Sauna Secrets of Finland: Where the World’s Most Beautiful Women Live | ...

Trump gets into irate screaming match with Zelensky in Oval Office

New details emerge surrounding the death of actor Gene Hackman

UPDATE: Gene Hackman death deemed 'suspicious'

TRUMAN Back at Sea After Collision Repairs

💥British and French FIGHTER JETS to ENTER the war in Ukraine! | Ben Hodg...

Bill Browder: Putin can’t afford to end the war in Ukraine | Superpowers

He Shot Down 4 Japanese Planes On December 7, 1941 and Went On To Great Things

Profile photo for Lyle F. Padilla Lyle F. Padilla · Follow Retired US Army Armor Officer, former USAF F-4 WSOFeb 9 Did any pilots who survived Pearl Harbor continue to fly in combat missions? How did their experiences differ from attacking ships at Pearl Harbor to flying over Japan? I can’t address any Japanese pilots who attacked Pearl Harbor, but the US Army Air Force fighter pilot who shot down the most Japanese planes (four confirmed) over Pearl Harbor and the surrounding area on December 7, 1941, 2nd Lieutenant George S. Welch, went on to have a distinguished combat record during the remainder of World War II and then as a test pilot in the postwar era. Welch remained at his base at Wheeler Field in Hawaii for several months after Pearl Harbor before transferring to another squadron during the New Guinea Campaign and started scoring more kills on the first anniversary of Pearl Harbor, then accumulated a total of 16 kills (including the four at Pearl Harbor) over the next ten months. He was then pulled out of combat flying and released from Active Duty to the Air Forces Reserve at the rank of major after contracting malaria, but was hired as a test pilot for North American Aviation and resumed flying in that capacity. He was the chief test pilot for North American’s P-82 Twin Mustang, then the swept-wing jet P-86 Sabre. He is believed to have actually broken the sound barrier in the prototype P-86 two weeks before Chuck Yeager was credited for doing so in a the Bell XS-1 rocket plane in October 1947, with the Air Force keeping quiet about it for several decades as it did not want to reveal the fact that their newest fighter, soon redesignated the F-86 and about to dominate the skies in the Korean War, had a supersonic capability. Welch made several trips to the front line air bases in Korea as a technical representative of North American, and it is believed that he flew a number of missions over “MiG Alley” in North Korea and scored additional kills over communist MiG-15s which were kept off the books and credited to other pilots because of his civilian official status. Welch then became the chief test pilot for the North American F-100 Super Sabre, a larger and more powered engine derivative of the F-86 which was the first production fighter to go supersonic in level flight. Sadly, he was killed in 1954 testing an F-100 which had stability problems. 32.6K views View 445 upvotes View 5 shares 1 of 5 answers

