Youtube comments of TheRezro (@TheRezro).
-
456
-
230
-
207
-
168
-
168
-
146
-
141
-
140
-
101
-
97
-
96
-
89
-
88
-
80
-
78
-
77
-
73
-
72
-
70
-
68
-
67
-
64
-
60
-
59
-
58
-
56
-
53
-
52
-
51
-
50
-
47
-
44
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
40
-
40
-
38
-
37
-
36
-
34
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
In short: Ukraine started with around 200k man, most of that was ground forces as they don't really have navy and only limited defensive airforces. Russia has 1 milion army... on paper. In many cases those were literal paper soldiers who never exist with they salaries going on colonel Dacha. From that only 1/4 is ground force, as Russia has large navy, huge humber of aircrafts, rail force, strategic forces, military police, etc. So from beginning of the war number of deployed soldiers was inefficient (150k initial forces, plus 50-100k of military police and separatists, who could not exactly fight). But it was compensated with large number of tanks and artillery. For reminder attacker should have 3 to 1 advantage at least. After war started Ukraine make general mobilization and raised up to 1 milion soldiers. From that around 300k is on the front, rest is training and rotating. Problem is lack of equipment what need to be restored, trained and delivered. Russia didn't mobilize and struggle to keep they numbers. Relying on mercenaries like SS Wagner and forced Ukrainian conscripts. They do not train or rotate they forces and not even provide them basic healthcare. As such Russia sustain massive attrition in both man and hardware (130-190k dead depending on the source). Mobilization helped them stabilize battlefield, but Russia struggle to maintain 300k forces on battlefield. They finally did train some number of mobilized, for few months, but it is not expected to be more then 100-200k people. So yes. They can double they forces, but would it matter? Probably not. But it is still open game. Ukrainians seams to intentionally allow Russia to lost people in pointless attacks on reinforced position. But we would not know in the end. Statistically, Russia lossless more, more resist to admit defeat. But Russia has huge capacity for ignoring the losses.
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
@Waffie The Dweeb A elemental deity. Word dragon originated from bible where it is used in Latin version of bible as title of Satan as the Serpent. But later it become used to describe broad category of wild elemental deities and overpowered monsters such as Lindworm or Wyvern. Here it is worth to mention that most famous and most stereotypical (gold hording) dragon is Fafnir who actually is a dwarf, who in Nordic mythologies were also a deities (earth elementals specifically). Being a deity is in fact most constant trait even in many cases overshadowing snake part. For example in Journey to the West white dragon Bai Longma spend way more time as a horse and later human then actual serpent. Anyway, even if most elemental deities are serpentine some also appear as birds (Phoenix, Suzaku, Rok, Geruda, Ziz, etc) or other types of beasts (like Behemot, Byakko, etc), also a "sacred steeds" (Unicorns, Griffins, Kirins, Burak, etc) and of course human. In fact it is quite possible that smith/knight defeating dragon in legend dating to Proto-Indo-Eurpeans as storm deity was a dragon himself.
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@petervermeer.4904 "Why would God (if he was real) create his own enemy?"
Read what I said in post you addressing 0_0
Satan is not enemy of the God. Satan is enemy of the humanity. There is disagreement between Satan and Christ regard fate of humanity and Christ basically is making his point.
"And this bad guy satan is the one who creates all kinds of misery on earth for innocent people?"
Lol, no. Natural order was created by God and it affect people because we are trespassers. Satan as angel of Justice seek to punish devious humans, but his pride make him blind on fact that whole thing is part of the God's plan. And Satan plots aren't against it, so he is allowed to manipulate idiots into self destruction as part of the test.
"If God allows that he is also bad or weak, one of the two"
If God is bad, then doing good is evil, cause as absolute he define what is good or bad. But what I can say for sure that he is master troll. Christian fanatics burning rainbow flags, when it is symbol of the God and homosexuality isn't even a sin (premarital sex is), is clear prove of that.
"Would i allow someone to hurt innocent people, or children or babies? No way"
Yes, in prison everyone claim to be innocent. As for innocent babies and kids, just watch anime Monster.
"No way. This would end very quick"
If people don't recognize truth fast enough. Yes, yes it would. And it would be destroyed by all those Christian fanatics, lead by Satan against Christ walking alongside appressed minorities and those who suffer. Pride is worst sin of them all, because it make people not see they own sin and imperfection. It turn people into hypocrites.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
I need point out that Poland falling in five days, was not actually classified data. It was part of famous simulation done around decade ago, on Military University level (what was actually semi-public). What tested how US could deal with three wars at the same time. Russian invasion on Poland (scenario assume that NATO dissolved), outbreak of Korean War and China attempting to size Taiwan. And yes, it sound too familiar. Simulation done by military students. Reveal importance of NATO and foreshadow need of especially straightening Asia-Pacific flank. But because US "loosing war" was sensationalist, result become quite public. Except that is not what actually did happen.
US actually did win, but simulation end before that. As generally after first strike circumstances become random. The conclusion was that it would be long and dragging conflict. With US needing to ramp up its military complex. Lesson what was not learn, as instead choice was focus on prevention. Furthermore in case of Poland, in simulation Russia reach capital in five days. But as war in Ukraine show, that doesn't mean the fall. Furthermore simulation assume that Poles would try hold the ground, what in perspective was actually correct choice. But it was something unclear at the time.
Anyway. Modernization of Polish military always was the plan. But after fall of Iron Curtain, Poland focus on rather dry reform of the professional oficer core. What in hindsight was again, a good decision. There was no point in supporting large military without proper spine. Creation of Territorial Defense (what again proved itself in Ukraine), was a good decision and now we would see plans of reserves reform (claims that Poland doesn't have those is based of misunderstanding, they absolutely are, but are not fit to NATO standard, as such were not accounted). Anyway, with proper ranks, time for rearmament come, what to be clear, despite popular meme. Was actually planed in the entire last decade. Only speed up by war in Ukraine. Reforms didn't happen earlier because Germany proved to be unreliable and US move its focus from Europe too much. But with South Korea and US support, things actually did move. Worth to mention that Poland also highly focus on licence production and not buying from shelf.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Major correction. According to most recent research Slavs inhabited region of Vistula from at least 1'st century. Originating in region of Eastern Galicja. Idea that Slavs originate in 6'th century imigrantom, as result of Huns (aka Hungarians) is true, but regard South Slavs and it did happen toward south, not west as they were cut from rest of the population known by West Romans as Veneti. But they didn't have direct contact, as such they were not recognized as Slavs until modern research. While Southern Slavs known as Sclaveni (or Serbs), were recorded by East Rome, giving the name Slavs. And for centuries it was assumed to be origin of whole group. To make things worst, later Frans who later become modern Germans, call Western Slavs Wend's, what add to confusion. And on top of that part of Wands adopt Christianity, calling themselves Bohemians, Moravians and Poles. And in 16'th century Mongolized Slavs from Muscovy swamp, start they imperial agenda of eradicating all Slavs in name of German Tzars. But I digress.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Nicholas Higgins
"We are all for getting the bigger picture here the reason this movie was dark and gritty is because it's the style of this decade"
Yes, a decade what declined with that movie. After Iron Man 2008 proved that more honest adaptations are way more popular, 2013 was last time when such movie could be released (production of movie can take few years after all).
"I mean look around at some of the other movies that are happening or have already happened The Dark Knight series for example took a much darker and gritty look to the Batman series to appeal to a newer audience"
Except this audience was raised on Batman: TAS. Those movies were made more for older audience who still think that Superman can reverse time flying around earth (by the way he can't).
"whereas in the 1960s Adam West starred as Batman a less serious smiling but yet mediocre Batman and his young boy companion"
Do yo seriously bring here Adam West? Most of his initial audience isn't even alive.
"It is simply the style of this decade to make superheroes and Vigilantes dark and gritty you see this style not only in films"
I'm not sure now that by "this decade" you refer to 80'ties from which those stories come, 90'ties what was pick of "dork and shitty" style in comic, early 2000't where comic movies tried prove that they don't need to be campy adopting stuff from previous decades, or current decade when this style died tahnks to MCU?
"but in all other aspects of entertainment video games like the Arkham series Injustice 1 and 2"
Two else world stories.. your point?
"TV series such as Gotham and Supergirl even Smallville"
Wait what? Neither fit definition 0_0
"you can also find it in animated movies like Superman versus the elite and Teen Titans versus the Justice League Teen Titans the Judas"
DC animation policy is weird.. mostly because people from Werner are idiots.
"contract and more popular films like the killing joke"
Again.. story form 80's, and this version is considered as huge failure.
"this dark and gritty feel is simply a style of our generation"
No.. every generation is edgy, until it grow up. Also this style is nowadays outdated.
"this style is used to attract a younger audience like men and women in their late 20s who may have similar problems and may be able to relate seeing these great men and women go through personal problems and issues and finding their own way to solve them"
Wait.. are you from some pathological family? People joke from "dark and gritty" because it is immature, exaggerated wiew on reality. Criminals in clown costume aren't that common.
"however with this being said I do completely understand how people can be mad about Superman being like this Superman is more than some comic book hero is he part of American history many people see him as an ideal of Hope and what we all aspire to be."
No. Last good Superman movies were one with Reeves and that is why people have incorrect presumptions regard him. And most adult people don't watch animated movies, so they don't know the correct version.
"for kids in poverty he was a man that could come and fix all their troubles and save them from the streets a man that no matter what would do the right thing even at the extent of his own life a man with extraordinary powers who did extraordinary things with them for some he was an inspiration for people to push themselves to do better be better than they are the idea of a man that can leap over buildings and fly around like a bird and had nothing but a heart of gold has been moving kids and young adults alike for Generations"
Not really. This outdated point of view was even outdated in 70'ties. Considering that there were decent animated versions of Batman and Superman in past decades. Most younger fans are usually against BvS. Those who still protect that shit either were teens in 90'ties, or are teens today so they have edgy-period (aka puberty). And as we know that turn people in idiots.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
It is complicated. Three core genres ara: Action, Logic/Puzzle and Narrative games. Due to technical reasons initially majority of action games were on consoles and arcades, with most logic and story driven games being on PC's, home computers and workstations. But both start fusing with improvements of the hardware.
Classification of actin games is generally simple, as it include all things like sport games (including racing), platform and maze games, shooters (FPS, TPS, space shooters, etc.), slashers, fighting games (including Beat'em ups), stealth games and rhythm games. With only few mixed genres like tactical shooter, action-adventure or survival games (including survival horror). Most based on simple dexterity mechanics, usually used nowadays as supplements for more advanced games.
