Elon Musk has become a born again Christian! Isn't that comforting?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/once-atheist-hero-elon-musk-155640603.html

This is the way to deal with billionaires!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-court-reportedly-fines-google-160502356.html

Interesting book

https://www.amazon.com/Universal-Purpose-Lifes-Evolution-through-ebook/dp/B0DGC41T7H/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&sr=1-1

Some Definitions

Some Definitions Scientist: A scientist is someone who pretends that they have developed ideas and concepts of great intellectual, cultural, and practical significance, that will dramatically improve the way we live, and will change everything in a very positive way and will solve all the world’s problems. In fact, scientists never do anything at all, other than say how great they are. Engineer: An engineer is someone who claims they have developed, and are developing technologies of immense value to humanity, that will achieve great things, solve the world’s problems, and make the world a much better and more interesting place to live in, and will vastly increase humanity’s potential, and will empower everyone enormously. In fact, all engineers ever do is blow things up, and say what a great job they did. Doctor: A doctor is someone who claims to be great healer, who saves peoples’ lives, who cures them of terrible diseases and makes them whole again, someone who eases pain and suffering, and is an angel of mercy to all mankind. In fact, doctors just charge people a ton of money to kill them slowly and painfully.

Is it possible to fight a war and not be a war criminal? How about Erwin Rommel?

Erwin Rommel, The Desert Fox, is a popular and enigmatic figure in military history. Having been forced to commit suicide by the Nazis -- he was given the alternative of suicide, or a public trial for treason, with the consequent destitution of his entire family -- has become something of a martyr and legend for people on all sides of WWII. He almost certainly knew about, and approved the Von Stauffenberg bombing plot to kill Hitler, in 1944, but, he wasn't involved in the planning to any extent. This was enough for Hitler to want him dead, so, the Nazis arranged it. Rommel was somewhat unique, in that he was respected by all sides, even at the height of the conflict, as an honorable and brilliant commander and general. He had no significant involvement in slave labor programs, extermination campaigns, the murder of civilians, or any other activities normally associated with war crimes. He was a brilliant and successful Nazi general, who was frequently used by Hitler for popular political purposes and propaganda, because of his effectiveness, his charisma, and his courage. So, let's just suppose that Rommel survived the war. Perhaps Hitler decides he needs Rommel too much to kill him. After all, Albert Speer is supposed to have known about the plot, and the plotters were even planning on keeping him in his position of Minister of Armaments and Munitions, if their plot had succeeded! Nevertheless, Hitler never touched Speer. He probably found him too useful. Perhaps, he might have changed his mind, and decided to spare Rommel as well, for the same reason. Or, quite possibly, if Rommel had refused the option of suicide, Hitler might have decided a public trial and humiliation of such a popular figure simply wasn't worth the political fallout, and might have backed off, at the end. Hitler was always very, very sensitive to German popular opinion, which is why he had such a hold over the German people. So, once they win the war, what exactly do the allies decide to do with Rommel? Will he be charged as a war criminal? On what basis, exactly? After all, Werner Von Braun and his merry band of engineer-rocketeers was certainly involved much more in killing civilians, slave labor programs, and war crimes in general, but, they were never touched at all! Von Braun wasn't merely a member of the Nazi Party, but a member of the infamous SS, responsible for the Jewish Holocaust. Why go after poor old Erwin Rommel? Rommel was never even a member of the Nazi Party, and openly disapproved of their policies! It might be instructive to compare the case of Admiral Donitz, the head of the German navy, and, hence of their highly successful U-boat campaign. Donitz would have employed slave labor in building his ships, and, his U-boats targeted civilian and military alike. Furthermore, his U-boat blockade of Britain was highly successful, and put the entire nation at risk of starvation. Yet, despite all this, he only got a ten year sentence at the Nuremberg war crimes trials. So, why would Rommel have been charged as a war criminal, at all? For what purpose? The Soviet Union, and Josef Stalin, who had suffered the most from the war, probably wouldn't have given a damn about Rommel one way or another. They never even fought him, he wasn't a Nazi, he was just a terrific general, and the Russians respect great generals, even amongst their enemies. I suspect even the Russians wouldn't have insisted on Rommel being charged for war crimes. So, I strongly suspect Rommel wouldn't have been charged with anything at all. He would simply have been an old, highly respected general, respected by friend and foe alike, and, would likely have gone into German politics, with some success. As his son eventually did, of course, OTL. Erwin Rommel represents something fairly unique, the "good general", the noble warrior. He reminds me a bit of WWI German air ace Baron Von Richthofen, who was shot down over enemy lines after having shot down 80 allied airmen in the course of the war. The allies buried him with high honors, and some even cried at his funeral!

