Russia's Pearl Harbor Moment
415: When Virtue Signaling Ignores Peril
Morning all,
Over the weekend, Ukraine executed a daring drone strike deep inside Russia, targeting multiple air bases and reportedly destroying over 40 aircraft, including A-50 surveillance planes and Tu-95 and Tu-22M bombers. The operation, known as “Spiderweb,” was in the works for 18 months (obviously involving Western intelligence) and involved smuggling drones in wooden crates on trucks to launch the surprise attacks.
Russia has acknowledged damage across its air bases, and Ukraine claims this mission cut down about a third of Russia’s long-range missile carrier fleet—marking one of the most audacious drone raids yet. Russian Telegram and media is reportedly referring to this as “Russia’s Pearl Harbor Moment”.
Contrary to what I have seen online in the past 24 hours, you can admire the cunning/daring of such an attack while also grasping the severe implications this has for the Ukraine Russia War in the short term and the threat it poses to Europe, the US, and the globe.
It’s been awhile since I did a politically charged post for all of you — admittedly crypto and markets have commanded a significant amount of my attention.
But it seems the majority of normies and people online have zero clue how serious this is. They’re just clapping like happy seals because the new “Hitler” (Putin) got taught a lesson! Take that you big bad man!
The arguments are all the same and all emotionally charged:
Russia invaded a sovereign nation!
Russia started it!
Russian’s have killed, raped, and stolen from Ukrainians!
Russia continues unprovoked attacks!
All of this is true.
But it doesn’t change the fact that this conflict is spiraling out of control and threatens to cause much more devastation and death if we don’t approach it pragmatically. Which everyone in theory, should not want.
But I guess it’s not that simple.
The recent deep-strike drone attack inside Russia—targeting bombers capable of delivering nuclear payloads, marks a significant escalation in the Russia-Ukraine war and highlights the dangerous interplay of deterrence and risk in modern conflict.
Classic nuclear game theory emphasizes how rational (key word rational) actors weigh the costs of escalation against existential threats, but it also underscores the danger of miscalculation when signaling and retaliation blur the line between conventional and nuclear thresholds.
Russia’s military doctrine explicitly allows for nuclear use if its core security interests are threatened, and attacks on strategic bombers are more than likely perceived as encroaching on that red line. Even if Russia’s nuclear saber-rattling is meant to coerce rather than commit, the combination of heightened battlefield vulnerability and domestic political pressures increases the risk of miscalculation or brinkmanship. There’s ALWAYS a chance something really fucking bad happens.
Polymarket has a 14% chance of a nuclear detonation in 2025 — sure it’s pretty low on their odds — but is 14% an acceptable chance for the death of hundreds of thousands if not millions? Would 10% be acceptable? Would 5%?
In my opinion, the world is dangerously underestimating the nuclear risk here. Many still treat this threat as remote or rhetorical, but the environment is primed for sudden, catastrophic escalation if the line between conventional and nuclear thresholds continues to blur. The recent attack is a vivid reminder that what was once “unthinkable” can rapidly become plausible in the fog of modern warfare.
I’m getting really tired of the normie corporate globo dorks endlessly supporting the new “thing” without question. People paint rocks in my town with Ukrainian colors as they drive Range Rovers, go to hot yoga, and sip on $11 dollar lattes.
It’s one thing to support BLM/Antifa, or unisex bathrooms, or hate Trump. Their virtue makes them feel empowered and a part of something. But now this cult like thinking has bled into the a full scale modern war, these people like this “thing” because it gives them a feeling of superiority and importance. In their mind, nobody (besides Trump) is as evil or deserving of collective condemnation as Putin.
As I said on X yesterday — the dangerous nature of this conflict isn’t just the physical war itself — it’s the misrepresentation of the war, it’s progress, and how it’s ACTUALLY going by Western liberal media. This shouldn’t surprise anyone considering the media’s track record the last 10 years.
In this case you can add financial/political incentives on top of the rewards reaped from making sure support for Ukraine is unwavering and binary. Lucrative Blackrock contracts, arms deals, laundered money, political favors, and the opportunity to weaken Russia through proxy (for now). Zelensky retains power, if the war ends, he’s gone faster than free tins of Zyn at a Murray Hill pregame.
War hawks like Lindsey Graham are licking their chops. NATO sympathizers clearly want a war in Europe. They’ve done everything they possibly can to perpetuate it. Germany, the UK, and others are announcing war time readiness alerts. You’d think in the year 2025 the general population would have recognized the classic “politicians start wars, your kids fight them” dynamic. But evidently not. It’s the same playbook again.