So called "PC genres" are way more complicated. For the start logic and narrative games fused quite early leading to creation of Adventure genre where we explore environment trying solve puzzles to progres the story. What later evolve into two separate schools associated with highly logical "point and click" adventure games and more exploratory action-adventure. On top of that genre overlap with RPG's, what are simulations of complex party game. And speaking of simulation they aren't associated with any specific mechanic trying reconstruct real or fictional world mechanic (most famous examples are: RPG's, Sport Games, Space Sims and Economic Sims).
Anyway, RPG's separate on: classic adaptations of Tabletop Systems (what I remind are tactic supplements, not the role-play itself), simplified dungeon crawl (include roguelike and hack&slash) and modern Action RPG's, what replace combat with action modules, instead tactical ones but still is true to role-play core (when all stuff like western RPG or console RPG is a console kid bullshit). And one more thing. jRPG's aren't RPG's but tactic-adventure games. They only evolve from dungeon crawl, so name stay. And ironically interactive visual novels (eroge) ironically commonly contain strong role-play (for clarity usually classified as Narrative games) even if they lack combat.
On top of that we have also strategy games, what are more expansive branch of logic games. they include more action based RTS, more complex grand strategy games (what include elements of economical simulation) or classic turn-based strategy games and specific case known as 4X what lets say is mix of some aspects of RTS and GSG. Too much to explain.
And that excluding new weird genres like battle royals and arenas. What are specific forms of older genres mixes. So topic is quite convoluted.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@mish375 Again. Bible doesn't mention "fall of Satan" outside Revelation, what is prophecy for the future (also nothing prove connection of the snake from Garden of Eden to Satan). What did fall is the humanity and our souls are exactly that. But like everyone refuse to acknowledge what bible straight saying, but bring well known farfetched overinterpretations of few unrelated quotes, exactly because they like story from novel. Just they confuse it with actual theology. What is a huge problem.
As side note: Legend of Lucifer is based on Islamic version, except Legend of Iblis straight confuse Jewish story of Azzazel (who refused to acknowledge humanity and was imprisoned under the rock... by Satan), with Legend of Raziel. Who was accused by Satan of fall, except because story end with him being called back to heaven on trial, everyone forget minor detail that he is still Archangel, when Satan isn't. In Jewish theology. Thing is that Raziel as "brother" (as they are the same being) of Sandelphon and Metatron (who BTW is Noah grandfather) absolutely has right to descend on Earth, when Satan overused his authority in his absolute justice. Still Satan didn't fall (yet), he only was delegated as Angel of Death, to prove his point about fallen humanity not deserving salvation. His fall would reveal his hypocrisy, in the day of the end.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Personally my favorite tropes are so called: Evil Light, Good Darkness and Eldritch Entity archetype (they I core are similar, so I treat them collectively as perceptual dissonance characters). In short:
- Good Darkness is when character would be normally considered as monstrous or evil, but in reality is kind or protector. This archetype is easiest to explain, because many classic monsters and stuff like ninjas fit this category. Frankenstein monster was more a victim then real monster, classic werewolf story is about struggle to preserve own humanity, or something initially inhuman (like AI or demon) gain humanity for some reason. Or monster start protecting someone just because he show him kindness.
- Evil Light is the opposite. Something what should be good is ultimate evil. From corrupted policeman, immoral priest, or inhuman medical doctor. To evil angels or God, to whole bunch of manipulative muppets. Or in short Kyobey from Madoka Magica.
- Eldritch Entities are everything in between. For clarity it isn't that they don't have morality, but way in which they work is beyond human comprehension or moral understanding. It usually is how we step on ant nest. For example Lovecraft Yog-Sothoth was benevolent, but due to his obliviousness his good intentions screwed everyone involved. Like when he turned whole village into fish people, to help them survive. On the other hand Nyarlathotep treat humans like toys, but that is also reason why he saved humanity on several occasions. Or Kyobey from Madoka Magica, because he totally fit also that one. After all he try save the world, not lie despite being manipulative ass and even prove his moral superiority at one point, despite being responsible for suffering and deaths of numerous people ;D
They totally should do episode about those :D
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@tyskbulle It is bit more complicated. Slavic culture refereed collectively as the Wends. Reach almost up to Denmark. Shortly after formation of short living Great Moravia in 10'th century. Czechia and Poland (what even back then was powerful tribal union) adopt Christianity. Saxons also start conquest of Wends, west from Oder River.
At the time Poland did control terrain close to modern times, with exception of Prussia, what at the time was Baltic Tribe (unrelated to later Prussia). Later after district division period Germans, who captured land of Wends also expand they control over weekend ant the time Silesia (what also for a time was controlled by Bohemia). And Pomerania, what exist also as semi independent principalities.
After Personal Union with Lithuania. Those regions were fully beyond reach of Poland. As Germans permanently sized control, despite local Polish population (look Silesia Uprisings). Because Lithuanian Grand Duke, who become Polish King of Jagiellon dynasty, also was Duke of Rus people. Poland focus on expansion east.
After partition by Germans and they Puppets. After restoration after WW1. Poland end with territory patch-worked from many cultures. Part of Belarus, Part of Ukraine and still ongoing territorial dispute with Germany.
While Stalin intended to create conflict between two. Restoration of border of Piast Dynasty. Actually solved all territorial disputes. As Poles could relocate form East, to they homeland.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Regard education. First of Asian tigers have more time. They hottest time was in the 90's, when in that time Poland was extremely poor, so we can't exactly compare them now. Polish educations also focus on the quantity, with large portion of population being decently educated. For comparison Russia actually suffer on severe intellectual impairment, what paralyze they development and politic. Despite having several high profile education facilities. It was always pointed out that polish universities are severely underrated, for arbitrarily reasons. As Central Europe has excellent IT specialists and highly educated personel respected in the EU countries. Despite theoretically low standard of the universities. My guess is that as mentioned, Polish education is focused on the quantity. So there may be arbitrarily factors lowering statistic. Like fact that less those who enroll finish university, even if in practice number of skilled workers may be higher then in country like Russia, with few elite, but inefficient vanity universities. What do educate few, but to relative top tier standard. And somehow country doesn't work anyway. Polish bottom up approach, may be in practice way more proficient. Especially when educated people start coming back to Poland, with knowledge from actually relevant industry.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I personally believe that it never was four faced Chayot (I mean what Christians call Cherubim, what are separate from Guardian Cherubim of Judaism, what in the one who fall). But prophet confused four separate entities standing together as singular one. It is believed that there is only four Chayot representing natural elements, as those are angels of creation (and destruction). Furthermore it make more sense that human faced one is actually serpent, but its flat face was confused with human from distance.
And yes. Seraphim and Ophanim are same entities (author confused them with Cherubim what are leaser order). From context it make most sense that "wheels" are part of the Seraphim. Or Seraphim are projections created by "wheels". As side note Jews believe that Ophanim (which is seven plus, one with the three other forms corresponding to eight regular heavens, plus barrier and land of the creation). Are actually avatars of the God. It is why God referee to himself as "we" in the Genesis. And yes. The eighth one is the trinity. Metatron (king of angels sitting on the jade throne, The Father), Raziel Helal (archangel of wisdom, The "favorite" Son) and Sandelhon (aka Abaddon who is king of Sheol and Angel of Creation/Destruction in charge of Living Beats, The Holly Spirit). Also fun fact. Sources indicate that Lamb is true angelic form of Christ. But it is actually more peacock tailed griffin-like creature. In islam known as Buraq.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@francisdupont1656 If we want to be specific, West Rome also technically didn't fall. After Hun invasion in 4'th century, where Legions perform poorly against horse archers. Rome start increasingly relying on the Cataract cavalry. And because those were usually part of auxiliaries (tribes who fought on side of the Rome). Those "barbaric" commanders start play increasingly important role in Roman politics. When Vandals burn the Rome in 5'th century, they actually intervened against usurpers in name of the Emperor. After that West Roman Empire basically go through Balkanization. With Longobards sizing control over Apennine Peninsula.
BUT! Most of regions of the Rome, despite tribal population did consider itself as Roman. Only few decades after formal fall of Carolingian's (Franks) attempt to unite empire. In 8'th century recapturing the Rome. In fact they did attempt to rejoin Byzantium as Cesar (elector). But Roman Augustus (actual Byzantine Emperor) refuse negotiations seeing them as barbarians (fact that religions drifted from each other play also the role). Shortly after that control over Rome is taken by woman, in rather shady way. What is exploited by Franks, who call Byzantine interregnum and as they as Romans control city of Rome, they declare themselves as proper Roman Empire.
From that point both sides basically were ignoring each other, considering other side as illegitimate. In 9'th century Frank empire go through split ironically identical to late Rome. Separating on three countries. But shortly after that Fance and Germany, invade Italy and Germans take Emperor crown. Founding Holly Roman Empire. But due to elector method Germany is divided, until Prussia finally unite country in 19'th century. While Italy struggle with reconquest of peninsula and isn't strong to claim title. While France despite united nature doesn't have strong enough claim to do so. At least until Napoleon temporarily claim the title. And there was also Austria-Hungary. Though it is weird case.
Anyway, after WW1 Emperor is overthrown and formally for now, there is no one there. Though ironically Europe finally reunited though different means. So we may call it as Roman Union? I'm joking. East was no better. Country was in constant decline, after failed attempt of recapturing Apennine Penisula. They are finally defeated by Turks. Who also declare themselves as Roman Empire. But are universally ignored and later drop the idea. And there is also a madman known as Ivan the Terrible. Who declare himself as Cezar (Tzar) of Third Rome and some vogue concept of All-Rus (Russia). Though despite it being completely illegitimate, Russia is later overtaken by actual Germans, related to Kaiser. So it sort of become true. But not really? Definitely not now. If anything Bulgarian Tzar did have most legitimate claim to Byzantium heritage. Because he actually was subject and elector of Rome. So they technically could elect themselves. Anyway. Bulgaria is now in EU, so it doesn't matter.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Russians aren't purely Slavic. They literally AREN'T Slavic! While Rus States were founded by Swedish Verengian. No historian with common sense claim it was Germanic. Verengians rapidly adopted local Slavic culture. What spread from (at the time) from Holstein to Volga. But vikings form in reorganization from Tribes to medieval kingdoms. But unlike Poland, they never truly unified.
