'It requires staggering miscalculation on both sides to escalate a war'.
The cavalier analysis of the managerial class...
In reality since the nuclear age there have been several incidents where one, let me repeat ONE, man’s (sorry ladies), action, or perhaps better calculated non-action, prevented the launch of nuclear missiles. In 1983 Stanislav Petrov for instance.
But since you mentioned Cuba 1962 let me remind you of the incident where US Navy ships were depth charging Soviet submarines in the Atlantic. The Americans were using charges without the actual explosive load so only the detonators would go off. That, the Americans reasoned, would let the Soviets understand, let me repeat, understand, that the Americans were only SIGNALLING and not really attacking...
Down below however it appeared WW3 had begun…
There were 3 officers needed to fire the subs missiles. Both the captain and political officer were in favour of firing. The second officer was against and thus prevented the launch of more than a dozen nuclear missiles targeted for US cities.
Without that specific second officer it’s quite likely none of us here would be reading or writing this.
i'd say that even the happiest of happiest, decent, and well educated middle class desk-warriors, whose entire social class is perfectly isolated from anything risky, and to whom the idea of, or better the instinct to actually physically defend your country (a mighty controversial concept if not straight out fascist until very recently - You would encounter few of them back in the days of national conscription during the cold war) should be able to understand that exactly their sterilized view of history, and their theoretical view of contemporary danger, is the most risky element.
Not Putin - who is wholly calculating - in Moscow is the risk for instance, let alone a ‘crazy dictator’. (And he has factions to deal with). But the fools who called for a no fly zone in 2022 are. (All politicians ie academics ie managers ie theorists). The pentagon was against.
In 1962 ALL of Kennedy's military chiefs of staff were in favour of a preemptive strike (damn the soviet submarines already out to sea). Only a handful of politicians - notably Kennedy himself and his brother - prevented it.
The only thing that seems to have changed since then is that the PMC now are the vengeful warmongers and the military the realists.
A great takeaway: Don’t sell based on headlines. Buy based on durable changes in fundamentals. Thanks for the pragmatic guide — especially timely given today’s headlines.
Timely…
𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐤𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬...
ɪ ʜᴀᴠᴇ sᴏᴍᴇᴛʜɪɴɢ ʜᴜɢᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴘʀᴏғɪᴛᴀʙʟᴇ ɪ'ʟʟ ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴛᴏ ɪɴᴛʀᴏᴅᴜᴄᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ᴛᴏ, ᴀʟᴍᴏsᴛ ᴀʟʟ ᴍʏ sᴜʙsᴄʀɪʙᴇʀs ᴀʀᴇ ᴇᴀʀɴɪɴɢ ᴍᴀssɪᴠᴇʟʏ ғʀᴏᴍ ɪᴛ. ɪғ ʏᴏᴜ'ʀᴇ ɪɴᴛᴇʀᴇsᴛᴇᴅ
👇👇
+1 (850) 703-1686
ᴛᴇxᴛ ᴍᴇ ᴛʜʀᴏᴜɢʜ ᴡʜᴀᴛsᴀᴘᴘ
'It requires staggering miscalculation on both sides to escalate a war'.
The cavalier analysis of the managerial class...
In reality since the nuclear age there have been several incidents where one, let me repeat ONE, man’s (sorry ladies), action, or perhaps better calculated non-action, prevented the launch of nuclear missiles. In 1983 Stanislav Petrov for instance.
But since you mentioned Cuba 1962 let me remind you of the incident where US Navy ships were depth charging Soviet submarines in the Atlantic. The Americans were using charges without the actual explosive load so only the detonators would go off. That, the Americans reasoned, would let the Soviets understand, let me repeat, understand, that the Americans were only SIGNALLING and not really attacking...
Down below however it appeared WW3 had begun…
There were 3 officers needed to fire the subs missiles. Both the captain and political officer were in favour of firing. The second officer was against and thus prevented the launch of more than a dozen nuclear missiles targeted for US cities.
Without that specific second officer it’s quite likely none of us here would be reading or writing this.
i'd say that even the happiest of happiest, decent, and well educated middle class desk-warriors, whose entire social class is perfectly isolated from anything risky, and to whom the idea of, or better the instinct to actually physically defend your country (a mighty controversial concept if not straight out fascist until very recently - You would encounter few of them back in the days of national conscription during the cold war) should be able to understand that exactly their sterilized view of history, and their theoretical view of contemporary danger, is the most risky element.
Not Putin - who is wholly calculating - in Moscow is the risk for instance, let alone a ‘crazy dictator’. (And he has factions to deal with). But the fools who called for a no fly zone in 2022 are. (All politicians ie academics ie managers ie theorists). The pentagon was against.
In 1962 ALL of Kennedy's military chiefs of staff were in favour of a preemptive strike (damn the soviet submarines already out to sea). Only a handful of politicians - notably Kennedy himself and his brother - prevented it.
The only thing that seems to have changed since then is that the PMC now are the vengeful warmongers and the military the realists.
𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐤𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬...
ɪ ʜᴀᴠᴇ sᴏᴍᴇᴛʜɪɴɢ ʜᴜɢᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴘʀᴏғɪᴛᴀʙʟᴇ ɪ'ʟʟ ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴛᴏ ɪɴᴛʀᴏᴅᴜᴄᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ᴛᴏ, ᴀʟᴍᴏsᴛ ᴀʟʟ ᴍʏ sᴜʙsᴄʀɪʙᴇʀs ᴀʀᴇ ᴇᴀʀɴɪɴɢ ᴍᴀssɪᴠᴇʟʏ ғʀᴏᴍ ɪᴛ. ɪғ ʏᴏᴜ'ʀᴇ ɪɴᴛᴇʀᴇsᴛᴇᴅ
👇👇
+1 (850) 703-1686
ᴛᴇxᴛ ᴍᴇ ᴛʜʀᴏᴜɢʜ ᴡʜᴀᴛsᴀᴘᴘ
A great takeaway: Don’t sell based on headlines. Buy based on durable changes in fundamentals. Thanks for the pragmatic guide — especially timely given today’s headlines.
𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐤𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬...
ɪ ʜᴀᴠᴇ sᴏᴍᴇᴛʜɪɴɢ ʜᴜɢᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴘʀᴏғɪᴛᴀʙʟᴇ ɪ'ʟʟ ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴛᴏ ɪɴᴛʀᴏᴅᴜᴄᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ᴛᴏ, ᴀʟᴍᴏsᴛ ᴀʟʟ ᴍʏ sᴜʙsᴄʀɪʙᴇʀs ᴀʀᴇ ᴇᴀʀɴɪɴɢ ᴍᴀssɪᴠᴇʟʏ ғʀᴏᴍ ɪᴛ. ɪғ ʏᴏᴜ'ʀᴇ ɪɴᴛᴇʀᴇsᴛᴇᴅ
👇👇
+1 (850) 703-1686
ᴛᴇxᴛ ᴍᴇ ᴛʜʀᴏᴜɢʜ ᴡʜᴀᴛsᴀᴘᴘ