The arguments for the unchecked continuation of this war are largely hyper emotional and devoid of any rational logic. In many cases we see the same energy we see against someone the left/mainstream hates like Trump, employed here.
Putin must be stopped at all costs, even if it means ANOTHER million Ukrainian/Russian lives and another $200B US taxpayer dollars. There’s no thinking ahead at all. No considering what happens if a nuke goes off or if Europe is dragged into a ground war.
There’s actually zero respect for the enemy — many eagerly believing that Russia is about to collapse or submit because the media told them so.
That view is not rooted in reality.
We are moving to war-fighting readiness as the central purpose of our armed forces
— Keir Starmer, UK Prime Minister
War in Ukraine Overview & My View
From the start of the war in February 2022, Russia framed its invasion of Ukraine as a struggle for national security and territorial integrity, using both military force and economic leverage to pursue its aims. The West responded with unprecedented economic sanctions and military aid, bolstering Ukrainian forces and initially halting Russia’s early advances.
This was the time when we got unprecedented images of fighting. It wasn’t like the Middle East, this was largely full on “Battlefield 3” type combat with tanks, trenches, helicopters, armored vehicles, drones, and artillery. Quite the shock for those of us used to seeing grainy images of drone strikes on sheep herders for the last 10 years.
Support for Ukraine was an immediate global phenomenon, complete with Ukrainian flags in US suburbs, on cars, in corporations, and in universities. It was and is reminiscent of larger social movements or “things” we’ve seen over the last 10 years including BLM, Free Palestine, etc. In other-wards, it becomes people’s religion.
And I want to make one thing clear — I support Ukraine or any countries’ right to defend themselves, particularly from invasion. I would do the same thing if my homeland was invaded.
The sober difference here is:
Your opponent is nuclear and worse unpredictable feeling cornered and ganged up on
You cannot win this war without escalating it in a big way and dragging other nations (my nation) into it (anyone saying Ukraine can “win” is an absolute moron)
You have sabotaged peace options along the way
In the beginning it seemed Ukraine stood a fighting chance. The ideal outcome was a withdrawal by Russian forces and an end to offensive action.
However, as the conflict has dragged on, the fundamental imbalance of power (despite billions of funds, intelligence agency support from other countries, etc.) has come into sharper focus: Russia’s deep reserves of manpower, energy leverage, and strategic depth have proven more resilient than many in the West anticipated (and you can’t blame many of them given the media isn’t willing to give an accurate portrayal of Russia’s capability).
Ukraine’s battlefield success, particularly in retaking territory in Kharkiv and Kherson, were impressive but depended heavily on Western-supplied weapons, intelligence, and financial aid. Without this pipeline of support, Ukraine faces the grim reality of fighting a far larger, nuclear-armed power whose economy has adapted to sanctions and whose military industry, despite setbacks, can still outproduce Ukraine’s.
Meanwhile, Russia’s leadership has shown it is willing to absorb both domestic dissent and battlefield losses to achieve strategic goals. Russian defense spending has surged, and the Kremlin’s ability to maintain internal control despite Western attempts to isolate it has undercut hopes for regime change or internal collapse.
The economic and logistical reality is that Ukraine’s economy is running on Western life support. Kyiv’s government revenue covers less than half its monthly expenses, and its military capacity is increasingly reliant on foreign arms and US support. Absent direct NATO intervention or an exponential surge in Western military aid, Ukraine’s ability to sustain the fight indefinitely diminishes rapidly.
Russia’s advantage is also structural: it controls vital energy supplies to Europe, and it can outlast Ukraine simply by grinding down its forces with conscripts and stretching Western political resolve.
While the moral and political arguments for Ukrainian independence are clear (and that needs to be reinforced here), the longer the conflict drags on, the more likely it becomes that Russia will achieve at least partial victory by sheer weight of attrition and the exhaustion of Ukraine’s allies.
I am not justifying Russia’s aggression, I am not minimizing the suffering of the Ukrainian people — I am looking beyond the tree line and seeing what happens if we do not veer from the current course.
This pragmatic view doesn’t deny Ukraine’s bravery or the moral case some may make for its sovereignty.
It simply acknowledges the hard realities of geopolitics and war: without a massive Western military surge or a fundamental change in Russia’s strategic calculus, Moscow’s endurance and brute force are likely to tip the balance in its favor over the long run. If they are poked too hard — we risk reaching the point of no return.
That hasn’t stopped hordes of people from thinking that there’s anyway to beat Russia head on OR somehow accomplish that without triggering a much larger war.
The only answer they have for the possibility of nuclear or global escalation is:
They won’t do it.