How The Finns Beat The Russians 1939-1940

Profile photo for Catalin Olteanu Catalin Olteanu Former Small Entrepreneur 4y Why did the USSR, with superior military size and strength, suffer such losses in the Winter War against Finland? Can anybody imagine how it is possible to conduct a military assault on average temperature of -21 to -24 degrees Celsius? Can anybody imagine how enthusiastic can be a soldier sleeping in a tent at -30 or even -39 degrees Celsius, especially when on the next day he is supposed to attack one of the most fortified defensive lines in the history of warfare? What if the attack is to be led under such circumstances that snow can reach 1.5 meters ? Or what if beneath the snow there are mines, swamps and marshes ? The ‘’Winter War’’ was a political action designed to impress the world-Germany too- about the major technological advance of the Red Army. The attack would have been an incredibly difficult task even in the summer time. This is the great general who saved Finland -Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim - Wikipedia and this is his main opponent : Kirill Meretskov - Wikipedia Geographically speaking, Finland is arranged such that any aggression could come only from the Soviet Union, and only through the Karelian Isthmus.The Finnish army, began an extensive buildup of defenses on the Karelian Isthmus since 1918. Beginning 1929, the scope of the buildup expanded significantly. On the Karelian Isthmus emerged a solid strip of fortifications and obstructions, which became known as the Mannerheim Line. Finland spent practically all of her military budget for ten years on the fortifications. The main strike was carried out on the Karelian Isthmus; secondary strikes were carried out along the entire Finnish-Soviet border, from the Baltic Sea to the Barents Sea. The Mannerheim Line was not located on the immediate border, but deeper in the territory. The line was in fact a brilliantly camouflaged defense structure, well integrated into the surroundings, and stretching 135 km in width and up to 30 km in depth. Its right flank met the shore of the Baltic Sea; its left flank bordered Lake Ladoga. All in all, the Mannerheim Line counted 2,311 concrete, ironclad, and wooden defense structures. All existing bridges on this strip were wired with explosives and ready to be blown up or burned. The Finns used a brilliant tactic. A couple of snipers could block a whole Red Army division. The Finnish snipers and light mobile squads were fully active and operating to the best of their capacity. Here is a standard situation: a column of Soviet tanks, motorized infantry, and artillery is moving along a forest road. To their left and to their right there is nowhere to go—impassable woods, packed with land mines. Ahead of them was a bridge. The Soviet demolition experts checked for mines and came back reporting that the way was clear. The first tanks begin to crawl onto the bridge—and together with the bridge they fly up into the air: packs of dynamite had been inserted into the supporting beams of the bridge during its construction; they are undetectable, and even if they had been discovered, any attempt to defuse them would have triggered an explosion. The Soviet column, many kilometers in length, like a snake is stopped in its path. Now, the Finnish snipers spring into action. The snipers strike from somewhere far away. They hit only Red Army officers and tow-truck drivers. A diversion through the forest is not an option-on both sides of the road lie impenetrable minefields. Below probably the best sniper in history : Simo Häyhä - Wikipedia Not a single army in the world had conducted an offensive operation, under a temperature of minus 20 degrees Celsius. In such temperatures, no one had even attempted to conduct massive attacks, because it is impossible. The Red Army’s attack was an exception. Finnish soldiers are born, raised, and trained to act in these conditions. The snipers who spent days waiting for their victims, and the soldiers of the light ski squads which raided the rear of the Red Army, were warmly clad and well equipped. They had clear orders and retreat path to shelters and bunkers. The theater of operations consisted of 50 percent woodlands, 25 percent water, some swampland, and only about 10 percent of the total surface could be crossed by tanks. During the 105 days of the war, there were twenty-five days of flying weather. The rest of the time, blizzards or snowfall impeded flight. In December, there are very few daylight hours. Complete darkness falls at four o’clock. In the north there was no daytime at all. The mighty Soviet artillery was pretty useless due to thick snow; the tanks were useless; the air force also could not help, for it could not see anything. The Finns were most of the time under the snow, well camouflaged. The finish pillboxes were made by professionals: Against the pillbox #0011, the Soviets unleashed 1,322 shells from 203-mm howitzers and 280-mm mortars—almost two hundred tons. The pillbox was partially damaged, but even after this it continued to resist. Despite the incredible resilience of the Finns, the Mannerheim Line was penetrated and the Finland was forced to sue for peace. On March 13, 1940, the war between Finland and the Soviet Union was ended. The war lasted 105 days The Soviet Union received the Karelian Isthmus, but Finland kept her independence. On April 12, 1942, Hitler said the following: “The entire war with Finland in 1940, just as the Russian advance into Poland with obsolete tanks and weapons and poorly clothed soldiers, was nothing other than a grandiose disinformation campaign, because Russia at that time controlled arms which made it, in comparison with Germany and Japan, a world power.” He also said, on June 22, 1942: “Back home in Russia, they created an extremely powerful military industry . . . and the more we find out what goes on in Russia, the more we rejoice that we delivered the decisive blow in time. The Red Army’s weaponry is the best proof that they succeeded in reaching extremely high achievements.” 42.4K views457 upvotes32 shares28 comments 7.5K views View 25 upvotes

State Secrets - Still Classified WWII Subjects

💥British fighter jets to ENTER THE WAR in Ukraine! US Troops to DEFEND t...

Trump Fires "Woke" Pentagon Leaders

Deep Intel on the U.S. Plan to End the War in Ukraine

Deep Intel on the TRUMAN Collision at Sea

Ben Hodges - Europe must Prepare for War or Risk Russian Provocation and...

Why I Left MSNBC

Psychic predictions 2025: completion of the oligarch era & people power ...

