya by NATO and their terrorist allies. The consequences have been horrific and they never ended. >Is there a US president president that hasn't committed terrorist acts or randomly killed far more people than Gaddafi? Maybe Carter? But nearly every one for the last 100 years. Would you use that to justify helping terrorists destroy the US, publishing everyone? Pretty sure Gaddafi did all those things to his population, as most life long dictators do. Anyway you seem pretty active on Passport bros, so ill let you get back to that.
The disgusting thing is trying to use it as an excuse to have innocent people killed, tortured, raped, and enslaved. That doesn't make you upset? Then pretending you don't know what's wrong. I clearly said the problem was the illegal destruction of Libya by NATO and their terrorist allies. The consequences have been horrific and they never ended. Is there a US president president that hasn't committed terrorist acts or randomly killed far more people than Gaddafi? Maybe Carter? But nearly every one for the last 100 years. Would you use that to justify helping terrorists destroy the US, publishing everyone?
>Thank you, that's a wonderful reason to punish the entire population by helping terrorists destroy the country. . The first thing our allies did was carry out a black African genocide and open slave markets. The slave markets are still open today, and the fighting has never stopped. >If you were an oncologist, do you executed the patient's whole family? >Aside from that, if committing a terrorist act is justification for destroying a country, we could nuke every original NATO country along with half the planet. Getting this mad about me calling Gaddafi a terrorist.
Thank you, that's a wonderful reason to punish the entire population by helping terrorists destroy the country. . The first thing our allies did was carry out a black African genocide and open slave markets. The slave markets are still open today, and the fighting has never stopped. If you were an oncologist, do you executed the patient's whole family? Aside from that, if committing a terrorist act is justification for destroying a country, we could nuke every original NATO country along with half the planet.
Apparenty the deal would include NATO troops permanently in Ukraine, so they kinda have to.
Your theory is that Russia, which cannot conquer half of Ukraine, would attack NATO member states next, involving mutual self defense across all of NATO? That’s your theory?
>Well, some war criminals, maybe. Still waiting to see some consequences for the illegal destruction of Libya by NATO and their terrorist allies. Muammar Gaddafi was a terrorist big guy. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan\_Am\_Flight\_103](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103)
Well, *some* war criminals, maybe. Still waiting to see some consequences for the illegal destruction of Libya by NATO and their terrorist allies.
I’m not sure how the peace optics work here. Unoccupied land is a bit much, frozen lines is at least understandable, but does Ukraine/russia just have a massive DMZ now? What’s the final outcome if guarantees aren’t perfectly set in stone? If Donetsk lets them into NATO would they change their mind?
None of the things you mentioned are both new *and* positive for european defense since Rhm spiked earlier in the year. I don't think RHM is a bad company, and I'm aware it's effectively a monopoly in German defense. I think that it could be a good short term play if we expected the war in Ukraine to continue for many years to come. Here's what I don't believe. I don't believe that recent news justifies a belief that the war will continue past the medium term (1-2 years), at most - Russia meeting with the US in the flesh is a sign of weakness, not strength. Ukraine's ability to sabotage Russian infrastructure at will is a sign of weakness. Russia very clearly wants out. This, to me, informs a belief that the war will end in the short to medium term, with a *massively* weakened Russia. A weakened russia that does not justify the 1.5% bump to defense spending, and European politicians will have a hard time selling that to their constituents above things like internal security or social spending. When the war ends, we will see all of the holes in Ukraine and Russia that were hidden by the fog of war. We will hear all of the stories - and those stories will make clear to the public that Russia is a shell of itself. So: - I don't believe that Nato's 3.5% commitment (in Europe) will hold up any better than the Nato 2% commitment. Europe, collectively, has nobody to arm themselves to fight against except for Russia, and Russia is very clearly in a weak state - in part because of how effective Drone warfare is against a massively spread out opponent. - This commitment is over the space of 10 years and is no more enforceable than the 2% commitment was. - Drones are massively less expensive than traditional weaponry is, and are greenfield. Development in this area has only just begun. When the war ends (because all wars do), Ukraine will export an enormous amount of expertise in drone warfare, through both people and product. This will result in a boom in investment in companies working on Drones rather than traditional armament. - I believe that the remaining 1.5% of NATO 5 has far more growth opportunity in the area of drone warfare (cybersecurity, electronic warfare infrastructure, development of rare earth processing) than it does in traditional weapons development (hardening roads, updating rail infrastructure), and will seem more appealing to an EU looking to future-proof themselves. Tanks aren't on the way out, but they're increasingly seen as less relevant. - The US wants NATO to invest in its own defense, by *buying american weapons*. They don't care to see the EU developing their own defense. There was a period earlier in the year where the US seemed to be encouraging them to do so - but this time has clearly passed, with the EU trade "deal" and during NATO 5% talks, where European countries were encouraged explicitly to buy american arms. - I don't either see a belligerent China in the near future, nor do I see political will for the EU to arm itself *for* such a direct conflict. tl;dr: - I believe the war in Ukraine will end in the short-medium term. - I believe that post-war, we will see the full warts of Russia and Ukraine, and that this will result in the world seeing just how bad of a shape Russia is in, economically, politically, and militarily. We will see Russia as even less of a military threat, which will result in NATO members deferring their spending on defence. - I believe there will be a temporary bump in re-arming Ukraine to defend against a future Russian invasion, but not a serious wholesale European rearmament. - When this NATO spending comes, it will more likely be dumped into drone warfare companies. - The 1.5% of NATO budget not directly for arms will not directly benefit legacy weapons companies as much as it will drone companies. - I don't believe the EU will get involved in a conflict with China. I don't believe that such a conflict would require product from RHM. - I don't believe that the money going into rearmament for Ukraine post-war will result in new - I don't believe NATO will actually hit that 3.5% direct spending goal which is the way that RHM benefits from that policy change. - if they were to, that direct spending goal is 10 years out, and this money is by no means guaranteed to flow into RHM. Happy to hear your thoughts, but that's where I stand.
You forgot to mention the fact Rheinmetall produces a lot of anti air systems. Which is one of the biggest things NATO will focus on. You forgot to mention NATO is at its biggest rearmament since its creation, and billions will be spend to up its own security. You forgot to mention the USA actually wants NATO to invest in its own defense. The USA is sick and tired of pumping in trillions of their own money. You forgot to mention Rheinmetall is a top tier company that will be able to adapt to new situations, being able to introduce and develop new systems to whichever need there is. Less tanks, more drones? No problem. IMO defo one of the best times for European stock.