When Mongol Horde hit them, disjointed states were swiftly conquered and forced under brutal occupation. With exception of Kingdom of Galicia-Wolhynia (aka Russia, later absorbed by Poland) and Baltic Lithuania, what stay independent. It is also where minor city of Muscovy start gaining prominence, after they allied with Tatars to overthrow Vladimir-Suzdal. And as such they become tax collectors in name of Khan and by extend extremely rich.
When Tatars were weakened and overthrown, Muscovy conquered Novgorod Republic, what at the time was multi-ethnic state composed primarily from Fino-Ugric Tribes, Slavs and German Merchants (as it was part of Hanziatic League). After that in 16'th century, madman Ivan the Terrible declared himself "Cezar of Third Roman Empire and All-Rus" (Russia). Only to kill his only heir and country plunge in civil war known as "Smuta". Where also Muscovy triggered war with Polish-Lithuania Commonwealth who actually hold title of Duks of Rus and majority of they actual territory (with capital in Lviv).
As result for a time title of Tzar was hold by Poles, but due to bad politics they lost power in the rebellion. Lead by Germanic Romanov family. Many years later after fall of Poland as result of German plot and growing in power due to sell of valuable fur. Tzardowm of Muscovy officially renamed itself in 18'th century as Russian Empire. While they use name before (same was as actual Russia call itself Ukraine) it was more symbolical. But from that point people were for from calling themselves as Muscovy, or as any other nation then Slavic. Even if minority of people actually were ethically that. Later being forcibly Rusified or Genocided.
Normandism in fact come as pseudo-historical justification of German nature of Tzars. Same as Slavic nature of Empire was also complete fabrication. What is notable if we compare them with Poles or Ukrainians. Even they do consider Russian culture as bizarre. Especially as under Putinism they start regressing on every level.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
muzaffarkrylov2365 Yes. As side note. Common misconception is that God the Father is the God. He is not. Actual God is higher being what is unseen tot only to humans, but also the angels. Trinity are his avatars. Kong of Angels and Voice of God, Metatron is literally God the Father. His main duty is dictating Law of Heaven. His orders are absolute to angels. He is leader of Council of Ophanim/Seraphim who also are connected to god more directly, if you wounder why God sometimes say in Bible "we".
Then you have Archangel of Wisdom Raziel Hellal (Morning Star) aka God the Son aka Christ/Mesiach, who is quite interesting as only Ophanim who is also Archangel of his domain. His role is of Arbiter. Unlike other avatars he technically doesn't have any greater authority (what is the point), what represent itself with his constant bickering with Archangel of Justice Satanael. Story of Job show that quite clearly. Role of this avatar is basically to be the every man. And prove that God is not strictly above the creation, what also lead to famous Rabbi from Galilea.
Finally we have King of Shaol (and realm of creation) and Angel of Destruction Sandelphon aka Holly Spirit aka Abaddon. Who is managing the forbidden domain of the God (aka our world or as some people call it Hell) and also formally safekeep Cherubim from breaking things. And yes, that also include technical command over Satan, after he was demoted as Angel of Death. He is generally separate from other two avatars, as generally if angel see him. Well, he would regret his life.
And yes, that is classic. Order vs Balance vs Chaos thing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Putin is a Shizo. He straight project crimes of Russia on Polish strawman. In short:
1) Russia couldn't give Poland Silesia, Prussia and Pomerania, because they never own it! It was territory of the Germany (though historically Polish). And yes, Stalin did that. But his goal was to create conflict between two states and weaken East Germany. It didn't work as Poland and Germany come to agreement regard that. Stalin is also mass murderer who kill many Poles. We don't own him anything here! As side note, Poland don't actually have reparations demands toward Germany. All that is theater, to remind them history.
2) Poland do not see Belarus and Ukraine as own land. It never did. Polish-Lithuania Commonwealth was coalition of two (later three) kingdoms. When Poland regain independence there were no clear borders (doe to Tzarist mangling) and initially goal was to restore Commonwealth. But during that proces it become clear that Lithuanian and Ukrainians want independence. Unfortunately because conflict with Soviets, restoration of the states was impossible. Anyway. Poland do not hold claim to neither Belarus or Ukraine. Poland in fact want them to be independent from Russian occupation.
Edit: I forget to add that Polish–Soviet War was direct fallow up to WW1, when freshly independent Poland was attacked by Bolsheviks, attempting to exploit perceived weakness of Germany (Lenin openly called off Treaty of Brest-Litovsk). Clashing with Poles who were on the way. Why they did that during fight with Whites? Is a mystery.
3) If Poland has any claim it would be Kaliningrad. What was part of Prussia, arbitrarily cut from it, because Russia wanted a port. And even that is not serious claim. It never was official, in any serious circle. Mostly because there is too many Russian there (same is true in case of Lithuanian and if we fallow memes Czech part of it). Poland bring it up purely to annoy Russia, when they start making they imperialistic demands. It is literally a meme. That is all. Generally if anything Kaliningrad as independent state, would be preferred option.
Honestly I wounder if Russians really lost grasp with reality, or they build the drama before surrender? We would see.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It is what is needed for current threats. US as Superpower, would not fight on one turf. After Iraq no one would even try. It would fight on many fronts, as enemies of Hegemon would work together to put him down. Also true hegemon don't fight on his own. US is hegemon because of inherent alliance with NATO and ASEAN. As such need to be capable of supporting them on all fronts at the same time. If some insane Orange abandon US allies, that would end US hegemony, with incoming threat of Pearl Harbor 2.0 (or specifically simultaneous attacks on Alaska, Hawai, Israel, Philippines, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea... what is not a theory, that is exactly they plan!). US must be capable to respond everywhere, at the same time. But most importantly with they crucial allies.
Success or Failure in Ukraine would be prove of the concept. This war would determine future!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It is worth to mention that several countries today, could potentially have (or secretly do may have) nukes.
Germany, Japan and South Korea (and few others) have ability to make nuke in a week. They simply chose to not to.
Also few other countries did have nuclear programs in the past. Israel and they politic that they may or may not have nukes, is most known. But we also do have ex-Nuclear powers like Ukraine, South Africa or Poland, who may potentially have tech (Poland have full nuclear program in the past), or some secretly stored "missing" warheads.
Anyway, it is why Russia nuclear rattling is so annoying. Because it actually could make world weirder in short spawn of time.
On top of that, countries who claim to have nukes, may actually not have them. Like, Russian science take major blow after end of Cold War, with state of they nuclear arsenal being in question. I find weird that despite acting like rabid dog, Russia didn't make any nuclear test? Another case is North Korea. It is entirely possible that they make actually not have nukes. Either being a secret test ground for China. Or possibly people confused bizarre seismic activity with nuke and they play along. Whole region has some unusual seismic reading now.
Anyway, in the end we would see in practice. What hopefully would not happen.
1
-
People forget that Ukraine was not a colony, but major part of Soviet Union. With Brezhnev and Khrushchev being Ukrainians. It wasn't until 70's, when Russians start actually dominating USSR. Anyway while it is true that Russians did have button and there were a lot of Russians in nuclear basses, Ukraine did participate in development of nuclear weapons. And at least initially there were no distinction between two nations (what is also argument used as justification for the ongoing war, where many technically Russian people fight on side of Ukraine). So it isn't actually that Ukrainians couldn't reverse engineering Soviet nukes, which they help develop. But Ukraine would not withstand pressure of both Russia and USA, at the same time. They simply didn't have a choice. But modern Ukraine has robust civilian nuclear industry and should be considered as one of nuclear capable nations. It is one of main reason why US would try secure them in NATO. What also isn't first time when that did happen.
BTW: In Poland, Soviets also stored nukes, but in less official manner moving them on they whims. But Poland itself also has nuclear program, in fact playing major role in development of nuclear fusion. Project was officially canceled after KGB assassinated leading researcher. I stress officially. But Polish Nuclear Institute NCBJ is in fact fully capable not only of making nuke, but also enriching uranium on they own for production of medical isotopes. Not that far ago US helped in disposing 750kg of nuclear grade uranium from "MARIA" Reactor. It is not a secret that it was one of main reasons why US agree to suport NATO membership of Poland, despite initial opposition. Possibly also why Yeltsin give signed agreement. Same as rest of developed countries, Poland is fine with status quo.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, it is complicated. Magic realism is when story is placed in realistic setting, but has some paranormal elements in it. It isn't about accepting magical, but that there is lack of clarity between it and psychological aspects of characters. I would say we observe they perception, what may or may not be actual magic. I think good example of genre is movie Pan's Labyrinth, Be Like John Malkovich, 1408, Frequency, etc.
Urban Fantasy (and her counterpart called Rural Fantasy) on the other hand is simply a fantasy placed in urban (rural) setting. Usually with magical hidden in modern world, paralel words when action take place in both equally (character should be capable to travel in between, though Isekai type of stories are sometimes lumped together due to similarity) or fantastical world what for some reason has modern setting (technically separate subgenres). Those are nowadays quite popular so stuff like Supernatural, Hemlock Grove, Grimm, Carnival Row, etc.
I could also add science fantasy, what refer either to stories where science and magic coexist (Warhammer 40k or Dark Matters), or so called magic is result of Clark's style science (examples: Shin Megami Tensei Persona, Final Fantasy XIII, Breath of Fore series, etc.) plus most of Space Opera is also nowadays considered as most isn't sufficiently scientific to be actual SF (so Star Trek, Star Wars, Mass Effect).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Before I watch the video: Biblically accurate demons are... actually angels! Of course older sources use term "angel" specifically to describe "messenger of God" (and in some cases actual person doing this job). What was later retroactively associated with all servants of the God. While term "daemon" describing beings in between humans and Gods, was reused for all spiritual beings of unknown origin. Like pagan gods or beings hostie to humans. Even if they may be servants of the God (angels). Later nomenclature also expand that with concept of devil/diablolous (devious), what describe specifically evil spirits (usually deceiving or hostile to humans).
So how it actually is in the bible? Well, servants of God are commonly eldritch horrors, who are not meant to make contact with humans, as it may not end well. Only selected small portion called angels is allowed to do so. In fact there is no war between heaven and hell! That is misunderstanding based on non biblical sources. Term "Satan" who is actually not singular being (though most famous Satan is Angel of Death and ex-Archangel of Justice Samael, if we include later traditions), is almost always depicted as servant of God, who task is to test humanity. In fact humanity itself is closest to what we call devils. As rouge beings, only attempting to come back to glory of God and by extend tested by Satan, regard conviction.
