US-Soviet Russia WW II Alliance

Stalin was a sub-optimal military leader and the Soviet dictatorship was cold-blooded in war. If Stalin had not made an agreement with Hitler to take Finland in exchange for neutrality it is possible Hitler might not have started the war. As it was Hitler invaded Poland and so did Stalin in 1939. Then the Soviets captured Finland in the winter war. When the two serpents turned upon one another, the Hitler-Stalin agreement was terminated. War in Leningrad was to develop in 1941-42, by which time Field Marshall Rommel and his Panzer edge was being blunted by the British at El Alemein

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mo...

If 70% of the storm troopers were not former socialists that believed that Hitler would purge the aristocracy if in power, Hitler might not have taken power in Germany and the war might not have occurred. As it was Hitler declared war on the United States in 1941, after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and the U.S. declared war on Japan. The United States had to fight a world war on two broad fronts it didn’t want.

The United States had kept England in the fight after western Europe was lost with lend lease and other material support until entering the war itself. Stalin had purged his military of high ranking officers in his paranoia before the war. The Red Army was in a less than optimal condition when Operation Barbarossa was launched upon the Soviet Union.

Hitler had some allies in the Ukraine as well as in other Eastern European nations who would act as fifth columnists in the fight against the Soviets. Eisenhower wanted to directly invade France to attack, yet Roosevelt forestalled that. Rommel and the Panzers in North Africa needed to be addressed. When the Brits and Americans wound up the Wehrmacht, Italy was an obvious place to flow the war. A general pincers attack on two European fronts along with Soviets engaging in a third on the east presented tactical complications for the former corporal.

Britain was able to supply the Soviets with about 700 tanks in 1941 and together with the U.S.A., about 5000 tanks in 1942. During the entire war the Soviet produced about 350,000 wheeled vehicles while the United States supplied more than 500,000. The U.S.A. provided most of the armored troop vehicles the Soviets had for they produced none during the war. U.S. and Britain built 40% of the Soviet Air Force.

Lend-Lease tanks and aircrafts

There is no question about the value of the Soviet war contribution to defeating Germany and the axis powers. Most Americans do not learn Soviet history- just western history, and learn of their own national contribution in that regard. The allies were a team, rather like the super band Cream that played together for just two years, that accomplished a lot working together.

Questions like; Could the Soviet Union have survived the Nazi invasion if the other allies had not been in the war?, or Could the allies have won the war without Soviet participation? are interesting, yet unrealistic historical speculation or war gaming practice for war theorists. Stalin was about as lethal to Soviet subjects before the war as Hitler was during the war. The kulakization policy alone killed I believe, twenty million people. Red Army soldiers fought well, yet the peasant soldier sleeping on the frozen ground in a greatcoat was a tradition reaching far, far back in Russian history under the Tsars. They were badly used during the Second World War by the communists.

Opportunity Rover Was Partly to Blame for New Zealand Shooting

When the Mars Opportunity Rover died and transmitted its last image with all of the pathos of the Martian landscape there is no telling what effect it had on the psyche of the New Zealand shooter. When the final images from Mars went blank and the brave little rover was defeated with barely a squeak in the oppressive cold and dirt flung around that inhospitable world marginalized people faced the loss of opportunity and hope. Thus the way of the gun may have presented as a last chance to relive the memories of the good times and lost world.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/opportunity-final-image-panorama/

https://thinkprogress.org/mick-mulvaney-forced-to-defend-trump-from-charges-of-white-supremacy-fox-news-new-zealand-mosque-shooting-be151f3256d9/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mick-mulvaney-not-fair-to-cast-accused-new-zealand-shooter-as-a-trump-supporter

Alternatively it may have been the prsence of the Opportunity Rover on Mars that enraged the New Zealand shooter and iit last gasp emboldened the shooter to take the headlines for himself. If democrats had financed a manned lunar base with a mass driver constructed to fling supply off world the shooter might have been stifled into peaceful contemplation of the Green New Deal.

image credit NASA- Opportunity Rover 

President Obama Was Far More Aggressive Abroad Than President Trump

President Obama stimulated wars across North Africa and the Middle East. The Syrian war was easily avoidable yet he kept puffing it up with support for revolutionary-guerrilla terrorists that led to more than a million casualties. He ordered a U.S. war on Libya that made room for Al Qaeda and Isis in the wake.