I think that stocks will mainly be influenced by the outcome of the war in Ukraine. If there is a ceasefire, stocks will fall. The fact that Europe is pumping billions into defense will then no longer even matter. While it actually provides massive stability for those companies for the coming years. Because as is so often the case, stocks are often influenced by emotions and expectations, and defense stocks will be no different. Defense stocks are hugely driven by sentiment. If people hear that the war is coming to an end, they will think that there is no future for defense stocks, no ‘need’. They'll completely neglect the fact NATO is at the beginning of the biggest rearmament in its history, and billions are flowing into defence companies. They'll think 'no war, no need for defense stocks'... because a lot of people just jumped into the wagon, not even understanding the market. That's the 'human' component of the stockmarket. A lot of double digit iq apes are holding stocks too
Muammar Gaddafi (Libya) controlled an estimated $100–200 billion in state and personal wealth. After the Arab Spring uprising and NATO intervention (2011), Western powers froze $67 billion of Libyan assets held in European banks. Gaddafi was killed later that year. The cash? Still mostly frozen or disputed today. 💡 Takeaway: You can have sovereign-level wealth, but if you’re outside the global financial rules, your power can be erased with a few keystrokes from central banks and regulators.
They suck oil out of Putins dick, funding the Russian economy in direct opposition to EU/NATO/Western goals/funding. They deserve this.
When America defaults on its debt the dollar is worthless, Foreign materials imports are near impossible, and definitely no rare earths from china. So in that situation the US cant produce any new weapons, let alone pay the soldiers. America will simply run out of shells, drones and missiles before China does. Basically waging war would be impossible. America is not a self sustaining economy producing everything it needs. Therefore. It cannot financially sustain a war in the case of default. Especially when its not on home soil but in Taiwan with long logistical chains. I'm sorry to hurt your "America is the best syndrome", but in the cause of a hypothetical financial collapse of the US. China will win this war and they know it and that is why they will strike at the first moment they think they can win. Oh and NATO allies, you basically arsed all your friends so they wont be coming to AID either. Probably Europe is still dealing with Russia...
Puts on NATO and Europe
I got in on Rhm late, in February. Got out before NATO 5%. - It takes a long time to make war materials. - it takes a longer time to make factories that make war materials. - drone warfare is not Rhm's specialty, and seems to be a large part of future warfare - you don't need armour if there's nothing fleshy inside to protect. Won't replace tanks, but we won't need as many tanks as a proportion. - Russia looks weak AF. Why else go to a peace summit in Alaska? Russia's industry is being bombed literally every night by Ukrainian drones. Russia, the country, will only have less manpower to wage war with 5 years from now. - rhm doesn't make anything substantially valuable for peacetime. I just don't think there's a good way to rationalize the idea that they should rise even further.
Spot on. Peace talks actually mean both sides go shopping for new toys. Russia will rebuild their depleted stocks, and NATO countries will keep pumping cash into defense. Rheinmetall benefits either way. That order book isn't shrinking anytime soon.
You can't really time the whole market that easily. You could... But do you understand the meta data that you would need to be GOOD at processing? To time companies on not random feels, means being balls deep in reading material. To time the total economy, you need to be a virtual expert on dozens of industries, geopolitics, psychology, and follow all new discoveries/tech. "Whale oil is getting slim, I predict a whole market Crash" then John D Rockefeller comes in and fucks you up. Now... shorting some wale oil companies? Maybe. Buying Standard Oil? Maybe. But THE market? I'd say if you wanted to reliably time the total market, you should be averaging 60 hours a week of data analysis and sociology studies. Be powerfully able to function in raw discipline, avoid emotional misunderstandings. And be born with at least an above average IQ. Now, if you have less than that, you might time the market, because there is no accounting for distribution. And dozens of people just like you would also time it, but fail. So we can call that luck generally. Timing companies is easier, 5-10 hours a week, with a focused view. Even then, you can miss the timing for ideals. I had a stock that I did a deep dive into, solidly a $100 stock. It went past where I could imagine human psychology wouldn't finally give it it's due. But it did hit 75 and I pivoted. Then within the week... 100.... because Truman Show? Am I? Idfk. Lol. I mean I made a good profit, 50 in, 75 out, 1.5 years, + 5% dividends. But 100% gain is cooler than 50% gain lol. I could know that that company was going up, because it is easy enough to spend hours analyzing a company. However, you do still have a few risks, such as larger market impacts to the businesses, chances do exist that financial reports are wrong (why I don't buy Chinese stocks ever again especially). My biggest "fails" were China stock, perfect company, false reports, so my readings were useless. Americam stock, Lagging industry reports available and broader market influence. Raw materials company, was in the 30s. I bought actually as a seriously long term hold, 6% dividend, solid financials and prosperity.... considered it a $50 stock. One morning, it was $90, and I felt almost guaranteed that it would settle to 50, but also, it was a good long term and I thought the cap gains was future value, plus dividends long term. I did less swing trading back then, still learning. Why $90? Well the rest of the world decided what I knew, this was a good dang stock. Then, the newest report came out, and the the bottom dropped out of the materials prices, the industry as a whole dropped, and the company financials took a hard nose dive, basically overnight. Within a week it was a $7 stock trading. I eventually sold for opportunity cost and tax harvesting around $20..... So yeah. Granted, back then I was less good and today I would have almost guaranteed moved somewhere above 50 because I have more things I'm tracking and more opportunity cost concepts. But, still.... ouch. But the market? Oof, I can give a dozen reasons why the market can crash tomorrow. I can also give you a dozen reasons why the market will skyrocket tomorrow. And right now, we stand on so many uncertain ledges. Ukraine war ends tomorrow, what do you think happens to the market? Solar Panel company launches a solar panel that is 50% efficient at the same price, than anything on the market today? AI gets good? Does good AI crash the economy in 2 years due to joblessness? Does good AI lead to resource prosperity? It can go either way. So you realize that if we got 800Watt solar panels of current 400 size, at the same price point, the game changing would be insane. Right now, my best placement for solar can do about half of what I need. 800W panels at 400 size/price would cut my cost in half, not require any additional seperate panels setups. And actually give me whole home solar. This would be true across many realms. And likely lead to an economics Boon. Will that happen? Probably not this year. Could it? Yeah, no, idk. What about if Iran goes nuts? Or if NATO starts slapping Russia and then Nukes fly? What if China invades Taiwan? What if the pro-China elements in Taiwan, actually vote to join? What if that impacts the chip market? What if some place like the Philippines, who is trying to build a chip market, become a global powerhouse in it and cozy up to the west, making China/Taiwan not relevant? You can make some higher percentage guesses... I suppose, but, it's always a lot of X factors that are reliant on the whims of humans psychology, luck, and similar things.
The problem is that you have to gamble not only on the peace talks happening and being successful, but also on the outcome If Ukraine remains a neutral state or joins NATO/EU, yes, companies involved in the reconstruction are likely to go to the moon. Like Caterpillar, MP materials for mining (Ukraine has a ton of rare earth) etc. But it's just as likely that Ukraine becomes a Russian puppet state in some way or another. If Ukraine becomes the new Belarus or Georgia, American companies get nothing
He admitted to not be able to end Russia's invasion, saying "it's more difficult than expected" to americans and "of course it was satire" to NATO allies.
