German Stocks Drop 10% as Debate Intensifies on Whether Putin Can be Stopped – Trustnodes

The French CAC has seen a similar performance, though dropping 8% in the past month, as long built relationships with Russia suddenly unravel at speed.

Germany sells $23 billion to Russia, while France sells just $8 billion, and Germany buys $18 billion from Russia. For France, it’s only $4 billion.

So for the two European great powers, Russia is a small pie. Germany sells to France more than $100 billion, for example, and buys $64 billion worth of goods.

Yet both are being affected a lot more than US stocks by Russia’s decision to bombard Ukraine with the continued red in the EU stock market not finding much respite since the invasion began.

Where US is concerned, this is probably more a problem for Europe to them, rather than America, with prominent commentators, like Tucker Carlson, still not fired for supporting Russia for example.

“In a democracy, citizens who rule have an absolute right to have any opinion they want. Period,” Tucker says.

Even in war time? Thankfully, except in Ukraine, we’re at peace but how was this allowed to even come to war and do we really have no other choice but to expect this to become a prolonged war right in the borders of the European Union?

We’ve seen what Iraq did to the whole Middle East region, and in part thanks to that, Europe has seen a decade of economic stagnation.

America has doubled its GDP during that time, and since they’re an ocean away, maybe they’re right that they can afford to have “any opinion.”

But in Europe, can the continuation of this war be afforded? Can we easily foresee what a prolonged war would mean for the continent?

A war that first of all is a trap for Russia, and maybe even for Europe. These two are the biggest losers and we see it clearly in the stock market. America seems to be gaining, if stocks speak, or at least is less affected. China’s Shanghai trading has yet again produced green.

This can change. Germany’s announcement they will now spend €100 billion on defense may well boost tech development in Europe, not least because even the weapons themselves are now pretty much computers.

Europe clearly needs a space plan. It needs its own operating system, especially for the military with Linux being free. It needs its own navigation in regards to GPS, its own search engine which maybe can even disrupt the far too complacent Google, and a whole raft of state guided, but private driven, strategic development.

So the budget should be increased to €150 billion, and of course when we speak of Germany you have to take a wider view in as far as Austria, Denmark, Sweden, Netherland etc are pretty much German.

They kind of speak the same language and therefore they can merge, with the Franko-UK military alliance then sort of merging with that German constellation.

This has to happen regardless, but it is then easy to see this spheres of influence sort of thing, this no defenseless borders justification for forceful imperialistic subjugation, becoming a fairly direct confrontation between Germany and Russia because under a geopolitical thinking where everyone is an enemy out to get you, so making it a self fulfilling prophecy, both Germany and Russia would want their sphere of influence to include each other’s capital.

This is discredited thinking, but clearly not in Russia and maybe not even in USA with it unclear really whether Russia hasn’t been fooled by some Americans that claim to intellectually analyze security matters, like that Mr George Friedman.

As it happens, Friedman and this whole geopolitics – which we shouldn’t forget was a dirty word until late naughties – was introduced to the millennials when Stratfor was hacked and Wikileaked.

Not much after you’re introduced to this thinking, you begin realizing that geopolitics is more the ‘science’ of how to create conflict because it basically says you have to fight your neighbors as otherwise you’re defenseless.

On Ukraine for example, that Friedman said back in 2009 that Ukraine as a democracy means that Russia is unable to defend itself because open plaines.

Defend from Who? Also isn’t the reverse the case that under Russian subjugation, Poland would not be able to defend itself?

And thus according to this analysis isn’t then the prognosis that Europe and Russia should go to war just because they both exist and are neighbours?

Of course if you follow it through it also means they should go to war with China as well and America because this is a way of thinking that ferments war.

The people like Friedman or his Russian counterpart Alexander Dugin are basically the devil’s agent disguised as angels claiming to bring peace and security while architecting global war and total insecurity.

And this is proven. Both second world wars were a product of this 19th century Romantic thinking derived from extreme nationalism based on the premise that your neighbor is a threat just because they’re your neighbor.

The antidote to it is of course free trade, free movement of goods and people, accountable governance, and globalization.

That’s what secures peace and prosperity, but it is currently being attacked by outdated thinking, and the war in Ukraine is a product of ‘intellectual’ flawed thinking. It’s not an outcome from chaos or accident, but a product of sophistry which we hoped it had been proven to be wrong because it provides the opposite of what it promises. So what can be done about it?

The Challenge to Peace

“Vladimir Putin’s badness doesn’t absolve us of our responsibility to think clearly about how to protect this country and the rest of the free world, in that order,” Tucker.

In that order. Not that the unreliability of America was any secret. But with matters allowed to get to this stage, is there really any good option?

