Search the Community

Bit of a gamer & designer/playtester all my life. Some military & historical background... What's your favorite wargame (et al)? Board or computer...no matter. Some of the new ones are remarkable... For example... War of Rights...MMO US Civil War...FPS w/ musket and bayonet.

If the Ukrainian - Russian war will end with some sort of agreement or cease-fire, in my opinion, one man will come out of all this as a sort of Messiah: Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan told his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin that the meeting between the US and Russian intelligence services was important to prevent an "uncontrolled" escalation in the field, the Turkish presidency announced on Friday, Reuters reports. Lesson for people out there. If you have issues in life, think about Erdogan, this man barely survived an internal coup to come back with an image as a saviour. And not only that, Turkey is pulling strings and benefits from both sides in this conflict. This man is what I call a skilled politician for one side. Now I understand why his people died in the streets in Ankara, Istanbul against the Gullen attempted coup to maintain his power. but this man has issues too, authoritarian issues, but that is for another thread. You don't have to like a man to respect his commitment to his interests.

In terms of the Russian athletes participating in the Olympics, where do you stand? a) Allow them to participate but under no flag. b) Allow them to participate with a full flag, like it was a couple of years ago. c) Do not allow them to participate at all. Myself, I am still thinking about my view. I don't think b) is an option for me. The CBC article below gave me this random idea to start a poll: https://www.cbc.ca/sports/russia-sports-ban-one-year-1.6756198

In Czech Republic, one can see if the war in Ukraine has changed the view of the population. So far, good news for Europe, NATO and our Western Alliance. The populist side in Czech Republic even accepted the Communist Party support. 😄 --- Retired general and former NATO official Petr Pavel led billionaire ex-prime minister Andrej Babis by a nearly 18-point margin ahead of a Czech presidential election run-off vote, according to the final Ipsos agency poll published on Monday. Pavel was polling at 58.8% to 41.2% for Babis in the survey conducted on Jan. 20-22. The two candidates meet in the second round of the election on Jan. 27-28. ---> Pavel (picture 1), an independent backed by the centre-right government, has projected a clear pro-Western policy stance and support for Ukraine in its defence against Russian aggression. ---> The populist, Babis (picture 2), who heads the largest opposition political party, won the backing of retiring President Milos Zeman as well as figures from the extreme fringes of the political scene, including the pro-Russian former ruling Communist Party. Zeman had favoured closer ties with China and Russia, until Moscow's invasion of Ukraine last year. Sources: ABC News and my commentary 😃

Another day, another diplomatic crisis for the Biden administration. U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin worked the phones with Turkish officials in Ankara, trying to stave off a full-scale incursion by Turkish forces into northern Syria. And separately, James Jeffrey, a former U.S. ambassador to Turkey, was in Ankara to meet with Hulusi Akar, Turkey’s defense minister, in person. Having a Pentagon chief dial up his Turkish counterpart hasn’t exactly stopped the United States’ NATO frenemy from wreaking havoc on Syria before, where around 900 U.S. troops are still based to help the Pentagon-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) (most of them Kurdish) fight off the remnants of the Islamic State. See 2019, when U.S. troops stood aside at the order of then-U.S. President Donald Trump, allowing a Turkish incursion into Syria. “An invasion into the Kurdish areas of Syria and the direct targeting of elements of the [Syrian Democratic Forces] will do just that,” said Mick Mulroy, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense during the Trump administration. “Turkey has an absolute right to defend itself, but if it is attacking our partner [by] force, it needs to produce evidence that they were involved. If they cannot, the U.S. should insist they cease those operations.” It’s already clear how disruptive another Turkish attack into Syria could be. Last week, a Turkish airstrike hit less than 1,000 feet from where U.S. forces are based in al-Hasakah. But stopping a Turkish incursion at the same time as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan faces a sagging lira, skyrocketing inflation, and a war on the other side of the Black Sea with Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine could be a different matter from three years ago. “There is no doubt that [the Islamic State] will benefit more than anyone else from this Turkish offensive,” SDF commander Gen. Mazloum Abdi said on Monday, as the group prepared to reposition forces away from the Islamic State fight to deal with the possibility of a Turkish onslaught. Erdogan already used a rally of his Justice and Development Party to brag about the strikes into Syria that Turkey has carried out in recent days and a possible ground invasion to follow, making former officials worried that the window for diplomacy may be closing. “I think we’re late to it,” said Jonathan Lord, a senior fellow and director of the Middle East security program at the Center for a New American Security, a Washington think tank. “He has already politically walked himself out onto the branch.” If the Turks do push for an incursion, then it might look a lot like the combination of airstrikes and ground invasion from 2019. The only difference, with strikes already wounding guards at the embattled Islamic State prison camp at al-Hol and knocking out power stations, is that it could be even more devastating, experts said. “The stakes are a little bit higher,” Lord said. “Already, we’ve seen Turkish strikes target in and around al-Hol and killing guards. A breakout from al-Hol would be incredibly problematic. The strikes, by displacing people, by destabilizing the area, create problems on their own.” https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/01/turkey-syria-invasion-attack-us-kurds/