Charles Hughes U.S. Chief Justice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Evans_Hughes https://www.nationalbook.org/books/charles-evans-hughes/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merlo_J._Pusey

How much longer can Ukraine hold out? The British say, "Not much longer".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fkK42nJjtQ Russia is advancing on all fronts, and pummeling Ukrainian infrastructure with a ferocity which will make it virtually impossible for Ukrainians to survive the coming long, hard winter. Russians, of course, love winter offensives, so, the rate of advance is only likely to increase in the coming winter. By this stage, of course, NATO has essentially given up on the notion that Ukraine can mount effective counteroffensives, as Russia quite systematically liquidates all Ukrainians in their supposed "invasion" of Russia in Kursk. There was never any rush about this, of course, it was always quite clear the Ukrainians there weren't going anywhere, except to the graveyard, of course. By this time, the only hope of a NATO/Ukrainian victory has been based on the "overwhelming" Russian casualties reported by Ukraine, which, supposedly, would make Russia quite literally run out of manpower within a year or two. That these casualty figures have been exaggerated by at least an order of magnitude is rarely discussed in the Western media. I'm old enough to remember the "body counts" from the Vietnam War, and, we all knew how much those were worth! Another possibility suggested is that the Russian economy is about to collapse. The problem here, is that the Russian economy is now growing faster than any other in the industrialized world. A third possibility for "victory" for NATO/Ukraine, is that democratically elected Vladimir Putin is actually a brutal dictator, so extremely unpopular in Russia that he will be overwhelmed by a popular revolt. However, the problem with this hypothesis is that Putin was just elected with 80% popular support, about double the best any NATO leader has currently, and his support is quite steady among Russians, despite some rather limited opposition to his highly effective rule. Finally, there's always the hope of a military coup against Putin. However, given the successes of his military on the battlefield, and the general prosperity of Russia currently, and Putin's high level of popularity, this possibility does seem rather more remote than coups in the NATO nations, doesn't it? So, is this NATO backed war in Ukraine about to mercifully end itself? The British seem to think so, and nobody hates the Russians like the British, do they?

Russia is continuing its steady progress to taking over all of Donbas

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/10/9/russian-troops-grind-towards-pokrovsk-take-second-ukrainian-town-in-a-week While the Western media continues to generate its fantasy Russian casualty figures a la Vietnam era body-counts, Russia continues to take towns and territory on its way to conquering all of Donbas, its key objective when it invaded Ukraine. At the moment, it is systematically surrounding the large city of Pokrovsk, pre-war population 400,000, from all sides, by taking all the towns intervening, from the East. It's taken a couple just this week, with substantial territory, moving forwards every single day. Now, the West seems to accept that Ukraine can't actually take any of this territory back, it's too well fortified, and the Ukrainians simply haven't the manpower to do it, their military has been totally decimated. So, rather than talking about Ukrainian "counter-attacks" to retake territory, now the Western media is simply sticking to its script of claiming "overwhelming" casualties on the part of the Russians. Now, even the BBC has acknowledged, that its best efforts at research can only actually verify about 70,000 Russian dead in the entire war, about a tenth of the regular claims for Russian "losses". They comfort themselves by saying the "actual figure" is "believed to be higher". Well, maybe, but, probably not much higher. Now, that's just dead, of course, and, there are wounded as well, but, in most wars, the maimed and the dead turn up at about equal numbers, so, that really only means about 140,000 permanently out of action, or, about 1/10 of 1% of Russia's total population in three years of war, hardly an insurmountable figure from a practical point of view. When the Russians do take Pokrovsk -- which even the Ukrainians are acknowledging is inevitable by this stage -- that's pretty much it, for Donbas, Russia will effectively control it 100%. So, what happens then? True, the Russians have only taken about 20% of Ukraine so far, but, it's probably the best 20% of Ukraine! When they've finished taking Donbas, probably within a few months now, I suppose they could just keep going -- take Kharkiv, take Odessa, retake Kherson, eventually move on to Kiev. At what point will the West give up? Ever? Will the West want to keep fighting the Russians for decades, as they systematically colonize the rest of Ukraine? I doubt it actually. The war may be over next year, as Zelensky's support collapses. One can only hope so!