There won't be any peace deal, especially not after the recent defense-line breach in Donbas. Putin would only agree to a peace deal if they reached a true stalemate, and Ukraine would only agree to a peace deal if NATO provided them with security guarantees. None of these things seem likely in the near future.
Well, that sort of goes to my point maybe now it’s not the time to be buying European defense stocks? I know the NATO countries of Europe have already committed to 5% of GDP but would an Ukraine piece steal crash the prices of companies like Rhinemetal and other European defense stocks?
It already came at 11.30. Drill team NATO otw
Anyone have thoughts on NATO stock? I been eye balling it
Y’all europoor fuckers better dump SPY otherwise we’re pulling outta NATO 💀
For fun, I put your criteria into Grok and asked it to give me a stock recommendation that fits the criteria: Recommended Stock: Lockheed Martin (LMT) Based on the provided criteria from the Reddit post, Lockheed Martin (LMT) stands out as a strong investment candidate. It meets most of the key requirements, including superior long-term growth potential, financial stability, recession resilience, alignment with future trends like AI in defense, a sustainable dividend, and a robust competitive moat. Below, I’ll address each criterion point by point, using recent data as of August 2025. 1 CAGR above the S&P 500’s at over 10%?LMT’s 10-year total return CAGR (including dividends) is approximately 18%, outperforming the S&P 500’s 10-year CAGR of around 12.57% (as of May 2025, with similar trends holding into August). This exceeds the 10% threshold and beats the market benchmark, driven by steady defense contracts and innovation. If this growth continues, LMT offers better potential than simply holding an S&P 500 index fund. 19 20 2 Net income & revenue increasing on an annual basis? No negative net income?Yes, revenue has shown consistent growth: $65.98B (2022), $67.57B (2023), $71.04B (2024), and trailing twelve months (TTM) at $71.84B as of June 2025 (a 1.09% increase year-over-year). Net income remains positive and has fluctuated but trended upward overall: $5.73B (2022), $6.92B (2023), $5.34B (2024), and TTM at $4.20B (impacted by one-time charges but still solidly profitable). There are no instances of negative net income in recent years. 24 33 3 P/E in its low range historically?LMT’s current P/E ratio is approximately 23.87 (TTM), which is above its 10-year historical average of 19.94 but within a reasonable range considering recent highs (up to 47 in 2017). While not at the absolute low end, it’s below peaks and competitive with peers in the defense sector (industry median ~44). Tools like Koyfin can confirm this historical context. 42 47 4 Currently any discount compared to its all-time highs? Avoid all-time highs unless clear breakout.Yes, LMT trades at ~$426 (as of August 11, 2025), a ~29% discount from its all-time high of $602 in October 2024. This provides a margin of safety without being at peak levels, avoiding the risk of buying at highs. 53 5 Would the company fare well in a recession? Look at 2008 data.LMT demonstrated resilience during the 2008 financial crisis, dropping ~51% (vs. S&P 500’s 57% decline). It recovered in ~53 months (similar to the market’s 49 months). Defense spending often remains stable or increases during downturns due to national security priorities, as seen in LMT’s consistent performance. 61 6 Future prospects for the company? Aligns well with things like AI?LMT has strong prospects in AI-driven defense innovations, including the “AI Fight Club” initiative (launched in 2025) for testing AI in military scenarios across air, land, sea, and space. It aligns with trends like AI-enhanced nuclear propulsion, command systems, and cybersecurity. Global defense spending growth (e.g., NATO increases) and U.S. priorities in hypersonics and space further bolster its outlook. 70 73 76 7 If it pays a dividend, what is the dividend payout ratio? Too high and it’s unsustainable.LMT pays a quarterly dividend of $3.30 ($13.20 annualized), with a TTM payout ratio of ~57%. This is sustainable (below 60% threshold for safety), supported by strong cash flows ($5.3B free cash flow in 2024) and a 23-year streak of increases. It’s not overly high, leaving room for growth and reinvestment. 79 31 8 Does it have a moat/clear sticking power? Bonus if only one other main competitor.LMT has a wide economic moat from technological superiority (e.g., F-35 program), long-term government contracts (92.5% of revenue from U.S. government), high switching costs for customers, and barriers to entry in defense (capital intensity, regulations). It operates in an oligopoly with few peers like Boeing or Northrop Grumman, providing strong sticking power. 94 70 Overall, LMT aligns closely with the criteria, offering stability, growth, and income in a volatile market. It’s undervalued relative to its prospects, with analysts targeting ~$497 (15% upside). However, monitor defense budgets and geopolitical risks, as they drive demand. This is not financial advice—conduct your own due diligence.
Yeah bro, $10 million a year in *efficiency gains* from a Japanese insurance firm clearly justifies a $500B valuation. Next quarter they’ll automate 3 coffee machines at NATO HQ and that’s easily another +$100B in market cap. PLTR is no longer a company. It’s a **theory of belief**. An **AI religion** with PowerPoint scripture and RSU indulgences. But sure, keep buying at a **646 P/E**. They’re only diluting you out of your shares so they can afford Karp’s next shirtless horseback retreat.
Meeting on Friday is going to be theatrics, where 🥭 pulls out of NATO and supporting Ukraine. Chyna gonna make a new cheaper chip that competes with Nvidia. Rates are not getting cut. Unemployment is cooked and inflation keeps trickling up (FEDs worst nightmare) Bonds are fucked. Usd has the same valuation as wet toilet paper. Potential war in the south China sea. Russia takes Ukraine and prepares for the baltics. This is the road map for the rest of the year.