For the United States, or at least for people like Friedman, all of this is pretty much perfect. Russia gets bogged down in a mess in Ukraine, and now apparently even Belarus is sending troops which may well also destabilize Belarus, and gradually Russia collapses under its own weight because their economy can’t really support such war.

And then what? Well presumably nothing because if USA was a threat to Russia as Putin claims, they had a very weak Russia in the 90s after its own communism failed to which US could arguably do anything, and did pretty much nothing instead leaving Russia intact.

While where Europe is concerned a destabilized Russia in its borders means at the very least a lot of refugees.

Russia maybe can win however and maybe it doesn’t collapse. For Europe again there’s potential destabilization in its EU borders in Poland, Romania and other countries.

So win or lose, neither Europe nor Russia wins, both lose, if this keeps on as a prolonged conflict which would change dynamics on how Europeans view Russia and vice versa, dynamics that would would deepen and solidify the longer it continues.

Europe can maybe keep arming Ukraine and hope they win, but Russia outnumbers them significantly.

They holding off, but clearly matters are getting worse with the country in the process of being destroyed.

Europe can directly intervene instead. Going by what people like Tucker say however, it may be on its own. US may well say Nato is a defense alliance, rather than a military merger of sorts, and so they’re not getting directly involved.

Not least because would Nato win in a sort of quick shoot and run way? Well, obviously it would win where the skies of Ukraine are concerned. Just recently US revealed some 52 stealth fighter jets.

It wouldn’t go into Russia, and so Russia wouldn’t go into any Nato country, but it would be Russia and Nato fighting directly, though in a third country.

Where nukes are concerned, appeasement doesn’t work so any threat of nukes can’t be appeased and can’t be seen to be appeased, not least because Nato has nukes as well and all this is in a third country, but Russia has some 1,571 planes in its airforce, about half that of USA.

So it wouldn’t be an easy ride, with it unclear how long this operation would go for, which for US might also be too costly as they also have to defend Taiwan.

Plus where America is concerned, why would they even. This is a trap for Russia, and they’ve fallen right into it.

It happens to be in Europe however, at the borders of EU, and clearly many actors within the continent are not happy at all that matters have been allowed to reach this stage.

We’re already seeing a reconfiguration in regards to security with Germany’s doubling of defense, and Germany now together with France as well as Italy have to take the lead in securing EU’s borders through a credible continental army.

So that when they sit at the table, with Putin or whoever else, they can make their own decision prior to negotiations on whether to say they would or not send troops.

US took out that card months ago even while negotiations were ongoing. Did Zelensky not hear it?

Without US, as Russia claims, is there really a credible continental force? And where Europe is concerned, both Russia and US probably have the same diagnosis in arguing the continent is fragmented, broken into nationalist governments, and a non-power militarily with a United Europe, to people like Friedman just as much as Putin, being a threat to US because these people still operate within a master and slave worldview.

Europe can still cause a lot of problems if it wanted however. The defense budget of just Germany and France is now vastly bigger than Russia and inching towards matching China.

But, it is probably in Europe’s interest for this war to end as soon as possible, and preferably immediately. A Finlandization option should address any 19th century concerns the clearly outdated Russian government may have. That can avert the risk of a full on clash down the line between Germany and Russia, so Putin should take the option.

He also wants Crimea. He has and has had Crimea since 2014, so it may well be time for great power politics and the German chancellor Olaf Scholz to make some decisions.

He has already made a pretty big one and it’s in Berlin where most people rose to show support for Ukraine.

Those aren’t things to be dismissed, so the Russian government needs to sit and think a bit more about the foreseeable future, especially as Germany has had a great rise over the past two decades, far greater than Russia.

The worst can probably still be avoided because debate is only starting about Europe cutting gas imports from Russia.

That’s gone hurst as China has only so much need for gas. After that there’s only the option of no fly zone or something worse for Russia, Europe re-arming.

Europe can also offer China to sign that treaty they wanted if they reign in on Russia. A Russia that to a lot of Europe may well seem to be doing America’s bidding in now bringing war to the continent after two decades of war in Europe’s near neighborhood and by Turkey’s border.

To the point now one must think Putin is actually dumb, not smart, because their influence on Germany already had Ukraine vetoed from Nato in 2008, and because those close relations with Europe up until that 2008 and even 2014 were giving Russia plenty of prosperity and peace.

Their mistake in confusing US with Europe has now reached the point where they’re fighting within their own family, when both Ukraine and Russia could have been part of the European family.

Only in that Europe can there be security, because sooner or later, if China adopts the same thinking as Russia, especially because Russia gives no one any option, the horses will again come to Moscow and again perhaps keep it for two centuries.

As in this game, where war is just a past-time of billionaires in bunkered castles while the peasants perish, we’ll see the same mistakes.