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-physicists-lie-all-the-time

Russia has remarkably quickly taken full control of the high ground, and the very important strategic fortress town of Vuhledar

https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-secures-biggest-victory-since-164038972.html This is being described as the most important victory for Russia in six months of warfare. Although not a huge city, this town of some 15 thousand people was very heavily fortified, and is situated to control supply lines to much of what remains of Donbas, out of Russian control. Russia now controls more than 80% of Donbas, and, the way things are going, there doesn't seem to be much question that they will control all of it, by the end of the winter, if not earlier. Now, I know what many of you are thinking. "It was supposed to just be a 3-day operation, here it is, coming up on three years later, and they're still fighting. Doesn't this prove just how incompetent the Russians are, they can't even defeat the Ukrainians." Well, first of all, it's not just the Ukrainians. It's the Ukrainians plus limitless NATO assistance. The total amount of aid -- economic and military -- given to Ukraine so far from all NATO nations, is comparable to perhaps half the entire U.S. military budget, by far the largest in the world. Absent this aid, the war would certainly have been over, with a smashing Russian victory, within a month or two. Also, Ukraine is, actually, the second largest nation in Europe in terms of land area, after Russia, with a pre-war population of nearly 50 million people. So, between the massive NATO aid, and the size of the country, it's hardly surprising that Russia is having to work at this a bit. Now, many are claiming that Russia has proven that NATO is vastly superior to Russia in terms of military skill. After all, America defeated Iraq quite easily. Twice! Well, let's take a look at that. First of all, the population of Iraq in 1991 was 20 million people, in 2003, it was 27 million people. About half the population of Ukraine. And, about half the land area. Also, and perhaps more critically, Iraq was not getting 400 billion dollars in outside assistance, they were managing on their own. Finally, and perhaps most critically, America went in very big, from the start, they had nearly a million men in the initial assaults. In contrast, the Russians went in with just a couple of hundred thousand troops. They weren't expecting massive NATO assistance, and, that was the difference. If the Russians had went in with a million men, from the start, it would all have been over in days, probably, certainly weeks. What Russia is doing now, is colonizing Ukraine, one town at a time, and, it looks like Russia has achieved its primary objective, the reassimilation of Donbas into Russia. And, whoever wins the U.S. election, there's nothing whatsoever that can possibly be done to reverse that!

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Why-does-China-do-ANYTHING-with-Japan-if-China-hates-them-so-much-Decouple-from-them-deport-Japanese-pull-the-plug-ANYTHING-China-needs-to-stop-acting-all-buddy-buddy-with-Japan-and-see-them-like-the-enemy-they-are

Epitaph on the grave of a beloved child -- Starship, R.I.P.

I will land Starships on Mars in two years, he said. I will land astronauts on Mars in four years, he said. I will build a great city on Mars in twenty years, he said. And, all the while, the FAA was grumbling, the FAA was mumbling and fuming. "Your Starship is, a liquid fuel powered Atomic Bomb! You want to land it on land! On our watch, it's our responsibility This is no mere technicality. It's a potential environmental catastrophe!" But, there were no ships large enough to catch the Starship on the seas. There was no engineering technique skillful enough, no systematic approximation technique bold enough, to tackle this particular problem. No hybrid approach that combined waterfall methodology with agile principles, No methodology to build a fully and rapidly reusable rocket. I will land Starships on Mars! I will land astronauts on Mars! I will build a great city on Mars! Starship, R.I.P.