President Obama drove relations with Russia downward to the realm of a new Cold War. His policies were aggressive in support of Europe’s will to annex as much of the former Soviet Union lands as possible, and to create more sales for the defense establishment. Conflict in the Ukraine grew as a possibility. He supplied weapons and intelligence to a region that could have been peacefully joined in prosperous, amicable relations.

President Obama made the Bush II tax cuts permanent when all he needed to do was to let them expire. The tax cuts for the most rich enabled a globe of investments for the 1%ers and Chinese partners too.

President Trump has yet to start a foreign war, increased taxes only moderately (they were already too low), has added just a trillion and a half to the public debt (it should have decreased yet the increase was modest compared to President Obama’s.

President Obama traveled to more foreign countries than President Trump. President Trump has sought to normalize relations with the difficult communist leadership of North Korea. President Obama signed foreign accords such as that of Paris on global warming remediation, while President Trump has not (he should have unilaterally surpassed the Paris accords with innovation).

In my opinion President Obama was far more aggressive.

Quantitative Comparison of White vs Non-White Terrorism Shows Non-Whites WIning

A quantitative analysis and comparison of the numbers of terrorist incidents around the world on a racial basis would have non-whites- mostly Muslims, winning by miles and miles. The United States has fewer Muslim terrorists than it would if it had not spent billions and billions on Homeland Security. That obnoxious airport screening if removed would perhaps allow an airliner to be blow up at least annually if not more often over American skies.

The corporatist media finds white nationalists are the problem though.

https://ourworldindata.org/terrorism

White Nationalism vs White Y Gene Extinction

I don't like the term white nationalism that is popular in the corporate media, pejoratively. There are numerous derivative and collateral connotations associated with it as well as assumptions of what remedies and courses for it are. One must also stipulate that it exists as an actual problem or thing for-itself rather than as a fictitious media creation for political and demographic sales purposes.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/03/violence-new-zealand-echoes-past-terrorist-patterns/585043/

https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/3/15/18267163/new-zealand-shooting-christchurch-white-nationalism-racism-language

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/16/704125736/a-mainstreaming-of-bigotry-as-white-extremism-reveals-its-global-reach

The term in the United States flows from a continuum of pejorative ideas from the old south before the elimination of convict labor rentals to companies and Jim Crow segregation. With the liberation of non-whites and other poor from the old style exploitation the concept of legal compensation appeared as well as affirmative action politics to compensate those exploited previously. All white culture was regarded as an oppressive class instead of just whites of the old south. All male whites except for the most queer liberals were lumped into the class of oppressors by their opponents. Empirically women boosted themselves up and joined with the progeny of former slaves, children of illegal immigrants and Asians in Affirmative Action and a slew of litigation that compelled equal pay for equal government work.

Eventually straight white males were regarded as being an  undeserving insider class of inherited privileges oppressive to affirmative action classes. Support for illegal immigration and any policies that downgraded straight white males so they would be nothing more than proles among equals was accepted as right and proper politics for the left. The grave ecospheric threats that presented including global warming were regarded as arising and continuing because of white corporate activities and culture. The party line went that if women and former minorities were in charge, even with socialism, the result would be a swift return to a decent world where exploitation was gone and nationalism no longer let males wage battles for resources and power over women and non-whites everywhere.

Some extremist white males were traditionalists regarding history and viewed racial life as competition. Such competition has existed for the entire history of human culture and isn't appropriate for addressing the ecospheric challenges facing all humans on Earth. There are of course additional elements that drive societies, races, cultures and imperial aristocrats to battle or subjugate others that are not gone from the world, even nearly. It is ironic that godless evolutionists only that cannot comprehend how theology could incorporate modern physical cosmology tend to divide society and support wars for religious reasons themselves even from within an antipathetic role.