The Long-Term Costs of the Ukraine War Will Be Staggering: After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February, the Russian economy seemed destined for a nosedive. International sanctions threatened to strangle the economy, leading to a plunge in the value of the ruble and Russian financial markets. Everyday Russians appeared poised for privation. More than eight months into the war, this scenario has not come to pass. Indeed, some data suggest that the opposite is true, and the Russian economy is doing fine. The ruble has strengthened against the dollar, and although Russian GDP has shrunk, the contraction may well be limited to less than three percent in 2022. Look behind the moderate GDP contraction and inflation figures, however, and it becomes evident that the damage is in fact severe: the Russian economy is destined for a long period of stagnation. The state was already interfering in the private sector before the war. That tendency has become only more pronounced, and it threatens to further stifle innovation and market efficiency. The only way to preserve the viability of the Russian economy is either through major reforms—which are not in the offing—or an institutional disruption similar to the one that occurred with the fall of the Soviet Union. The misapprehension of what sanctions against Russia would accomplish can be explained in part by unrealistic expectations of what economic measures can do. Simply put, they are not the equivalent of a missile strike. Yes, in the long run, sanctions can weaken the economy and lower GDP. But in the short run, the most one can reasonably hope for is a massive fall in Russia’s imports. It is only natural that the ruble strengthens rather than weakens as the demand for dollars and euros drops. And as the money that would have been spent on imports is redirected towards domestic production, GDP should in fact rise rather than fall. The effect of sanctions on consumption and quality of life take longer to work their way through the economy. At the beginning of the war, in February and early March, Russians rushed to buy dollars and euros to protect themselves against a potential plunge in the ruble. Over the next eight months, with Russian losses in Ukraine mounting, they bought even more. Normally, this would have caused a significant devaluation of the ruble because when people buy foreign currency, the ruble plunges. Because of sanctions, however, companies that imported goods before the war stopped purchasing currency to finance these imports. As a result, imports fell by 40 percent in the spring. One consequence was that the ruble strengthened against the dollar. In short, it was not that sanctions did not work. On the contrary, their short-term effect on imports was unexpectedly strong. Such a fall in imports was not expected. If Russia’s central bank had anticipated such a massive fall, it would not have had introduced severe restrictions on dollar deposits in March to prevent a collapse in the value of the ruble. Economic sanctions did, of course, have other immediate effects. Curbing Russia’s access to microelectronics, chips, and semiconductors made production of cars and aircraft almost impossible. From March to August, Russian car manufacturing fell by an astonishing 90 percent, and the drop in aircraft production was similar. The same holds true for the production of weapons, which is understandably a top priority for the government. Expectations that new trade routes through China, Turkey, and other countries that are not part of the sanctions regime would compensate for the loss of Western imports have been proved wrong. The abnormally strong ruble is a signal that back-door import channels are not working. If imports were flowing into Russia through hidden channels, importers would have been buying dollars, sending the ruble down. Without these critical imports, the long-term health of Russia’s high-tech industry is dire. Even more consequential than Western technology sanctions is the fact that Russia is unmistakably entering a period in which political cronies are solidifying their hold over the private sector. This has been a long time in the making. After the 2008 global financial crisis hit Russia harder than any other G20 country, Russian President Vladimir Putin essentially nationalized large enterprises. In some cases, he placed them under direct government control; in other cases, he placed them under the purview of state banks. To stay in the government’s good graces, these companies have been expected to maintain a surplus of workers on their payrolls. Even enterprises that remained private have in essence been prohibited from firing employees. This did provide the Russian people with economic security—at least for the time being—and that stability is a critical part of Putin’s compact with his constituents. But an economy in which enterprises cannot