Five Special Books That Had A Profound Impact On My Life

In a recent Op-Ed, I praised the author Sonya Walger and her book "Lion." Sonya also has a podcast called "Bookish." In each segment, she interacts with a major film or television star with the same question: "What were the five books that most influenced your life?" She started me thinking. I want to share with you the five books that had a profound influence on me as follows: 1) The Wind Off The Sea by David Beaty; This novel follows a career Royal Air Force officer from 1940 until 1962. My sister and I love the winter days in our hometown of Galveston, Texas, The cold wind blasts in from the Gulf of Mexico. This book has wonderful character development. The reader comes to know the RAF officer so well. The book ends with a murder mystery and an unauthorized attempt to fire a ballistic missile with a nuclear warhead. 2) Once An Eagle by Anton Myrer; this novel covers 50 years in the life of a man named Sam Damon. He comes from the Midwest of the U.S. He joins the U.S. Army. He is sent to fight in France as an enlisted man in World War I. He distinguishes himself in combat. He is given a battlefield commission as a second lieutenant. He hates war but loves the army. He is a leader who is always concerned about his men's welfare. He plans battles carefully to minimize casualties. When the war ends, Sam stays in the army. He goes through 23 years of the peacetime army. When World War II comes, he is sent to lead soldiers in the Pacific island campaigns including the Philippines. He is promoted to general. He is a brilliant infantry officer. When World War II ended, he goes through the peacetime army. He was sent to South Korea in 1950 to lead an infantry division. He becomes quite knowledgeable about combat operations in Asia. He was recalled from retirement to take a tour of South Vietnam in 1968. He sees the madness of this war. He is getting ready to release a report warning the public. Career military officers murder him to keep him silent. The whole theme of the book was "Suffering can deaden the soul or enrich it." 3) The Captain by Jan de Hartog; this novel follows the wartime experiences of a merchant marine captain who routinely made the run from England to Murmansk in the Soviet Union. As you can imagine, the Nazis did everything possible to stop these ships from bringing supplies to Russia. The captain survives the war and attributes it to good luck. 4) Firefox and Firefox Down by Craig Thomas; this novel has a wild premise. The Soviet Union designs an advanced jet fighter that a pilot can control with thoughts. The U.S. sneaks a former U.S. Air Force pilot and Vietnam veteran to steal the plane and bring it back to the West. The pilot is named Mitchell Gant. He steals the Soviet plane and begins the mad dash to the West. The Russians do everything possible to recover their plane or shoot it down. The aerial combat scenes would make a great action/adventure story. The author does a further brilliant job of developing Mitchell Gant as a character. As he rushes to evade the Soviets, he vomits in the cockpit. He has blackouts. He has flashbacks to the trauma of his Vietnam combat missions. He is never sure that he can accomplish this mission. As Firefox Down ends, Mithcell drops the landing gears to land the Soviet fighter in Scotland. I was throwing the book in the air and cheering. It was not because Mitchell had defeated the Russians. It was because he had defeated the dark spirits that lived inside him. 5) The House Of The Spirits by Isabel Allende; this novel tells the story of three generations of Chilean women starting in the early 1900s and ending when General Pinochet stages the military coup in 1973. Having spent decades of my life being married to two South American women, I love this book. It shows what it is really like to be a woman in South America. This book was published 39 years ago. Each time I read the ending, I get tears in my eyes and am emotionally touched. The is a dog with magical capabilities in the book. His name is Barabbas. The book ends with these words: "Barabbas came to us by the sea."