CPI tomorrow gonna be dogshit and the meeting with Putin on Friday will be a publicity show, where the Europeans are baited into showing an “unwillingness” to end the war, giving 🥭 “just cause” to end all support and leave NATO
Ukraine/Russia war could’ve led to WW3 if it wasn’t for him telling Putin to stop and some gibberish about NATO
The arrogance with you Americans is mind boggling. Even the ones who claim to be ‘better’ but you’re all high off the American exceptionalism non sense. First of all buddy, you’re overestimating both the threat and the saviour complex. First, no one in Canada is blaming all Americans for Trump. We're well aware that over 75 million voted against him and that there are many thoughtful, rational Americans who reject his politics. But let's not pretend that those votes somehow saved Canada from invasion. That’s not how geopolitics works. Second, the idea that the US military would "steamroll" Canada is simplistic and ignores decades of military history. The US had overwhelming technological and military superiority in both Vietnam and Afghanistan, countries that had far fewer resources, far less infrastructure and no formal alliances like Canada does through NATO. Yet in both conflicts, the US failed to achieve lasting control. In Vietnam, a local insurgency with Soviet and Chinese support forced a withdrawal. In Afghanistan, a rural guerrilla force with limited infrastructure outlasted 20 years of American occupation. Canada is not a faraway, poorly resourced country. It's a G7 nation with a highly trained military, extensive geography, difficult terrain and some of the closest intelligence-sharing and defense partnerships with the US through NORAD and NATO. Any invasion would be politically, militarily and economically catastrophic for both sides. Third, the idea that Democrats would take up arms to defend Canada is pure fantasy. The average American/Democrat/Republican has no appetite for civil war, let alone cross-border armed resistance on behalf of a foreign country. If Trump ever tried something as unhinged as invading Canada, the US would tear itself apart from the inside through political, legal and economic chaos. Canada wouldn’t need to fight the US military alone; it would just need to wait for the US to implode under its own contradictions. Finally, Canada doesn't rely on US charity or threat deterrence from American voters. We are an independent nation with our own strategic interests, alliances and capabilities. Canadians appreciate support from reasonable Americans, but we don’t owe our sovereignty to anyone but ourselves. You want long-term memory dude? History shows that even the most powerful military in the world struggles to occupy sovereign nations especially ones that don’t roll over. Ask Vietnam. Ask Afghanistan.
If this peace agreement comes to nothing NATO will respond with the greatest Winter Twitter offensive the world has ever seen. Let's see how the Russkies deal with a deluge of second rate memes and shadow bans.
Americans don't care about how other countries want us to vote. Most of our allies hurt us more than help us. Like NATO and the Ukraine war. US funds Ukraine while our allies in NATO fund Russia through energy purchases. Trade should be dollar for dollar. Equal No deficit trading for the US Canada and Mexico should become part of the US. The US could eliminate the cartels in Mexico and build the golden dome around all 3 of us.
My DD is just getting, removed, I have no idea why: ChatGPT Summary: ASNS is a $6M microcap in secure networking with defense and telecom contracts. Earnings, federal distribution access, and a new crypto plan are all potential catalysts. Very high risk, but also multiple paths for growth if things break their way. Alright peeps, first DD and I’m aiming to make it a good one! I’ve been looking into Actelis Networks over the past few weeks, and I think it’s worth putting on the radar. This is a really small company – market cap around $6M – but they’re in an interesting spot. They build secure networking gear that can deliver fiber-like speeds over existing copper lines. That might sound niche, but it’s actually pretty useful for places like smart cities, the military, and telecom providers that can’t or don’t want to dig up streets to lay new fiber. For me, the appeal is in how quickly they can roll this tech out. Instead of waiting months for construction, you can upgrade existing lines and be live in days. That speed could be a selling point, especially for defense or emergency infrastructure. The next couple of weeks might be eventful: \- Q2 are expected mid-August. This will be the first real check to see if the recent contracts they’ve announced (including one with 3 US military bases) are actually showing up as revenue. \- They’ve got a distribution deal with Carasoft which opens the door to the US federal market. Even one contract from that channel would be significant for a company this size. \-They recently picked up a telecom order in the UK, and are involved in smart transportation projects in Europe. I like seeing them diversify outside the US \- The board also approved a crypto strategy. No details yet, but if they decide to move forward and announce specifics, it might draw extra attention from certain parts of the market. Now, let’s be clear: Cybersecurity spending is only going up, especially in the defense sector. Governments are getting more careful about where their tech comes from – US and NATO countries don’t want to rely on Chinese suppliers for critical infrastructure. Hybrid fiber/copper upgrades make sense in many cases because they’re cheaper and faster than full fiber replacements. That’s a space where ASNS could compete well. Now for some relevant risks: The market cap is tiny. It doesn’t take a massive contract to have a noticeable impact on results. The low float means news can sometimes cause large moves. ASNS also has multiple angles – defense, infrastructure, and now crypto – which gives it more than one way to get noticed. One big thing is dilution. The share count is about 10× higher than at IPO in 2022 because they’ve raised capital multiple times. Normally that’s a red flag – but the share price is already well below IPO levels, so I think some of that is already priced in. They’re also under the 1 dollar NASDAQ minimum, and have until November to fix that. I don’t think they’ll want to dilute further at much lower levels unless absolutely necessary, since that would make it harder to regain compliance. A reverse split is still a possibility, so that’s something to be aware of. And of course – they’re small. One bad quarter or a missed contract could hurt badly. Microcaps like this will swing a lot, and position sizing is important.
Probably, or agree not to join NATO. Russia needs a buffer between itself and NATO countries.
PALANTIR $500 incoming! Buy & hold! Great value ! PALANTIR is one of the best AI stock. NATO & EU are already working PALANTIR! 3 trillion dollar company
And Turkiye a NATO member also buying Oil and Gas from Russia and selling back to EU. EU proposed to cut off all Oil and Gas by 2027 but Turkiye rejected. “While the EU may or may not decide to totally ban the import of Russian gas, Türkiye is of the view that unilateral sanctions risk disrupting economies and heightening energy security concerns for all,” Ankara’s foreign ministry said in a statement to POLITICO. “Türkiye implements only those sanctions adopted by the United Nations Security Council.”
Ah thanks. I always forget turkey not in EU because they are in NATO. So yea apparently no imports but also very low THc. Basically a hemp market. I think same with Brazil. Maybe in a couple years they’ll convert over
People said EXATLY the same thing about Russia invading Ukraine. Russia was literally on the borders and people said the day before it was NATO propaganda and they weren't going to invade.
Then the goal is already accomplished. Russia will not attack NATO countries for the same reasons we don't dare attack Russia: nukes.
Theu'd have to get through Poland first, and trigger Article 4 of NATO!
"Difficult to invade" is something of an understatement. The UK is in NATO so an invasion triggers a response from the rest, and even if you exclude the US there's not a chance Russia can withstand that. And Switzerland is not only surrounded by NATO, but along with the UK it is home to a considerable amount of wealth held by US citizens and it would absolutely be in their interests to protect it. So in short, there's not a snowball's chance in hell that Russia, who can't even invade and hold 1/3 of Ukraine, could even dream of steamrollering through Europe to invade Switzerland or mounting a sea and air invasion of the UK.
With the Witkoff Putin meeting and all the settlement rumors floating around including no NATO for Ukraine mutual security guarantees and whispers of Nord Stream 2 quietly coming back into play it is clear geopolitics is starting to bleed into the energy sector again. But let us be real Russia has no reason to budge. They are holding ground the front lines have stabilized in their favor and every passing month weakens Western unity and drains Ukraine’s resources. Sanctions did not collapse their economy. They rerouted through BRICS and Asia and adapted. Europe is struggling the US is distracted by elections and NATO is not looking as solid as it once did. A frozen conflict gives Russia leverage indefinitely. Settling would mean giving that up for what promises. Even if the West wants a deal Zelensky cannot give Russia what it wants without political suicide. Putin is playing a long game. He wants more than a ceasefire. He wants a fractured Europe weakened NATO and permanent influence. Until those goals are met or seriously threatened they are not moving. And let us be honest if this so called settlement were real you would not be seeing Trump slap weak new tariffs on India out of nowhere. That is not the move you make if a major realignment is being locked in behind closed doors. It looks more like distraction politics and economic scrambling than strategic confidence. So yes I am watching energy plays especially anything tied to uranium LNG and infrastructure like BBU or BEP but I am not buying the peace talk hype just yet.
