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

Russia is continuing to systematically retake territory from the Ukrainian guerrillas operating in Kursk

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_2024_Kursk_Oblast_incursion I've been saying for weeks that the Ukrainians are not actually occupying or controlling any territory in Kursk, Russia, the Russians are too powerful for this. And, of course, this is quite correct. The Ukrainians are just waging a guerrilla campaign in Russia, they're wandering around in the woods trying to avoid getting killed, and not having very much success at all! The Russians have just retaken one of the bigger villages supposedly "controlled" by the Ukrainians there, although the Western media isn't giving this much "play" of course. It's such a downer for the West, to see how totally useless their Ukrainian ally is, and that President Zelensky is really just an actor, who probably should have stuck to show business. Of course, it could be argued that show business is really all Zelensky is doing anyway! He sure as all Hell ain't no general!

The reason the Ukrainians are "still there" in Kursk, is because this is just guerrilla activity

Much is being made in the Western media of how much territory the Ukrainians have "conquered" in Russia, in Kursk Oblast, and how much difficulty the Russians are having in getting rid of them. And, indeed, there is a grain of truth in this. A grain. Indeed, the Ukrainians are operating over a fairly large area of largely unoccupied dense forest on the border, of perhaps a few hundred square miles, with minimal population. And, indeed, because they are operating in mobile units, and not really exerting any stable control over anything, or even staying anywhere very long, they are fairly hard to kill in large numbers. They are operating in the countryside in small mobile units, and so they are hard to pin down. But, this also means they really can't do anything much, other than engage in some disruptive tactics. They can't build anything much, they can't engage in large scale military confrontations, they can't organize the local population, they can't directly confront organized Russian forces. They are also very vulnerable to air attacks, having no real anti-aircraft capacity. Fact is, and this point isn't being emphasized, I think, the Ukrainian forces really aren't engaging in conventional warfare at all in the Kursk Oblast. This is not conquest of territory, for any functional purpose, since, they don't really have secure control of anything. This is straightforward guerrilla activity. Now, guerrilla warfare can be highly effective, under the right circumstances. If the local population supports a widespread guerrilla war, such activity can, over a very long period of time, thoroughly undermine an established regime, and, potentially, overthrow that regime. We have seen this in Cuba, Vietnam, Afghanistan, etc. However, there is no local support here. The Ukrainians are actually engaging in guerrilla warfare on the enemy's territory, at great cost to themselves in terms of manpower and resources. They are an irritant, and, they have been constrained and confined. True, they would be hard to remove. However, in time, they're likely to simply die out or be bombed out of existence, having no local support, and being on their own. All this really illustrates, is that Ukraine is no longer able to engage in conventional warfare against the Russians, but, has been reduced to disruptive guerrilla tactics, that don't actually take or control any territory, at all. And, that probably signals the beginning of the end of Ukraine as an independent nation, don't you think?

Russians are kicking ass on all fronts in the Ukraine War

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgsHO1miO_I As many predicted, the infiltration of Ukrainian forces into Kursk has not helped Ukraine. Rather, it has led to a bloodbath for the unfortunate Ukrainians in Russia, who are, as the Russian phrase goes, being rapidly "liquidated". Russia reports 400 Ukrainian soldiers killed by Russian bombing in the last 24 hours -- Russian casualties, zero. Hey, this is like shooting fish in a barrel! Very, very much like shooting fish in a barrel. Thankyou President Zelensky, Vladimir Putin loves you! After long months, the drain of Ukrainian forces to the failed Kursk incursion, has made it fairly easy for the Russians to conquer the key town of Chasiv Yar, a key long term objective, which is now under Russian control. Russian forces have moved on key villages in Western Donbas, and are now close to cutting of supply lines completely to the important city of Pokrovsk, and are in its outskirts. Russian successes on the battlefield have progressed rapidly since the foolish decision of the Ukrainians to leave their key and best forces to be utterly exterminated in Russia! The powerful bombing and missile attacks by Russia throughout Ukraine have largely destroyed the Ukrainian energy infrastructure, making it virtually impossible for Ukraine to survive another long hard winter. To add insult to injury, these attacks have largely come from the Russian Black Sea fleet missile cruisers, which, supposedly, according to "Ukrainian Intelligence", had all been destroyed by Ukrainian drone ships! President Zelensky is begging for direct NATO intervention to defend Ukraine from Russian aerial assaults that he is helpless to prevent, but, this would mean WWIII. That's what Zelensky wants, but, unfortunately for him, he's not going to get it! NATO knows better than to get too close to failed state Ukraine. Bye-bye Ukraine!

Ukrainians are rapidly losing their small territory in Kursk

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_2024_Kursk_Oblast_incursion#/media/File:August_2024_Kursk_Oblast_incursion.svg If you're wondering why the Russians didn't bother guarding their borders more carefully to protect themselves against incursions, you can see in the wikipedia maps why. The Russians are rapidly retaking this territory in several areas, and without great difficulty. The Ukrainians are being attacked from all sides, and from the air, and internally within the "Ukrainian occupied" territories themselves. In other words, we just have some heavily armed terrorists in mobile armor running around in the woods, and trying to avoid being wiped out by the Russians. The Russian counterattacks have been highly effective, and, this territory is likely to be completely cleaned up within a few weeks, without significant Russian losses, and with massive losses to the Ukrainians. The Russians were of course well aware that this is exactly what would happen, and, that's precisely why they didn't bother with their borders much. "Hell, if the Ukrainians want to die in Russia, rather quickly, and in large numbers, let them! We Russians don't mind killing Ukrainians in Russia at all! Not at all!" And, that's precisely what the Russians are doing, too! What's going to be fun is seeing how, after all the Ukrainians in Russia have been killed, with minimal Russian losses, the Western Media will tout the "incursion" as an enormous success! They will claim it as proof positive that Russia is falling apart, and the Ukrainians are on the verge of total victory! However, by this time, I think the Ukrainians themselves have had enough. It's not the Russians who are going to overthrow Putin, it's the Ukrainians who are going to overthrow Zelensky, and, probably by the end of the year. Then, we can have peace, at last, in Ukraine.