The Economist Magazine Cover For 02-15/2025

The Economist Read in browser February 15th 2025 How we chose this week’s image SUBSCRIBER ONLY Cover Story How we chose this week’s image Insert a clear and simple description of the image Edward Carr Deputy editor We had two covers this week. In America and Asia, as Donald Trump and Elon Musk prepare to take on the Pentagon, we weigh up whether DOGE will reform it or wreck it. In our British and European editions, we feature an interview with Friedrich Merz, who is the clear front-runner to become Germany’s next chancellor. America’s armed forces face a real problem. Not since the Soviet Union launched Sputnik and built huge tank formations at the height of the cold war have America’s military vulnerabilities been so glaring. In the killing fields of Ukraine the United States is being out-innovated by drone designers; in the seas and skies off China’s coast it is losing its ability to deter a blockade or invasion of Taiwan. Our task on the cover was to get across the importance of reform as well as the risks that it descends into chaos or corruption. We start with the latest in our attempts to depict Mr Trump by showing ever smaller parts of his body. A hand will do—though the Pentagon has been reduced to a tiny steel nut. However, although Mr Trump is the immediate reason to write about the Pentagon, we wanted to get across the fact that our coverage is broader than that. Our main focus is the technological, industrial and bureaucratic weakness of America’s defence establishment. That led us to a second, more promising, idea of the Pentagon and the drones. This design doesn’t quite work—we weren’t sure whether this swarm was emerging from the DoD or (more appropriately) attacking it—but, as you will see, it figured in our final cover. The Economist Here we have the Pentagon implanted in a circuit board, in a misty, atmospheric sketch—with a hint of the film “Blade Runner”—and a crystal-clear worked-up final cover. America struggles to turn technology into a military advantage. The drones over Ukraine are upgraded every few weeks, a pace that is beyond the Pentagon’s budgeting process, which takes years. American and European jammers in electronic warfare cost two or three times as much as Ukrainian ones, but are obsolete. The good news is that a new generation of mil-tech firms, including Anduril, Palantir and Shield AI, is banging on the Pentagon’s doors. Indeed, Palantir is now worth more than any of the five big prime contractors, such as Boeing and Lockheed Martin. Again, however, the Pentagon in this treatment is awfully small. And, although the focus on its problems with technology is justified, they are just symptoms of a deeper malaise. This took us in a different direction. We have the drones, we have DOGE battling the bureaucracy and we have a truly massive Pentagon somewhere in deep space—less “Blade Runner” than “Star Wars”. The space connection makes sense, because NASA shows how to introduce competition, risk-taking and innovation into a procurement system dominated by incumbents. In the 2010s, to escape the ignominy of paying for rides to the International Space Station on Russian spacecraft, NASA put fixed-price contracts out to tender. Boeing offered Starliner; Mr Musk’s SpaceX offered Crew Dragon at a much lower cost. Crew Dragon has been a huge success. Starliner has yet to fly a successful mission. We liked this idea and asked for it to be worked up into a cover. This was almost there. We needed a bit more going on, so we added some drones and explosions and brightened up the background nebulae. We called this the battle for the Pentagon. Mr Trump and his insurgents will be taking on pork-barrelling politicians, as well as the bureaucracy. They guard their control over defence spending so jealously that, without congressional permission, the Pentagon cannot as a rule shift more than $15m from one line to another—too little to buy even four Patriot missiles. And yet it could all go very wrong. If Mr Trump prefers sacking generals for supposedly being “woke” or disloyal, he will bring dysfunction upon the Pentagon. If Mr Musk and his mil-tech brethren use DOGE’s campaign to wreck, or to boost their own power and wealth, they will corrupt it. Their work could not be more important, or more risky. We also published our interview with Friedrich Merz, the Christian Democrat from North Rhine-Westphalia who, after elections later this month, looks very likely to become Germany’s next chancellor. Outside Germany, the beanpole from Brilon is an unfamiliar figure, so we decided to use a photograph from the interview. Mr Merz has a difficult task ahead of him. Germany has been in recession for the past two years. Unhappiness at migration has led to a surge in support for the xenophobic right, fragmenting politics and causing paralysis in government. For years Germany has relied on importing cheap gas from Russia, selling expensive exports to China and outsourcing its security to America. That business model lies in ruins. Here are two standard shots. In our interview Mr Merz came across as confident, intelligent and remarkably calm considering the stakes. His instincts lie in the right direction. He understands the concerns of business and promises a crusade against red tape. He believes in free markets, free trade and the Atlantic alliance. He knows that fixing immigration is crucial to weakening the appeal of Germany’s hard-right party, the Alternative for Germany. These would make fine covers, but they are a bit dull. We wanted to get close up. The frown tells a more accurate story than Mr Merz’s optimistic gaze into the middle distance. Our worry about the next chancellor is that Mr Merz favours what sounds like incremental change over the radical shake-up that Germany and Europe need. He behaves as if the hard part will be to get elected. Yet governing will be much harder. To command his coalition and to carry through difficult reforms in a time of turmoil, he will need a mandate for sweeping change. To capture that tension we zoomed right in on Mr Merz, who is looking straight into the camera. Some Germans may see this as a harsh portrait. In fact it dramatises the man and the hard road that lies ahead of him. Cover image • View large image (“Battle for the Pentagon”) • View large image (“Can Friedrich Merz save Germany?”) Related stories → Will Donald Trump and Elon Musk wreck or reform the Pentagon? (Leader)

Will Donald Trump And Elon Musk Wreck Or Reform The Pentagon?

