Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[THE_WIZARD_]

...

[Jeff Buchanan]

This is a decent opinion piece discussing the risk of a nuclear weapon being employed by Putin should he face a defeat of his conventional forces in Ukraine. It's from the NYTs and it's probably pay-walled for you. I'll provide the link anyway. Douthat deals with this issue:

Across almost eight decades the possibility of nuclear war has been linked to complex strategic calculations, embedded in command-and-control systems, subject to exhaustive war games. Yet every analysis comes down to unknowable human elements as well: Come the crisis, the awful moment, how does a decisive human actor choose? This problem is worth pondering because the world is probably now closer to the use of nuclear weapons than at any point in decades — and just how close may depend on the unknowable mental states of the Russian dictator.

The weight of the critical thinking and analysis on this question revolves around the presumption that Putin is not suicidal. That is likely an accurate assessment weighing against Putin's use of nukes in the context of a strategic nuclear exchange. Ukraine is a hot war with a non-nuclear side trying to win a conventional war against the other side that has tactical nukes. The closest similar confrontations are Truman refusing to authorize MaCarthur to use nuclear weapons in the face of defeat in Korea and the Cuban missile crisis standoff between JFK and Nikita Khrushchev.

The main difference in the current conflict is that in the conflicts noted above, no threat existed to the positions or lives of the leadership. In Ukraine, a defeat for Putin threatens his presidency and potentially his life. That would seem to tip the scales in favor of the use of a nuclear device to alter the outcome he may be faced with in the coming months. The author goes on to speculate:

This doesn’t mean that we should expect Putin to use nuclear weapons (and it’s unclear from the Russian chain of command just how singular the decision would be). The world-historical recklessness of such a decision would carry its own potentially regime-destroying consequences — the possibility of escalation to outright war with NATO, the total abandonment of Russia by its remaining quasi-friends and the full collapse of its economy. It’s a reasonable-enough bet that even facing defeat, he or his regime would blink.

This would seem be the basis upon which the current western approach of avoiding escalation in Ukraine letting the chips fall where they may with a nod to Ukraine holding out and gaining leverage in any negotiated settlement that would involve withdrawal of Russian forces from agreed upon Ukrainian provinces, possibly a return to pre-invasion borders and some kind of restriction to what Russian proxy forces in the Donbas can actually enforce.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/24/opinion/ukraine-war-putin-russia.html

[lineygoblue]

Unless Russia and Putin have come up with technology that can locate where US nuclear submarines are, and destroy them first, then any first strike on his part will result in the destruction of the state of Russia. The US wouldn't even have to deploy nuclear equipped B-52's, which could be easily shot down anyway. Russia would be completely crippled by only sub launched missiles and sea launched cruise missiles.

Its like launching a first strike, but then not being alive to find out if you were successful.

[Jeff Buchanan]

The NYT's opinion piece deals with the use of tactical or battlefield nuclear weapons of low radiation and megaton outputs. The use of strategic nukes - the kind you talk about above - are an entirely different circumstance providing a much different range of bad outcomes. You'll recall MAD or Mutually Assured Destruction that formed the cornerstone of US nuclear strategy deterence for decades. That doesn't apply in the situation in UKraine as long as the deployment of a tactical nuke doesn't escalate to a national/strategic nuclear exchange. In that circumstance the Russians have historically offered that a strategic exchange between nuclear capable countries is survivable. It's much more of a deterrent threat than recognition of reality much like his nuclear saber rattling now is a deterrent to western conventional escalation. Putin is being regarded as bluffing and a bluff he is unlikely to act on. He's already set a bunch of red lines in Ukraine that have been crossed by Ukraine without the promised Russian nuclear response.

[crashcourse]

Crash - this is your opportunity to make a lot of money...."buying the dip". If you play the market, max out your 401(k) / Roth stock contribution and throw what spare change you have into index funds. If you're personally doing okay, lump sum buy index funds funds for your kids or open a 529 fund for them. In a couple of years when the market returns to 35-36k levels, you'll be glad you did.

yeah Im kind of meandering when to jump back in --My ira is based on a mixture of stuff, bonds, russell overseas and s&P 500- I jumped back into all s&P for the month of july and did pretty well then cashed out back into a lot of bonds when s&P got up to 4200. Now that its down to 3600 im thinking of jumping back in--kinda have a feeling though its gonna drop to 3400 or even less before the end of the year. Im sure it wuill get back up above 4200 before i retire in 3 or 4 years

far as kids go they are all out of college --so i guess i'll try to spend as much as i can once retired.

[CGVT]

Jesus, man. You are a poster child for financial disaster.

Put your cash in and let it ride. Thinking you are smarter than the market is not a good look or strategey

[crashcourse]

worked out pretty well so far

[THE_WIZARD_]

This administration is a 14 karat fuck up.

[lineygoblue]

Putin and Xi are testing us.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/nation/2022/09/27/patrol-spots-chinese-russian-naval-ships-off-alaska-island/69521209007/

[Dr. Strangelove]

Germany suspects sabotage after three leaks suddenly appear in both Nordstream pipelines within 24 hours

Germany Suspects Sabotage to Russia’s Nord Stream Gas Pipelines (yahoo.com)

[Dr. Strangelove]

During the night the track for Ian ticked backed to the east just a bit which is bad news for the Tampa Bay area.

100939_5day_cone_no_line_and_wind.png

[Jeff Buchanan]

Ian is going to be a very bad storm. Landfall uncertainty remains high because of the angle of approach to FL's west coast and varying assessments in the forecast models of steering winds aloft. Storm surge and flooding are major concerns let alone forecast 100mph+ winds that will persist as Ian crosses the FL peninsula, W to E all the way through Orlando and parts N.

We are still on Cruise ship now in the E Caribbean dodging bad wx. Have experienced 2 itinerary changes - one for Fiona as it tracked N and one for Ian. Our place in Fort Lauderdale has been hurricane prepped for a month as we've been traveling since 9/1. We're not in the high winds or storm surge fcst cone but likely to get 6-10" of rain. Our property drains well so hoping no flooding of the home.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Seems like the barrier islands off Bradenton and Sarasota will take a beating. Siesta Key, Longboat Key, etc.

[Mike]

I presume this is why gas prices have skyrocketed in the last 24 hours?

[Da Geezer]

I presume this is why gas prices have skyrocketed in the last 24 hours?

Refineries are doing their annual refitting for winter blends. There was also a fire in an Ohio refinery. Gas where I live jumped from $ 3.79 to $ 4.27 yesterday.