Here as side note, if we include later sources (and book of Enoch), it is worth to note that Noah was grandson of Archangel Metatron. So yeh. Our souls are the devils. But to be clear, those are not biblical sources. Also there are also plain evil angels like Azazel, but they do not seams to have any real power. And Lucifer is mistranslated. It was actually astrological title used regard Nabuchodonozor II called "Son of Morning Star" (Planet Venus). In fact sources use term Helel usually in reference to Archangel of Wisdom Raziel (identified in later sources, who is one of twins of Matatron and definitely not fallen... and well, a Christ).
Anyway in Bible cosmic zoo is always depicted as subject to God or irrelevant. Most later sources expand on that. But lot of confusion was caused by pop-sources exploiting more dualistic idea of war in heaven. Even if that is not a thing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Here is my opinion of the placent in Star Trek, based on context clues from the shows:
1) We do know that Federation, Romulan Star Empire and Klingon Empire share borders. Furthermore they centers are relatively close together as they interact as early as 22'th century. Vulcan territory seams to wedge between Romulans and Klingons. Romulans are closely related to Vilcans and we do know that Klingons have early relation with them. Though I think that Andorians are wedged slightly between Vulcans and Romulans. As they seams to be main target of Romulan intrigue and Vulcans do not know who Romulans are.
2) Vulcan itself seams to be relatively far from Klingon or Romulan borders. As most Federation races are in Beta quadrant. And it make more sense that Vulcan, not Earth to be prime meridian. But both seams to be almost in same, line. Though Earth is technically Alpha Quadrant. Important note. We do know that earth border Romulan Empire. Vulcans would warn Earth is they would know that, what is main reason why I think there is another state between that part of border and Vulcan-Romulan border.
3) Tallarites seams to be partially detached. Probably covering one of far flanks of Vulcan, but also have border close to Earth, which is why they were interested in preventing Romulan invasion. I think Earth and Tellerites in that region border Tholian, who are extremely xenophobic but not hostile race. Anyway, they are main reason why Federation didn't expand much into Alpha Quadrant.
4) Earth itself was initially part of Vulcan domain. It seams to be relatively close to Vulcan. But also somewhat isolated from rest of Federation. Yes. Center of Starfleet was basically Federation orient. Far from main centers of population. Wedged between Romulans on one side and Tholians on another. With relatively close proximity to founder races, where most expansion did happen. I do believe Earth was also bordering Delphic Expanse, what was most likely region relatively near core of galaxy. It was wild area full of anomalies and also fact that after nuclear war on Earth, whole area was surrounded by semi-independent colonies, didn't help. Situation changed only after Xindi join the Federation in TNG.
5) So finally. Everything imply that Ferengi and Cardassians are actually shockingly close to Earth, but were not discovered until 24'th century. What is bizarre! This is one of main arguments of Earth being border region. I think first contact was so delayed, because of minefield of independent colonies and dangerous anomalies. Where Starfleet forget its reputation of explorers and diplomats. But Ironically this area was also not the main focus of the Federation. Earth-Cardassian border war was straight ignored by Federation.
Or at least that is my idea about all that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Good example of medieval warfare myth is a weapon triangle. Staple of video games. It was not actual thing!
Fun fact. Medieval Archers were closer to Light Infantry, which equally effectively used bows and swords. It is why they wear armour. Yes. Cavalry could decimate them, if they attack them dispersed and by surprise. But the problem is that they could use pikes. Heavy Cavalry in fact more commonly attack line units, as they have sufficient power to break through them. Lighter Raiders generally were used to attack behind the lines, not specifically the archers and also fun fact. Cavalry itself was commonly armed in bows and crossbows (as side note. Longbow was not stronger then high quality short bow, only cheaper). Pikes actually start being popular during renaissance, with changes to conscription. It was far easier to train peasant to use pike then a proper male armour. While such infantry was decent in fending of raids and in larger numbers, even professional soldiers (though great sword was designed specifically to counter them). In short, not really a thing.
Closer to actual case was ancient warfare, but it was only because special units were even less capable. With most relying on heavy infantry. Cavalry was more used for scouting, while archers for defenses of static fortifications. Spearman usually were used to prevent the raids then specifically to fight cavalry, which rarely attack directly. In fact light infantry also use short range thrown weapons like Pilum.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Scenario 1:
After initial shock, French remind Russia that they also have nukes. While China remind Putin that they also would retaliate in such case. Poles are shocked that they weren't target of Russian nukes and then with Finland attack Kaliningrad and Belarus, with European part of NATO bombing Russia to the ruble. Chinese are pissed that Russia blow up they plan to attack wakened US simultaneously and move to plan B, sizing Amur. Putin kill himself in his bunker and Russia sign peace with NATO, to focus on defending Siberia.
Scenario 2:
The same, but it make more sense as Suvalki gap is Russia's weak spot. As they must capture it to prevent siege of Kaliningrad. Safe to assume that Russia attack Estonia first, hoping for lack of response. And then attempt to counterattack Poles, before they restore Prussia. Russia do not actually have resources to open other fronts. What BTW would be something what NATO would see month in advance. Unlike cowardly MAGA, Europe know how to fight.
Scenario 3:
Hybrid War is a cope. It only work when enemy do not expect it. We basically already have hybrid war.
Scenario 4:
The most likely one. After Trump leave NATO. China attack Taiwan, what they plan to do entire time. Meanwhile Iran attack Israel. North Korea attack South Korea. Venezuela attack Guana. Azerbaijan attack Armenia. Maybe even Pakistan and India jon the rumble? There could be dozens of such ignition points. Hamas just happen prematurely as that is what they plan to do entire time and Biden know it! US is overstretched, not capable to respond to more then two fronts. Furthermore cowardly isolationist government of Trump refuse to respond. Breaking US hegemony, what is they goal entire time. It is when Russian ship show around Alaska, what was cut previously by Chinese navy and Putin actually withdrew his forces from Ukraine. excluding Crimea. He would need them somewhere else. Somewhere where he already annex as Russian soil. WW3 begin! And NATO is ironically not there. Because Chinese do not want involve Europe for now.
Anyway, this video is really bad.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@knucklejoe26 In those times everyone was racist, because of racial segregation in US. It was straight illegal to not be a racist and could lead to serious problems. We don't debate if Lovecraft was obvious, but even if he was vocal about that, he was also vocal against, Jews, German, Irish, etc. In short, he was more general misanthrope then actual racist (by the way his wife was a Jew).
If anyone actually read his work, this topic doesn't pop up that much outside standard voodoo and language of that time. In fact recurring theme of apparently normal white man being secretly tentacle monster (Dunwitch Horror, Whispering in the Drak, or that one where guy escape from dark cave to find out that he was a monster, etc.) show that his prime source of fear was his genetic mental disorder (both his parents died in asylum).
Main problem is that many hipsters act like his work is about racism "as they read meme on internet", even if Lovecraft himself strongly opposed racial interpretation of Shadow over Innsmouth. And ironically because he was openly racist we can believe that when he was talking about fish people he meant actually a fish people, not black people. Because otherwise he would say that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Terminator 5 basically removed this concept entirely, excluding that time traveler become part of history itself, so basically exist even if his grandpa is dead due to proces of traveling itself. Yes, it is bit heavy handed but what ever. And I see you allude to "good Skynet theory", because if you think about it, why Skynet develop one thing what can destroy it but somehow doesn't? After all it was him who invented time travel on the first place, with humans only stealing his resources. But if Skynet find that destruction of humanity removed his push for progres, he would have reason to bring humans back. Then send last reaming humans to stop himself, but at the same time seeding his seeds to the past (it is why it has tech what wasn't even possible to construct in the 90's) so they basically would not succeed completely. Then Karl Reed become father of John Connors, who for reminder wasn't anyone special beside having knowledge about upcoming invasion, so being capable to prepare for it. It is why we ended with full hybrids at that point, as it somehow appear to be Skynet goal (one from upcoming movie would be good this time).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Objectively, nuclear ban is literally impossible. Today tech is so simple that actually several countries can develop nukes if nuclear consensus is breached. Only option is contentment, but fortunately whole risk of small scale nuclear exchange is higher, the risk of nuclear holocaust is not.
I would still say that Cold War was the worst. While US and Russia still have over 5k nukes. Most of that is dysfunctional and is kept only as bragging rights. People forget, but previous denuclearization agreements, were purely to cut costs. In era when precision strikes make nuclear carpet bombing irrelevant. When there was literal risk of nuking world several times.
Today only relevant parts of of nuclear triad are ICBM, SLBM and tactical level short range nukes, used on contact lines. Basically anything launched by bomber, would be destroyed before leaving store. In fact today, we do not have enough relevant nukes to destroy Earth. Still in eventual nuclear aggression, aggressor is guaranteed to be destroyed due to efectivnes of precision strikes.
BUT! While I do not expect much risk from major players as US, China or even Russia. Because neither actually care/can to defeat others. Despite they rhetoric they know that they can't go MAD. Unfortunately there is increasing risk of escalation in the operational level exchanges. Like North Korea going hot, or India-Pakistan, Iran-Israel, or Putin thinking that he can use nukes tactically. Still it would not end the world.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So here is my opinion about aliens. Everyone who claim anything about little green man, is a idiot. Unfortunately lot of people suffer on mental illness, what is not always obvious like sleep paralysis and have more selective memory then we are willing to admit (if we do not understand something, we would misremember it). Better question then asking if alien exist, would be what actual alien entity would look like, or better. How we would do it in they place?
So first of we already rely heavily on robots. It is unlikely that aliens would ever show personally. Assuming that they did not fused with the system. Any exploration mission would be done with automatic probes, what would passively collect data and hide they presence (for example we already can do optical cloaks). If contact would be needed, they ironically would use human form, least confusing to local people. Modular and organic robotic, or kinetic holography. Your pick. Something like that would be extremely hard to detect. Especially if they observe and can hijack your systems, or use mind tricks. What generally wouldn't be that hard.
