Salvete.
Today, I thought I'd start an annual series on my favorite military weapons coming out this year, based strictly on what http://militaryfactory.com/ tells me about them. As a disclaimer, I know practically nothing about military weapons. The weapons will be judged based on how they look, basic statistics, and general things that I like about them. So, without further ado, let's look into the military weaponry of this year:
The Plaustrum Tank of the Year is, by default, China's Main Battle Tank 3000. What I like about the tank is, well, the retro name, the long history with previous Russian and Chinese tanks, and the large arsenal that accompanies the tank. The website is http://militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=624.
The Plaustrum Military Firearm of the Year goes to the Pindad SS4. It's Indonesian but made by a Belgian company. It a standard rifle, but the rifle's rival was the AK-12 (AK-200), the Call of Duty of assault rifles, so it was the best option. The site is http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=596.
The Plaustrum Military Aircraft of the year was the Italian Alenia Aermacchi M-346 Master. This plane is not necessarily fast or well-equipped, but it is light and powerful. The design is fantastic. Israel, Singapore, and Italy all want this plane. The site is http://militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=967.
Those were the Plaussies. Have a nice night, everyone. Perhaps next year we'll expand to naval warfare and civilian firearms.
Wednesday, April 16, 2014
Monday, April 14, 2014
Lent Post: Russia and Estonia
Salvete.
Well, today I read from the ERR (a popular Estonian news source) that ethnic Russians decided to host a pro-Russian rally outside the Russian embassy.
http://news.err.ee/v/politics/9307203d-2534-4587-9fe8-61f86f8166d5
I laugh at their attempt.
That said, I am concerned for the Baltics. I heard on the radio today the concern that NATO would probably not retaliate over an invasion of the Baltics or even an invasion of Poland. If we cede the Baltics, we lose our advantage on the Baltic Sea, since Russia would have ample shoreline. Estonia is too financially and symbolically important to lose in the Second Cold War against Russia. Estonia is the pawn in front of the king, in danger of other pawns, knights, a bishop, and a queen. If Estonia is lost, we get nothing out of it, and they have an incredible position, which they can fortify with any of their pieces. Is Estonia too small and weak to defend with NATO troops? Perhaps, but NATO presence would mean the difference between a solid win and a Pyrrhic victory for the Russians. Russia would think twice before going further, and we would have left the Baltics practically unscathed. The Russian force in Estonia would be weak enough for underground movements to take over the task of reclaiming Estonia, if, of course, Russia moves past the Baltics.
Letting the Baltic states be taken is not a tactical retreat, nor is it a sign of wisdom. It is surrender in the Baltics, just as we surrendered Ukraine by not thinking ahead.
Saturday, April 12, 2014
Lent Post: Links of Death
http://science.house.gov/press-release/subcommittee-requests-ig-review-epa-experiments-humans
Good afternoon.
http://news.yahoo.com/epa-experiments-seek-harm-sick-patients-states-association-151200468.html;_ylt=AwrTWfzR0UlT_RoARxDQtDMD
How is everyone feeling today?
http://www.video.theblaze.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=31968605
Because I'm feeling FANTASTIC.
(for good measure and comparison, here's Gosnell: http://www.video.theblaze.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=26304583)
In response, my Catholic friend had but one thing to say:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDJtBh3LGJg
My the Lord have mercy on our souls.
Good afternoon.
http://news.yahoo.com/epa-experiments-seek-harm-sick-patients-states-association-151200468.html;_ylt=AwrTWfzR0UlT_RoARxDQtDMD
How is everyone feeling today?
http://www.video.theblaze.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=31968605
Because I'm feeling FANTASTIC.
(for good measure and comparison, here's Gosnell: http://www.video.theblaze.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=26304583)
In response, my Catholic friend had but one thing to say:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDJtBh3LGJg
My the Lord have mercy on our souls.
Thursday, April 10, 2014
Lent Post: State of Jefferson
Salvete.
Today I heard The Blaze cover the State of Jefferson. I've known about the state of Jefferson for about a year, but I was excited to learn from The Blaze that three counties thus far support the secession. Unfortunately, I live too far south in California to be largely affected, but I very much want my county to join the movement. Essentially, from what I recall of the state of Jefferson, there was an attempt in the 1940s to split from California. While, of course, it didn't work (particularly because of the Pearl Harbor bombing and the start of World War II), it makes far more sense in today's standards. Literally, millions of Republican conservatives are being politically drowned out. When we try to stop the union corruption, the unions out-fund and defeat us. We are taxed without our consent, and we are forced to accept liberal policies, both social and fiscal. These policies have driven California into a dust-bowl, impoverished humiliation, and we desperately want out. I want red counties from the northern, Jefferson-supporting Siskiyou County to the southern Kern county to secede from the Californian government.