This is exactly what happened with the EU. Trump claims a $600 billion investment in the USA. The EU have no power to make any business invest in the USA and nothing will happen. The USA is free to provide as much fossil fuels to the EU as it wants and we will happily take them over Russia but since energy is an independent business they need to beat them on price. As for weapons we will no doubt still buy some from the USA but the vast majority of that extra NATO money will be staying in Europe making USA less competitive.
Withdrawal is obviously not on the table. If I had to guess, something like an agreement that Ukraine won't join NATO and the war ends on the current lines.
The only substantive part of that agreement is the 15% tarrif that US citizens will pay. The NATO defense purchase agreement was already in place.
You're completely blaming India but let’s be honest many countries including US and EU, are still dealing with Russia too, just in a different ways India is buying Russian oil mainly because it’s cheap. We need affordable energy, we’re not in NATO or as rich as the West. And yes some oil gets refined and sold again. That’s not illegal or shady it’s allowed by the global trade rules & practices and even European countries are buying that refined fuel. If the West didn’t want this to happen they could’ve blocked refined products too. They didn’t. So this isn’t India funding a war this is the West leaving loopholes and then complaining when someone uses them. Pure Hypocrisy. The EU still buys russian LNG (,natural gas) and the US buys uranium from Russia too. No one's 100% clean here. Stopping India won't stop Russia. If India stops, China and Turkey will buy more. That oil will still be sold it won't be magically disappear. So instead of pointing fingers west should tighten sanctions properly, and work with countries like India not just blame them.
That may be what they're trying to do but it's like stepping in a rake. It appears this onshoring is more than a single administration effort. The trump administration is just the messenger. Nobody was forcing TSMC or introducing the CHIPS Act because they thought it'd be fun. They're doing that strategically to bring fans back home. Especially after finding alterations in some chips built in China years ago. I don't know if Tim Cook can't read behind the lines or if he just doesn't have enough clearance to be told. But the whole can't do China, okay we choose Vietnam and India as a substitute nonsense needs to stop. Stop funding Apple to do what any competent person knows you have to do. Onshore or NATO otherwise you're going to crash the company. You can't keep thinking about things in terms of cheap labor, quarterlies, and annuals. Eventually you just have to do what aligns with strategic defense. Let Tim Cook sink apple if he can't understand it
But specifically against NATO members not as long as
Mainly because it's pure bullshit Russia is an imperialist nation. Same for the US The reason NATO spreads is because Russia attacks his neighbors. If Moldavie don't join NATO how can they defend themselves the day Putin thinks Moldavia is an existential threath to Russia ? No one in Europe is threatening Russia and they would never accept NATO strikes first because it will expose the country to nuclear retaliation The only reason missiles could be used from Europe is if Russia strikes an European country first
No. Russia knows full and gosh damn well. Ya fuck with the United States you mess with EVERY other country in NATO. That old Soviet bird is trying to hang to his glory days. One of our nuclear subs can take out 161 cities targeted in Russia. That's JUST ONE. So it's just ego's and propaganda typical of Russia.
EU keeps violating treaties and moving east. USA/Israel thinks they and are the only ones allowed to break international law and commit war crimes NATO is using Ukraine as a military hub and the proximity of their equipment to Russias most active warm water port is a massive national security threat, especially if Ukraine were to join NATO It’s pretty much a no brainer for Russia to want to control that land. They don’t trust westerns (for good reasons) In the event that there’s another world war, Ukraines position and ties to countries that don’t get along with Russia simply makes them a threat. Think of it like this. Imagine if Canada and USA had a massive failing out and Canada got cozy with one of USA’s enemies. USA would not be okay with that. Imagine China dropping military equipment near the American border, spying on them, doing military drills in the Arctic near Alaska and threatening to cut off the supply of Canadian oil/energy to USA. USA would be dropping airstrikes everyday until they could make of a fake reason to invade Canada in the name of “national security”. Heck Canada literally did nothing, and Trump *still* called the prime minister a governor, called Canada the 51st state and basically threatened to take Canada’s sovereignty.
EU keeps violating treaties and moving east. USA/Israel thinks they and are the only ones allowed to break international law and commit war crimes NATO is using Ukraine as a military hub and the proximity of their equipment to Russias most active warm water port is a massive national security threat, especially if Ukraine were to join NATO It’s pretty much a no brainer for Russia to want to control that land. They don’t trust westerns (for good reasons) In the event that there’s another world war, Ukraines position and ties to countries that don’t get along with Russia simply makes them a threat. Think of it like this. Imagine if Canada and USA had a massive failing out and Canada got cozy with one of USA’s enemies. USA would not be okay with that. Imagine China dropping military equipment near the American border, spying on them, doing military drills in the Arctic near Alaska and threatening to cut off the supply of Canadian oil/energy to USA. USA would be dropping airstrikes everyday until they could make of a fake reason to invade Canada in the name of “national security”. Heck Canada literally did nothing, and Trump *still* called the prime minister a governor, called Canada the 51st state and basically threatened to take Canada’s sovereignty. Countries are only as stable as their next leader. Putin has been in the game long enough to know that. No way he lets Ukraine just turn into NATOs playground while being in his backyard.
I think they hate seeing NATO next door. But it looks like Putin is getting the opposite effect: Sweden and Finland are NOW part of NATO AFTER being neutral for so long. And I won’t hide my admiration for Ukrainians. Those guys are badasses and will not give up ever. Winning means remaining free for them. And they will win. Their resolve is unshakable. They don’t fight for Zelensky, they fight for themselves and their families. You can’t beat that
Ok so you are fine with Turkey ( NATO ) partner or China buying stuff from Russia. I feel Trump being a bully is scared of both Putin and xi, he can only bully EU or Canada.
NATO game don’t believe that shit
Ukraine had long been within Russia’s sphere of influence, and even after the Cold War, Russia continued leasing the port of Sevastopol from Ukraine to maintain its Black Sea naval headquarters. But in 2014, the possibility of Ukraine aligning with NATO became a serious concern for Moscow. That shift would have meant losing Sevastopol and watching Western influence replace Russian influence on its doorstep. This scenario was viewed as a major national security threat for Moscow. It’s not unlike the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the U.S. saw Cuba falling to communism and hosting Soviet nuclear missiles as an existential threat, prompting the brink of World War III. That’s the strategic logic behind Russia’s intense interest in Ukraine.