Another irony is purely biological as those passing on just x genes in the U.S.A. are working to exterminate European-American y gene culture. Y genes do not pass on through women. Historically flooding a land area with external, non original cultural y genes has driven out or exterminated the native y gene culture.

Recently a scientific study found that the y gene culture of Iberia in 4500 b.c.- dark haired and blue-eyed farmers, was extirpated over time by an influx of Eastern Europeans. While the female x gene culture could pass on, it was the foreign origin male y gene culture that replaced the former y gene culture that was more native. A similar process is slowly occurring in the United States, and resistance to y gene cultural genocide is a legitimate basis for white nationalism to exist (besides the reasonable desire to keep the founding culture alive so far a possible).

What kept the aboriginal American y gene culture from being entirely exterminated was segregation on reservations. Cultural segregation is requisite for viable continuity of minority y gene culture amidst a very large majority.

The issue of if a racial group of y genes is better than another, or even significantly different, is far beyond by knowledge. It is unfortunate that such issues arise at a time in history when every culture should be doing better where it is to conserve ecospheric resources and ecospheric health while advancing the quality of human life and the technology. Those are challenges that cannot be well addressed by a drunken like mad bull forward rush by men or women of any culture, as they seek to overcome and dominate any polity where they happened to be. Exploitation is bad for humanity in all its forms.

Nations also support political diversity and experimentation that does not exist in one with a solitary world government. Competition is generally good and productive more so than a large village commune under one dictatorship might allow. White culture in the United States has had some strong points in that it supported liberation of oppressed people it regarded as equal. All men are created equal was a basic political idea regarding worth. That idea is not present invariably in white nationalist approaches. White nationalism also creates fear of immoral forms of white assertion such as that of Nazi Germany, and those are reasonable though not well measured fears today. Those fears tend to drive proletariats in U.S. politics toward extermination of white culture, and white y gene culture, that created the concepts that were presented and actualized during the foundation of the United States.

The strong points of white y gene culture might be science and technology, Christianity and constitutional principles of equality of human worth as individuals. Some of those points are absent from racist y gene culture and non-white y gene and xx cultures. The drive to eliminate any genetic culture isn’t in keeping with the strong points of white y gene culture. A greater irony is that the most strong element- Christian faith, is a gift from God to all people equally.

Complicating the issue are underlying extra motivations by numerous actors to degrade the United States intentionally and unintentionally. Corporations for one, seek more market share and product sales, so expanding sales and consumerism to non-white cultures was a practice of white owned and led corporations. Corporations are also usually protrans-nationalism and work too degrade national sovereignty and political power everywhere. Ads on television are leading agents of social change with interracial couples and homosexuals being placed or featured these days. As in the slavery era of the antebellum south, individuals pursue their own immediate, narrow economic interests before those of culture. Corporations, slavers, political leaders and the most rich still tend to pursue their own immediate self interests and regard cultural issues as externalities.

Nationalism is being morphed by the 1%  super rich owned media to equate to white nationalism and thus terrorism. One media writer seemed to think the President of the United States should work to get rid of nationalism.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/17/opinions/presidential-weekly-briefing-nationalism-donald-trump-vinograd/index.html

That would be too convenient for global corporatism, communism and misc. totalitarians.

Free WiIl and the Eternal Coherent Quantum Field

Consider for a minute the nature of free choices. Say that God has created 1000 pre-determined paths and that you, as a kind of intelligent pinball, can roll along any of the paths. If one has conditional freedom, the degrees of freedom are those that one may choose. What number of choices would make one free? What if one were very dumb yet free and could never think of more than one or two things to do? Would free will be limited by that individual or His creator?

Can one be said to be free if one is restricted to being subject to a gravitational field that draws one toward mass? Can a human being in a steady state of mass that is generally made of decohered quantum wave-particle strings from a coherent field of all possible world lines be said to be free? To be is to be in a solid state mass of strings downloaded into particle-waves and a solid-state of matter. Matter exists because of symmetry breaking of all potential locations of coherent particles. Observations of quanta brings symmetry breaking.

