NATO
Themes Transatlantic Defense ETF
Mentions (24Hr)
5.56% Today
Reddit Posts
Mentions
How it started: fuk you Brits & NATO we dont need your ships 😎 How its going: China pls send help 😭
Who knows what country Trump Attack next? Could be cuba or some NATO country.
LOL, Russia took most of Ukraines Natural Resources. They sit now on over 10 trillion of extra Natural Resources. NATO is keeping Ukraine on life support by destroying their own economy.
https://www.garoweonline.com/en/news/world/houthi-maritime-drone-and-uav-strike-hits-us-linked-oil-tanker-in-red-sea Still ongoing, and NATO gave up on them a long time ago.
LASR (not LAZR, which has lost me a bunch of money) is interesting. I hadn’t heard of them, so have just done a bit of reading. nLIGHT’s anti-drone laser tech - assuming it works - is going to be in demand, but as the DD on Seeking Alpha notes, they face client concentration risk and are already very highly valued. If they fall into favor with the DoD, the sky is the limit. But it is a risky play. Given how much it has appreciated over the past year, it’s probably not worth YOLOing on, but I’d be interested in throwing a bit at it if it dips. What I’m looking for is a company that is making tech that is going to be in much higher demand now than it was a week or two ago. For example, mine detection systems that could be outfitted to commercial shipping or underwater drones that could sweep shipping lanes for drones. While I’d be overjoyed if the war ended tomorrow, I can’t see a way that we’re not in this for the long haul. And if we’re in planning at any NATO navy or in charge of risk management at any large commercial shipping line, I’d be pounding the phones trying to figure out what tech is out there that can help make the strait safe again for shipping.
He’s talked shit about NATO and the EU for almost 10 years now. What an embarrassment he is
The Strait of Hormuz distinction between allies vs NATO is interesting. So countries like Japan and South Korea (massive oil importers, US allies but not NATO) get hit, while France and Germany technically don't? That's a weird dynamic if it plays out that way. Agreed on oil equities though. Even if this de-escalates tomorrow, the risk premium isn't going away fast.
Rutte did call NATO a platform to project power tho...
He was referring to UK Military in Afghan. Which because of 9/11 was the only time NATO alliance has been called to action.
Interesting, I have been investing in thematics for many years now and as part of that allocated to HANetf's NATO a couple of years ago not long after it was launched, which has done extremely well with exposures to companies like Rheinmetall and BAE. Will look into UKRN for sure.
Yep, NATO is only there for when allies are attacked, not when allies engage in illegal, undeclared, Pearl Harbour style sneak attack wars. In properly engaged wars (even if they were based on lies) the alies were doing the jobs American aren't very good at, and were well in advance of front lines, where just a handful of Australian and British took enemy airfields, and after American sof turned up to guard the place, moved on to taking the next airfield. Then the Americans and their embedded media hacks came in flags waving in the sun. Just like they did with the storming the beaches in Somalia lol. Wankers.
#TLDR --- Ticker: PL (Planet Labs) Direction: Up 🚀 Prognosis: Buy Shares, load up on 2027/2028 LEAPs ($15C, $20C, $45C), and sell cash-secured puts if you're feeling spicy. Catalyst: Earnings call in 5 days. Listen for FY2027 revenue guidance of $380M+ and CEO Will Marshall dropping his signature catchphrase, "the business is humming." Thesis in a Nutshell: Wall Street is mistakenly pricing $PL as a speculative space hardware/SaaS company. In reality, it has quietly transitioned into an indispensable defense data infrastructure platform with massive sovereign military contracts (NRO, NATO, SHIELD) and a potential massive Anduril partnership. Once the market realizes this, it re-rates from 1x to 25x multiples. Ghostwriter: Claude AI (but the $1.42M diamond balls are 100% OP's)
After Trump shit on NATO veterans, undermined our security and our democracy. Get fucked honestly
But but but, NATO is useless. You don’t need NATO… remember. And calling on China? lol is he sniffing glue?