Because Ukrainians and Russians are basically the same ethnicity, they were one country for the last 300 years and separated only 30 years ago. In fact, Europe didn’t really care about Ukraine and saw it as a less formidable but similarly corrupt version of Russia until it was invaded by Russia. Ukraine will never enter the EU, nor NATO, because they are effectively Russians, just like the Serbs. This ethnic identity is exactly why Russia wants Ukraine and why Europe does not.
If they're so paranoid about being invaded, why was the Kursk border so poorly defended that the Ukrainians could basically just waltz in there? This was _a nearly undefended border near the front line of a war they started_. That suggests to me that their arrogance got way out ahead of whatever paranoia they might still feel. I don't see much evidence that they're still very concerned about a land invasion. They shouldn't be; 6000 nukes is a pretty good deterrent. They do sometimes express concern about NATO missiles being sited where they could reach Moscow, and I think they have a point, but Ukraine joining NATO wouldn't make much difference; the Baltics' borders are not much farther from Moscow, and of course much closer to St. Petersburg. The Kremlin puts it out that this war is about their national security. But it's really about keeping Putin in power. If he let Ukraine escape the Russian sphere of control — the usual phrase is "sphere of influence", but that's a euphemism — he would probably have been deposed. Such is the culture in the Kremlin.
I wouldn’t expect adversaries to make deals with palantir, but I could see NATO countries and other allies possibly being interested. There’s also companies all around the world that may be interested in their commercial software.
Best setup in the space, hands down. Real assets in NATO countries, near-term cash flow, and barely anyone's watching.
Sorry for making things up like the EU, UN and NATO. My bad 🤣
Honestly, Donald wants our substantial rare earth deposits. However, since we’re apart of NATO, and have a lot more allies than the US he’s trying to destroy our economy. And like the piss poor business man he is, he’s doing a terrible job at it.
# Russia and India: Leaders of Multipolar World India has shown pragmatism in approach as it builds a strong partnership with the United States and, at the same time, maintains ties with Russia. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s two-day (July 8–9) official visit to hold talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin indicated the significant depth of their bilateral relations within the context of global changes. Russia’s closeness in enhancing and deepening economic cooperation also has an intertwined strategy for ensuring readiness against threats from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a political and military alliance of countries from Europe and North America. But India has, thus far, shown pragmatism in approach as it builds a strong partnership with the United States and, at the same time, maintains ties with Russia. [https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2024/07/12/russia-and-india-leaders-of-multipolar-world/](https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2024/07/12/russia-and-india-leaders-of-multipolar-world/)
Whatever NATO has done to get the 34 time felon to stop being adversarial to the west is working. Good job Europe!
Honestly I still support Trump because I just feel like when he was in office things were workin better for regular folks like us, the economy was rollin, jobs were solid, gas was cheaper, groceries weren’t eatin up your whole paycheck, and small businesses weren’t gettin choked out by taxes and red tape every time they tried to breathe, and yeah the pandemic shook everything up but before that you could feel the difference, and I liked how he didn’t just kiss up to other countries, he stood up for us, whether it was dealin with China or tellin NATO it’s time y’all pitch in too, and shoot I gotta give it to him on them peace deals in the Middle East, that wasn’t just talk, that actually happened, plus the judges he put in place weren’t tryin to rewrite the Constitution every time the wind changed, they were about stickin to the law and not playin politics on the bench, and when it comes to the border I don’t care what people say, we gotta have rules and order or it all falls apart, it ain’t about hatin anybody, it’s about keepin our country safe and fair, and honestly I just liked that he didn’t back down when the heat got turned up, he said what he meant and meant what he said even if it rubbed people the wrong way sometimes, and these days I’d take somebody who’s got a backbone and fights for what he believes over another slick talkin politician that just tells folks what they wanna hear then disappears when it’s time to actually get somethin done.
It's because the EU needs the US in NATO desperately. The US completely owns us. We have zero intelligence capabilities and zero military capabilities compared to US.
First you call someone corrupt but when you cannot actually point to any real crimes or cases, you say the courts are just refusing to act. That is not how the law works. If someone breaks the law, especially someone as high profile as Trump, there are thousands of people who would love to put him in prison if they had real proof. Yet after years of nonstop investigations, media hit pieces, and political grandstanding, nobody has produced anything that sticks in court. That says a lot. You want to talk about dismantling corruption? Just look at what Trump did with things like slashing government regulations that existed just to give bureaucrats more power and line the pockets of their friends. He forced transparency on agencies that were used to doing whatever they wanted behind closed doors. He renegotiated trade deals that screwed over American workers for decades. He called out China for manipulating the market and actually put pressure on the World Health Organization for playing politics with global health. He demanded that NATO allies actually pay their share instead of riding for free on the backs of American taxpayers. He cut funding to government contractors and consultants who were getting rich while producing nothing for the country. You want actual cases? Look at Operation Warp Speed. That was government and private business finally being held to results instead of endless waste. Look at the VA reforms and accountability measures that let the government fire people who abused veterans or just collected paychecks for doing nothing. Look at the border deals with Mexico that forced their hand on illegal immigration enforcement when everyone else just talked about it. Meanwhile, all we get from the other side is the same empty accusations with zero proof. Every time one narrative falls apart, you just shift to another one and call it corruption with nothing to back it up. You can be mad at his personality or his style, but facts are facts. If he was half as dirty as you all claim, he would have been done for a long time ago. If you really want to talk about preventing future corruption, maybe start with the bureaucrats, lobbyists, and political operatives who have turned public service into a cash grab. Trump is not perfect, but at least he put a spotlight on the whole rotten system instead of pretending it is not there.
EU leadership is controlled by Washington. Just last year they cancelled the Romanian election and banned the guy who was about to win because he was viewed as anti-NATO
These countries have people with brains, believe it or not. They are just telling grandpa things he can twist to make his base happy because he’ll do it anyway… non of them double check what he says as long as he acts like it’s all amazing. You can throw out a figure like the U.K. investing 1 trillion in the US over 10 years or that they are going to invest 5% of GDP in NATO and ignore the small print that shows the risk of that no happening is pretty high. This is the person who thinks that established US economic data, that is trusted to move world markets, can just do what he wants it to … next he’ll say that the US is now growing by 20% per month and the official data is just incorrect and controlled by Obama or Biden or Aliens. Nuts !!