modernize, restructure, and fire employees to boost profits will stagnate. Not surprisingly, Russia’s GDP growth from 2009 to 2021 averaged 0.8 percent per year, lower than the period in the 1970s and 1980s that preceded the collapse of the Soviet Union. Even before the war, Russian businesses faced regulations that deprived them of investment. Advanced industries such as energy, transportation, and communication—that is, those that would have benefited the most from foreign technology and foreign investment—faced the greatest restrictions. To survive, companies operating in this space were forced to maintain close ties with government officials and bureaucrats. In exchange, these government protectors ensured that these businesses faced no competition. They outlawed foreign investment, passed laws that put onerous burdens on foreigners doing business in Russia, and opened investigations against companies operating without government protection. The result was that government officials, military generals, and high-ranking bureaucrats—many of them Putin’s friends—became multimillionaires. The living standards of ordinary Russians, in contrast, have not improved in the past decade. Since the beginning of the war, the government has tightened its grip over the private sector even further. Starting in March, the Kremlin rolled out laws and regulations that give the government the right to shut down businesses, dictate production decisions, and set prices for manufactured goods. The mass mobilization of military recruits that started in September is providing Putin with another cudgel to wield over Russian businesses because to preserve their workforces, company leaders will need to bargain with government officials to ensure that their employees are exempt from conscription. To be sure, the Russian economy has long operated under a government stranglehold. But Putin’s most recent moves are taking this control to a new level. As the economists Andrei Shleifer and Robert Vishny have argued, the one thing worse than corruption is decentralized corruption. It’s bad enough when a corrupt central government demands bribes; it is even worse when several different government offices are competing for handouts. Indeed, the high growth rates of Putin’s first decade in office were in part due to how he centralized power in the Kremlin, snuffing out competing predators such as oligarchs operating outside of the government’s fold. The emphasis on creating private armies and regional volunteer battalions for his war against Ukraine, however, is creating new power centers. That means that decentralized corruption will almost certainly resurface in Russia. That could create a dynamic reminiscent of the 1990s, when Russian business owners relied on private security, mafia ties, and corrupt officials to maintain control of newly privatized enterprises. Criminal gangs employing veterans of the Russian war in Afghanistan offered “protection” to the highest bidder or simply plundered profitable businesses. The mercenary groups that Putin created to fight in Ukraine will play the same role in the future. Russia could still eke out a victory in Ukraine. It’s unclear what winning would look like; perhaps permanent occupation of a few ruined Ukrainian cities would be packaged as a triumph. Alternatively, Russia could lose the war, an outcome that would make it more likely that Putin would lose power. A new reformist government could take over and withdraw troops, consider reparations, and negotiate a lifting of trade sanctions. No matter the outcome, however, Russia will emerge from the war with its government exercising authority over the private sector to an extent that is unprecedented anywhere in the world aside from Cuba and North Korea. The Russian government will be omnipresent yet simultaneously not strong enough to protect businesses from mafia groups consisting of demobilized soldiers armed with weapons they acquired during the war. Particularly at first, they will target the most profitable enterprises, both at the national and local level. For the Russian economy to grow, it will need not only major institutional reforms but also the kind of clean slate that Russia was left with in 1991. The collapse of the Soviet state made institutions of that era irrelevant. A long and painful process of building new institutions, increasing state capacity, and reducing corruption followed—until Putin came to power and eventually dismantled market institutions and built his own system of patronage. The lesson is grim: even if Putin loses power and a successor ushers in significant reforms, it will take at least a decade for Russia to return to the levels of private-sector production and quality of life the country experienced just a year ago. Such are the consequences of a disastrous, misguided war. https://foreignaffairs.com/russian-federation/russias-road-economic-ruin