#TLDR --- Ticker: PL (Planet Labs) Direction: Up Prognosis: Buy Jan 2027 & Jan 2028 LEAP Calls ($15, $20, $45) / Sell Cash Secured Puts OP's Skin in the Game: $1.42 Million Ape Level: Claude-Assisted Quant Whale **Summary:** The guy who successfully called the Micron supercycle is back and throwing $1.42M at Planet Labs ($PL). The core thesis is a massive valuation re-rating: Wall Street currently prices PL as a speculative commercial space/hardware company, but it has quietly transformed into an indispensable defense and military data platform (with major contracts from the NRO, NATO, Germany, Japan, and Sweden). If the market starts pricing PL with a defense AI/data multiple (similar to Palantir or Rocket Lab), the stock will soar. The catalyst is this coming Thursday's earnings call, where the CEO *must* formally announce FY2027 guidance. Thanks to a massive $734M backlog, OP calculates a mathematically funded revenue floor of $380M. Anything above that, or any mention of integration with Anduril’s recent $20B Army AI contract, and the stock could launch from its current ~$24 price to the $35–$48 range.
Ask your new "Board of Peace" friends, Donald. Its traditional to enlist NATO's help BEFORE you kill the Shia pope and shit the entire gulf up the wall.
You’re not wrong, Russia’s invasion has been overwhelmingly useful for NATO countries in general, even if that does sound cold. It’s also woken up a lot of EU countries. While Trump being his Russian asset self is a temporary advantage for Putin, the whole campaign has been a general disaster for Russia and they can’t be allowed to win.
Embarrassing for US. For someone who said they don’t need NATO, he is begging the world for help now
So turkey, a NATO country, is allowed passage? Now that's interesting. Turkey should be able to re-sell oil and gas to Europe. Calls on Turkish delight.
Take a lesson from Afghanistan. Iran will be much, much worse. Bigger population, has had decades to prepare, even after all strikes they are still 10x better equipped than the Taliban. The entire country has a massive mountain chain around it. Entry via Iraq puts you smack into the mountains. There's only 2 places where it's possible to establish a bridgehead. Bandar Abbas at the strait or Chabahar in the south. NATO doesn't have the expeditionary capacity to invade. Europe has lots of manpower and ground vehicles, but no way to get them to Iran even if they wanted to withdraw their entire military. This is the mess of the century, and only a quarter of it has passed.
Which they shouldn't be. NATO is not for offensive wars. I feel sorry for the US that gets to live with a President that only acts on emotion and doesn't know basic things.
Trump is now begging other countries to send in warships, just last week, he said NATO was useless and we don’t need NATO or any other countries. Now he’s begging for help and said we need to do this as a group, as it always should have. lol
Maybe NATO should ask Trump to pay his tab before sending any form of ma power or equipment.
And yet another bozo who doesn't realize that NATO, being the world police, keeping bases everywhere and all yada yada has NOT been to benefit the world, but to expressly shaped it to favor the 'ol U, S of A. Ever tried to square in your head that you simultaneously have **25%** of the worlds GDP but _still_ are being taken advantage of?
Yeah, he also spent a decent amount of time personally attacking PM Kier Starmer last week. For that matter, he recently said the US might not support other NATO members if they were attacked. And not long ago he also said he doesn't value the contributions British and other militaries made in Afghanistan and Iraq. All in all, it's a little surprising he'd even ask something like this of them now.
You believe that America covered the military expenditure of 32 countries? NATO is a defensive alliance. You chose a war with your greatest ally. Finish it with them.
He said NATO soldiers aren't on the front lines and don't get their hands dirty (basically).
I used to go to Trump´s Truth to confirm these messages are indeed real and no satire, but not anymore, they are always real Anyway, I sure wish that they would ask among other NATO countries, Denmark for help. I am sure they will be excited to jump to support the close allies who recently tried to annex part of their country (and yes, I know it´s technically not an integral part of Denmark...)