Anyway, if aliens would be hostile we would be dead already. There is literally nothing on Earth what industry would find as valuable. There are whole asteroids made from gold or diamond, we consider valuable only because Earth is quite poor. As heavy metals tend to sink. Only reason why aliens would be interested is the science. And not some weird genetic experiments or slaves. Aliens shouldn't have much trouble to crack our genetic code on spot or use... well... actual robots or even transform matter on the post. It is also entirely possible that humanity would be ignored, as aliens are naturally inhumane and may find our overblown egos as not interesting. Though I do consider as rather probable that there may be a coalitions of different species, so we may not deal even with singular entity. But only fallowing similar law. What sound oddly familiar?
1
-
Vatican actually seriously considered this possibility. There was quite famous debate in Vatican over, how Church should react in situation if aliens actually do exist? Well, they conclusion was that this debate was already solved in medieval times, when they debated over "mythical" beings become Christians due to some sources claiming exactly that. It is worth to add that both Judaism and Islam, do consider possibility that Malak may be actually aliens.
Fun fact, saint Christopher was not a human, he was a bishop of "dog people" who after capturing monk (who may or may not be Saint Nicholas), actually become Christians. What BTW could be related to some conspiracy theories of shape shifting lizard people (as side note, if alien AI try mimic dominant specie of Earth, it make sense why it would have experience with lizards/birds and later canines, what could be used at least as starting point. And BTW legend of shape-shifting animal spirits are shockingly common: Dragons, Griffins, Kitsune, <U>Nicors, Kirins, etc.).
Anyway, conclusion even as far as medieval, was that if they do use cloths then they do understand shame and as such morality. It was expended over fact that bible do not deny existence of other sapient species, only say that humanity itself has special connection with the God. As such, there is no reason why aliens could not exist (from theological point of view) or become a Christian. So it isn't anything new.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Before I watch it. Full integration is not possible and even not wanted. It is concept lurking somewhere from the foundation. But realistically EU is currently in too large power imbalance. With Germany and France playing too big role and neglecting needs of Eastern European countries. Who start forming own alternative in form of Three Seas Infinitive. What is not because of Europe of two speeds. It is to prevent it, as West part of EU neglect East part and go through its own internal crisis.
While concept of singular army was competently discredited by the structural weakens of the West. What can't agree even on the army model, with more COIN focused france, navy focused UK (when they still were in EU) and inept politic of the Germany. While everyone else was doing own thing as Iberia, Italy and Nordics, have own things and no one ask them about opinion. What lead to East Europe loosing patience and going into alliance with US.
Still EU is far from falling apart. Everyone still profit too much from the deal, including those openly opposing EU. I think those crisis actually make EU stronger, promoting organic unification over pipe dreams. United Army is a basically a joke. But I do see local unification, done rather in standard of the NATO, who should be the one doing that. Nordic states create joint air force, what would more effectively cooperate during conflict. East Europe also go through its own Army standardisation and unification. As they may need fight together against common threat. While France and Germany can't agree what canon put in they shared Tanks. But at the same time, they are not in direct threat.
And that goes also in the other zones. I actually do see unified migration polity, but it must acknowledge needs of all sides. It is note worthy that Germans talk about redistribution, when they lost control over own unregulated migration, while they start hesitate when East European countries. Actually did something with problem of weaponized migrants. But I think everyone can and should agree on some bottom line there. Fiscal policy is consolidated, but Eurozone must first solve its own problems.
So in short. I expect something in between. A strong confederacy. With united, what should be united and relatively high level of independence, where it should be independent. In a sense I don't hate Brexit. It was really bad idea, but it also prove the concept in that zone.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Wait what? From when PPP is correct way to count economic capability? That claim is pushed by some weird people claiming that gold standard is still a thing. While it can be useful in some circumstances, there are factors what make them unreliable. Like government subsidies, what artificially decease costs of products. Also "law of one price" is quite shaky as it ignore that different cultures actually has different demands and also selection of basket is bit arbitrary. Anyway, PPP by own concept is highly unreliable.
If anything most people would use "GDP per capita" because while it also has flaws (resource economies are less dependent on the workers who actually get less from total budget), it at least show economic capability to country potential. So while India is 6'th largest economy, with absurd population of 1.3 bilion people, they economic capability is actually extremely poor with most people living in poverty. While most developed countries have relatively low population to total GDP, to point that demographic decline actually have impact on the productivity. Currently largest problem of Western societies.
China is closer in structure to India with 1.4 bilion people they have still smaller economy then US, who has only 1.6 milion. But despite some weird predictions China actually already reach development wall, where educated people start expecting higher prices and population start declining. So no, China would not overrun US. And I would not even mention Russia who in 60% is resource economy, what can be ignored same as domestic military production. In reality real economy of Russia is the same as in Poland. Except with higher infrastructure costs due to large size and cold climate. And actually three time larger population. So average Russian actually produce three time less then average Pole. Even if GDP per capita is similar and that is still more reliable that PPP?
In fact countries with primitive economies tend to have higher PPP because economy focus on basic products. After all price of quality bread may rise when people think over picking it or fancy bio-corn fit waffles, not counted as bread. While economy based on large quantities of basic bread, may have lover prices. Especially when people earn less. While PPP can be used when compering same types of economy, it is extremely finicky statistic.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm fairly sure there are no drag queen shows for kids, as drag queens are from of cabaret satirizing old dry divas. What yes, was commonly a sanctuary for gay and transvestite males. But I never faced any drag queen show actually targeted to kids, over parents not paying attention to what kids watch.
Third wave feminism is result of some portion of females not accepting equality and demanding gander supremacy, but I feel this issue diminished after development of proper transgender practices. As many of those failed feminists were actually trans-people who were jealous toward those who born as a man. Rather then actually having agenda.
On this topic I do agree that education should be careful to not promote transsexualism, but only acknowledge its existence. Those are decisions adult people should made and generally I advise tolerance, because most issues come from fact that tradespeople need hide who they are, what lead to ironic fear of straight people on finding out hard way. It is better for everyone, when they can be open about who they are.
Finally positive racism is a thing. Racial tolerance is when topic of races is ignored, not when media overly focus on this issue. Even with supposedly good intend. Not every movie need black actor, only that they should have equal opportunity for the work. This same goes for woman and gay people. Those factors should not be relevant, until it is part of the script.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The greatest failing of Terminator was not that it was too new. The opposite! It wasn't! There are already two categories of vehicles what do exact same thing as Terminator, but also aren't overspecialized in de facto niche role of mobile anti-infantry support unit. First of IFV's already do carry 30mm auto-cannons and ATGM's providing support, not to a tanks. But to infantry supporting the tanks. Because in the end, you literally couldn't send Terminator to clean building from ATGM team, when it was equally venerable to the same weapons. When if dismount bump on some reinforced firing position, IFV if used properly should do the job. Furthermore we also have SPAAG's (like Gepard), what until now were rather niche due to high capacity of modern aircraft's, but with rise of popularity of drones, they start being restored into service. And people seams to forget that they absolutely cold shoot in the ground targets and mulch concentrated points of infantry, being designed to secondary role of the anti-infantry support. Terminator was literally reinventing the wheel, to solve the problem what should not exist on the first place, if Russia would actually utilize own combat doctrine properly. But it was always hampered by abominable quality of Russian infantry. Due to core flaw of they doctrine, what is lack of respect to own man. Or human life in general.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@willieoelkers5568 "Pure evil is not the same as deliberately evil"
It exactly is.. either unawares or circumstances diminish "purity" of evil.
"Maldor from the Beyonders book series is pure evil"
So poorly written? If he doesn't have reasons to be tyrant then he why he is one? Self preservation is also one of things what could justify many thing and it is something what healthy person literally should have, so in the end "pure evil" is simply unnatural concept by itself.
"He is clearly pure evil and never given any redeeming or sympathetic qualities"
That is just your opinion. And lack of redeeming qualities doesn't make someone pure evil. For example because someone claim to act for greater good doesn't mean he does. Still "evil" in not his goal anymore even if he is horrible person.
"At the same time he's pragmatic"
So not evil in straight sense, as his actions depend on circumstances not moral validation?
"He deliberately avoids being deliberately evil"
It is because he is not pure evil. He is someone who try achieve specific goal what could be evil for some.
"but only because he views it as the most effective means of maintaining his pure evil hold"
So in order to do evil for sake of evil, as pure evil does.. you don't need to make more evil then convenient? It isn't how it work.. even if case of Joker who is close to being pure evil, he still is brainwashed by people with specific goal in mind.
"Thus while he is pure evil he intentionally averts being deliberately evil not for moral reasons, but for personal and selfish ones"
So in order to do evil for sake of evil, as pure evil people do. He try not make too much evil for selfish reason, as being selfish is also evil? And it is exactly why concept of pure evil if internally contradictory..
"From a meta perspective"
You use words you don't understand?
" "good" and "evil" are just labels we assign a character to designate whether or not their actions and principles align with or against traditionally morality"
Yes, but also not exactly. It is why we speak about gray zones of morality, but pure evil isn't about gray, it is about black. Also traditional morality don't exist for sake of itself. It exist to regulate societies defining good as working for and evil as against it. Problem is that some of those things tend to be subjective, outdated or shortsighted. Stealing to feed the kid isn't the same as stealing to deliberately hurt someone.
"A pure evil character is under no more obligation to view themselves as "evil" than a pure good character is to view themselves as "good"."
Except good characters should see themselves as evil, because that make them question own actions and try make good decisions. Evil people always see themselves as good, but pure evil characters see themselves as personification of evil what make them especially dumb.
"To summarize, a deliberately evil character is one that specifically takes conventional morality into consideration so they can do what would be considered "evil" "
What make no sense and is something only person seeing himself as servant of evil would do. That is exactly what make them pure evil (excluding being manipulated or insane what are redeeming qualities).
"while a pure evil character simply rejects being conventionally "good" as the correct or better choice"
So he reject morality and so become morally grey character (so the opposite of pure evil), because even if he don't feel obligation to not steal, it doesn't mean that he would, as there is many reason why he would not do that. People without morality are only potentially immoral to other people. They for example could become examples of virtue only for sake of perceived personal superiority.
"but the only requirement is that they consistently make choices that would be considered "evil" by the audience"
Audience? From when audience is ANY way relevant to moral judgment? Most people are ignoramus idiots. If they make evil actions they do that either because: A) They deliberately chose to do that, B) They have other reason to do that, or C) they don't know that it is evil. Option B and C are in fact reaming qualities, so not "pure". Option A is wat you claim it is not, for reasons..
"without attempting to justify those actions as "good" to themselves or others"
But hiporyzy is one of greatest sins! You claim that lack of hypocrisy, if not honesty, make people truly evil? WTF?