The FAA is extremely reluctant to give Elon Musk approval to land Starship on land

Starship has been Elon Musk's baby for 12 years now, and, he's been launching various versions of it for six years or so. It's never worked worth a damn, and, it probably never will. In the last two years he's launched a "final version" of Starship four times, and, it's never had a fully successful mission, despite the astonishing cost of a billion dollars per launch for a rocket that cannot get beyond lower earth orbit. Nevertheless, however useless this pile of garbage is, it is, as they say, "Elon's money", so he can waste it as he sees fit. Problem is, a rocket this huge, when it explodes, has the effect of a tactical nuclear weapon on the immediate environment. And, now, for the fifth mission, Elon Musk wants to land his Starship on land! And, quite naturally, the FAA is seeing red over this. The cannot afford to overlook the possibility, or indeed, the probability, of a truly massive environmental catastrophe, and quite possibly many deaths, on their watch. Of course, SpaceX is crying foul over a delay of several months on the award of the license, and, of course, SpaceX is insisting that the FAA license will, inevitably be granted at the end of November. Actually, this is rather unlikely, unless SpaceX modifies the mission's stated objective, to make the landing on sea, instead of land. Some of the more reasonable supporters of SpaceX are accepting this, acknowledging that it must be proven that landings can be accomplished safely, consistently, outside of a land based areas which could suffer catastrophic damage if anything goes wrong. And, the problem with trying to land on the sea, is that the rocket is too large to be accommodated by any normal sea-borne vessel. So, exactly how SpaceX and Elon Musk can proceed is unclear at this point in time, and, precisely how they can proceed with the mission is very much up in the air. Fact is, the Starship seems to have taken over from Controlled Nuclear Fusion as the Garbage Technology you can make the most money investing in. It can't work, it won't work, it won't ever work, but, the mere fact that people are willing to bet their money on it working, means you can make money investing in it. Unfortunately, the entire world Stock Market works on this principle, garbage technologies that are effectively marketed so that engineers, scientists and businessmen can make their money lying for a living. And, this may explain why Russia and China, which largely exist outside of the entire Western disinformation machine, are able to wipe the floor with the West militarily, despite our on paper claims of massive economic and military technological superiority. Fact is, the West is running on disinformation, and very little else. Maybe that's why Elon Musk is so very successful!

Even the British are becoming more reasonable in their estimates of Russian casualties in the Russo-Ukraine War.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjr3255gpjgo Since the beginning of the Russo-Ukraine War, we've been hearing systematic disinformation about Russian casualties from the Western media, generally of the order of 1000 casualties a day or so. In fact, these casualty figures, inflated by an order of magnitude or more, are one of the main reasons Russia was presented as "losing" the war, despite systematic advances on the battlefield, that the Ukrainians seemed unable to stop, despite virtually limitless supplies of weapons and ammunition from NATO. The notion was that Russia couldn't possibly sustain these casualties, that the Russian people would revolt against their leaders, or, at the very least, Russia would simply run out of men to fight with. Now, possibly because the West is getting a bit tired of trying to prop up the Ukrainians in a conflict they cannot possibly win, at last the Western media is starting to acknowledge the inevitable fact that, actually, Vladimir Putin has been fairly careful to try to minimize Russian casualties, and, has done so! In fact, rather than 1000 casualties a day, the Russians are probably only experiencing about 100 casualties a day -- substantial, but quite easily sustainable by a nation of 150 million people, extremely patriotic, and making great progress in terms of reintegrating much or most of the nation of Ukraine back into Russia. Indeed, it is quite possible that the Ukrainians are experiencing, and have been experiencing rather higher casualties than the Russians have! Ukraine's rapidly failing Kursk incursion, where Russia is quite rapidly destroying the Ukrainian guerrillas there, and continued steady progress in conquering the whole of Donbas -- now 80% Russian controlled -- combined with fairly modest Russian casualties throughout this special military operation, make a major Russian victory in Ukraine almost inevitable, and this stage. And, even their mortal enemies the British, are now acknowledging that the Russian Bear is very healthy indeed, and doing just fine militarily. The West may have learned its lesson, and, this war may be coming to a close, with a resounding Russian victory, of course.

How did Napoleon travel to and from Russia safely after the burning of Moscow?

It’s actually an interesting question. Given virtually his entire army was totally destroyed, and he was the most sought man in Russia, how could he possibly have survived? Of course, he might not have, and the French simply put a double in his place. This is a real possibility. I believe he had his own transport, his personal carriage and horses, and very loyal guards. That might have done the trick. He simply fled, leaving his entire army to freeze to death. That might explain this paradox. https://www.quora.com/unanswered/How-did-Napoleon-travel-to-and-from-Russia-safely-after-the-burning-of-Moscow

Do you miss Fidel Castro?