When the GCC countries finally realize the U.S. can’t actually protect them and start accepting yuan or rubles for oil, while pulling their investments out of the U.S. because of a prolonged war with Iran, the petrodollar system could unravel quickly, and the stock market will definitely feel it. Meanwhile, 🥭 is still operating with his famous “concept of a plan,” apparently hoping NATO will rush in to help, after he spent years turning his back on them over Ukraine.
Doesn't consult and ignores allies, insults allies (remember when he spit on the contributions of NATO during Afghanistan), then asks allies, countries he considers rivals, for help. Sounds like they are all out of ideas and the straight isn't opening any time soon.
Still part of NATO, however clause 5 is not in effect in this situation because you can’t call for help when you’re the aggressor.
the guy shit talking NATO is now begging NATO to help them
Sure did, asking NATO too after spending 10 years belittling them. Also he'll be continuously bombing the navy he said was already destroyed.
So maybe he should appeal to NATO to het their support. Too had we are not allies any more.
I think the US and NATO allies are waking up to the fact that Ukraine has most of the answers to fighting an asymmetric war. None have that so that will be incredibly valuable. Also the reconstruction of Ukraine will be $500bn plus and will be a boom for itself and Europe more generally and some US companies. Timing will be key big themes like this you can’t leave it late
Is he delusional? NATO maybe, Japan Korea may send some supply vessel, Australia NZ too, but who else?
If there is a false to attempt to unite people against Iran, he will use it to cancel elections and make NATO join the war
It has to - if they don’t accept surrender after the Kharg leverage shit is going to escalate with NATO involvement and Iran will get decimated.
But it doesn’t matter that Russia cant takeover Ukraine, only that Iran can hurt the US enough to make it say “well fuck, this is looking like a bad idea”. Also, by having the US divert additional money and attention to Iran it frees up the battlefield in Ukraine which is currently (at least somewhat still) supplied and monitored by the US. Think back to old Soviet-US proxy wars, that’s more like what Putin is familiar with. By helping Iran he forces the US away from helping Ukraine. If Iran hurts the world economy enough, of which Russia is severely removed from due to sanctions, it could cause the EU/NATO partners of Ukraine to scale back support as well. All in all, each missile gifted to Iran would be more beneficial to the Ukrainian war (from russias perspective) than if they bombed another random building in Kiev. Especially if Iran spends that investment hurting the global oil markets, which further helps Russia.
I don't think he could do that... but it does make me nervous that Iran keeps lobbing random missiles at the US incirlik Air Base in Turkey (all shot down so far) because that is where the U.S. stores most of the nukes for NATO.
Pretty soon he’ll be blaming NATO for not opening the strait.
NATO militaries possess these systems already, but we can expect them to be scaled up considerably in the coming months. Whether that will appreciably affect the bottom line of any of the companies mentioned is, of course, a different question.
If Oil becomes too expensive, it’ll force other NATO countries to get involved in the war against 🇮🇷
i'm uneasy with news Iran is firing on NATO bases. Why would they do that unless China & Russia gave sign off.
For the third time now,, NATO won't be jumping in
NATO is a defensive alliance, I don't see how america can claim it has been attacked.
NATO article 5 activated
Its like the third one.. NATO doesn't want in on this
FAFO is about to happen faster and furious Turkish Ministry of Defense: NATO defenses stationed in the eastern Mediterranean destroyed a missile launched from Iran.
Well when NATO troops did some training exercises with the Ukrainian army, they set up all these different exercises with the Ukrainians playing the bad guys, so the NATO soldiers could show them the wining tactics in these exercises…… The Ukrainians pulled out their drones and repeatedly wiped the floor. The NATO trainers then banned the use of drones as it was unfair and ran the exercises again so they could show the wining tactics……
The turks are Muslim and hates Israel, so it makes sense. Except that they are in NATO.... Turkey is a wierd country.
NATO members/allies are more or less a military extension/projection of US. hence they provide their inteligence and military bases to aid US.