The Growing Nuclear Risk
The recent drone strikes inside Russia—damaging bombers that form a key part of Moscow’s strategic deterrence—are not just another escalation in the conventional war.
They signal the growing potential for nuclear miscalculation or brinkmanship, a risk that remains deeply underestimated by most market and geopolitical commentators along with the game theory “experts” running their mouths on X and other platforms.
Russia’s nuclear doctrine allows for the use of nuclear weapons if the state’s existence is threatened, and while these strikes were tactical, they pierced deep into the heart of Russia’s military infrastructure. Kremlin officials, including former President Dmitry Medvedev, have repeatedly stated that Russia will “not hesitate” to use nuclear weapons if pushed.
Just last year, President Putin himself warned that any attempt to break up Russia would “provoke a global catastrophe” and that Moscow would defend itself “by all means.”
Russia maintains the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, with an estimated 5,889 warheads—of which around 1,550 are actively deployed on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched missiles, and heavy bombers (which were recently targeted). The strategic bombers that were damaged in these recent strikes are part of that triad, equipped to deliver both nuclear and conventional payloads. Imagine if the Chinese, with all the farm land they’ve purchased *checks notes* near our military bases, did something similar?
How would we react?
The threat environment is complicated by the doctrinal flexibility in Russia’s nuclear posture—highlighted by the 2020 amendments to its official doctrine that explicitly state Russia can use nuclear weapons “in response to aggression with conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened.”
We’re very close to that line.
The risk, as I see it, is not that Russia will immediately resort to nuclear weapons as a direct response to these strikes. Rather, it’s that the normalization of deep strikes into Russian territory, combined with Putin’s domestic political need to show strength, raises the possibility of a retaliatory escalation that quickly spirals out of control. This is textbook nuclear theory.
In game theory terms, it’s a classic escalation ladder, but with a very short climb from high-impact conventional strikes to nuclear threats—especially in a regime that sees existential threats around every corner and feels like the world is closing in on them.
For those of us tracking this from a market perspective, it’s a scenario that can’t be ignored.
It’s also a reminder: in an environment this unstable, “unthinkable” outcomes aren’t just black swan events—they’re edge-of-the-knife risks that can upend everything from energy markets to global trade flows overnight.
Something we will discuss tomorrow at length for paid subs.
The Globalist/Far Left Hive Mind
My main point in today’s article isn’t to “side with Putin” or “defend Russia”, though critics will inevitably say just that because they a.) don’t like what I’m saying or b.) lack the intelligence to extrapolate past “Ukraine good Russia bad”. You know what I care about more than getting called “Pro Russia” by pencil necked dweebs virtue signaling?
Nuclear war.
The death of millions.
Continued suffering of the Ukrainian people.
NATO or the US getting dragged into a major conflict in Europe.
Spending countless more billions on an unwinnable war.
We’re seeing the extension of this “suicidal empathy” virtue signaling that’s become so prominent in the modern political left/globalist toolbox move to the modern battlefield.
I’ll give you several examples.
I posted the recent attacks on the Russian Bombers to Instagram. The comments overwhelmingly consist of people cheering, saying how awesome it is, etc. I don’t think I’ve seen a single comment that takes into account what this means for the world and the risk of escalation. Think about that. It’s an impressive collective ignorance that drives this phenomenon — you overestimate yourself or your cause, completely unaware that you could get punched in the mouth and not get up because you’ve acted so recklessly.
“You have to respect your enemy. Never, ever underestimate them. The second you do, they’ll squash you. Be smart about them. Respect their abilities, even if they don’t respect yours”
More recently a video surfaced of a Russian soldier sitting dejectedly in a field somewhere on the front, no weapon, no threat, just sitting, clearly in his own personal hell. An anti personnel drone hovers around him, taking its time before ultimately detonating in his face.
War is war — it wasn’t so much the killing of an enemy combatant that bugged me. It was the sick pleasure people took in watching a human being be mercilessly murdered on camera, regardless of who he is or who he’s fighting for. That sick demented joy and pleasure people took from that video illustrates the mindset many have about this war. Revenge at all costs, killing Russians at all costs, trying to hurt big bad Putin at all costs, thinking that this video is representative of the chances Ukraine has at “winning” this war.
I’m going to solve my pain with more pain and murder.
There’s zero level of second thought going on. “Wow it’s kind of fucked up I am taking this much pleasure in watching a defenseless soldier explode on camera” or “it’s funny watching this guy get killed on camera while I sip my Starbucks 6,000 miles away”.
Same energy when I was in public the day Trump was almost killed on live TV.
“Wow can’t believe they missed”
“Did they get him"?”
A complete detachment and abandonment of humanity.