Leaders | High alert Will Donald Trump and Elon Musk wreck or reform the Pentagon? America’s security depends upon their success The Pentagon as a space station in a battle of drones and military aircraft image: Mona Eing & Michael Meissner Leaders February 15th 2025 Will Donald Trump and Elon Musk wreck or reform the Pentagon? Can Friedrich Merz save Germany—and Europe? After DeepSeek, America and the EU are getting AI wrong Countering China’s diplomatic coup The Lucy Letby case shows systemic failure and a national malaise Feb 13th 2025 Save Share Give Listen to this story. IN THE PENTAGON they must surely be on high alert. On February 9th President Donald Trump declared that it would soon become the target for Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Accusing it of “hundreds of billions of fraud and abuse”, Mr Trump will unleash his insurgents, fresh from feeding foreign aid into the woodchipper. Their work could not be more important, or more risky. That is because America’s armed forces face a real problem. Not since the Soviet Union launched Sputnik and built huge tank formations at the height of the cold war have America’s military vulnerabilities been so glaring. In the killing fields of Ukraine America is being out-innovated by drone designers; in the seas and skies off China it is losing its ability to deter a blockade or invasion of Taiwan. America’s military supremacy is in jeopardy The stakes are all the higher because the Pentagon is a place where MAGA ideology meets reality. Mr Trump’s foreign policy is transactional: this week he said he had begun talks with Russia on the future of Ukraine. But it is built on the idea that peace comes through strength, and that is possible only if America’s forces pose a credible threat. And what if DOGE goes rogue in the Pentagon? If Mr Musk causes chaos or corrupts procurement, the consequences for America’s security could be catastrophic. The problems are clearest in the struggle to turn technology into a military advantage. The drones over Ukraine are upgraded every few weeks, a pace that is beyond the Pentagon’s budgeting process, which takes years. American and European jammers in electronic warfare cost two or three times as much as Ukrainian ones, but are obsolete. Many big American drones have been useless in Ukraine; newer ones are pricier than Ukrainian models. Another problem is that America’s defence industry has been captured. At the end of the cold war the country had 51 prime contractors and only 6% of defence spending went to firms that specialised in defence. Today, just five primes soak up 86% of the Pentagon’s cash. Wary of driving more primes out of business, the department has opted for a risk-averse culture. Contracts are typically cost-plus, rewarding lateness and overspending. The resulting lack of productivity gains helps explain why building warships in America costs so much more than it does in Japan or South Korea. Behind this is the nightmare of budgets. Two-year delays are aggravated by congressional squabbling. Pork-barrelling politicians waste money by vetoing the end of programmes. They guard their control over spending so jealously that, without congressional permission, the Pentagon cannot as a rule shift more than $15m from one line to another—too little to buy even four Patriot missiles. When the Pentagon proposed diverting just 0.5% of the defence budget to buy thousands of drones under its “Replicator” initiative in August 2023, winning approval took almost 40 congressional meetings. Pentagon angst is as old as the military-industrial complex. Past secretaries of defence, including Bob Gates and the late Ash Carter, were philosopher kings next to their new and manifestly unqualified successor, Pete Hegseth. And yet the defence bureaucracy has always seemed to come out on top. There are two reasons why this moment may be different. One is that the time is ripe. Not only is the threat to American security becoming clear, but a new generation of mil-tech firms, including Anduril, Palantir and Shield AI, is banging on the Pentagon’s doors. Indeed, Palantir is now worth more than any of the five prime contractors. More controversially, Mr Musk is eager to crack heads together, an enthusiasm which stems partly from the second reason to hope: his experience elsewhere. In the 2010s, to escape the ignominy of paying for rides to the International Space Station on Russian spacecraft, NASA put fixed-price contracts to provide such services out to tender. Boeing offered something called Starliner; Mr Musk’s SpaceX offered Crew Dragon at a much lower cost. Crew Dragon has been a huge success. Starliner has yet to fly a successful mission (and has left Boeing having to absorb billions of dollars of budget overruns). From 1960 to 2010 the cost of getting a kilogram into orbit hovered at around $12,000; SpaceX rockets have already cut that by a factor of ten, and promise much more. Helsing, Europe’s only defence unicorn, takes a similarly nimble approach to development, continually updating its systems with data from the front lines. Mr Musk’s task is big and complex. American weapons need more AI, autonomy and lower costs. Where possible, they should be made from cheap off-the-shelf parts that ride on advances in consumer tech. The Pentagon should foster competition and risk-taking, knowing that some schemes will fail. A decade ago Carter set up a unit for innovation, but it was often seen as a threat. The Pentagon needs more of them. It should also listen to combatant commanders, too often drowned out by politics. Hardest of all, Mr Trump will have to get congressional Republicans to give the Pentagon a freer rein to spend and innovate. Reforming the Pentagon is much harder than other parts of government. America cannot focus on preparing for war in 2035 if that involves lowering its defences today. It cannot simply replace multi-billion-dollar submarines and bomber squadrons with swarms of drones, because to project power to the other side of the world will continue to require big platforms. Instead America needs a Department of Defence that can revolutionise the economics of massive systems and accelerate the spread of novel systems at the same time. Mr Musk and his boss are conflicted. If Mr Trump prefers sacking generals for supposedly being “woke” or disloyal, he will bring dysfunction upon the Pentagon. If Mr Musk and his mil-tech brethren use DOGE’s campaign to wreck, or to boost their own power and wealth, they will corrupt it. Those temptations make it hard to think that this administration will succeed where others have failed. But the hope is that they will. America’s security depends upon it. ■ For subscribers only: to see how we design each week’s cover, sign up to our weekly Cover Story newsletter.

If We Want To See How The Russia/Ukraine War Ends, We need To Look At The Historical Parallel of Finland vs The Soviet Union 1939-1946