I was with you until that last part about Trump not creating this and it being organic for the past 100 years. Trump absolutely created all this. the Tariff crash? that was Trump. Isreal and Iran were fighting alone than as soon as Trump comes in and starts sending missiles into Iran all of this happened. Isreal and Iran have been fighting for years, none of this stuff ever happened at this big of a scale, it was definately Trump and far from organic. Before this we had Trump threatening to invade Greenland by force and NATO saying they would be disbanded if Trump did that. He had the entire world against him. Trump is the greatest threat to the entire world. Absolutely nothing organic or natural about it. He's like the modern day guy that tried to take over the world in World War II, I forgot his name....Charlie Chaplin or whatever.
Iran farts a paper airplane with a grenade on it towards the only possible sympathetic pseudo-Muslim nation in NATO. And it *didn't even happen, get off Twitter, retard*
Interest in anti-mine underwater drones is about to go through the roof. Just had a quick look at which companies offer the best bang for the buck if this sector blows up (ha ha) and here’s what I found: Kraken (KRKNF) - its already run up +300% in the past year, but is still only a $2 billion company and may have more to room to move Kongsberg Gruppen (KBGGY) - hasn’t moved all that much recently, but it’s a $37 billion company and so may not have much room to move. NATO navies widely use their underwater drones. Teledyne Technologies (TDY) owns the Gavia AUV platform and many underwater sensors, but has a market cap of $30 billion and has run up quite a bit recently. L3Harris (LHX) is a $68 billion company up 70% over the past year, but does a lot of cool underwater tech. Maybe not much room to move either, but I can’t imagine they are going to stop losing contracts in the current environment.
because they want Iran to attack the homeland. Congress will 100 percent give trump everything he wants to retaliate back without the support of the UN, EU and NATO.
A NATO ship getting attacked in the Strait wouldn’t trigger Article 5. Nations would have to willingly come to the aid of another, no obligation. Attacking merchant ships holds the same weight as attacking a warship. A nation can respond with force. Thailand could theoretically attack Iranian launchers and ships and it isn’t illegal because they were attacked first. Other nations don’t want to get involved because it’s just more fuel to the fire. Sitting this one out is the safest option.
Torpedoes are absolutely a huge threat at this point. Modern navies with submarine forces just haven't fought that much since WW 2. Almost the entire premise of the Soviet Navy was to threaten NATO shipping in the Atlantic, we just (thankfully) never saw that play out. There's an entire LINE of sonar transponders between Greenland and Iceland just to account for that. The British sunk General Belgrano during the Falklands with a submarine. Obviously the US juat sank an Iranian Frigate with one. There are some think tanks that believe that the main way the US can limit/stop a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be with submarines. Waterborne drones change the game because you don't need to maintain a much more expensive naval asset to use them. Ukraine doesn't have a navy to shoot torpedoes at the Russian fleet, Iran when confronted with the US really doesn't have a navy. Any boat ramp with access to a road gives you the ability to deploy a sea drone against a foe you couldn't actually fire a torpedo at.
No, that’s not realistic. Europe isn’t going to start a war with the United States. The U.S. and most of Europe are tied together through NATO and decades of military, intelligence, and economic integration. European security still relies heavily on the U.S. military and nuclear umbrella, so going to war with the U.S. would basically mean dismantling their own defense structure overnight. If the U.S. did something that extreme, the response from Europe would be political backlash, condemnation, sanctions, or distancing themselves diplomatically. We’ve already seen that pattern with past U.S. wars Europeans disagreed with. But an actual shooting war between NATO allies against the U.S. is about the least likely outcome. Europe has far more incentive to contain the crisis politically than to start a trans-Atlantic war.
