Putin’s ambitions do not\u00a0<\/strong>stop with Ukraine. He blames the late 1990s breakup of the Soviet Union on the West generally (as embodied in NATO) and on America specifically. He’s nuts, but he has a big grudge and the resources to wreak havoc.<\/p>\n He’ll do anything to weaken us. For now, it will be cyber. He’s good at that. And we’re not good at protecting ourselves.<\/p>\n Above all, we have no centralized protection against cyberwar — something I’ve been aware of for eons\u00a0 and warning about — and now the subject of a piece today in today’s\u00a0New York Time<\/em>s:<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 I\u2019ve Dealt With Foreign Cyberattacks. America Isn\u2019t Ready for What\u2019s Coming. \u00a0Here’s the link: \u00a0Click here.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n We had a good jobs reports this morning. But the market continues to drop.<\/p>\n I have only two areas that interest me — cyber and energy stocks. They include CrowdStrike (CRWD), Enbridge (ENB) and Chevron (CVX), all of which I own.<\/p>\n Miserable selection, I know. But, buying a little is better than panicking.<\/p>\n I’m looking at stocks with exposure to Europe — like LVMUY\u00a0(Mo\u00ebt Hennessy Louis Vuitton) and ASML. I sold those two.<\/p>\n Images of Putin’s Ukraine<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Where do markets go from here?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Where now? Most likely down. The New York Times’s financial reporter, Jeff Sommer, did a piece last weekend:<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0“The Outlook: Short-Term Rattle, Long Term Rebound.<\/em>” Here are some excerpts:<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0Global markets usually weaken as wars approach, strengthen long before wars end and treat human calamity with breathtaking indifference.<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0That\u2019s been a common historical pattern, anyway. And, with some important caveats, it seems to be playing out with Russia\u2019s latest aggression toward\u00a0Ukraine<\/a>. …<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0Riding out a storm in the stock market has been a good strategy over the long term. One year after the 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbor, the S&P 500 gained 15 percent. A year after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, it was up 35 percent. History shows that just one year after most stock-market-shattering crises, the S&P 500 stock index has risen.<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0Russia’s war in Ukraine could be the start of something much bigger: a geopolitical shift that plunges the world into a 21st-century version of the Cold War. But even if that\u2019s the case, the hard numbers suggest that the financial implications for prudent, diversified investors who live far from immediate danger zones may not be all that severe.<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0The Cold War was destructive and debilitating for vast populations, but it was an excellent period for stock investors. Even during recessions and regional wars, the Dow Jones industrial average turned in an outstanding performance.<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0Here are the numbers, which I calculated over the long Presidents\u2019 Day weekend:<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0From President Truman\u2019s March 17, 1948,\u00a0speech\u00a0<\/a>to Congress criticizing what he called the Soviet Union\u2019s expansion of Communism in Eastern Europe, until the end of December, 1991, when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, the Dow returned 10.05 percent, annualized. In the roughly 30 years since then, through Friday, the Dow returned 10.77 percent, annualized, a bit better than during the Cold War, but not by much. …<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0The Immediate Market Effects<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0The price of oil is already steep: approaching $100 a barrel, from about $65 a year ago. It is likely to soar higher, especially if Russia mounts a full-scale invasion and, in return, faces\u00a0harsh financial sanctions<\/a>\u00a0by the United States and its allies.<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0Oil prices are already painful for consumers. They are reflected in the most salient marker of\u00a0inflation<\/a>\u00a0in the United States, the cost of gasoline, which already averages $3.53 a gallon, according to\u00a0AAA<\/a>. Inflation is already\u00a07.5 percent,<\/a>\u00a0a 40-year high in the United States.<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0As Caroline Bain, chief commodities economist for the research firm Capital Economics, wrote on Feb. 16: \u201cMuch would depend on whether Western sanctions are placed on Russian energy companies and\/or Russia decides to withhold energy supply to the West.\u201d In a worst-case outcome, she said, \u201coil and gas prices could easily double temporarily and the impact on gas prices could last for longer.\u201d<\/p>\n \u00a0 \u00a0That said, Capital Economics and many other analysts view so severe an outcome as unlikely. Even if energy prices continue to spike \u2014 largely because of speculation in financial markets \u2014 they are likely to decline quickly, based on fundamental supply and demand, said Edward L. Morse, global head of commodities research at Citigroup and a former deputy assistant secretary of state for international energy policy.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>As Russian missiles rain on Ukraine, there\u2019s\u00a0another battle brewing<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 in the cybersphere.\u00a0Destructive malware<\/a>\u00a0has flooded hundreds of Ukrainian websites and computers since Vladimir Putin announced his invasion. It would be a mistake to assume such attacks will remain limited to Ukrainian targets.
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.technologyinvestor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Ukraine-Damage2.jpg\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.technologyinvestor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Ukraine-Damage1.jpg\")
\nThis is what Putin did to Grozny.\u00a0The 1999\u20132000 battle of Grozny was the siege and assault of the Chechen capital Grozny by Putin’s forces, lasting from late 1999 to early 2000. The siege and fighting left the capital devastated. In 2003, the United Nations called Grozny the most destroyed city on Earth.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.technologyinvestor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/grosny-800x654.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\nGlobal markets typically rebound from war and disaster, and they are likely to do so this time, too. But Russia\u2019s nuclear arsenal raises the risks beyond calculation.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.technologyinvestor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Putins-long-desk-800x523.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.technologyinvestor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Soviert-Russia.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.technologyinvestor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/one-year-in-Nasdaq.jpg\")
<\/p>\n