And it’s pretty crazy. Why? Because oftentimes the people celebrating this gore and death were, just years ago, the strongest anti war proponents and activists, they often claim to be MOST against violence and force, they were firmly against the US getting involved in foreign wars.
Now they’re all for it. Because in their minds it justifies means to an end THEY think is right.
What changed?
In my mind — it’s the need to be the “good guys” which goes hand in hand with the globalist/marxist virtue game we’ve seen unfolding in Western society for years now.
It’s a moral ultimatum game with zero nuance that’s used endlessly by the modern left (and now neo cons, RINOs, and war hawks who want to perpetuate conflicts that enrich themselves or serve their ends) to try and get people in a “gotcha!” moment. It makes the users of this moral game FEEL good. It makes them FEEL as if they are the “good guys” beyond any scrutiny or reproach.
It’s a wild game of always trying to form the “us” and “them” camp.
Illegal immigrants have families and children! Therefore Trump is Hitler for trying to stop illegal immigration — if you disagree YOU support Hitler.
Israel has every right to defend itself by any means! If you think it’s fucked up kids are getting blown to pieces in Gaza YOU are antisemitic!
Israelis were slaughtered and butchered by Hamas on October 7th! If you’re against the Israeli military targeting militant individuals involved YOU are pro Israel! Zionist!
Russia invaded Ukraine first! I support reckless strikes by Ukraine inside a nuclear country! I support the death of millions and potential nuclear escalation that involves NATO and the US! If you don’t agree you’re a Russian spy and Putin lover!
There is no conversation anymore.
Zero rationale or critical thinking being applied to any issue, just emotionally charged hard stances that only increase division and animosity.
It’s the same lack of real world cause and effect awareness that the majority of modern normies lack entirely.
Being open borders feels good until your country is virtually unrecognizable
Being anti police feels good, until your cities are crime ridden cesspools where criminals terrorize with no fear of persecution or consequences
Supporting antifa/BLM feels good until your communities and neighborhoods are burned to the ground
Being pro DEI/non merit based feels good until your kid can’t get into college with a 4.0 or get a job after graduating top in his class from a prestigious university
Accepting unchecked foreigners into universities and government roles feels great until you have CCP spies leaking vital national information and research
Being pro censorship makes you feel good if it’s in your favor, until elections are interfered with, vital information is suppressed, and the public is entirely misled
Letting men compete in women’s sports feels good until a 6’5” quasimodo hulk breaks your daughter’s collar bone
Riddling your universities with far left professors (and funding said universities) feels good until violent demonstrations targeting Jewish students break out on your campus
Being anti gun feels good until you or your family is the target of violent crime
Mandating experimental vaccines feels good until your find out years later you were lied to about efficacy, what’s actually in them, and who was most at risk for a lab engineered bio weapon (that big tech censored discussion on)
Backing Ukraine unquestionably, feels good until a world war kicks off or a nuclear weapon gets used or “accidentally discharged”
Countless examples — one thing in common.
Zero ability to realistically weigh cause and effect.
With this most recent strike deep inside Russia, the masses are celebrating what they think is a monumental win against an ultimate evil. They fail to see the larger picture and how this is a suicidal venture at best.
Ukraine will never BEAT Russia.
You have a handful of outcomes:
A peace deal is struck (losses are cut)
Russia escalates significantly, more death ensues, the war does not stop
A nuclear weapon is used
The US and Europe are dragged into a global war
That’s it. Ukraine is not going to occupy Russia. They are not going to outmatch the Russians by themselves. They are not going to “win” in any conventional sense of the word.
If you understand this you understand the only thing blind allegiance does in this situation is get us closer to the last three options on this list, none of which are good for Russia, Ukraine, the US, or humanity.
If you don’t care about those three options playing out, you’re blinded by virtue and hatred. If you think they’re not possible, you are hopelessly uninformed.
This stubborn unwavering stance on a war that has the capacity to become utterly disastrous for humanity, perfectly illustrates the madness the current “thing” brings about.
A lack of anticipating consequences.
A lack of logical thinking.
An inability to zoom out and grasp who gains what from your blind allegiance and who can potentially lose everything.
Tomorrow’s post will be a markets guide centered on plays adjacent to this development — defense stocks, commodities, other assets that are moving in response to drastically changing geopolitical relationships.
See you tomorrow
Andy
Spot on article today!
From the James Patterson quote and on is the best summary of this war and the current state of humanity I’ve ever read. I wish it could be forcefully broadcasted to every single American so that the millions of virtue signaling idiots that fall into the bucket of “not understanding common sense” could maybe, just MAYBE, get a dose of reality.