The US and US businesses would become a pariah. -- Think "North Korea", but worse. The US would have just PERMANENTLY disrupted the worldwide supply of oil and contaminated most of Europe, Asia and Africa. Even if nobody counterattacks there would be massive sanctions placed on the US. NOBODY would do business with the US or US companies. All the multinationals would flee and the world would turn to Russia, Saudi Arabia & Venezuela for its energy. NATO would dissolve and you'd see a wholesale alignment of foreign militaries & governments with China and India. Short term, the US stock market would crater. Long term, the US stock market would more deeply crater because nobody would buy our goods or services. TSLA would go up 10%
I've dicked around some on a topographical map of Iran, and it's simply god awful. The mountain range starts about 20~30 miles from the coast at Bandar Abbas, and keep going for about a 100 miles. I'm not sure if the entirety of NATO has enough manpower for the task. I mean, wtf are we supposed to do with our Armor units in the mountains?🤔😔
> or they lose credibility even more And they will lose credibility. Russia using nukes won’t change the calculus of NATO not wanting to get into a full scale war with Russia, especially if the U.S has already withdrew military support for Ukraine. > it green lights more nukes Yes. America and Israel have already showed that if your stick is big enough, you can do whatever the fuck you want.
Russia would then use nukes in Ukraine, that would require European nations/NATO to respond with force or they lose credibility even more. Once you launch a nuke in a war of agression it greenlights more nukes to be used by others as well.
The only NATO country besides the US that could realistically project power in the Persian gulf is Turkey, and I don't think they're too keen on the idea of going to war with Iran.
Interestingly though, NATO, G7 has actually supported this war way more than a I expected. It's actually bizarre. I thought they would completely blast Trump but they've offered tons of support.
Part of why we are where we are is that we have at best. luke warm transactional relationships with supposed allies. All the nonsense that has occurred over the past 14 months has left us far more isolated. Instead of building consensus and cohesion through NATO / G7. Trump has been adversarial and isolated them. Now they are left 2 steps behind. Trying to clean up another mess.
With the help of the US and NATO! We are taxed so much and for what? Wars for Israel!
What a strange assertion; I’m certain you meant *you* don’t know the full extent of Russia’s manufacturing capacity, or their true intentions in Ukraine. The use of “we” is as presumptuous as it is inaccurate. Both of those unknowns are transparently evidenced by their actions spanning years of recent memory, where all the world’s been watching. “We” know their manufacturing limits starkly and clearly, not just by how the “3 day special military operation” has gone, but by Putin’s own speeches, domestic directives, and their state media commentary. To suggest they’ve been reserving anything other than nukes is a laughable stance to take, as they gain nothing by grinding themselves out if the alternative would’ve been a quicker victory. If they had X+10% instead of merely X, whether we’re talking missiles, military production capability, or anything else, it would’ve been applied long before now. Putin has lost face and played virtually his whole hand, for what he expected to be a short token resistance — and instead, it’s put a spotlight on the touted Russian top-tier war machine being a paper tiger. Not only that, the last few years have taken Ukraine — a state whose military no one looked twice at, with no goals or ambitions of conquest or war making — to a veteran fighting force that would outmatch many NATO militaries. The longer this goes, the weaker Russia becomes, and the steeper the slope on regaining everything that’s been spent and lost in the meantime. If Russia had whatever you think they’ve held in reserve, “we” know they would’ve used it already. What a bizarre argument.
Why would Europeans or NATO get involved with a criminal Zionist led war?
>U.S. has a Russian folly and gets itself into a war of attrition against a well equipped enemy >U.S. tanks the global economy as a result >U.S. empties its oil reserves, pulls resources, and gets sucked into an entirely unnecessary war and resource vacuum >China sees the U.S. is at its weakest and takes Taiwan >Russia, full ports into Ukraine >Europe sends all resources to ward off Russia >NATO boots hit the ground >Welcome to World War III >Were you born in 1995 or later? Welcome to the front soldier Why? Because Americans couldn’t stand her laugh.
It harms US, because rest of the world wants to decouple from US. China, etc. are buying tons of gold and selling dollars, NATO and EU is sick of US and sees them as alike Russia after the constant threats, economic abuse etc.
I think it’s unlikely. If it pushes past $130-$140 or so. They G7 / rest of NATO will probably become involved. In terms of military. Would still pretty much ensure a nasty recession though.