1
-
@willieoelkers5568 Dude, you clearly don't understand what word "pure" mean 0_0
"Pure evil refers to someone who consistently makes evil choices without attempting to excuse or rationalize them as "good" "
Again, hypocrisy is also evil so last point make no sense. It isn't about making excuses, but fact that in shitty world sometimes you need make bad things for greater good.
"This differentiates them from a grey character who will make evil choices, but also good ones and who usually feels that all of their actions were at least justified"
Yes, because they don't try make deliberately evil choices. Pragmatic people do make both depending on circumstances.. it is you who claim that somehow magically pragmatic person is pure evil (or other religious propaganda like that).
" In essence, the difference is that a grey character will feel the need to justify their actions"
Yes, because that make a sense considering that they abandon morality 0_0
What justify they action is they pragmatism, it isn't about them being delusional.
"while a pure evil character has little to no need to justify their actions as they don't care what others think and have no self-doubt or moral qualms"
Yes, because they chose road of evil deliberately doing evil things, so why they would justify it, at least until they do that before others 0_0
"at least prior to their third-act breaking point"
Breaking form what? If they are pure evil, then there is nothing to break.. you are pure in your evilness.
"You are getting too hung up on the specific use of the word "evil", it's used here as context for how a character's action align with conventional morality, not their goals or self-image"
Again. Conventional morality isn't really a thing. It is just what some old dude said somewhere. It is extremely easy to show examples of absolutely evil supporters of conventional values (like terrorists). It is why people say that morality is subjective. What make it objective though is debate about society and they needs, what can be extremely complicated and circumstantial.
"Pure evil characters can see themselves as evil and deliberately choose to make evil decisions, but they are not required to see and act in that manner, as long as their actions are consistently evil and self-serving without attempts to excuse or rationalize them"
Except! As I said insanity or even self preservation are redeeming qualities what do justify they behavior. Purely evil characters exist only for sake od doing evil things. It isn't about arbitrarily idea of "making excuses", what absolutely make no sense in context of purely of evil especially as I said, hypocrisy is evil (so making excuses by person itself). You clearly confuse things here..
"Self-image is not what's important here, actions are."
Wait.. do you just said exactly why you are absolutely wrong? Do you think of what "excuses" are? And again, pragmatic people do make both types of action because they do care only result (even if that make them look like evil). When pure evil care only about.. drums.. EVIL 0_0
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mastermold10 On the contrary. Devil being called that way is source of the term. As in Latin version of the bible Serpent (or Whale) was called Draconem.
"where are you geting this elemental deity nonsense?"
From fact that 90% of known dragons straight are that and those who aren't are usually questioned as such? Fafnir, who is literally source of half tropes (like gold hording) was a dwarf, so lesser earth elemental. Apep straight is god, Vrtra is Asura, Leviathan
and Bahamut are hayyoth, Hydra was Zeus niece, Chinese Lungs and Qilins are deities of storms and rivers,
same as they sea counterparts. Many known lesser dragons (Wyverns) like Basilisk, Cockatrice, Knucker are Fae so lesser Celtic deities of nature. They regularly could also talk and shapeshift. Of course when those beings were adopted to children books, religious elements were pushed away.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Thomas Hacker
Yes, like for example (from Arrowverse for simplicity): Cisco Ramon, Sara Lance, Laurel Lance, Thea Queen, Iris West, Joe West, Harrison Wells, Eobard Thawne, Damien Darhk, etc.
At least those are those I remember to die yet are alive.. d'oh!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bloodydove5718
"The reason superman came back was because of fan and "fan" outrage, it was prettymuch even said via interviews after the fact."
Because I didn't live in 1956 I can't verify that, so i would believe you. Or you referee to his other death? He died in the sixties at least dozen times.
"Todd isnt a kind of joker jr, he just uses a moniker that the joker did before his joker days."
You mean the Red Hood? I said that.. but you clearly don't know about this theory about him.. eghm.
"Totally different universes for one"
What is a norm in DC multiverse. There is many 52-clusters even in the comic. That is not the point. Crisis on Infinite Earths basically confirm that real number of universes is infinite, and so they multiverse basically include also movie and TV universes. In case of Marvel MCU is officially a part of it as Earth-199999.
"Theres never going to be a flashpoint live action movie like the comic arc, because it would require far too much time and money to set it up to be remotely on the same scale as the comicbook arc."
It doesn't need to be.. they already did Flashpoint in the Arrowverse (yes, half assed but not the point). And as it is now it is only way to remove shit stain of BvS.. not that I'm happy about that.
"Look at Marvel's civilwar... The movie was might as well have had a different name, for the vast difference in scale alone."
Or it is a different universe so your point is redundant. Marvel did know that this debate is old so they use it as red hearing for the great twist. If someone want classic stuff then he have comic.
"The infinity wars is going to be the closest thing we're going to get with the whole concept on screen, and look how much time and money it took to get to this point... and we all know its STILL not going to be anywhere near the same scale as the comic."
Until they don't adopt the comic.. but the point is not to adopt comic but have coherent movie universe. Scale is secondary thing. If you have else world story with the alternative events of the Flashpoint it also would have different scale. Not because of different media but because different story.
"The rules between the mediums are different, because of the differences in resources."
To some degree yes, but you clearly use here some weird logic here.
"If we were to talk about animated movies and cartoons... the argument isnt the same and can be far closer to the source material, but even still things are different because its a hell of a lot cheaper to punch out art and story, when theres so many less people involved in creating."
Again, how that is relevant? Number of people has really nothing to do with the quality of the story and scale is relative. You don't need hire actors if in the comic those hundreds superheroes doesn't really talk. In end comic has similar framing rules like any other media, and if for some reason they would want have hundred superheroes in the movie.. they would have. But there is no reason for that. In comic they are part of the universe.. in other media it would be just pointless fan-service until they intend to make a direct adaptation for some reason.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MarkA-ql3gc It may shock you, but countries in NATO are actually independent! I know, it is above your understanding.
War in Ukraine is not war over rule based order. It is absolutely simple, two dimensional scenerio where imperialistic fascists attacked neutral country in name of colonial agenda and try genocide its people. And no. It was not US but Russia who did it and you are genocide apologist.
NATO really is not a side of this war, beside helping the victim. And yes. Allowing someone to actually do imperialistic conquest and colonial purges is also in long run threat to the global order.
Invasion in Iraq was criticized on the West, Afganistan did attack US, not the other way around. And Russia attack Ukraine, with NATO not being even there. So you at least could bring Libia, that is actually somewhat controversial.
And fun fact! It was Kuchma who wanted Ukraine in NATO... in 90's. He was blocked by Germany. No one was ever talking about it from time of Orange Revolution, because Germany was stil blocking it. Yanukowych make impossible for Ukraine to enter NATO by leasing Sevastopol to Russia. Zelensky openly proposed model of Finland, because everyone know that Ukraine in NATO would not happen.
But Putin didn't cared about logic. He needed excuse and so he straight made it up. Ironically it make Ukraine in NATO only valid option, as Putin break trust between those nation. Russians are and would be seen as sociopath kinslayers. Ukraine can't trust them for the next century.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@userwsyz Actually Rome did not fall. It is combination of Byzantine and Enlightenment propaganda. Most Germanic tribes were invited as workforce and preserved bulk of Roman culture and knowledge. France, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Romania actually speak dialects of Latin.
Though Classic Rome did fall, it was during third century crisis. When capital was focused on backstabbing emperors of the week. While Galia went rouge to form alliance with Franks to fend off other Germans and economy already at this point moved east, what go rouge not acceptation being second grade citizens, despite being more rich.
Edict of Caracalla granted citizenship to all free man in Empire (including Christian Franks, Goths and Vandals), what later lead to Constantine moving capital East and gradual decline of the Rome. What already at that point was mosty defended by Germanic warriors in chain mail, with ax, long spear of spatha and round shields. Not to mention heavy armored cataphracts aka the knights.
When title of Emperor was transferred to Byzantium by Odoaker (there was no conquest) nothing really did change in the Western side of the Empire. It wasn't until Justinian, who betrayed Latins and destroyed huge portion of West, including eternal city itself. To avoid competition. Charlemagne actually did usurp title with help of Byzantine province of Papal State and after fall of Byzantine, second title was transferred to Spain. Ending in hands of Hapsburg, who also were emperors of HRE.
But with rise of national states, people were not concerned with Roman heritage anymore. Though Germans through most of medieval times were refereed as the Romans. Worth to mention that US congress has symbols of Roman power in the main hall and Europe is again united.
1
-
@Haijwsyz51846 Actually Rome did not fall. It is combination of Byzantine and Enlightenment propaganda. Most Germanic tribes were invited as workforce and preserved bulk of Roman culture and knowledge. France, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Romania actually speak dialects of Latin.
Though Classic Rome did fall, it was during third century crisis. When capital was focused on backstabbing emperors of the week. While Galia went rouge to form alliance with Franks to fend off other Germans and economy already at this point moved east, what go rouge not acceptation being second grade citizens, despite being more rich.
Edict of Caracalla granted citizenship to all free man in Empire (including Christian Franks, Goths and Vandals), what later lead to Constantine moving capital East and gradual decline of the Rome. What already at that point was mosty defended by Germanic warriors in chain mail, with ax, long spear of spatha and round shields. Not to mention heavy armored cataphracts aka the knights.
When title of Emperor was transferred to Byzantium by Odoaker (there was no conquest) nothing really did change in the Western side of the Empire. It wasn't until Justinian, who betrayed Latins and destroyed huge portion of West, including eternal city itself. To avoid competition. Charlemagne actually did usurp title with help of Byzantine province of Papal State and after fall of Byzantine, second title was transferred to Spain. Ending in hands of Hapsburg, who also were emperors of HRE.
But with rise of national states, people were not concerned with Roman heritage anymore. Though Germans through most of medieval times were refereed as the Romans. Worth to mention that US congress has symbols of Roman power in the main hall and Europe is again united.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As side note, when war started Ukraine expected it may loose Donets, Luhansk, parts of Zaporizhia and Kherson (Dniepr is quite defensible). Maybe even Odessa, Mykolaiv, Dnieprach and Kharkov if things go wrong (claimed territories of Novorossiya). But Putin's expectations were way higher. He wanted subjugate whole Ukraine (Western part kept as buffer state), with territories of Novorossiya being the minimum.