Would the economy of Jefferson work? It definitely would not have an economy as large as California's, but it would avoid the economic catastrophes that California has had over the years, such as an enormous debt and a monstrous government. It would function like a Midwestern state, with a small economy and perhaps undesired funds from the United States government, but relatively economically free. Whereas liberals could slander the Southern states as supposedly "racist" or "sexist" or "gun-toting," Jefferson would take a new approach to conservatism, one that would break stereotypes and be a positive light to conservatism. Would the innovation coming from Silicon Valley stop? Secession would cut its flow but would in no means halt the wave of innovation entirely; high school students from Northern California often travel south for their college education but move back north for work.
This is not a independence pipe-dream like the Scottish-independence fiasco that my friend at http://iconosceptic.wordpress.com/ bemoans. This is an upset faction choosing to leave failed policies and bogged-down bureaucracy for decently better policies and economic security, not the other way around.
I, Trygve Plaustrum, support secession from the state of California and formation of the state of Jefferson.
Today I heard The Blaze cover the State of Jefferson. I've known about the state of Jefferson for about a year, but I was excited to learn from The Blaze that three counties thus far support the secession. Unfortunately, I live too far south in California to be largely affected, but I very much want my county to join the movement. Essentially, from what I recall of the state of Jefferson, there was an attempt in the 1940s to split from California. While, of course, it didn't work (particularly because of the Pearl Harbor bombing and the start of World War II), it makes far more sense in today's standards. Literally, millions of Republican conservatives are being politically drowned out. When we try to stop the union corruption, the unions out-fund and defeat us. We are taxed without our consent, and we are forced to accept liberal policies, both social and fiscal. These policies have driven California into a dust-bowl, impoverished humiliation, and we desperately want out. I want red counties from the northern, Jefferson-supporting Siskiyou County to the southern Kern county to secede from the Californian government.
Would the economy of Jefferson work? It definitely would not have an economy as large as California's, but it would avoid the economic catastrophes that California has had over the years, such as an enormous debt and a monstrous government. It would function like a Midwestern state, with a small economy and perhaps undesired funds from the United States government, but relatively economically free. Whereas liberals could slander the Southern states as supposedly "racist" or "sexist" or "gun-toting," Jefferson would take a new approach to conservatism, one that would break stereotypes and be a positive light to conservatism. Would the innovation coming from Silicon Valley stop? Secession would cut its flow but would in no means halt the wave of innovation entirely; high school students from Northern California often travel south for their college education but move back north for work.
This is not a independence pipe-dream like the Scottish-independence fiasco that my friend at http://iconosceptic.wordpress.com/ bemoans. This is an upset faction choosing to leave failed policies and bogged-down bureaucracy for decently better policies and economic security, not the other way around.
I, Trygve Plaustrum, support secession from the state of California and formation of the state of Jefferson.
Tuesday, April 8, 2014
Lent Post: Equal Pay
Salvete. Before I begin, a friend of mine has started up a blog. Even though I agree with only half of the blog, it is very well writ, and, as was desired, it makes the average debater think and reflect. You may find it at http://iconosceptic.wordpress.com/.
So, the debate for "equal pay" is going on. My response is going to be controversial. You have been warned.
First, income inequality between men and women has far too many factors to be hailed as fact. One would have to include job types, job requirements, job rarity, job hours, and job quality. These practically cannot be measured by any outsider beyond biased narratives; thus, the statistics are essentially worthless. They may serve as a rough estimate at best, but there must be ample room for doubt, bias, and error.
The same goes with a large amount of statistics. Gun crime statistics cannot be accurate because either there were murders/homicides not recorded and thus not included in the report, or the statisticians fudged the numbers to fit the logic behind the gun statistics, thus polluting and biasing the statistics. Either way, there should be ample room for error in the result.
But I digress. People seem to miss the point about "equal pay," most likely because it seems to be too offensive to mention. The business is the organization providing the payroll, so they can be as sexist, homophobic, or racist as they want. To be sure, if I ran a business, pay would be determined based on merit and product, and in no way based on background, race, gender, or any other prejudiced manner. However, when the government establishes a foothold on the output of a business's income, it steps into very dangerous territory.