Idk if NATO wants members attacking a country first and then asking for backup
So NATO over, huh? Despite everything no emergency meeting or emergency response
Starting a war making Japan and South Korea run low on oil while depleting NATO missile stockpiles looks like the perfect window to invade Taiwan. Not sure the market priced kn the full ramifications of this Jeffrey diversion war on Iran.
I keep seeing this sentiment on here--usually made with GREAT confidence--but it doesn't seem to make sense. Why would opening the Strait invite another attack? Isn't the opposite the case? Iran has been very clear that it's using the Strait to inflict economic damage in order to get the U.S. to get back off. As recently as yesterday, an IRGC official said the Strait will remain closed "as long as" hostilities continue, or some kind of verbiage like that. If the U.S. *does* back off, but Iran *still* refuses to open the Strait, they lose that leverage. Instead, they simply provoke the U.S. into resuming military action and bombing them into oblivion (moreso) because there's no incentive not to anymore. This is not only bad news for the Iranian people, but the regime, who will be especially targeted. NATO allies and other Gulf nations would also pour into the Persian Gulf, if not in an offensive capacity, then at least in a defensively, to protect other Gulf states and if possible commercial shipping (as Macron suggested yesterday). Yes, Iran would inflict significant economic pain on the U.S. and the whole world, but in the end the Iranian regime has the most to lose. There's no strategic logic in continuing to poke the bear after it's stopped mauling you. They will, however, rebuild themselves over the next few years into a bigger regional threat.
Yes, I have a one dimensional brain. That’s why explained that Trump can be beholden to MORE than one party. You think acting as an antagonist to defense partners we’ve had since the first World War and threatening to pull out of the defense block that kept the Cold War from devolving into open conflict for decades is “trivial”? That must be why NATO members have cancelled defense contracts with US firms in favor of domestics manufacturers. Why none of them joined the “Board of Peace”. JFC, read something. If you think we support Ukraine for Ukraine’s benefit and not ours you don’t understand geopolitics. Your ignorance is showing.
North Korea building drones for Putin. South Korea building missiles for NATO
Iran doesn’t rely on airforce. The fact that you even mention it tells me how ignorant you are in this situation. Iran is still using ballistic missiles. Look at the alerts in GCC countries everyday and impacts being felt in fact UAE reported that yesterday was the toughest day. These GCC countries rely 80% of water from desalination plants, if Iran bombs them they will be in horrendous situation and it’s them who will get famine as they can’t even import anything with strait of Hormuz blocked. Second Iran can fire missiles from beneath the ground you can’t really take them out. Missiles are being made even at war. Look at the Houthis who literally fought NATO/US/Israel two years straight firing at least one missile every single day for two years. And Iran literally gave them leftover missiles. Iran is many times larger than Yemen, more mountainous, and has domestic defense industry. It’s not even a comparison. Oh look someone forgot to look at geography. Iran will not get famine because they literally import a shot ton from their northern border with Russia and Turkmenistan.
So Russia doesn’t benefit from Trump lifting sanctions on oil? He didn’t benefit from Trump’s abrupt withdrawal from Syrian in his first term? He didn’t benefit from Trump’s antagonistic attitudes to Ukraine? To NATO? Trump being beholden to Israel or Russia are not mutually exclusive. He’s demonstrated repeatedly that he will sell himself out to whoever massages his ego and/or pays him.
Lmao NATO is your argument? NATO was basically the United States guaranteeing protection for a bunch of countries that wanted their own subsidized healthcare and free college. All the knocks on Israel for what it gets, and your argument is NATO? Why do you think Europe has so many countries with socialized healthcare and education? Maybe because the United States used to guarantee their security, easy to promote society when you need to spend 1% of gdp on defense and let someone else do the rest. Same exact thing.