It didn't work. He overextended his force and suffer major losses. What actually lead to change in expectations. He as it is now expect to hold parts of Zaporizhia, Kherson, Donbas and focus on claiming at least whole Luhansk. But Ukrainians expectations changed. They actually expect to reclaim Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporozia and Kherson. With the maximum they consider to give up is Crimea. Especially as genocide committed by Russia, highly motivate them to victory (aka another prove why war criminals are idiots).
So war would still go. The problem is that Russia seams to suffer higher attrition rate and poor morale. With Ukraine actually successfully mobilizing own defenses. Which mean that longer this war go, worst position of Russia would be. Because as it is now they change chance to keep Crimea if they start negotiations. But Putin can't acknowledge defeat, what may lead to point when Ukraine may even refuse status quo conciliation prize and full lost of Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
First of we should take into account that at least some Russian nukes may work and that West still don't intend to invade Russia. So some potential exchange may happen, but only if Putin go fully insane. And that it could cause at least some damage. Which is why direct confrontation would not happen, until Russia trigger it deliberately.
BUT! Having that in mind. We basically may ignore Russia's five thousand nukes (sic!). From which only 1.7 thousand is even considered active. But we speak here "active" as in Russia. At this point quality of delivery systems become important. And Russia do not actually have more ICBM's then US or China. We may basically ignore traditionally drop bombs, as without stealth or missiles, those have zero chances to reach the target. The game is more equal, not only with US but also China and EU. So that in general.
Plus there are other factors. First of West actually has more major targets then Russia, even is they arsenal do work. If Moscow and few other major cities is destroyed, then there is basically no more Russia. As they are basically largest third world country on planet! In fact most of they territory are literal colonies, with zero to negative loyalty. After nuclear war, there would be nor Russia. Especially as China would definitely join. So why Russia still didn't do at least nuclear test? They already break all laws known to God and man. Maybe China threat them? Though we do know that Russian military is also frustrated with lack of nuclear test and Russia only doing some simulations, what make them look even more weak.
Honestly? We do not know. There is a theory that Russia get trigger isotopes from third parties as they could lost ability to actually make them. But that is pure speculation. It is best to assume that Russia may have some nukes, but they simply can't go MAD and should be last who want Nuclear War. West should grow balls, because Russia respect only the force.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gnolkenstein5527 Ok, in short:
Apache is acclaimed system, what perform really well not further then decade ago. Against military considered at the time paralel to Russian forces. Anyone who claim Attack Helicopters as obsolete, has no idea about tactical use of this platform.
Tiger is well known procurement fiasco, where series of fatal mistakes make it especially costly and unreliable. It is mostly related to composite armour its use, what is notoriously hard to repair. As such it was deemed not worthy of modernization.
Eurofighter is a platform comparable to F-15. Problem is that it cost twice as much as American counterpart, what is related to lack of economy of scale in Europe and local interest of partner states. After end of Cold War there was no need for Superiority Fighter and so it end short on modernization. What changed recently.
Alligator is new super helicopter of Russia. It is NOT CHEAP! It was extremely expensive project meant to confront NATO. Half produced ended destroyed by Stinger remembering Afghan War. Now mostly do attacks from stand off. While having short window of being effective, as Ukrainian failed to pull air defense during offensive. Until they did.
Su-34/35 A modernized variants of old Su-27. In strike bomber and fighter forms, as Russia still didn't master multi-role fighters like Americans did in 70's. They work ok, with stand off munitions. As Ukraine air forces are even more obsolete. But suffer massive loses. When Ukraine actually pulled SAM's. There is a reason even Iran canceled older for this platform.
There is a reason why EVERONE canceled they orders, as myth of Russian unstoppable army was shattered. But Russia pretend that they still is a superpower. Even if Iran has better fighters then Russia has now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Lun Lun Yes, Satan is called the Serpent but snake in the story is not Satan.
"but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."
Genesis 22;17
"Adam and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame."
Genesis 2;25
"For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Genesis 3;5
"Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves."
Genesis 3:7
Sorry, but bible clearly say something else.
Also:
"So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,
“14 Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring[a] and hers;
he will crush[b] your head,
and you will strike his heel.”
If it is about literal animal or being cursed to be one, is up to debate. But it definitely is not about Satan.
"One day the angels came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came with them."
Job 1;6
Satan has access to heaven, so what about us?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What mostly are BS. According to Kabbalah (Jewish Mysticism), God in fact has at least seven or eight avatars (take a mind number is symbolical and they are refereed by different names by various sources, so I also skip that part). Anyway it is why God say "we create" in the Bible, as those seven spirits around God's throne say that. But there is also eighth one (the man or animal sitting on the throne), who is one called by Christians God the Father and by Jews Metatron (King of Angels). He is equal to other spirits what operate as sort of hive mind, but he represent aspects of personality and so may take specific personas in contact with other angels. Over time he take role of voice of God (take a note that God himself is separated from creation as direct contact would uncreate it), but they all should be considered as the same God. But the quite important bit is that this aspect of the God can take different personas and in fact there are two other Archangels (as Princes of Heavens) who answer directly to God. Quite fun fact. Kabbalah has in fact concept of Trinity! When Metatron rule the heaven and his word is the law. His "twin brother" Sandelphon (possibly also known as Abbadon, though name is mistakenly confused with demon) is one who rule the Shaol (underworld), including material realm. It is wild realm of creation and destruction. Angels are prohibited to enter for safety reasons (place is inhabited by eldritch elemental angels usually refereed as Living Beasts), but not actually prevented (place also don't fallow the usual law). In fact he is what is known as Holly Spirit, a direct representation of God in the creation if not the material creation itself. The third one is Raziel Helal, Archangel of Wisdom, who was originally believed regular Archangel, until conflict with Satan (who for reminder is Prosecutor figure, not actually fallen) reveal him as God's persona. He was one who descent into material realm to bring fallen humanity to God and then comeback (yes, the Christ). In fact several times. Man known as Enoch (Noah Grandfather) was believed to be him and become later Metatron.
Anyway though technically we do have God himself, who then present himself as Spirits of God's throne, of who one present himself as the Trinity of Archangels. Those are still the same being and arguing who is more important make no sense. In fact opposite order of "creation" make most sense. Holly Spirit always exist as part of the material world (most likely formless), then the same spirit take position of "regular" Archangel (in animal form) and then finally take form of a man who recto actively represent him, as member of Spirits/Lights of the God. Anyway. Arguing over the order is pointless. At least Satan has legit point to question someone claiming to be a God.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sammiller6631 Again. Bundeswehr issues are bureaucratic in nature. It is a country who spend more money on the adviser commissions, then actual supply. And again. Russia is a country with economy size of Mexico and while spending larger percentage of budget, it is still pence. Comparing to US, China or collective EU spending. On top of that spend on over-bloated, antiquated and extremely corrupted excuse of the military. NATO countries generally didn't spend 2%, as they didn't really need do that.
Warsaw Pact IS the Eastern Block, Dummy. While not as strong as USSR (there are no other countries, excluding Yugoslavia, what was not controlled by Russia). They did have decent readiness, as they would need take first hit or do dirty work of Russia. Ukrainian SSR also was where bulk or Soviet ready forces were. While Russia was always one huge corrupted bordello. What without resources and credit stolen from subject, is nothing.
I don't think you are Russian, because they in fact do know that. And I do not waste more time on tankey, who take knowledge from Red Alert.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mattityahu00 For example, Job 1;6-12:
"6 One day the angels[a] came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan[b] also came with them. 7 The Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?”
Satan answered the Lord, “From roaming throughout the earth, going back and forth on it.”
8 Then the Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil.”
9 “Does Job fear God for nothing?” Satan replied. 10 “Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. 11 But now stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face.”
12 The Lord said to Satan, “Very well, then, everything he has is in your power, but on the man himself do not lay a finger.”
Then Satan went out from the presence of the Lord.
"
Yup. Totally enemies. I roll my eyes. Satan is God's prosecutor. He is angel of justice tasked with revealing humanity corruption, as we are ones who are fallen. Do you think who stop Abraham from sacrificing the Isaac? Totally vile action of Satan. According to prophecy of Revelation, Satan would only fall in the day of the end, becoming desperate due to his constant failings. And that what would mark end of the old world and beginning of promised new Earth. Seriously. Read the bible.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@marther3898 Without overcomplicating stuff: Whole heaven-purgatory-hell idea is simplification, sufficient for most people in every day life, but not exactly how bible describe stuff. In fact angels fall on Earth, creating unholy union with the flesh. I think it is not literally as reference to soul. Though still it is worth to remind that Noah grandfather Enoch is also known as Metatron.
Christ promised people new Earth, after days of the end and actual heaven is full of tentacle monsters forom Lovecraft seeing humanity as traitors. So you actually don't want go there. Closest thing to purgatory would be probably Sheol, so land of undead. It is described as unpleasant, but you don't actually feel anything there. It is also ruled by Archangel Sandelphon/Abaddon
and four elemental angels known as Living Beasts (Cherubim in Christianity) so Leviathan, Behemoth, Ziz and that forth one. Plus Satan as angel of death.
Thing is that they all work for God. Satan would fall only in the day of the end, as result of frustration that he can't prove that humanity is not worthy of salvation, what discredit his faction and open door for salvation. Fun fact: Peacocks, fluffy animals ("sword" sticking from head lead to interesting conclusion in this context) and rainbows are actually ancient symbols of Christ. Plus:
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star." Revelation 22;16
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, we have:
Light: So, funny, optimistic, comedic, even if it talk about serious subjects (Disney).
Realistic: So about real life, tend to by dry but reliable (most serious stuff).
Grimdark: So pessimistic if not nihilistic, talk about worst in the word (Warhammer, Witcher, etc.).
Edgy bullshit: So things like BvS, overly dramatic and dark, but nonsensical and adolescent at the same time.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Abhijeet Kundu "Gripen is a light jet"
What is a category of jets used for defense. What is exactly how Swedes intend to use them. As I said, it is equivalent of F-16 not F-15. And that was the problem, because it didn't offer more then F-16 did. Still F-16 is one of the best so calling equivalent bad is bit shortsighted.
"Eurofighter is a bad jet too but not as bad as Gripen"
According to who? Russia Today? Eurofighter is a equivalent of F-15C and I mean actual equivalent what is really good. The main issue was same as with the Gripen. It cost way more then F-15. Problem is that we moved few generations ahead so it doesn't compare to F-22 or NGAD, when F-15EX get life expansion as missile truck. Rafale was from beginning designed as such, which is why it is more competitive as multi-role. But it isn't really as good as F-15EX.