Yes, I do. He was a cool guy, and did a lot of good for his country. He stood up to the U.S. , and people respected him for it. He survived an untold number of assassination attempts from the CIA, and he never lost his cool. It’s a shame he never made it as a professional baseball player, he would have been great! https://www.quora.com/Do-you-miss-Fidel-Castro

Einstein's acceptance of the "ether"

Einstein FIRST rejected it then in 1919 realized “space without ether is unthinkable” but, as his Leiden speech, it must be FLUID medium (no ‘absolute’ state but an ‘infinite hierarchy’. (‘52 paper & Appx V). He stated that many times from then on! i.e. “1924…“ we are not going to be able to dispense with the ether in theoretical physics”, also; “It would have been more correct if I had limited myself, in my earlier publications, to emphasizing only the nonexistence of an ether velocity, instead of arguing the total nonexistence of the ether, for I can see that with the word ether, we say nothing else than that space has to be viewed as a carrier of physical qualities.” (Einstein to H.A. Lorentz, November 15, 1919, in Kostro 1992) The ether of the general theory of relativity differs from that of classical me- chanics or from that of the special theory of relativity in so far as it is not ‘absolute’ but its spatial distribution is determined by that of matter... We shall not be able to dispense, in the field of theoretical physics, with the ether, i.e. a medium which possesses physical properties; indeed, the general theory of relativity... excludes any direct distant action. Every theory based on close ac- tion supposes the existence of continuous fields; thus they also presuppose the existence of an ‘ether’. (Einstein 1924, translated in Janossy 1962) From https://www.quora.com/profile/Peter-Jackson-545

Putin cracks the whip, America and Britain cower in terror!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_2024_Kursk_Oblast_incursion#/media/File:August_2024_Kursk_Oblast_incursion.svg https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/14/ukraine-war-briefing-biden-starmer-stop-short-of-announcing-missile-strike-permission As the Russians continue to liquidate the remaining Ukrainian guerrillas in Kursk, and as they continue to take over the rest of Donbas, another rather significant incident has occurred, suggesting that Russia is well on the way to fully occupying all of Ukraine. Despite intense pressure and demands from President Zelensky, both America and Britain are balking at actually giving him permission for deep missile strikes into Russia. Now, given that Russia is advancing steadily on all fronts, it seems clear that, if Ukraine is to have any chance of defending itself, it needs all the freedom of operation and weapons it can get. Any restrictions will only make a bad situation worse for Ukraine. Indeed, arguably, all current levels of support do is provide the Ukrainians with enough weaponry to thoroughly exhaust themselves losing to Russia! Fact is, America and Britain are terrified of Russia, and probably not just their nuclear arsenal. They're probably also terrified of Russia's powerful army and conventional weapons systems, which are more than a match for anything in NATO's very poverpriced arsenal. Vladimir Putin has made it very clear that if NATO missiles are used to attack Russia, Russia will retaliate against NATO directly, and, NATO knows they are not bluffing. Who knows what they might do? Shoot down British aircraft over the Black Sea, attack NATO bases in Poland, attack the Baltics? While Eurotrash wax eloquent on NATO invincibility, I think we know better, from what's happening in Ukraine. Russia's weapons are more than a match for anything in NATO's arsenal. It's not clear to what extent Russia could actually invade Western Europe with success, but, it's quite possible they would do very well indeed, without having to resort to their enormous nuclear arsenal. So, effectively, NATO is actually making it easier for Russia to colonize and absorb all of Ukraine, by providing the Ukrainians with just enough weaponry to exhaust themselves in fruitless battles with the Russians, but not enough to win. So, the Russians can colonize the Ukrainians at their leisure, knowing the Ukrainians are simply being played by NATO, and prodded to destroy themselves for nothing!

Before WW1 and WW2, what was the most discussed event in history?

n the West, it would probably have been the Battle of Waterloo. That was the event that defined Western history for the century leading up to WWI, to a very high degree. The defeat of Napoleon, and the establishment of new systems of government in Europe, the recognition of Great Britain as the Imperial Power who defined the Pax Britannica worldwide, were all the direct consequences of Wellington’s victory at Waterloo. https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Before-WW1-and-WW2-what-was-the-most-discussed-event-in-history