Today we observe major military conflict that is developing now between two largest countries in Europe. It happened that no one stands on the sidelines and the warfare went far beyond the battlefield long ago. We do not intend to make any moral judgements, except that every war is horrible, we just state that non-military organisations are trying to impact the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. Sometimes the scale of such an impact is so substantial that these parties can be fully considered as war participants. Public relations has been always an effective tool of managing and disseminating information. What is more, PR agencies not only deliver the massage, they influence people’s perception of this message. The Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA) is the world’s largest professional PR body. PRCA officials were among the first who made statements about the war in Ukraine. The mood of these claims made explicit whose side they support. PRCA director-general Francis Ingham said: “I simply felt unable in good conscience to be associated with anything Russian given the war unleashed by Russia’s president” The organisation has also urged its members to consider the reputational consequences of working for companies that are not sanctioned by the UK Government but have links with Russia. In March 2022, PRCA among with another UK PR agency ICCO (International Communications Consultancy Organisation) established a new project – The Ukraine Communication Support Network (UCSN) “to coordinate volunteer communications activity in support of the people of Ukraine”. In fact, the project is designed to promote the Ukrainian narrative and damage the reputation of Russia. For instance, UCSN pushes forward newsletters about military situation in Ukraine released by the Ukrainian think-tank the Centre for Russian Studies. The letters are intended to “inform and educate” international, English-speaking media and politicians. In other words, ‘legitimate’ Ukrainian propaganda replaces ‘malicious’ Russian disinformation. Several initiatives advertised by UCSN look simply absurd. Letter ‘Z’ that is considered as symbol of Russian invasion of Ukraine was suggested to be removed from the name of popular brands. It is remarkable that such garbage ideas turn into reality. For example, in March 2022, Zurich Insurance Group retired its short logo (a white Z in a blue circle) due to the symbol becoming associated with the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Next step might be total abolishment of letter Z from the English alphabet. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The largest and the most influential PR agencies play a critical part in the military conflict in Ukraine. These organisations affect people’s understanding of what is happening in the world. In fact, they decide what is right and what is wrong as well as determine and legitimate current scheme of values.

