To be fair in 1938 Britain hardly had a land army so France would have had to do all the fighting anyway. So whatever Chamberlain wanted to do didn't really matter that much.
Well be the same definition Russia was at war with the US in Korea and Vietnam (or Afghanistan). To a much bigger extent to be fair since there were actual Russian pilotes deploying to both countries.
I'm not sure whether Johnson or Nixon (during periods of sobriety of course) were considering directly attacking Russian territory because of that...
The name of that is proxy war. They would attack each other directly only if they were prepared to escalate to open war, but when we’re talking about nuclear powers, luckily the chance of that happening seems to be very low. It’s the only reason Europe does not openly deploy troops to Ukraine, though there are definitely some under cover.
To be fair precision strikes on bridges are not that easy. Of course the Kerch bridge is especially resilient due to the way it was build but still actually hitting a 60-100 meter length bridge from 700-1000 km away is tricky.
Not that it matter anyway at all... since there aren't any major rivers separating Poland and Ukraine to begin with.
That's not really very fair. Besides the "draw" in Korea all the other defeats were political rather than military. Second Iraq war is more of a pyrrhic victory as well.
Is it a victory at all if it’s not political? Then what are you trying to accomplish? These are rhetorical questions. The problem is that leaders or frameworks have not been able to adapt as fast as technological progress.
Nope. Nvidia has often sold products at below the market price. This has created shortages where scalpers who are able to get some supply immediately resell above list price. It might seem stupid for Nvidia to leave money on the table that way but they don't want to burn relationships with customers by raising list prices (much).
Adjusting prices daily or weekly (in both directions) wouldn't have necessarily been that helpful for maximizing their long-term profits, though (as you said).
> unlike Canadians.
Who did what? Symbolically threaten to tax electricity exports to some cities close to the border and stopped importing American booze?
EU banks: 1. Lend and trade in USD; 2. Have a shitload of deposits (liabilities) in USD-denominated accounts [1] [2] (1 trillion?)
A huge amount of EU imports (from outside Europe) have to be paid in USD. Like oil/natgas/commodities and manufactured stuff.
The Euro is not really used as reserve currency outside of EU.
So if EU goes into economic war with USA by dumping US treasuries: 1. they would be trading those treasuries for something else (EUR denominated bonds? yuan? something else?); 2. no more swap lines and goodbye exports to USA so USD debt trap with depositors (forced conversion to EUR?); 3. How are they going to pay imports without USD lines?
The only other big player who can give them equivalent liquidity in swap lines is China. But as I stated, that would be even worse than USD dependency and less likely.
All this while the EU industrial base is on the brink and with a huge dependency on American natgas and Chinese supply chain. They cornered themselves and they can't do much without huge sacrifices. The only way out needs a complete shakeup of the leadership in Brussels and a new economic plan. I wouldn't bet on that happening.
In Yuan? Which is certainly a more of a global reserve currency than the Euro and is certainly widely used for international trade? The same Yuan with the massive amount of liquidity outside of China?
The Canadian Dollar and Pound Sterling each are a have a significantly bigger share as reserve currencies than the Yuan....
USD/CNY havs only slightly higher volume than USD/CHF. Hardly anyone uses it anywhere outside China.
RMB settled ~60% of PRC cross border payments last year (up from 30% a few years ago), ~6T USD equivalent in settlement, which already makes rmb more real/useful currency than euro/yen reserves. And functionally shadow reserve - RMB can buy Chinese inputs, intermediate goods and global commodities, i.e. even oil delinked from USD, which covers like everything a country typically needs. That's what reserve is ultimately for, to buy shit/liquidity, not mere storage. RMB already guarantees access to most global goods for the simple reason PRC is producer of said goods. PRC also has massive USD war chest reserves, they already do USD lending AND USD swaplines to global south. In terms of liquidity/scale of swapline to EU, peak US swapline to EU was like 600B during covid and 2008 financial crisis, i.e. 20% of PRC USD reserves, which PRC increasingly need to find uses for as she displaces more USD from trade settlement. So it's doable for PRC, but question of trust, but not whether EU trust PRC, but whether PRC trust EU since these swap lines tend to be commodity-backed, where frankly EU has limited offerings to PRC.
Perhaps there is no need to actually understand assembly, but if you don't understand certain basic concepts actually deploying any software you wrote to production would be a lottery with some rather poor prizes. Regardless of how "productive" you were.
Somebody needs to understand, to the standard of "well enough".
The investors who paid for the CEO who hired your project manager to hire you to figure that out, didn't.
I think in this analogy, vibe coders are project managers, who may indeed still benefit from understanding computers, but when they don't the odds aren't anywhere near as poor as a lottery. Ignorance still blows up in people's faces. I'd say the analogy here with humans would be a stereotypical PHB who can't tell what support the dev needs to do their job and then puts them on a PIP the moment any unclear requirement blows up in anyone's face.
So once elected more than 25 years ago they are allowed to stay and perpetuity and stage sham election just because they won a legitimate one a generation ago?
Venezuelans didn’t just vote for a candidate. They voted to re-found the country under a new constitution and ideology. They’re enjoying the consequences of the ideology they voted for.
To be fair in 1938 Britain hardly had a land army so France would have had to do all the fighting anyway. So whatever Chamberlain wanted to do didn't really matter that much.
reply