There was the announcement that President Trump is now opening negotiations with Vladimir Putin to end the three-year war in Ukraine. Elena got upset about this. She asked an excellent question: "Why haven't the Europeans been brought into the process? After all, this is a European war." I suspect that ending this war will be a process just as painful as ending the Vietnam. When the dust settles, Ukraine will lose some territory. It will be a neutral state. Membership in NATO is "off the table." Membership in the European Union is very possible. There is always the argument that Russia will use this time to rebuild its economy and military machine. Then will come a second Ukraine invasion. In the time of peace Ukraine will be rebuilding its economy and military machine that will be very modern with the best weapons in the world. I pointed out to Elena a fascinating point of history. I am a World War II amateur scholar specializing in Russia and the Eastern Front. Josef Stalin launched an invasion of Finland in 1939. Here is a summary of what happened: The Soviet Union invaded Finland on November 30, 1939, beginning the Winter War. The war lasted until March 13, 1940. How it started • The Soviet Union demanded that Finland cede land to create a buffer zone against Nazi Germany. • Finland rejected the demands, which led to the invasion. • The Soviet Union's forces included 465,000 men and 1,000 aircraft. How it was fought • The war was fought in brutal conditions, with heroic actions on both sides. • The Finns used guerrilla fighters, reindeer to haul supplies, and single-handed attacks on tanks. • The Soviets suffered heavy losses. How it ended • Finland had to surrender a large area of southeastern Finland, including the city of Viipuri. • Finland also leased the peninsula of Hanko to the Soviet Union for 30 years. Aftermath • The League of Nations denounced the invasion and expelled the Soviet Union. • President Roosevelt gave Finland $10 million in credit. The brave people of Finland fought this invading force with primitive weapons including Molotov cocktails (bottles full of gasoline with a rag in the top of the bottle that was lit and thrown at Russian tanks.) Stalin's forces suffered horrific losses. When the Nazis invaded Russia, Finland came in on the Nazi side. They played a big part in the 900-day siege of Leningrad. Soviet forces drove out the finish military contingent. After World War II, Josef Stalin took over all of Eastern Europe. He did not make a move to Finland. Here is the official explanation: Stalin did not invade Finland at the end of World War II because, despite having the military power to do so, he deemed it strategically unnecessary to antagonize the country further, considering Finland had already ceded significant territory to the Soviet Union during the Winter War and had largely aligned itself with the Allied powers by the war's end, preventing them from becoming a potential threat to the Soviet Union; additionally, a full invasion would have been costly in terms of lives and resources, which were needed for post-war reconstruction. In my humble opinion, Finland caused the Soviet Union such awful losses that Stalin had not the stomach for a repeat of the first Finnish invasion. I think that Putin will adopt the same attitude toward Ukraine.

Shocking New Video From the Israeli F-15 Beirut Bunker Buster Strike

Me 264 Amerikabomber: Hitler's Secret Plan To Attack New York

The Plane that Was Too Creepy For Hitler

Trump's First Airstrike Wipes Out ISIS Mastermind in Somalia

The Economist Magazine Cover For 02/08/2025 Beware Of Online Scams!

The Economist Read in browser February 8th 2025 How we chose this week’s image SUBSCRIBER ONLY Cover Story How we chose this week’s image The Economist Edward Carr Deputy editor We were keen to step back from the headlines this week. Since making landfall on January 20th, Storm Donald has battered the news cycle with hurricane-force bombast and a multi-vortex tornado of executive orders. We covered the tempest once again in this issue, reporting on the turmoil over tariffs and Gaza. But for our cover we chose to focus on people who are as bent on remaining anonymous as the Oval Office Aeolus is determined to be at the eye of it all. I am talking about scammers. Online fraud is a sophisticated industry that steals over $500bn a year from victims all around the world. It employs perhaps 1.5m people. In “Scam Inc”, our eight-part podcast series released this week, we describe the crime, the criminals and the untold suffering they cause. Scamming already rivals the global drugs trade, but it is growing much faster. It is the most significant change in transnational organised crime in decades. Our coverage draws on months of reporting by Sue-Lin Wong, our South-East Asia correspondent, and Sam Colbert, one of our producers. Our thought for the cover was to adapt the artwork for the podcast. Here are a couple of ideas that we used for the podcast. The first episode of “Scam Inc” tells the story of Shan Hanes, the chief executive of a bank in rural Kansas, who was manipulated into investing $47m in crypto, most of it other people’s money. He was in the thrall of a woman called Bella, whom he had met on LinkedIn. A part-time pastor, he also stole from his church. Even after the bank failed and his life had fallen apart, Mr Hanes could not believe that he had been duped. He flew to Australia in the hope that Bella would help get the money back. She never turned up. Unfortunately, neither of these designs capture the enormity of such a crime. Mr Hanes was the victim of what is known as “pig-butchering”. In the original Chinese that is known as 杀猪盘, or sha zhu pan, criminal slang for a technique in which scammers identify a mark, win their confidence over weeks or months, get them to invest and then mercilessly squeeze “every last drop of juice” from them, their family and friends. This design takes that idea literally—so much so that unless you are already familiar with it, you may be baffled. The Economist Here we have combined innovative tech, butchering and the crooks’ raid on people’s savings by depicting a piggy bank and a cyber-hammer. The Chinese criminal syndicates run a digital gig economy. Rather than being hierarchical mafias, they form an underground network that is scalable and hard to stop. One group may specialise in contacting marks, another in coaching them to invest in crypto and a third in laundering their stolen money. All of this takes place online. Once again, though, unless you know that the hammer is supposed to be digital, it is a bit confusing. This gets at the idea of an out-of-reach, upside-down world of lawless syndicates and broken lives. Pig-butchers work from compounds that host production lines of scammers, some of whom are trafficked and held there as forced labour. The compounds contain supermarkets, brothels and gambling dens—as well as torture chambers for workers who cause trouble. They are a cross between a prison camp and a company town. Some of the profits buy protection from politicians and officials. In the Philippines a Chinese national called Alice Guo became the mayor of a small, run-down town, where she built a scamming complex. In 2019-24 over $400m passed through her bank accounts. In Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar cybercrime is a mainstay of the economy. Scam states are likely to become even harder to deal with than narco states. As so often, simplicity won the day. The barbed hook is an allusion to the fact that everyone becomes a potential target of the scammers simply by going about their lives. The scammers manipulate their targets by preying on their emotions, not only by feigning romance, but by exploiting all human frailties: fear, loneliness, greed, grief and boredom. Among the victims we have identified are the relatives of the very FBI investigators whose job is to shut scams down. This is where that design took us. The drawing has more life than a photomontage. A subtitle advertised how much reporting had gone into our work. Unfortunately, just now everything seems to favour the scammers. Advanced malware helps them harvest sensitive data from victims’ devices. Online marketplaces supply them with tools and services, including web domains and AI software. By combining voice-changing and face-changing AI with translation services and torrents of stolen data sold on underground markets, the scammers will be able to target more victims in more places. The Trump tornado is far from blowing itself out. Doubtless, we will feature it on our cover before long. But another storm is raging in the shadows online, and many of us are barely aware of it. Finally, many thanks to all of you who entered a design for our cover competition. It is a festival of creativity. We will send out the shortlist of our seven favourite ideas in a special Cover Story newsletter next week. You will have a chance to vote on your pick; and then I will announce the winners. Cover image • View large image (“Scam Inc”) Backing stories → The vast and sophisticated global enterprise that is Scam Inc (Leader) → Online scams may already be as big a scourge as illegal drugs (Briefing) → Scam Inc: our eight-part podcast series investigating the sinister world of online fraud