The defeat of fascism was achieved by the teamwork of the states of the anti-Hitler coalition and the resistance forces in the occupied countries, and each of the countries at that time contributed to the victory by playing their roles in this world battle. However, the contribution of the Soviet Union is greatly diminished, despite the fact that their contribution was significant, decisive and crushing (Russia's losses amounted to 27 million people!!). Indeed, thanks to their army in 1945, our brothers, fathers and grandfathers did not die in a fierce struggle with the Japanese in the Pacific Ocean (Guadalcanal, Peleliu, Okinawa, etc.), 11 European countries were freed from Nazi oppression, and the defeat of the main Nazi bloc forces ensured the unconditional surrender of Germany and Japan.

Im currently a grade 12 student who started an Initiative to Inform Youth about Politics and World Issues. I started this podcast in the summer of 2019 after seeing the lack of attention being given to the Canadain election of 2019. My older friends were not voting, and if they were voting, they voted without the proper knowledge. That led me to create this podcast where I try to inform the youth about world issues and politics, and hopefully encourage them to vote. CHECK IT OUT HERE & TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK

The life of any soldier who has fallen into a military conflict epicenter is definitely impossible to be called sweet, and especially if he falls out of his usual life conditions, into the humid climate of Asian countries and suffers from eternal thirst and humidity, attacks of tropical insects and "landscapes" of countless deaths. But is this an excuse for the endless atrocities of the US Army, for which soldiers get no punishment? Obviously, the ordinary recruit is not able to withstand such psychological pressure, and sooner or later he “breaks down” and is forced to relieve moral tension. Unfortunately, there couldn’t be any better means than the narcotic and alcoholic substances that the doctors had at their disposal on the battlefield. The power of the impact of easily accessible "entertainment" and psychological pressure from the command pushed the soldiers to immoral crimes: killing and raping civilians, unjustified shooting in villages and dropping bombs where there were not any enemies. Some US Army soldiers in Vietnam even compared the desire to kill with itching: Lieutenant Paul Medlow said that he “felt moral satisfaction” by killing civilians. As for the Koreans, more than a million civilians were exterminated in the most terrible ways during the American occupation of North Korea. The US Army burned thousands people alive every day, including women and children. Also, “human values defenders” loved medieval tortures and executions: quartering, impaling through the genitals, ripping up the pregnant women, etc. Even Hitler could not organize genocide in the occupied territories on such a scale. It is inconceivable, but similar atrocities occur to this day in Japan, where American soldiers serve at their military bases. Many of the bases (for example, on Okinawa island) are located near the cities whose residents are constantly subjected to violence and robbery, for which they constantly protest and demand the elimination of US military bases from the Japanese territory. However, in 90% of cases, the military do not get any punishment for what they have done, because they use the rights of extraterritoriality. That is, they are responsible for everything before the American court (which calmly closes the cases and acquits them). So, for decades, the US army treats Japanese citizens from the position of occupiers and continues to commit atrocities, knowing that for this they will have nothing but a reprimand. And a "vicious circle" comes: the incident - the anger and protests of the Japanese population - an apology from the American command and the promise to fix everything - and again the incidents. The US Army has never been a place where citizens of the “freest country” would strive for. Throughout almost the entire history of America, its army has been a cross between a punitive corps and a gang of thugs who cannot be left free in a country where anyone can walk around with a gun.

A major new report about the Syrian war raises the question of whether Washington ever cared about it in the first place. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/03/the-united-states-is-done-caring-about-syria/

In August 2019, the fate of the INF will be finally decided. On February 2, 2019, the American side announced the suspension of the implementation of the Treaty between the USSR and the USA. This situation is quite in the spirit of Washington: this is not the first, and perhaps not the last treaty, which the States neglect. In 2001, America unilaterally withdrew from the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems of 1972, which was considered an integral part of the entire system of control over strategic offensive arms. During Trump’s presidency, the States renegotiated a free trade zone agreement between the United States, Canada and Mexico, withdrew from the UN climate agreement and the Iran nuclear deal. The INF was of great historical importance, it was the first Soviet-American treaty that not only limited weapons production, but also significantly reduced it. The USSR and the United States signed a treaty in 1987 with the aim of curbing the arms race that broke out in the second half of the 1970s. By agreement, the United States and the USSR have committed themselves not to produce, test or deploy ballistic and cruise ground-based missiles of medium (from 1,000 to 5,500 kilometers) and short (from 500 to 1,000 kilometers) range. Moreover, America and the USSR pledged to destroy all launchers and land-based missiles with a range of from 500 to 5,500 kilometers for three years. The United States has been talking about withdrawing from the Treaty for the first time, declaring its bilateral effectiveness ineffective. “The motto of the INF policy should be as follows: expand it or destroy it,” said Bolton in the Wall Street Journal in collaboration with former Deputy Secretary of State Paula de Sutter. Russia has not adhered to the INF Treaty, and the provisions of the Treaty do not apply to China at all. It was the behavior of the Russian side that, according to the States, was the reason for withdrawing from the treaty. The United States blamed Russia for the fact that, developed for the modernization of the operational-tactical missile complex Iskander-M, the new 9M729 missile violates the Treaty because it has a range of over 500 km. Moreover, Washington ignored the briefing given by the Russian Ministry of Defense, which demonstrated the tactical and technical characteristics of the new missile. In turn, the Russian side has accumulated a lot of complaints about the US observance of its part of the Treaty. Moscow demanded the destruction of the MK-41 universal launchers deployed on land, designed to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles; target missiles with similar characteristics to medium-range and shorter-range ground-based ballistic missiles (for testing anti-ballistic missile defense systems); as well as the destruction of strike unmanned aerial vehicles, which, according to their characteristics, meet the definition of the term “cruise missile of a land-based. Russian requirements remained unanswered. It is easy to predict what the next disregard of Washington may lead to. And the States themselves do not hide the fact that the goal of withdrawing from the treaty is to increase military pressure on the PRC and, most likely, short-range and medium-range US missiles will be placed primarily in Japan and the Republic of Korea. Furthermore, by abandoning the INF Treaty, the United States will be able to deploy ground-based missiles with a range of up to 5.5 thousand kilometers in close proximity to Russian borders, for example, in Poland and the Baltic countries. Obviously, the next step will be the US withdrawal from the “New Start”. Thus, the last treaty controlling the situation with nuclear weapons will disappear. This, in turn, will lead to an unrestricted nuclear arms race and heightening the risks of a nuclear war.