Ukraine's thousand year Reich in Kursk is collapsing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_2024_Kursk_Oblast_incursion#/media/File:August_2024_Kursk_Oblast_incursion.svg As you can see, Russia is systematically retaking the territory occupied by Ukrainian guerrillas for a month or so now. They always have been, actually, because as I've been saying since the start of this publicity stunt, there was never the slightest possibility of Ukraine occupying any territory in Russia, they haven't the forces or the military resources to do it. The Western media latched onto this, as it has latched onto so many failed Ukrainian military ventures against the vastly superior Russian forces, because they thought it gave the Ukrainians "hope". Hope of what, exactly? Being conquered somewhat more slowly, and with more blood and destruction. Because that's the only thing the West, NATO or Ukraine can possibly hope for under these circumstances. The Russians were "vulnerable" to this Ukrainian attack, precisely because it served no useful function whatsoever, and was a total waste of Ukrainian resources. The territory the Ukrainians have been wandering around in is unpopulated wilderness, and they've accomplished nothing other than getting themselves liquidated rather quickly. Of course, the Western media is simply ignoring this. It's not a "feel-good" story from the West's point of view, because it highlights the weakness and vulnerability of the West. Possibly, NATO and West should just start to recognize their own limitations, for a change?

Mourning

I It was a pretty little thing This little moth All white and gray And fluffy as the day It fluttered about My hand and wrist Settling gently on the edge Of my tattered blue sweater Just at my wrist It was walking about Settling about Just enjoying the cool of the early morning As was I under the tree on the grass And then Quite Suddenly Its wings closed up It's little legs dug firmly in And it lodged Like a rock At the edge of the sweater At my wrist. II Well, I wasn't sure what to make of this Was it dead Was it asleep Who could say So, I waved my wrist about A bit And it didn't move a bit But I didn't want to hurt it So, I just put my hands behind my head And slept a bit. III And then After perhaps an hour Or perhaps a half I awoke And put my hands before me And, there it was Just as before A little gray white rock Lodged firm by its little legs But it's slightly tattered wings fluttering a bit In the wind And, I knew for sure It was dead. IV So, the poor little moth Has come to die by my side I thought What a great privilege To be honored by the death Of a poor little living thing That should seek me out As its final companion in life I must mourn it somehow And I sought out a solitary fellow Walking by And showed him the little rock-like Thing, lodged firmly at my wrist And told him it had died there And he said "That's Crazy!" And I said "Does this have some mystical significance?" And he walked away. V And then Quite suddenly As the sun warmed Its little antennae showed themselves And then Quite suddenly Its little wings sprouted And it flew away.

FAA gives Elon Musk the Finger, are they following the lead of Brazil?

https://www.livemint.com/news/spacex-says-starship-launch-license-delayed-to-november-11725994204613.html Suddenly, it looks unlikely that Elon Musk's Starship is going to "fly" again this year, after all. After anticipating approval this month, now, it appears that the earliest SpaceX is hoping for approval is the end of November, so, don't count on the opportunity to see another really good Starship blowup this year! Elon is trying to arrange a landing of the first stage on land here, and, apparently the FAA is concerned about another serious blowup on land like they had earlier in the Starship series of blowups, and they don't want that on their watch. The FAA isn't into massive environmental damage, and Elon is. Will they ever give their approval? Who knows? Thing is, Elon has a really remarkable capacity for doing damage. In Brazil, Elon's managed to so tick off the government, that they're ready to arrest any and all employees of any companies owned by Elon Musk, merely for stepping off the damn plane there! Really! He refused to take stuff off X that offended the government, then he refused to pay the fines for refusing, so they just froze the assets of SpaceX there, and took them! Cool, eh? But, they've had enough of Elon and his companies, permanently, in Brazil! The FAA may be starting to feel exactly the same way, you know. After all, Starship is just an overpriced piece of junk that will never be used for anything useful, ever. And, this time, they want to land the first stage on land, leading to the possibility of really massive environmental damage, once more, on their "Starship watch". The fantasy accountants at SpaceX keep trying to tell everyone that it only costs a million dollars or perhaps ten million dollars or perhaps 100 million dollars to launch Starship, when actually it's a full billion dollars a pop, just to get to LEO! Totally useless and ten times more expensive than any other way to get to LEO! OMG!, what a mess. So, is this the end of our great "Starship" saga? We hope so! What's really fun, is that this FAA announcement is almost certainly triggered by Elon's bragging about how he was going to land Starship on Mars in two years! FAA: "Uh...Elon old buddy, about that landing Starship on Mars in two years thing...Uh...I'm afraid not, old buddy,...We don't think so...sorry about that, buddy!"