The Controversial Nude Scene that BANNED The Last Picture Show

This Congressman Wants to Kill the Ford Class Aircraft Carrier

Putin fears assassination as Ukraine takes out key Kremlin figures

Expert identifies 'doomsday scenario' with Trump that attorneys are worr...

Putin under threat as Russia foresees inevitable failure in Ukraine | Am...

‘Prigozhin-type’ assassination takes out Putin's 'death squad' chief and...

New Intel Reveals Massive Chinese "Doomsday" Command

Massive AIRSTRIKE! Ukraine HITS Russia's Most Famous Oil Plant! Putin is...

Did The Russian GRU Bring Down The Lear Jet In Philadelphia on Friday?

The First Sunday in February Is Here: As always, my radar is on a 360-degree sweep, looking for things that normal media outlets miss. I was in my study early Friday evening. News Nation delivered a shocking report that was most disturbing. A Lear Jet had lifted off from The Executive Airport in North Philadelphia. As it climbed, the pilot lost control. The jet crashed into an open field. A huge explosion followed. As more details came out, it was revealed that the aircraft was an older Lear Jet. It was carrying Mexican citizens on an emergency medivac flight that would stop in Missouri and proceed to Tijuana. Most likely, oxygen bottles were on the plane to support the deathly ill patient. Initial speculation was that a spark ignited the oxygen bottles, causing an explosion. The National Traffic Safety Bureau will spend months doing a detailed investigation before official findings are released. I went to full alert. The Ukraine war has disrupted conventional military thinking. A couple of unsophisticated drones can sink a major capital vessel of the Russian Navy. One hundred grams of explosives on a bicycle seat can kill two very senior and heavily guarded Russian generals. Putin's GRU has shown that a tiny explosive charge strategically placed can bring down a large jet airliner. His GRU targeted DHL cargo jets. A small explosive device was planted in innocuous packages. In 4 of the 5 cases, the explosive devices were detected and removed from the plane's cargo. In the fifth case, an explosive device was not detected. It detonated in midair. A major jet airliner was brought down. Vladimir Putin is taking savage losses in Ukraine and on Russian territory occupied by Ukrainian forces. Donald Trump was expected to cease all aid to Ukraine when he came into office and force an end to the war. Things have not gone according to Putin's hopes. He may have ordered the GRU to cause a plane crash on US soil as a warning to Trump. The Executive Airport in North Philadelphia was a perfect venue for such an attack. It did not have the security that the excellent Philadelphia International Airport has. GRU planners would have become aware of the medivac flight. A tiny explosive device was planted on the plane. The plan was to detonate it on liftoff. The goal was to have the plane heavily loaded with fuel crash at the nearby major shopping mall or a large concentration of row houses with devastating property damage and civilian casualties as the massive amount of jet fuel caught fire and rapidly spread. Luckily the plane crashed in an open field. Give thanks to your higher power for your good fortune in life. -JackW