Comparing Israel’s 75 years of carte blanche funding to Ukraine’s recent military aid is hilariously absurd. Ukraine borders 4 NATO countries that we are bound to defend as our own. They were attacked, completely unprovoked, by a world superpower in a bid for annexation. Leaving them out to dry would not only expose our sworn allies to danger, but also express complacency for the revanchism of our strongest adversaries (Russia + China). Israel, on the other hand, borders exactly zero NATO members. They have received massive funding during both peace and wartime for the better part of a century. On top of that, we have repeatedly deployed our assets and manpower *directly* at their behest. They make nebulous claims about the nuclear capabilities of their neighbors, incite conflicts to force our hand, and regularly exploit our resources for their “lawn mowing” campaigns. (As they’re literally doing right now) Oh, and they control one of the most influential PACs in our country and very evidently hold massive influence over our politicians. That’s not a conspiracy.
Isn't it convenient to not be talking about Iran when it's literally today's war and the one and only topic of this post? You said you don't choose where you get deployed, then brought up NATO, which worked out quite poorly, then shifted to Kuwait... You're clearly throwing everything at the wall to see what's sticks, hoping that you'll find some military intervention that eventually served some good. I'm sure you'll find one, but if Jeffrey Dahmer once helped an elderly woman cross the street, does it make him a good person we should praise as role model?
I know it's a bit more than 5 years ago, but I bought up a bunch of vaccine company stocks right when Operation Warp Speed was announced, sold them months later for a stupid profit. Second best was buying a bunch of Rheinmetall when Trump started talking trash about NATO at the start of his second term. Again, waited a couple of months and sold for good profit. Economic news is world news, and world news is economic news. Often times, the profit is right in front of your eyes. Follow the *zeitgeist*.
*"Why am I paying for so much of Europes military protection?"* Articles 5 of NATO has been invoked only once in history, and it was by the US to get assistance from other members. Like I said, you don't seem to understand NATO's mechanics. *"How come I don’t see any of that oil revenue"* You are not a recipient of the benefits of wars, never was intended to be. That belongs to a small group of people, and shareholders or some public and private corporations. That part should be clear to you by now. You'll see pennies on your shares if you're lucky, and affordable gas at the pump. Given how much of your taxes go towards them, it's a net loss to you. I have no idea why you're so hellbent on defending those wars. I mean, yeah, you probably feel it's the patriotic thing to do, but it's not helping you. The people starting those wars don't give two shits about you, take as much as they can from your income, and give you nothing in return.
You have no understanding of what NATO is designed to achieve and how it operates. I know it's common practice, but saying *"OMG this is so Reddit, I can't even!"* has never made anyone sound smarter than they truly are.
Okay so Sweden and Finland recently joining NATO doesn't count? As if 2024 is that long ago. Why would Norway want protection from a country that would just take its oil? And where is all this oil money from Kuwait and Iraq since we also fought wars there too? Shouldn't America own all those oil fields by now? This is like the most reddit understanding of American foreign policy possible.
*"Swedish and Norwegian armies are clamoring to join NATO"* Norway was a founding father of NATO, Sweden has been a member since 2024. How can you people make such strong statements while knowing so little? It's exhausting. Also, their objective is purely defensive. They have no interest in invading Venezuela or Iran for oil, which is why no one in recent history has ever had any issues with soldiers from Sweden or Norway.
Yet the Swedish and Norwegian armies are clamoring to join NATO which is ultimately carried by the American military
I'm not saying this is a well thought out decision. Obama's previous deal was regarded by experts as an effective solution. Trump usually pressures other nations to get what he wants, in many cases, impulsively. These are the current results of his short-sightedness, but it will get worse in the middle east. I can't be certain how wide the conflicts will spread after Iran's previous supreme leader was killed. The only reason the US didn't attack Greenland was because the NATO alliance were ready to defend their ally against us. That would've been war with half of Europe or WW3. That's just one occasion. Many of his tariffs were struck down as illegal which invited lawsuits from companies like Nintendo for example. Now we have to pay these companies back, potentially with interest depending on the ruling. That's inconvenient considering he laid off many government employees who oversaw these duties. Most of his methods are replications of previous policy from other administrations or brute force.