Elon Musk has badly overplayed his hand in Brazil

https://www.wired.com/story/x-starlink-brazil-suspension-musk/ https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-employees-told-not-to-travel-to-brazil-elon-musk-2024-9 Elon Musk, as usual, is not following one of Clint Eastwood's cardinal dictums, from his classic "Magnum Force" -- A man's got to know his limitations. Elon really does not know his own limitations. Now, up to a point, trying to transcend your own limitations isn't a bad thing at all. As long as you know what they are, and take systematic steps to try to improve. But, quite frequently Elon simply assumes he has absolute power, when he does not, to do anything whatever that he wants. And, this costs him. We can see this with his purely destructive "Starship", which can't even get into orbit, let alone to Mars, and costs a billion dollars to fail to get into orbit, when it's supposed to cost next to nothing to get to Mars. And, does a great deal of damage while failing to get into orbit. However, so far, this particular problem of Elon's, let's just say his God-Complex, hasn't gotten him into very serious trouble. So far. That may be changing. By failing to accommodate the Brazilian government's demands to remove material from his X-Social Media-Platform, Elon has run afoul of hate speech laws in Brazil, and, the Brazilian government is now freezing funds from Starlink in Brazil to pay fines. In principle, Elon Musk and any of his employees working for Starlink, SpaceX or X, or perhaps even Tesla, could be considered criminals in Brazil, for being associated with Elon Musk's crimes there. Is this a first, in world history? Have all employees of a billionaire ever been classified as international fugitives from justice simply because they were his employees, before? Will this be a threat to the continued existence of the Elon Musk empire? Will people still be willing to work for him, at the severe risk of being classified as international fugitives from justice, by INTERPOL? This is a very interesting question, isn't it? What if Brazil takes the next logical step? What if Brazil decides that all INVESTORS in Elon Musk companies must be extradited to face their courts and Brazilian Justice, in Brazilian Prisons? After all, these are the people who are really empowering Elon Musk to flout Brazilian justice, and disrespect the Brazilian State, by giving him their money to use and play with. What effects would this have on the stock values of Elon Musk companies? How many investors would really be willing to seriously risk being raped and beaten to death in a Brazilian prison, merely for the privilege of investing in Tesla Stock? Particularly given how Tesla has been doing lately. Hmmmmmmmmmm?

All the villains of WW2 were left wing, Germany, Italy, and Japan. Why won't leftists acknowledge that?

They’re all classified as right-wing, because they were intensely conservative regimes, that used government power to enforce traditional power structures like religion, the rich, and the nobility. The problem a lot of American conservatives have, is that they don’t get that “conservative” doesn’t mean “anti-government”. It just means that you want to keep things unchanged, indefinitely. In colonial America, there was no need for government, because there were so few people around that government wasn’t required. So, American conservatives want to go back to that time — but, they can’t, there are too many people in the U.S. for that to work anymore. In the rest of the world, American conservatives are considered to be anarchists. Conservatives in the rest of the world just think American conservatives are insane. Left-wing regimes get rid of religion, the rich, and the nobility. The government has absolute power. Everything is changed, in left-wing governments. Nothing is sacred. That’s precisely what makes them left-wing regimes. That’s why Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan are classified as right-wing, not left wing regimes. These governments were trying to use government to keep things the same, not to change them. https://www.quora.com/All-the-villains-of-WW2-were-left-wing-Germany-Italy-and-Japan-Why-wont-leftists-acknowledge-that

https://www.quora.com/Albert-Speer-said-he-did-not-know-about-the-Holocaust-Was-he-lying

https://www.quora.com/Why-isnt-Russia-quickly-sending-enough-forces-to-Kursk-before-Ukraine-digs-in-and-fortifies-the-region

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-risks-does-Ukraine-face-by-diverting-forces-to-capture-Russian-territory-in-Kursk

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/How-has-Ukraine-undermined-Russias-myth-of-invincibility-through-its-offensive-in-Kursk-Oblast

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Putin-struggling-to-force-Ukraine-troops-out-of-Russia

https://www.quora.com/Will-Ukraine-end-its-operation-in-Russias-Kursk-Oblast-soon