>>26858

I cannot upvote your thread. What do?

>>50326
Make sure to smash the like button harder. Anyway, now that you posted, lean back and wait for the gf to appear.
Reminds me there was this website with a red button in the middle of the page and could only press it.

>>50326
>I cannot upvote your thread. What do?

u gotta click on that little button on the side bernd

>>50327
ebaum's world?

>>50355
No. Maybe ebaums has such. But no.

>>50163
Well I am going based on the video, specifically where he said “Hitler was an idiot, Stalin was a genius, Stalin played Hitler with Barbarossa”

How can any of that be true? Barbarossa was one of the worst military disasters in world history?

Suvorov does bring into account the Soviet perspective that is often forgotten in the West, but there is ample evidence on the German side that the attack was premeditated with the goal of the destruction of the USSR.

Stalin probably did have confidence that, in the event of a war, the USSR would be in Berlin by fall of 1941. Who cares? It shows how out of touch he was, not how genius and powerful he was.

>>50162
>Former GRU officer says Russia is strong and can do no wrong and their leader is the smartest man in the world
Plus Suvorov did not say that at all.
>>50159
>"our mistakes are actually strengths you just don't know how strong we are fear us" line.
Neither this.
Nowhere Suvorov says getting beaten by the German at the launch of Barbarossa was part of the plan.
He clearly says the German attack collapsed all the Soviet plans. It's the other way around.

You note Crimea and Donbas and Mariupol, pulling current events into the discussion tells me you extrapolate from the current stance of Moscow, that if a plan fails they just say they did not want to achieve that - or at least what you think is the current stance of moscow.
Another problem with this that Moscow nowhere stated what they wanted with the initial attack.
They did not claimed beforehand that they wanted to capture Kiev. We, the outsiders, guess that it was in the plans (yeah, they really thought it will be like a 2nd, Crimea maybe I'll write about this too).
But they can freely claim they did not want to capture Kiev, they just wanted to distract forces from the south and such. We don't know for sure and can't know for sure.

>>50164
>Stalin played Hitler with Barbarossa
This was never said by anyone.

>>50152
That's a controversial subject around these parts.

Well, now that he probably isn't here, it's time to reply in more earnest. Probably will go on in a couple of posts in the following days.

First back to the previous post, just above >>50166
Stalin played Hitler to get into a war with France and Great Britain. Barbarossa was an unseen event by him, it took him by surprise. Suvorov spent time on explaining this too (eg. warning from Churchill, or the sheep price index).
We have to remember in the interwar era there was no CIA to play anyone on Earth, or US based multinational giants to buy the rest. All the major powers had their independent will, which wasn't subordinated to the US master. They had their foreign politics and secret services weaving a web to catch all the others and further the cause of their own country. It wasn't a two sided game of the Cold War.
Communism had quite a few sympathizers all over the world, and recruiting agents for the SU was easy. Stalin was also a devious psychopath who played the Soviet Game of Thrones, and outsmarted all the competing Jews. Furthermore it would be a mistake to confuse the various eras of the Soviet Union, these aren't Andropov times with the lazy corruption and high level of inefficiency.
The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact not just allowed the SU to act unchecked inside the limits of the agreed border of influence, but it allowed to get into a serious war with France and GB for Germany. One of Moscow's goals was pushing Germany into that mire they expected the war to be. They calculated well the war started. But they did expect what noone expected that Germany will breeze through several countries including France. So that was a failure, they wanted the Germans to bogged down for years in the West as they did in WWI. And failing to recognize they are next are partially for the wishful thinking that the Germans are preparing the landing in Britain.
On the side note they surely observed curiously the Blitz, which had some resemblance to their Deep Operation/Battle doctrine.

While I was browsing through Youtube I noticed a video about Naruto powerlevels and it had Tenten in it so I watched it because I like her.
They ranked her lower than Choji and other characters which I felt was odd and I wondered why they would do that so I looked her up on google and there is a Naruto wiki and the wiki mentioned data books that actually had stats for the characters listed. And in these books she has a higher level than Choji, so the people that made this video were wrong and just making things up even though there is a canonical source for such things.
This really annoys me.

Barett is Australian now.

https://www.thedefensepost.com/2023/01/19/australia-nioa-buys-barrett/

>>49664
Good for Australia I guess.
There is no news if they have some extra plan with them? Just continue manufacturing the barretts, or they want to do something new with their expertise?

Interesting, so it go full circle. Germany is talking about buying Boxers from us.

https://www.thedefensepost.com/2023/03/08/germany-boxer-vehicle-australia/

>>49934
German companies can't produce enough?