This is a shallow take. The straight of Hormuz and Iran are only symptoms of something larger. The “rules based order” that has controlled global trade since the end of WW2 has officially ended. American hegemony and their public aversion to empire are over. The Yen carry trade is over. A cohesive European Union and NATO alliance is currently corroding. The days of a passive China seem like they may soon end as well. There is not a single person alive today that has any clue where the markets will be next year, or 10 years from now. There’s currently too many possibilities for future timelines. We could have WW3, we could have a hawkish America enacting the Monroe doctrine across the American continents. We could have chip factories in Taiwan destroyed setting the AI and tech markets back decades. We could have none of that. Don’t try to time this market, invest what you can afford to invest and keep some cash on hand for any potential opportunities. Nobody knows what’s going on anymore which means it’s prime time to make a fortune or loose it all, the perfect time for WSB regards.
Get kraken robotics, NATO is using their katfish system for mine detection. It's pretty bullish
They can demand things of little countries. They can’t others. The G7 started upping defense spending because US gave doubt they’d defend in the case of an invasion of a NATO country. That’s not a demand. It’s a suggestion. You’re underestimating what the damaged relationship of a top 2 trade partner.
Absolutely, oil prices spiking can cause a lot of pain. Not disagreeing. Just saying beyond that there's not much more impact. If the strait is opened (by force or otherwise) then I don't think we see much more economic impact. I think this is why the market is reacting the way it is. The expectation is that short-term closure will be mitigated by NATO countries releasing some of their reserves + backing off some Russian sanctions. Long term closure could still cause damage, but there's too much uncertainty about that to significantly price it in right now. So we're seeing some wobbles and overall reduction in growth, but we're not going to see a crash unless a long term closure becomes unavoidable reality.
Some stocks are up by 20%! But I think this has less to do with the war per se but more to do with oil. The US market initially thought a short war would not impact oil. It was surprised by Iranian defiance. Now it appears that Iran has lost or used up most of its launchers and ammunition. Its civilian infrastructure is vulnerable to destruction from air (potentially a war crime but I doubt Trump or Netanyahu cares). Ongoing risks still exist but have been priced in and offset by potential NATO naval escort missions and the G7 tapping strategic reserves, hoping that Iran capitulates or lose all offensive capabilities before the reserves run out. The US can export more as well (Venezuela too in the long run).
Well from my understanding any conflict between NATO countries and Russia invokes NATO articles. This would essentially make all the NATO countries come to their allies aid. And from what I know (could be wrong) it's one of the reasons why we cannot directly help Ukraine. Because the rest of NATO countries will be forced to join a war. We can only send weapons and aid. But we can't actually fire a bullet at the Russians. Only the Ukraine can. Please let me know if I'm mistaken.
How would Russia joining invoke NATO articles? They wouldn't be attacking the United States. The United States attacked Iran, doesn't matter who joins in that fight. It's not an attack on a NATO member. If it were then Iran conducting strikes on US bases would've already done that, but it hasn't. Russia can assist in the same way that they assisted Assad in Syria. And Iran's allies in the Middle East are not countries. Their allies are Hezbollah, the Houthis, PIJ. They'll continue to support them. As far as countries that do support Iran, that's Russia and China. China has about enough oil when their strategic reserve for 100 days, some estimates up to 200 days. Then they're in trouble. But if the Strait were closed for 3 weeks that would be huge trouble. There's a reason they massively expanded their SPR in 2025 and early 2026.
Then what would a NATO task force on a ship accomplish? Nothing.
In all reality, to win a war you need to lie a lot, commit war crimes, and keep your population supporting you. He's only achieving 2 of these things right now. Republicans want this war, not just trump. They've been working towards it for decades. Its not just us that wants their oil, there are plenty of countries who depend on it. The US can supplement our own oil and even sell to other nations. That's the biggest factor in this war, what other nations will do to secure their energy needs. Europe for example will be forced to send NATO troops alongside our own forces as well as our gulf oil buddies. It's going to be a massive ground invasion