How Many Countries Have Submarines Within Firing Range of Russia? It’s Not Just the U.S. The idea that only the United States has submarines pointed at Russia is false. In reality, multiple NATO and non-NATO nations maintain submarines capable of striking Russian targets—either from nearby waters or through long-range cruise missiles. Here's a breakdown:🌍 Who Has Subs Within Firing Range of Russia? 🇺🇸 United States Capabilities: Ohio-class and Virginia-class subs armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles and nuclear warheads. Positioning: Routinely operate in the Barents Sea, North Atlantic, and sometimes under Arctic ice—all within striking distance of key Russian infrastructure. 🇬🇧 United Kingdom Capabilities: Astute-class attack subs and Vanguard-class ballistic missile subs (with Trident missiles). Positioning: UK submarines patrol the North Atlantic, Norwegian Sea, and Arctic region. Trident missiles can hit Russia from deep in the Atlantic. 🇫🇷 France Capabilities: Suffren-class attack subs and Triomphant-class nuclear ballistic subs with M51 missiles. Positioning: French SLBMs (sub-launched ballistic missiles) have a range of over 8,000 km. They can strike Russian targets from almost anywhere in the North Atlantic or even the Mediterranean. 🇳🇴 Norway Capabilities: Ula-class diesel-electric subs and new Type 212CDs (coming soon). Positioning: Operates in Norwegian and Barents Sea—close to Russia’s Northern Fleet bases. These are not nuclear-armed but track Russian subs and relay targeting data to NATO. 🇩🇪 Germany Capabilities: Type 212A submarines. Positioning: Operate in the Baltic and North Seas. Limited range, but they support NATO surveillance and anti-submarine ops near Kaliningrad and the Baltic Fleet. 🇸🇪 Sweden Capabilities: Gotland-class AIP (air-independent propulsion) submarines. Positioning: Operate mainly in the Baltic. Not nuclear-armed, but deadly in shallow water and capable of launching torpedoes or anti-ship missiles at Russian naval assets. 🇵🇱 Poland Capabilities: Orzeł-class (Soviet-built) and new submarines planned. Positioning: Operate in the Baltic Sea, close to Kaliningrad and Russian naval routes. 🧠 Why This Matters Russia isn't just surrounded by U.S. submarines—it’s boxed in by a network of Western naval forces. Many of these countries also share intelligence and target coordination via NATO, meaning that even if some subs don’t carry nukes, they play a role in real-time strike planning. Some submarines carry long-range cruise missiles (like Tomahawk or SCALP) that can strike Russian targets from 1,000+ km away. Others provide stealth surveillance, relay target info, or act as a counterbalance to Russia's own massive sub fleet. At least 7 countries have submarines in or near waters within firing range of Russia. The U.S., UK, and France have nuclear-capable submarines that can strike from thousands of kilometers away. Norway, Sweden, Germany, and Poland have smaller but strategically positioned subs in the Baltic and Arctic. This is a multi-national deterrence web, not a solo American effort. United States 🇺🇸 Submarines: Ohio-class SSBNs (Ballistic Missile Submarines) Missiles: Trident II D5 (range: ~12,000 km / 7,500 mi) Where They Patrol: Arctic Ocean, Barents Sea, North Atlantic Can Hit Russia From: Practically anywhere in the Northern Hemisphere 🔥 2. United Kingdom 🇬🇧 Submarines: Vanguard-class SSBNs Missiles: Trident II D5 (same as U.S., shared under NATO) Where They Patrol: North Atlantic, Norwegian Sea, sometimes Arctic Can Hit Russia From: Thousands of km away; fully within strike range while submerged near Norway or the North Sea France 🇫🇷 Submarines: Triomphant-class SSBNs Missiles: M51 SLBMs (range: ~8,000–10,000 km) Where They Patrol: North Atlantic, Bay of Biscay, Norwegian Sea Can Hit Russia From: Western Europe, Arctic routes, or far offshore Key Insight: These three nuclear powers can keep their submarines thousands of kilometers away from Russian waters and still strike virtually any part of Russian territory—including hardened targets—thanks to the intercontinental range of their ballistic missiles. No other country has sea-based nuclear weapons within that reach: China, India, and North Korea have nuclear-armed subs, but they do not operate near Russia, nor do their SLBMs currently have the range or patrol zones to reach it. All other NATO nations with subs (Germany, Norway, etc.) do not carry nuclear weapons. Only the U.S., U.K., and France have nuclear-armed submarines within realistic strike range of Russia. Their long-range ballistic missiles mean they don’t even need to get close—just deep water, stealth, and a launch order.
Absolutely , the "don't do *anything* or we you will upset us and make us throw nukes" thing is getting a bit old. They've planted the seed of propaganda after claiming NATO are aggressors defending their countries and not letting them run roughshod over Europe. So now they say it all the time because they think it's a fear of Trumps and people around him. Playing the unpredictable madman has influence.
>Cute of you to think that NATO and Trump’s America are still automatically on the same side. Cute of you to think NATO is anything but US assets in the first place.
Russia said they invadad Ukraine because they didn't want NATO near Moscow. Now Trump says he has submarines ?
Cute of you to think that NATO and Trump’s America are still automatically on the same side.
Look at Russia’s gdp vs NATO. It would be a slaughter.
> Freeloading nations means countries that can pay but won’t. I interpret that as European countries as he’s used similar language when discussing their lack of contribution to NATO as freeloading. I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. European countries are not getting medicine for free. Buying medicine is nothing like participating in a military alliance. Is it freeloading to negotiate lower prices from pharmaceutical companies? There’s no real question here that the “freeloading countries” he is referring to here are the poor, third would countries that cannot afford to pay a lot of money for life-saving medicine. Trump wants the companies to charge poor countries more for medicine and then give the money to the USA. It’s morally reprehensible. You are just bending over backwards to find any way to pretend he said something defensible.
Like… your argument is “Fuck yeah let’s destroy the US economy, as long as we also destroy the Canadian economy”. Two of the longest existing allies in the modern world, two world wars, Afghanistan, NATO partners, longest unsecured border, completely connected economies - but Canada is enemy number 1 I guess. Evil enough to destroy the US economy just to “own them”. I’m just curious how that makes sense in your mind. Trump could have done nothing and inherited the most powerful economy in the world. Now he is increasing inflation, devaluing dollar, raising debt ceiling, attacking allies, funding wars all while having sex with underage girls. But yeah, take that Canada.
Freeloading nations means countries that can pay but won’t. I interpret that as European countries as he’s used similar language when discussing their lack of contribution to NATO as freeloading. You realize taxes were cut for everyone? Not just the rich? Everyone pays less money to the government after the cuts.
EU is in a slightly more precarious situation and needs to keeps US onside for NATO. At least until they can meaningfully scale up their defense capacity. So agreeing to a “concepts of a plan” deal makes sense for them. Honestly I think everyone is just trying to drag this out until there is a change in the political winds.
Indias population is 1.5 billion, hence per capita. Turkey, a NATO member, bought 1/6 the amount of Russian energy despite having far less than 1/6 of Indias population lol Why tf should a country where the majority of people live off government provided energy be some type of global moral virtue seeker. Nice, couple million Indians die from a lack of electricity, but atleast those white people are gonna pretend to hate us less for doing it!!