The entire symmetry breaking of the Universe that becomes mass could be a result of the observation in the mind of God of quanta that became decohered by design. Is one free then knowing that an eternal coherent quantum field of all possible decoherent forms that fall into space-time thermodynamics, or not? That is the question, much less than those of what the mechanics are of the coherent quantum field that hasn't dimensions and time.

Chelsea Clinton Wasn't at Fault for Criticizing Rep Omar Because of an Australian Mass Killer

I find it hard to believe that the Australian killer Brenton Tarrant was a follower of anything Chelsea Clinton wrote or said. Today, political opponents will smear political targets through association with anything they can, even as vague derivative or parallel maladroit inferences. The criticism of Rep. Omar was self-standing, not to mention the post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy nature of the blame Chelsea Clinton thing. Anti-Islamophobists have been militating against any criticism of Muslims since 9–11. Totalitarian thought and speech controllers might want to rule the world and censor everyone. 

Y genes are passed on just through males. Killers concerned about y gene cultural extinction as happened to dark haired blue-eyed Iberian farmers living there in 4500 b.c. when eastern Europeans moved in and had a lot more children while bumping out the locals probably aren’t concerned about the opinions of x gene progeny of the privileged in some distant place have to say. X genes have a guarantee of survival, y genes require cultural stability for cultural continuity.

The point about general criticism of Islam as somehow inappropriate is wrong considering history. The cult formed in the 7th century has been warlike and expansive in fact and doctrine. It is probably the most intolerant of major religions going on Middle eastern experience. In the Middle East mosques of different sects aren’t allowed to exist in nations with a Sunni or Shia majority. Logically if one is from a Christian majority nation that has overcome its own sectarian issue, letting many Muslims in would be a dangerous way to let a dangerous weed grow. It isn’t very complicated.

The United States formed with more tolerance than most, because their were few people, they were mostly of one Christian religion, and everyone was needed to overthrow the British aristocrats ruling the place. There were brilliant philosophically minded dissidents who wrote a great declaration and constitution that was antipathetic toward aristocracy. Simply because the founders had God’s grace to found the nation does not mean that it necessarily must stand with a flood of millions of immigrants and many illegally that don’t speak one language, have one faith, or even one allegiance. The United States may not only experience more terrorism from more Muslim extremists down the road, it may fade away without a core population with one sentiment and identity.

During the cold war the communist propaganda machine was largely external. Today the anti-American left have internal allies in the broadcast media, deficient theorists in the Democrat Party, and billions of people that would not mind just moving in to take over the United States through demographic supremacy. Being aware of history does not comprise racism. It is o.k. to learn from history and defend the territorial integrity and political identity of the United States.

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/434425-trump-defends-fox-news-hosts-from-attempt-to-silence-them

Humanity tends to evolve technology as well as physiology. When humanity started eating less meat because it evolved agriculture, human teeth no longer needed to bite down on tough meat on edge to edge. Instead the softer diet allowed the upper teeth up front to moved toward an overbite. With that change the f and p words could be pronounced. Human vocabulary a recent article explained began a proliferation of those words just about 2,500 years ago. The United States may be humanity’s last best hope for making a sustainable new ecological economic structure. It already creates ideas for adaptive technology that could support a sustainable human place in a viable and healthy ecosphere. Flooding the nation with chaotic, under-educated immigrants or building religious conflict won’t necessarily be helpful. Though the Clinton administration led the way to moral corruption, Chelsea Clinton is faultless for making valid and appropriate political speech concerning job performance of Rep. Omar.

Fresnel Lens Toilets?

There are a few kinds of waterless toilets in use, including composting toilets, incinolet electric or propane toilets etc. I am not aware of a waterless toilet that uses direct, focused solar energy to burn waste?

For some areas with lots of sunshine focusing solar light on storage tanks to burn it to ash or evaporate it might work. Maybe their would be solar charged battery powered movement of the waste product to the burn tank.

If designers could use polarizing filters and mirrors to add one-way color to safety-glass enclosures the mess could be invisible for-others.