However, the case is different when the government contributes to a business's income. Because the government is controlled by all American citizens, the government should pay women and men without prejudice and based on merit. In that case, a racist, sexist, and otherwise prejudiced company does not need to receive money from the government. Should the government manipulate its investments to target the business by strengthening the business's rivals? Of course not, although that is possible under my strategy. However, if a company wants to function separate of the social and fiscal policies of the government, it has the right to do so, though the government has just as much right to retract its investments.
Such is my opinion. I'm planning on a solid day of video games tomorrow. It sounds like fun.
So, the debate for "equal pay" is going on. My response is going to be controversial. You have been warned.
First, income inequality between men and women has far too many factors to be hailed as fact. One would have to include job types, job requirements, job rarity, job hours, and job quality. These practically cannot be measured by any outsider beyond biased narratives; thus, the statistics are essentially worthless. They may serve as a rough estimate at best, but there must be ample room for doubt, bias, and error.
The same goes with a large amount of statistics. Gun crime statistics cannot be accurate because either there were murders/homicides not recorded and thus not included in the report, or the statisticians fudged the numbers to fit the logic behind the gun statistics, thus polluting and biasing the statistics. Either way, there should be ample room for error in the result.
But I digress. People seem to miss the point about "equal pay," most likely because it seems to be too offensive to mention. The business is the organization providing the payroll, so they can be as sexist, homophobic, or racist as they want. To be sure, if I ran a business, pay would be determined based on merit and product, and in no way based on background, race, gender, or any other prejudiced manner. However, when the government establishes a foothold on the output of a business's income, it steps into very dangerous territory.
However, the case is different when the government contributes to a business's income. Because the government is controlled by all American citizens, the government should pay women and men without prejudice and based on merit. In that case, a racist, sexist, and otherwise prejudiced company does not need to receive money from the government. Should the government manipulate its investments to target the business by strengthening the business's rivals? Of course not, although that is possible under my strategy. However, if a company wants to function separate of the social and fiscal policies of the government, it has the right to do so, though the government has just as much right to retract its investments.
Such is my opinion. I'm planning on a solid day of video games tomorrow. It sounds like fun.
Thursday, April 3, 2014
Lent Post: Fort Hood
Salvete.
Well, it happened again. Hopefully we learned our lesson this time.
My simple reaction is this: for instances like this, you need a gun on you at all times. Otherwise, you are a target. If the firearms of these victims are out of reach, they will rarely be prepared for a surprise attack. Concealed carry works; storing people's firearms with the police where they won't be needed is folly. Why even bring the firearms at all?
I understand that people and businesses should have the policies they want in their domains, but don't tell me that concealed carry doesn't work, nor should you tell me that institutions have the right idea by locking everyone's firearms away for the "safety" of the inhabitants.
Well, it happened again. Hopefully we learned our lesson this time.
My simple reaction is this: for instances like this, you need a gun on you at all times. Otherwise, you are a target. If the firearms of these victims are out of reach, they will rarely be prepared for a surprise attack. Concealed carry works; storing people's firearms with the police where they won't be needed is folly. Why even bring the firearms at all?
I understand that people and businesses should have the policies they want in their domains, but don't tell me that concealed carry doesn't work, nor should you tell me that institutions have the right idea by locking everyone's firearms away for the "safety" of the inhabitants.
Tuesday, April 1, 2014
Lent Post: Movie #1: Disney's "Frozen"
Salvete.
Now is the time that the three of you following this post have been waiting for: my movie posts. I think I'm going to start with Frozen.
Frozen is by no means worth the hype. There are only two or three marketable songs, and the rest seem about a minute at longest. The end result is a mediocre replacement for Tangled. I wouldn't recommend it for most non-Disney fans, while I do see why some people may like it.
Now, I recall hearing a Christian talking about the homosexual references in Frozen. Believe it or not, I can definitely see the multiple homosexuality references throughout Frozen. Was this intentional? Perhaps. Does it affect the plotline or the my general enjoyment of the movie (or lack thereof)? No. Emphatically no. I keep my views on homosexuality, but I believe that the homosexual references in Frozen are either too well hidden or too skewed to impose anything on the target audience. Thus, I watch Frozen with no feeling of ill will or hatred, bad though the movie is.