Thats cool By randomly picking and choosing India, a poor country where most people are in poverty and live off government subsidized energy, to target is quite an idea Theres literal NATO members who are far richer that buy even more Russian energy per capita. I guess Trump is just trying to push India into the China-sphere at this point, undoing all the work Bush + Obama + Biden did rofl
Well, that's where trump has the upper hand vs dems, other leaders, and even China. He doesn't care 1 bit how much it will hurt the citizens of his country. If Americans are hurting, it's to honor his presidency, or it's someone elses fault. Or, it's suddenly part of the plan to get where we need to go which is the excuse they have been using this year when gdp is down or the stock market was in the toilet. Trump is incapable of empathy, taking responsibility, caring, being mature, or having discipline, feeling consequences, etc. Just like covid time, he really didn't care. He was only mad he couldn't do his rallies, go golfing, or pretend everything was "the best ever". And yeah, trump still doesn't know what tariffs are. Have you ever heard him clearly explain them or ever explain the goal of tariffs benefit/cost? So we get a Bipolar admin that just angers everyone, insults our allies, and breaks any deals with everyone. This incompetent buffoon seems to still think a trade deficit means we've lost money to them or they've stolen money from us. He literally doesn't know! Further, It's pointless to even try to counter trumps ever changing reasons for something like tariffs or whatever he's on at the moment. It's all performance and a complete con. Trump says these reasons in bad faith and laughs when people take the bait, he's got the mark hooked when they try to argue his "reasons". The reasons keep shifting: - we are gonna have factories again! - America will get rich through tariffs. - Americans wont have to pay taxes cause tariffs will pay for everything. - Stopping the trade deficit he thinks is bad, cause he thinks America is losing,,, cause he doesn't understand basic trade or basic business. - Stopping fentanyl from coming across the border when 90% arrives through ports - Stopping illegals coming over the border - Stopping the cartels. - Making Canada pay it's share of NATO. - Making The EU pay their share of NATO. - Canada is gonna be our 51st State. - Stopping Canada from taking so much of our money in handouts which they don't. - about Steel and Aluminum - we are being cheated, but cant define how. - what did Australia do Btw? So just assume there is no "reason" cause the fool re-did NAFTA 7 years ago and celebrated it. Now, he's violating his own Agreement saying the usmca that he did is now the "worst deal". It's 100% about his ego, narcissistic personality disorder, megalomania, dysfunction, and of course grifting. Nothing else. There is no grand plan from this Semi-literate conman who enjoys making things bankrupt and watching people suffer. He also wants to make other countries suffer if they don't give in to his self-serving demands and/or megalomaniac ego. Also, it's about grifting. Being president is his side-hustle apparently.
The problem is previous first couple layers of US based tariffs on China leading up to 145% lasted a month, and those same empty cargo containers also weren't a benefit to the US either. Then Bessent went, or was sent, to Switzerland for negotiation. Since then, we know there's no "win," for the US against China in the short term on tariff threats alone. There could be mutual tariff destruction, but Chinese businesses tend to play the long game, and the short game isn't in the US favor since they don't have a 1 year store of critical minerals like Japan. And the CCP doesn't have to worry about midterms in 15 months. US has leverage over most countries since bilateral counter tariffs hold little teeth with a 30 trillion US economy, and the Trump administration has successfully created some frameworks to prevent an organized muti-nation counter-tariff push back. With China, the threat isn't just a tariff/counter-tariff squabble. The US is dependent on refined critical minerals for eletronics, vehicles, military equipment, and will need to negotiate. So far, the CCP is just responding to the US actions, but as noted with Japan, CCP aren't above cutting off refined critical minerals, even beyond gallium and germanium, when it is in their interests. Without RCM, along with 50% 232 tariffs on steel, aluminum - potentially copper - vehicles or even worse, auto parts, unhelpful rhetoric tariff rhetoric just seems self-defeating. With the secondary tariffs as a result of Russian oil purchases and dual-use technologies being sold from China to Russia while the Russia-Ukraine conflict continues, it just seems like the tariff threat is overextended and overused. It's also a far cry from a united Europe or united NATO supporting these secondary tariffs to "we've heard from several of our European counterparts, NATO allies... that they will be following on that." If it's just Trump's ego, and he's continuing to abuse IEEPA/232, or whatever he's planning to use to implement on China for importing Russian oil, primarily for an ego-based agenda, that's a problem. He won't get the concessions out of the CCP with rhetoric alone. No nation wants to be Japan after the Palace Accord in the 80s. Any country with leverage, like China, will push back on US demands. For these secondary tariffs, if they are genuinely trying to solve the Russia-Ukraine war, we've seen that a decade of sanctions has done little to help. This potential solution, going after the purchasing side, is also highly unlikely to succeed. Which is why toning down the rhetoric would probably be a better idea until they've come up with a viable solution - if one is even possible.
I agree. The thing with "strategic independence" is that if pushed too far you end up paying more for shittier things because you're sacrificing your competitive advantages in order to do things you're not good at. NATO seeking strategic independence by working to find non-China/Russia/Iran-aligned sources for critical materials? Good! USA seeking strategic independence by putting tariffs on things they get from geopolitical allies and either don't produce themselves or would need to massively invest money, time, and people to *someday* produce as much as the need *right now*? Stupid! The USA imported 3.3 trillion dollars worth of goods in 2024 - granted that is ~11% of American GDP so it might look like "hey we could do this ourselves if we wanted to!" But there are hundreds of trillions of dollars in capital investment into agricultural industries, industrial bases, logistics systems, and civic infrastructure, as well as hundreds of millions - if not a billion or two - of people *directly* involved in these supply chains. The USA doesn't have to rebuild *all* of that but they'd have to rebuild *a lot* of that - and where are you gonna get *tens* of millions of additional workers required? Should have probably also built out the *two or three fold* increase in domestic electrical production and transmission *before* tariffing copper imports. The way this is being done is criminally stupid, and the result is going to be just about everything in the USA becoming more expensive and worse.
Highly doubt that. They’re in a prime spot to scale with defense budgets climbing. Successfully delivering drones and training to a NATO country is huge. Plus Carney has been clear about wanting Canadian companies to lead the charge in defense...
AI, the world police, Movies, Music, Culture, soon to be our beloved Trucks! Food, oil, natural gas, tariffs, NATO, the UN is housed with us, Space, Elon Musk. Peace through War!
This is what people don't get. They've been a player in the government contracting world far longer than Donald Trump has been relevant. People jump on the Peter Thiel connection and find that it fits their overarching narrative are dismissing the the fact that their DoD and intel contracts have had a long, robust, bipartisan and uncontroversial history. They have now been adopted by NATO. Next that will mean adoption and integration into individual NATO countries. The simple fact is that they fill a niche that has yet to be replicated. If the EU is smart; they will try, but they will still need palantir in the mean time.