"Russian jets are better in every way possible than the Americans"
Lol, they literally aren't. Russia stuck on generation 4. They literally can't make multi-roles and performance of even modern Jets in Ukraine was catastrophic. And it wasn't even a surprise.
"The first version F16s don't have a chance against an upgraded MIG21"
Again. According to who? Because not the people who operated both. F-16 is way better then Mig-29 and at least comparable to Flanker.
"America is all about soft power"
Yes. Because they know how war work. Hard factors look good on paper and propaganda posters, but they don't win the war. Ten percent higher speed don't save you when you can't target the enemy.
"?This is why F35 is a 1.7 trillion dollar lemon that doesn't have a chance even against MIG21"
Are you stoned? Pierre Sprey is a hoax. He never actually work in the industry and doesn't know what he talking about. You seriously should stop sniff propaganda. American jest were proved in combat many times. Russian one can't get air-superiority in Ukraine.
"They are not spoiled LGBT army like NATO"
They are inept primitives, who stay mentally in the 50's. Like all Reformists. I pick those who actually can fight.
"Russia is one country, one army, with one purpose - restoring USSR"
And loosing war in Ukraine. What should be expected from Iranian proxy and Chinese colony, with economy in size of Italy and ego greater then US (but without merit).
"If you don't have nukes, you don't have a chance"
Nukes are defensive weapon. Who use them would die.
"Even with nukes, you don't have a chance"
Russia literally has no MAD ability and most of they nukes are as real as they fake tank reserves. If Russia use nukes, it stop exist. West and China (because they also would act) would be hurt, but far from the dead.
"After all, this is Russia we are talking about"
Yes. Liars and posers. USSR never has fighting chance after west rebuild after the 60's. And now they start believing in own lies, what usually end the empires.
"Before February, nobody thought Russia was going to attack. But they did."
You are confused. No one in the mainstream media believed that they would be so stupid. Considering how unprepared and underarmed they were. Attack itself was not surprise. It was no magic that Western support show up so fast.
"But they did. They are unpredictable and dangerous"
That part I agree. But also not capable. A cat is also dangerous. It can scratch you, before you smash its head. Until now West was believing that all might talk is just for own public. Because everyone know that Russia is incapable of actual war. It is why Germany was disarming and refusing to move defenses from line of Cold War. They didn't want Russia to be afraid, as that was largely reason for the Cold War. They didn't take into account that Putler is a Looney Tunes villain. Though it may be because he has Alzheimer?
Anyway. You clearly are brainwashed by propaganda. I would ignore you from now one.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I think he has one of earlier videos what explain exactly how terms come to be. Because it is actually different then people think so:
Development of torpedoes make small Torpedo Boats a direct treat to Capital ships. So as defense older class of Gunboats was picked. What also become equipped in Torpedoes, superseding them in that task. But Torpedo Gunboats were not exactly sea worthy. So Spanish design larger seaworthy Torpedo Gunboat, what was called Destruktor. It inspired class of oceanic so called Torpedo Destroyers. What were still relatively small. But those start growing rapidly also being armed with AA and anti-Sub weapons, losing and later regaining torpedo focus. And after WW2 Americans basically fused them with Fleet Leader class, what was type of Light Cruiser attached to fleet. Those were called Fleet Destroyers, but after introduction of guided missiles those become Guided Missile Destroyers, so just Destroyers as other types died out.
Meanwhile because Destroyers as dedicated fleet escorts, become simply too big and costly. British reinvent term Corvette for Flower class anti-sub ship. British also use term Sloop, but no one else does that and generally if even is used usually the opposite way as intended. Because Corvettes become from cheap, a specialized coastal war ships. While only circumstance when terms Escort or Sloop could be used is basically armed civilian vessel (aka Q-ship). When proper Corvette is not available. Term Frigate was used by US in reference to ship larger then Destroyer, but after those grow. US reclassify them with European definition. What was used to something what could be defined as "Coastal Destroyer". I remind that unlike boats Corvettes and Frigates can operate at sea. Just perform better in coastal areas then larger Destroyers, while not being fast enough to fallow War Fleet at full speed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@lmaonoobs3779 Putin is doing historical revisionism and India is not on they side. Neutrality toward evil is supporting the evil.
"Russia isn't a colonial Empire. It's simply something that you want to call them as"
Tatars, Bashirs, Chuvash, Chechens, Balkars, Buryats, Dolgans, Evenks, Kalmyks, Karachay, Kumyks, Nogay, Yakuts, Karelians, Komi, Mari, Mordovians, Udmurts, Adyghs, Cherkess, Ingush, Kabardins and Dagestani (total around 130 enslaved nations) disagree.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wedgeantilles8575 And what are those facts? First of, Rome almost did fall in 3'th century. Where capital was focused on infighting, Galia felt abandoned and basically formed alliance with Germanic tribes to defend itself from other Germanic tribes. And Eastern part of empire, where majority of trade was taking place, was unhappy that they are second grade citizens despite being richer.
Solution of this issue was Edit of Caracalla what granted every free man in Empire a citizenship, what again glued Empire together. That included Franks and other allied tribes in Galia. There is no coincidence that so many Magister Militum were Germans.
The problem begin when during Hun invasion massive numbers of Germanic tribes start requesting entering the Empire. What they in fact were allowed, as Rome need form military alliance with them. The unwanted side effect was that they were free man in the Empire. It is how Vandals for example could move so fast through the Empire. They did that legally. When they burn Rome it was in name of the legal Emperor.
Anyway, when Odoaker after series of civil wars overthrow Emperor. He send regalia to East Roman Emperor asking instead for title of regional Prefect (what was granted). Because Rome totally fall. King of Franks Clovis I was also recognized as Roman Consul. There is many sources confirming that "Barbarian Kings" recognized and visited Byzantium. But later they start ignoring them, fearing being overtaken from inside. What lead to Charlemagne.
And after its fall, last Emperor transferred his title to King of the Span (aka Hapsburg). What was later the reason why Ottomans siege Vienna (owned by Hapsburg). So Even Byzantium was recognizing HRE (lead by Habsburg) as West Rome!
It wasn't during Enlightenment when Europe start distancing itself from the Roman heritage. Moving from legislation in Latin to national languages (though French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and Romanian are dialects of Latin) and secularism. BTW Vatican and Sand Marino literally are remnants of old Rome.
Also fun fact. You think what West in modern context actually mean? Do you know what symbols are in US Congress?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cristaltophat "is somehow a weakness of character, really"
Yup. Especially in environment in this series. He was a tool and end as a tool.
"I don't think I've seen Joffrey once have a hobbie or belief that didn't result in someone's misery and or death.
"
But it is because this series is already long..
"He was 15"
You need to be at that age if you think that people stop being magically stupid when clock hit midnight in they birthday. Yes, they can be capable to become mature already, but law predict few years for adjustment for a reason.
"Do you think people or kids, don't feel empathy till someone teaches it to them?"
Yes, if you didn't watch Lords of Flies, then you should..
"More over being a kid isn't a character trait"
It is.. only after you stop being a kid, your true character could be judged. I'm not saying that Jeffery wan't a trash, only that he still was adolescent so it could change.
"If I could take Joffreys entire personality and shove it into a grown adult that would leave you with nothing positive to say about them anymore"
Probably, but there is still small possibility that there wold be otherwise. Many wise people were stupid as a kids..
"His existence in game of thrones is just so the viewers can say:
"Man, I Hope You Die." "
I need to say that actor did great job here ;D
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Mr_MikeB Ok. I feel I actually would waste time on possible troll/kid and actually explain you how it work:
A state generate steady profits. When you do investment you need wait to accumulate money for that project. But with rapidly changing governments, next leader may waste it or claim work he didn't do. So governments are uninviting to work that way.
But there is a work around. A loan from private sector. This way you can do investment immediately and leave debet problem to next government. But here is a nice trick. Private banks care about government profits and investments what actually bring profits, help in paying the debet. So this system additionally prevent vanity projects.
And it would not threat the system! Not only banks reinvest those profits in economy. In time of crisis government can cancel paying the loans, what hurt economy but not the stability of the state. So western centuries are in crisis... from a century. They are rich because they know how to make money in that system.
China work completely other way around. They make huge profits, selling resources. In this case the workforce is also a resource. But it was still the western companies who actually generated profits. Mostly through selling to the West.
Meanwhile government reinvest those profits in the GDP growth. Problem was that they prioritize GDP, to keep illusion of success. Over actual long term profits. And remember that building factory generate GDP, even if it doesn't work.
China actually build mostly vanity projects like high speed trains to nowhere and speculator owned cities. And entire Road and Belt was extension of that, with local warlords building huge statues instead roads.
Problem begin when time come to pay it back. There is no actual profits. Government can cancel the debts, but this money vanished. And it is nothing new! Something similar did happen in Japan in the 90's. But they actually did mismanage only some sectors.
Problem is that due to aggressive Chinese polities, western countries start pulling own bussines back. US specifically want rebuild its own economy after realizing failure of the work import. Or alternatively move to India, what is now in similar position as Chinese few decades ago. Anyway, due to bad politic China is on edge of largest economic crash in history! Mostly self inflicted.
Believe or not, we would see what happen in next decade. But we did see that already in the past. It is crucial to learn the lesson how to avoid middle inom trap or especially the another investment bubble.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
And then they call Russians (a white Europeans) as saviors. This show toxic level of hatred toward Western world. And commonly not based on actual crimes committed (except French). This arguments are commonly based on revisionism, so not actual historical grudge. But historical fantasy of "bad white people destroying peaceful African nations" and same is true for Russian revisionism.
While in reality slavery exist in Africa way before Europeans come. And while some horrible historical events did happen, in most cases they simply were buying local goods, with what was accepted by locals (weapons). Unfortunately because after end of colonialism, European feel guilty of they historical crimes and overcompensated, what lead to many misconceptions. Like from three big epidemics ravaging South America, only one was smallpox. Two were actually local epidemics, which Europeans survived better because sanitation and quarantine.
Anyway, from my experience most of anti-Western stances (except involving French, where I would admit mistakes where deserved), come more from jealousy and hatred. Then actual crimes. Because West in fact did try help, only to be spited on. Honestly I do think this white savior behavior should also end West should become more passive.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1