>>48032
How is the education level in Russia? It seems to be a trend on imageboards for people to promote studying there but there must be something happening in the background I assume.
That being said, I don't think studying there can't be as bad taking into account institutions tend to insert useless subjects involving social sciences on universities here. After finishing my current studies I would like to get into studying something related to computer science there, possibly robotics, maths or nanotechnology if only to see what could happen.

>>48057
>How is the education level in Russia?

I can't answer this question completely because I had no education except Russian one, so can't compare. It is very diverse, from relatively good to completely bad. There are "big" universities with long history like MGU, MFTI, MIFI etc, some "medium" ones (also with history but not so famous), plenty of small ones that mostly take your money. Big ones may be very different depending on department. I've studied in big one and can say that it was relatively difficult, but some people from other faculties had easy mode for all 5 years.

Russian high education has some specific that foreigners wouldn't understand. For example, most of men go to university not for education but to avoid conscription (especially in past, when it was 2 years). There is also some specifics from Soviet time, when USSR overproduced engineers and higher education became some kind of necessity for average person, even if he don't know anything after university. There are plenty of jokes about vacancies of janitors that have university education as requirement. These things lead to situation when average student go to university not for education but just for diploma, so university staff also don't care too much about education in this circumstances. Although it all depends on you. If you want to learn something, you will.

I don't really know how different is education of foreigners though. Our group had 3 foreigners from Uzbekistan, they were sent by some industrial company that payed for their education. They didn't study anything and in the end they decided to stay in Russia, tricking that company to "forgot" that they had contract (I guess they've just bribed someone). Only thing I remember about them is that they were ok with drinking beer with us because "Allah wouldn't see us here" (c). There were also completely foreign groups (from Vietnam or Cambodia, don't know) who didn't know Russian and were rarely seen.

>It seems to be a trend on imageboards

I don't think that it is good advice.

>institutions tend to insert useless subjects involving social sciences on universities here.

This happens here too. For example, we (metallurgical engineers) had course of Russian language (lol), course of Philosophy (where first words of professor literally were "you all dirt and shit, I don't want to see all of you"), oversized math course that is completely unrelated to our profession etc.

>>48057
>How is the education level in Russia?
I'd assume varying level as everywhere. How proficient will you be on a field depends on yourself what you are willing to learn besides they give you on universities. There is a false assumption that universities give you a working knowledge on a field you can do a job, accomplish a work. They could give you a foundation, or a set of information which makes you familiar with concepts, which then helps you learn your actual job when you found one.
You yourself have to seek out the sources of knowledge, and acquire that knowledge, and do practical things to be a master of the thing that makes you stand out from the crowd of mediocre students and makes others - professors, people working in that industry - interested in you, and help you with your carrier by providing opportunities.
You have to have an entrepreneurial/adventurous mindset to move your arse and actually do something, participate in things and put yourself close to opportunities which you can recognize and exploit. Otherwise doesn't matter what university you are student of.
Or have rich, influential parents with connections, who secure a career for you.
>trend on imageboards for people to promote studying there
I did not notice this.
Do you think it is a good idea to listen anonymous people on imageboards (beside this board ofc, we only give good advis, based on legit information)?

>>48057 >>48060
>institutions tend to insert useless subjects involving social sciences on universities here.
>This happens here too
Yeah, filler subjects are everywhere. Sometimes (frequently) they are politically motivated, sometimes just because they have to fill the curriculum, and they have to work with the professors available, who work on certain fields. Sometimes both.

>>48057
>computer science there, possibly robotics, maths or nanotechnology

>>48064
About filler subjects, I used to think the same but now I wonder.
I studied computer science and I had philosophy and some social thing science and I kind of enjoyed it. Its like it was engaging different part of your brain, teachers weren't harsh on us, so we could relax a bit there while still gaining some knowledge. Not directly related to computer science ofc but might be still useful (since as an engineer you're probably still going to be dealing with other people), and even if this isn't the case it might be helping you grow as a person in other areas. People do philosophy all the time since everyone nowadays needs to have opinion on everything, so might as well get some education to do it slightly better. Even my proffessors of purely technical subjects would do that, like my algorithm teacher lecturing us that yeah we should ban people from driving once we get automated cars good enough since it kills less people and therefore it is moral thing to do.
I think the idea is, and I can get behind it, that people with higher education should be above the ordinary men and not just a specialised worker in a company. Therefore this education should include broader topics, to sort of make you more into this renessaince man. I think it'd be beneficial if both students and their teachers didn't think about those subjects as fillers.

When a trading post was established somewhere by the colonizers what were the main buildings they erected there?
They obviously built some kind of a stockade as a defensible strong point, and there had to be a harbor. What else?