Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (187842)	5/21/2022 9:35:08 AM
From: arun gera	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217688

<Russia surrender Sevastopol and all of Crimea and retreat north to Russia, surrendering their southern port and centuries of Crimean possession and development> It depends on what USSR had agreed to when they let the former Soviet republics and countries such as Poland, Hungary and others loose when USSR was dismantled. Are there examples of other former republics from USSR taking over regions of other former USSR republics since 1990 based on some old legacies. So you are saying that Russia is more equal than other USSR republics. Why - because they have nukes? -Arun

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (187842)	5/21/2022 9:54:41 AM
From: arun gera	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217688

<Accept rockets with atomic bombs to Moscow being based in Donetsk and Crimea. > If Finland joins NATO, any installed nukes will be the about same distance from Moscow as from Crimea and Donetsk. Does Russia have a legacy right over Finland too? Russia is so immense that they have borders all over. What have US and Russia agreed on about Alaska? No missile sites there? After all it is only 50 miles from Russia across the Bering Strait. And if there is a nuclear war, there is no shortage of nukes and ICBMs ready to launch from 100s of other places around the world. And so how is Russia any safer with just a few less missile sites? -Arun

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (187842)

5/21/2022 10:42:26 AM

From: arun gera

1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Pogeu Mahone

Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217688

Tell me Arun, what do you think is a good outcome from where we are today? I guess you would write "Unconditional surrender by Russia>

Practically, Russia will have gained the additional territory they wanted, but it may be a pyrrhic victory. Because, Sweden, Finland, and half of Ukraine will be on the NATO side. And the NATO alliance could get stronger. Ukraine will get a Marshall plan equivalent boost. And that will make Ukrainian oligarchs very rich. As Ukraine has a highly educated population, there may be more manufacturing and IT companies setup there. So ordinary Ukrainians might climb out of the destruction in about 10 years.

Russia may lose a little clout because they only won partially. The West will go on with regular business with Russia in 5-10 years. But 5-10 years of handicap will make Russia less competitive with other advancing nations of similar size.

At one time USSR at least inspired an idealism based on communism. And 1950s USSR seemed at least equal to the capitalist west and way over the poor third world. Russia does not have those clear advantages any more. They do have a huge land mass, natural resources, nuclear weapons, and a well educated workforce. So they will survive or even thrive if constructive nationalism happens.

-Arun