Is the historical purpose of Russia, to bring decadent empires down?

If we look at Russian history, it's remarkable for the number of powerful empires that have, effectively been destroyed rather completely by the Russians -- the Mongol Golden Horde, the Ottoman Empire, the Swedish Empire, Napoleon's Empire, and Hitler's Nazi Empire. All destroyed by the Russians, primarily anyway, and all to the benefit of the Russians themselves, who gained territory and power by the empires they brought down. Is this what Russia is for, basically? Centrally and vulnerably located in the middle of Eurasia, at the conflux of many great nation states, any of which could become a great empire, and a threat to Russia, the Russians have acquired the ability to defend themselves furiously and brilliantly, and to destroy overweening and powerful empires that presume to challenge her, and attempt to destroy her. It's what they do. Currently, we see NATO claiming that Russia is a threat to the current world order, and must be brought to heel, and must submit to NATO rule and power. Of course, NATO doesn't quite put it this way. Rather, NATO insists that it merely is preserving the peace, and maintaining an ideal world order, in which NATO, perhaps not entirely coincidentally, happens to make the rules, and dictates policy. Naturally, the Russians don't quite see it this way. The Russians will attempt to preserve their own nation's independence and power, by any means necessary, and are perfectly happy to do so. And, actually, most of the world is largely in agreement with them. It's not that Russia is perfect or close to it, or even that Russia is necessarily a better or more generous nation than the NATO nations. But, Russia is an alternative to NATO's overweening pride and power, and, that is a welcome relief to the majority of the citizens of the world. The poorer nations in the world in Africa and South America and the Indian subcontinent, in particular, look to Russia to even the playing field a bit, and give them a slightly bigger share of the pie. And, in all probability, the Russians will do just that, for a while anyway. They have to, to maintain their support. So, what we are seeing currently in the Russo-Ukrainian war, effectively a Russo-NATO war fought by proxy, is a redistribution of wealth and power away from the NATO nations, and to Russia and her allies, like China and India. Russia, as usual, is not allowing herself to be pushed around by the great, traditional empires, no matter how powerful they, or others, may think they are. Russia is intimidated by no one, and will kowtow to no one. And, this is, historically, why Russia is so important to the world. Russia shakes things up, when the traditional empires get complacent. Russia keeps things moving forwards, when the great empires want them to stay the way they are, forever, with themselves on top, forever. Russia will not permit this. And, this is Russia's great contribution to human civilization! Russia makes sure the human species keeps moving forwards, when the great empires, currently NATO, want them to freeze in place, forever, with themselves on top. God Bless Russia!

What would have happened if Stalin had not come to power in the USSR? Could the country have become more democratic?

Probably not, they had no tradition of democracy in Russia. More likely, a right-wing White Russian military dictatorship would have emerged, if the Communists hadn’t won the Russian Civil War. Probably something like Franco’s military dictatorship in Spain, following the Spanish Civil War against the communists — very brutal, but effective, and good for the Russian economy and the rich. Actually, after Stalin died, that’s likely what Lavrentiy Beria would have arranged for the USSR, if Khrushchev hadn’t staged a coup to bring him down, and executed him. One of the major accusations against Beria was that he wasn’t really a communist, just an opportunist, who sought power for himself, and wanted a military dictatorship in Russia under his rule. https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-would-have-happened-if-Stalin-had-not-come-to-power-in-the-USSR-Could-the-country-have-become-more-democratic

Why is there so much historical evidence about religion? Does this suggest thousands of years from now the things history remembers will still be religious?

This is, actually, a very interesting question, that brings home a very interesting point. What, exactly, is religion? How does it differ from politics, science, education, social services, or any other aspect of human existence, exactly? The fact is, it doesn’t! What we call “religion” these days is simply the kernel of traditional practices from older knowledge and social practices, some of it very ancient indeed, perhaps thousands of years old, or more. Joseph Campbell, the famous mid-twentieth century specialist in world mythology, pointed out that there is no real conflict between the Bible and science, as Campell said, “the Bible is simply Sumerian science.” For example, I can quite confidently assure you, that in the future, and perhaps the not too distant future, Einstein’s Theory of Relativity will be relegated to the status of a primitive religious cult, very much the way “flat-earthers” are today! It won’t be considered “science” at all, but simply a kind of religious superstition that physicists were brainwashed into believing with religious fervor in their worthless institutions of higher learning. So, the reason there is so much historical evidence about religion, is simply that “religion” is what we call science and education as it was practiced long ago. Religion is how societies were run and controlled long ago, and religion is how they are controlled now, but, we don’t use that term for them, because it would tend to undermine contemporary political authority. https://www.quora.com/Why-is-there-so-much-historical-evidence-about-religion-Does-this-suggest-thousands-of-years-from-now-the-things-history-remembers-will-still-be-religious