After Astana talks where the Syrian gov't and opposition representatives met for the first time Russia provided a draft constitution for Syria. Nevertheless, all sides of conflict refused to accept the document and intended to use it as a basis for their own projects. So, the next meeting of the warring sides is scheduled on late February in Geneva. What should we expect from the next round of talks there? Are the sides expected to propose their own constitution drafts?

It seems America is determined to antagonize China over those tiny Spratly islands that nobody wanted until natural gas and oil was discovered five years ago. Vietnam, and the Phillipines have their own military forces and mutual defense treaties with America, yet America keeps provoking China claiming they will put nuclear subs in the Philippines. Sorry to say, but it seems as if they want to provoke a conflict in the South China Sea - not avoid one. So if the shit hits the proverbial fan, should Canada get involved with troops, arms, or anything more than verbal support, if even that?

Canada has always been a loyal ally to the U.S. But is there a limit to this loyalty as Chretien once demonstrated? Will too much loyalty to America kill and terrorize more Canadians for no justiafiable reasons? At first I was of the attitude "Kill all those damn terrorists" until I read this article and realize that if some foreign troops invaded and occupied Canada because our leader refused to turn over Canada's oil fields for pennies on the dollar, we'd also be pissed off. And if we came home from work one day and found our home smoldering in flames and our spouse and kids charred black like coal from some stray missile, we would also be outraged and called "patriots" to seek revenge on the barbaric bastards responsible for the war crime. So today my opinion is a little more objective. Read this and see if your truly disagree or if you are just trying to be politically correct or a false patriot http://www.globalresearch.ca/prime-minister-stephen-harper-and-canadian-war-crimes-in-afghanistan/24473 This is why IMO Harper has helped to increase terrorism in the world today. Real terrorism must be stopped, but drones impose terrorism from 30,000 feet and Harper implicitly condones this by unconditionally supporting American policies in Afghanistan and Iraq. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147 The UN and 57 countries have agreed that drones = terrorism and the war in Afghanistan is illegal. So should Canada really be fighting America's illegal war? Before you answer just think about how fairly America has treated Canada on past lumber and trade deals. Do they really deserve such unconditional loyalty or do we have the right to say "No Thank You" once in a while?