The Economist Magazine Cover For 02/01/2025

Cover Story: The revolt against regulation Inbox The Economist Unsubscribe 10:04 AM (3 hours ago) to me The Economist Read in browser February 1st 2025 How we chose this week’s image SUBSCRIBER ONLY Cover Story How we chose this week’s image The Economist If you think you have what it takes to design an Economist cover, enter our competition by February 3rd. You’ll be in with a chance of winning a copy of our new Cover Story annual, which assembles our covers of 2024 week by week. Edward Carr Deputy editor This was another week when the Trumpian news cycle imposed itself on our choice of cover—not on what we wanted to write about, but on how we illustrated it. I suspect that the remaining 206 weeks of this presidency will see plenty more covers go the same way. Our theme was slashing red tape and it is a heroic one. Javier Milei has wielded a chainsaw against Argentine regulations. Narendra Modi’s advisers are quietly confronting India’s triplicate-loving babus. Rachel Reeves, Britain’s chancellor, wants to overhaul planning rules and expand London’s Heathrow Airport. Even Vietnam’s Communists have a scheme to shrink the bureaucracy. Done right, the anti-red-tape revolution could usher in faster economic growth, lower prices and new technology. Here is where that thought leads. We have Eugène Delacroix’s painting that commemorates the revolution of 1830 in which Liberty dispatched the reviled Charles X. In our version she is brandishing a sharp pair of scissors, ready to dispatch an equally pernicious web of red tape. Some of us thought that it was odd to evoke revolutionary France in order to illustrate a theme that has often been championed by the right. However, politicians on the left have realised that, with high interest rates and towering public debt, rapid growth is the only way to make welfare states affordable. Besides, the reason to cut rules is not just to enhance enterprise, but freedom, too. We liked this, but then along came Mr Trump’s sledgehammer executive orders—some of them weakened and rescinded within days. Because the president risks making deregulation seem reckless, our heroic imagery would not work. One alternative was the world swathed in red tape. It has the virtue of being accurate. Americans spend a total of 12bn hours a year complying with federal rules. The federal code runs to 180,000 pages, up from 20,000 in the 1960s. In the past five years the European Parliament has enacted more than twice as many laws as America. In Britain, well-meaning rules propounded by newt-fanciers obstruct, delay and raise the cost of new infrastructure. But we use a lot of globes and this one lacks drama. The Economist These two are better at getting across the scale of the problem. In much of the rich world getting anything built has become a daunting task, keeping house prices high. Highway projects suffer cost overruns and delays. Proposals to dig mines in America endure nearly a decade in permitting hell. Over-regulation most hurts small businesses, deterring newcomers. Incumbents sit back, knowing that they are sheltered. These ideas are downbeat. The figure lost in the forest has a chainsaw, but it is a lonely and forbidding place. We wanted to be more enthusiastic. You need only look at history to see that deregulation can pep up the animal spirits. Margaret Thatcher’s Britain, India in the early 1990s and southern Europe in the 2020s all sped ahead after their leaders undertook pro-market reforms. Under Mr Milei, Argentina is growing again; deregulation has brought the prices of some imports down by fully 35%. The marching scissors certainly convey efficacy. But they also have an unfortunate overtone of militarism. This is a portrayal in which the thickets of bureaucracy are being cut back by an overmighty state. That paradox is confusing. This paradox, by contrast, is amusing. The scissors are stuck to the wall by the very same red tape they are supposed to cut. It is a nod to the reality that reforms are often stymied by incumbent businesses, trade unions or lobby groups who stand to lose from deregulation, even if society as a whole will benefit. Our designers liked this image because it echoes the “Comedian”, an installation by Maurizio Cattelan that sold at auction for $6.2m in November. The editorial team was less sure, though. Even if you already know the story of this concave comestible, it is hard to work out what is going on. This was the idea that held our attention. Rules and government are essential in any society. Without them, and the bureaucrats to enforce them, life would be shorter and less secure. But this cover shows how the rules can proliferate until they are suffocating business and society. For the final design, we overlaid our masthead with the sticky stuff, we got rid of the words “red tape”—you don’t want to repeat the visual metaphor—and we made the tape itself into such a tangled mess that you are just itching to peel it back. A bit like all that bureaucracy. Cover image • View large image (“The revolt against regulation”) Backing stories → Milei, Modi, Trump: an anti-red-tape revolution is under way (Leader) → Many governments talk about cutting regulation but few manage to (Briefing) → Even in India, bureaucracy is being curtailed (Briefing) → Javier Milei, free-market revolutionary (The Americas)