Factoid on China's Political Future

China isn’t going to collapse anytime soon. There are too many people living there to allow a collapse to occur. With more than a billion three-hundred million souls the political structure is a kind of fly-by-wire thing that if turned off would let the jet fly without control into the side of a hill or something. China will evolve governmental changes even with ad hoc structural changes rather than have a black out and fall.

There was a good book published a few years ago named Capital in the Twenty-First Century. The author, Thomas Pickety, examined some of the statistics concerning demographic growth and economic growth in trans-generational configurations historically. People should read it for data regarding classical economic growth (rather than sustainable ecological economics).

New Zealand Shooter and Internet Censorship

During the massacre of mosque-goers in Christchurch New Zealand one of the shooters made a live video with something like a GoPro camera and it was streamed online. It made its way to social media outlets such as Facebook and Youtube before a mob of media companies and news agencies castigated the social media platforms for carrying it. The video was deleted from the social media sites and is very difficult to find.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/live-video-of-new-zealand-mosque-shooting-dodges-social-media-safeguards-11552657931

There are a million ways media and the corporate world track people and their personal business these days through technology, and the 1% own most of the media, so what is inconvenient for corporate goals tends to become marginalized if not censored outright. Deleting history is offensive to those interested in learning and observing for themselves what is what about social events, crimes, etc. Video crimes captured online cannot be allowed to become live entertainment, so it is reasonable to take down live feeds, yet the content should go up into social media after a suitable time has passed- perhaps 30 days, in order for the content to become part of the historical record the public has a right to know.

Social media sites themselves presently are being neutered by the left, and blamed for ads by foreigners that influence American voters, blamed for allowing 'right wing extremists' to post material, and sundry other special crimes or misdemeanors that invade the privacy of users. Governing powers have no concern about conserving the integrity and existence of material posted by writers and image creators to the corporate media that tends to be unreliable in the long run.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/03/zuckerberg-facebook-will-shift-focus-to-private-networks-instead-of-open-ones/

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/11/facebook-removes-elizabeth-warren-ads-1216757

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/07/facebook-privacy-domination

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/4/10/17208322/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-congress-testimony-regulation

I understand that Muslim jihadists post video of people they execute; sometimes with heads being cut off. That material is offensive yet is also part of the historical record. The New Zealand mosque shooting should become archival material at least on Youtube within 30 days.

Corporate owned social media has taken down popular shows on social media such as Prison Planet by Alex Jones, who hasn't killed anyone, simply for offending the left. He was subject to a lawsuit by Sandy Hook people, yet a civil suit or even criminal charges should not be enough to prompt censorship and deletion by Corporate from social media. If one were convicted and in prison, then one could not be available for creating content.

Apparently offending the left is enough to make individuals lose social media rights in the way convicts lose their voting rights in several states. The United States cannot have a free society if people are not free to criticize the government and corporations including media corporations, and free to criticize the 1% for owning the media, and corporations for promoting wrong value theories such that develop Mussolini's philosophy of corporatism in the United States as an actual political fact. The spineless Democrat Party passed Bush II tax cuts permanently to reinforce the concept of the deep state of Republocratic government interested in making pets of the citizens. If they actually wanted to revolt the corporate social media would be sure to censor everything and call it hate speech. That would be especially true if people were to say they hate the government, they hate the media and they hate the 1%. One cannot express a revolutionary level of hate; even if it is deserved, without incurring the wrath of the social media queer minders and their media stooges.

Logicians may not actually experience an emotion rising to the level of hate when realizing the deep inefficiencies of the U.S. Government and the way the corporate system has evolved in the United States. It is needful to leave real content including the unpleasant and offensive, when it becomes part of public history, in the public realm where it to can be considered in understanding who and what actual people have done.

One wants to know if their political leaders and fellow citizens are as daft as they appear in such cases. One might want to know if people perpetrating various crimes for political reasons fit into their social environment in very unusual ways. What one doesn't want is propaganda alone, and the media point of view that is a device the very rich prefer the public to receive.

The left with their corporate leash holders have made hate a symbolic sign for everything antipathetic to their political agenda. It is another Orwellian step too far.