Ruthlessness Of The Religious Made Billions Suffer (Killer Shot 101) Everything in the bible (or any other book of any other religion for that matter) aside from the fundamental lie of that religion was stolen from society, from the paranormal, from the Earth itself, from the dead and from the living. the religious steal every name that they like then they like to attribute what they steal to their foundation of factually proven lies, They steal the cross from the dead and try to attribute it to their foundation of lies. A thousands years before some human carved out of stone what they call the ten commandments, do you think that you would want your possessions stolen, your family killed etc. Long before some guy got what the religious call crucified, the cross was used to mark a grave of the dead simply because if you see a stick poking out of the ground you may not think much of it but if you see another stick fixed crossing it you would then recognize the significance of a grave for thousands of years before some guy got crucified then they with a stolen cross use it to propagate their religious foundations of lies. The religious steal everything they can from society, every story within any religious scripture etc. is stolen from society and is sickly twisted with lies to propagate that religions foundation of lies. The religious steal Morality from humans and still to this day they attempt to attribute what they steal from us to their sickly devised foundations of factually proven lies. These are the tools that the selfish and the greedy use to take advantage of those from a time of weakness for power and control over the many. What was your weakness, were you an innocent little baby? Did you just lose a loved one? Were you lonely? Were you homeless or starving was you time of weakness when the religious preyed upon you? Did you just get raped? Did you just get in or out of jail?~ could be a time of weakness for some. Did you see some eye candy walk into some religious filth hole? the list goes on. It is sickening, it has make the world sick for thousands of years and it has got to stop so that we may all then finally move on after thousands of years of war and divide leading to the death of millions if not billions over nothing more than foolish pathetic yet deceptive filthy religious factually proven foundations of lies. The foundation of every religion is some ridiculous story about how everything came to be. Again I will include the non contestable factual information that proves every religion is based upon a foundation of lies within this very article. The non contestable factual evidence which proves the foundation of every religion is based upon lies with an additional paragraph for support: It takes energy matter and time to re create energy and matter, not anything goes poof into existence out of nothingness and not anything that exists goes poof into nothingness which is proof that energy matter and time always was, is and always will be because the only thing that doesn't change is that change occurs and that is because energy matter and time are always present. Nothing is able to come into existence, let alone be able to process a thought or put that thought into motion via action without there first be the energy matter and time it takes to re create energy and matter which proves that there is no such thing as a god. (foundation of religion is some ridiculous story of how we / everything came to be! Which is the very non contestable evidence which not only so easily proves that there is no such thing as a god, but that the very foundation / fundamental of every religion is based upon lies. 　 At best there is some alien life form [of which again "For anything to first develop intelligence, or come into existence to develop an intelligence, or use that intelligence come up with a plan or put that plan into motion (to first be able to create / re create) it takes three things, it takes energy matter and time to re create energy and matter."] taking credit for what even created it thus proving again this alien is no more than a liar for taking credit for what even created it / us and everything throughout the universe in it's present form! Praying or worshiping is a disgusting sign of ignorance towards respecting your environments for what they do or do not provide for you. All these people of all of these religions who's fundamental is a lie known as god pray to or worship this lie/god thus acknowledging that they also believe that this lie/god has intellect to be able to understand worship or prayers to begin with. Yet for anything to first come into existence to be able to develop an intellect or to use that intellect to put a plan into motion thus re create with the energy and matter already present, it first takes energy matter and time to re create energy and matter for any of this to first occur because again not anything goes poof into existence out of nothingness and not anything that exists goes poof into nothingness. Paragraph for support: I have noticed that upon several occasions during interaction with people on various web sites that immediately after reading that which has already been shared, they then have the nerve to ignore that which was already in what they just read and ask me well where did energy and matter come from then? The answer as already revealed within that very demonstration: Proof that energy matter and time always was, is and always will be is that it takes energy matter and time to re create energy and matter. Again not anything goes poof into existence out of nothingness and not anything that exists goes poof into nothingness. You want to contest any of this as fact then quite simply share one factual example of anything going poof into existence out of nothingness or just one factual example of anything that exists going poof into nothingness. No one ever will share even one example and I know this quite simply because the fact remains that it takes energy matter and time to re create energy and matter! Just because we all suffered war and divide over filthy religious lies for thousands of years because previous generations were too ignorant too address this problem appropriately doesn't mean we have to drag our future generations down / dump this garbage on them! Our future generations deserve better as does all life on this planet that ever existed! The question is do you value lies more than you value life, and if you value life than you must realize that the only place for religion is in the garbage. Remember, if you decide to continue to cling to religion like a dung beetle clings to it's food just remember you encourage lies and deception for power and control over the many from a time of weakness which has lead the globe to war and divide for thousands of years and yes again to the death of millions if not billions over pathetic filthy lies, but me I am not weak and I see through all the fundamental lies of all / every religion and that is just for starters. Go ahead read up on some articles I have written in my profile. Earth, everyone's mother. We all share the same umbilical chord to her via we sleep, eat, drink, live, keep entertained or busy on her in reflection of the Sun my brothers and my sisters of the sweet landscapes and waterways of Earth love David Jeffrey Spetch Ps. Be good, Be strong!