More later.
Now is the time that the three of you following this post have been waiting for: my movie posts. I think I'm going to start with Frozen.
Frozen is by no means worth the hype. There are only two or three marketable songs, and the rest seem about a minute at longest. The end result is a mediocre replacement for Tangled. I wouldn't recommend it for most non-Disney fans, while I do see why some people may like it.
Now, I recall hearing a Christian talking about the homosexual references in Frozen. Believe it or not, I can definitely see the multiple homosexuality references throughout Frozen. Was this intentional? Perhaps. Does it affect the plotline or the my general enjoyment of the movie (or lack thereof)? No. Emphatically no. I keep my views on homosexuality, but I believe that the homosexual references in Frozen are either too well hidden or too skewed to impose anything on the target audience. Thus, I watch Frozen with no feeling of ill will or hatred, bad though the movie is.
More later.
Lent Post: Common Core
Salvete.
I'm back, after a spontaneous one week of vacation. Miss me?
Today I'm going to talk about Common Core. Personally, I don't know too much about it, but from what I know, this transformation of American education is unnecessary. I would encourage and promote the condensation of education in youth (teach them calculus by the end of middle school or at least high school) because that would give our youth the educational kick that would perhaps eliminate the need for higher education. A complete rearranging of the curriculum, however, is unnecessary. No one was calling for a change in curriculum schedule because it worked well; it was not the problem. The new rearrangement doesn't seem appropriate, and the curriculum seems quite dumbed down. I wish, if anything, that they took the curriculum and shifted everything down two or three grades, especially considering that the first through fourth grades seem exactly the same.
There are no new connections between different mathematical concepts, and they in fact seem to dumb down each and every grade from the old educational plan. For example, serious two-dimensional and three-dimensional graphing does not come up until high school, perhaps freshman or sophomore year. I love that Common Core is trying to make a connection between the first, second, and third dimensions, but that should be a late-elementary concept at most.
The inspiration of this blog was http://www.video.theblaze.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=31661801. I get the confusion of the people involved, but I understand what the Common Core exam was trying to do. They were trying to split the subtraction number (316) into hundreds, tens, and ones units and subtracting each of them from the subtracted number (427) to achieve the difference. This, however, can only work to solidify subtraction, addition, and, if applied well enough, factoring. You cannot link this method to multiplication, and in fact it seems to weaken the relationship between addition and multiplication and (eventually) multiplication and exponentials/factorials. Addition should be a quick, easy process, and most students should understand the concepts behind basic addition and basic subtraction. Great. Move on to more applicable functions.
That is part of my Common Core opinion. You shall have more posts as Lent progresses.
I'm back, after a spontaneous one week of vacation. Miss me?
Today I'm going to talk about Common Core. Personally, I don't know too much about it, but from what I know, this transformation of American education is unnecessary. I would encourage and promote the condensation of education in youth (teach them calculus by the end of middle school or at least high school) because that would give our youth the educational kick that would perhaps eliminate the need for higher education. A complete rearranging of the curriculum, however, is unnecessary. No one was calling for a change in curriculum schedule because it worked well; it was not the problem. The new rearrangement doesn't seem appropriate, and the curriculum seems quite dumbed down. I wish, if anything, that they took the curriculum and shifted everything down two or three grades, especially considering that the first through fourth grades seem exactly the same.
There are no new connections between different mathematical concepts, and they in fact seem to dumb down each and every grade from the old educational plan. For example, serious two-dimensional and three-dimensional graphing does not come up until high school, perhaps freshman or sophomore year. I love that Common Core is trying to make a connection between the first, second, and third dimensions, but that should be a late-elementary concept at most.
The inspiration of this blog was http://www.video.theblaze.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=31661801. I get the confusion of the people involved, but I understand what the Common Core exam was trying to do. They were trying to split the subtraction number (316) into hundreds, tens, and ones units and subtracting each of them from the subtracted number (427) to achieve the difference. This, however, can only work to solidify subtraction, addition, and, if applied well enough, factoring. You cannot link this method to multiplication, and in fact it seems to weaken the relationship between addition and multiplication and (eventually) multiplication and exponentials/factorials. Addition should be a quick, easy process, and most students should understand the concepts behind basic addition and basic subtraction. Great. Move on to more applicable functions.
That is part of my Common Core opinion. You shall have more posts as Lent progresses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)