If You Like Barclay De Tolly, But You Miss A Lot Of Content With Him, And At The Same Time You Love Fiction,

«All people have the right to life, freedom and happiness»

«Все люди имеют право на жизнь, свободу и счастье»

Eng: I watched an episode of TNG and read the name "Sakharov" on the shuttle. I am from Russia, and I am pleased to see positive references in Western culture. Vicky confirmed my suspicions: According to Star Trek Encyclopedia, 3rd ed., p. 426, the Sakharov was named for "Russian nuclear scientist and peace advocate Andre Sakharov (1921-1989)"

Andrei Sakharov is a Soviet theoretical physicist, academician of the USSR Academy of Sciences, public figure, dissident and human rights activist.

One of the creators of the first Soviet hydrogen bomb. People's Deputy of the USSR, author of the draft constitution The Union of Soviet Republics of Europe and Asia. The winner Nobel Peace Prize in 1975.

!

Since the late 1950s, he has actively advocated for the cessation of nuclear weapons testing. A.D. Sakharov expressed his attitude to the question of the justification of possible victims of nuclear tests and, more broadly, human sacrifices in the name of the future in general as follows:

"…Pavlov [the state security general] once told me: — There is a life-and-death struggle going on in the world between the forces of imperialism and communism. The future of humanity, the fate and happiness of tens of billions of people over the centuries depend on the outcome of this struggle. To win this fight, we must be strong. If our work, our trials, add strength to this struggle, and this is extremely true, then no sacrifice of trials, no sacrifice at all, can make a difference here.

Was it insane demagoguery or was Pavlov sincere? It seems to me that there was an element of both demagoguery and sincerity. Something else is more important. I am convinced that such arithmetic is fundamentally wrong. We know too little about the laws of history, the future is unpredictable, and we are not gods. We, each of us, in every case, both "small" and "big", must proceed from specific moral criteria, and not the abstract arithmetic of history. Moral criteria categorically dictate to us — thou shalt not kill!"

Rus: Я смотрела эпизод ТНГ и прочитала название "Сахаров" на шаттле. Я из России, и мне приятно видеть положительные отсылки в западной культуре. Вики подтвердила мои догадки: Согласно энциклопедии «Звездный путь» , 3-е изд., стр. 426, « Сахаров» был назван в честь « российского ученого -атомщика и сторонника мира Андрея Сахарова (1921-1989)»

Андре́й Са́харов — советский физик-теоретик, академик АН СССР, общественный деятель, диссидент и правозащитник.

Один из создателей первой советской водородной бомбы. Народный депутат СССР, автор проекта конституции Союза Советских Республик Европы и Азии. Лауреат Нобелевской премии мира за 1975 год.

!

С конца 1950-х годов он активно выступал за прекращение испытаний ядерного оружия. Своё отношение к вопросу об оправданности возможных жертв ядерных испытаний и — шире — вообще человеческих жертв во имя будущего А. Д. Сахаров выразил так:

«…Павлов [генерал госбезопасности] как-то сказал мне: — Сейчас в мире идёт борьба не на жизнь, а на смерть между силами империализма и коммунизма. От исхода этой борьбы зависит будущее человечества, судьба, счастье десятков миллиардов людей на протяжении столетий. Чтобы победить в этой борьбе, мы должны быть сильными. Если наша работа, наши испытания прибавляют силы в этой борьбе, а это в высшей степени так, то никакие жертвы испытаний, никакие жертвы вообще не могут иметь тут значения. Была ли это безумная демагогия или Павлов был искренен? Мне кажется, что был элемент и демагогии, и искренности. Важней другое. Я убеждён, что такая арифметика неправомерна принципиально. Мы слишком мало знаем о законах истории, будущее непредсказуемо, а мы — не боги. Мы, каждый из нас, в каждом деле, и в „малом“, и в „большом“, должны исходить из конкретных нравственных критериев, а не абстрактной арифметики истории. Нравственные же критерии категорически диктуют нам — не убий!»

Окей, я видела теории, что какая-то часть экспедиции Атлантис могла быть потомками Януса. Ок да, кажется, я точно кто его потомок. 1) Добрый 2) Не мудак 3) Волчьи уши 5) Нарушил приказ, чтобы защитить людей Контр аргументируйте 4) Любит Вейр АЗАЗАЗА Просто подумайте, о том, что Янус не смог быть рядом с его итерацией Вейр, не смог узнать её ближе. Но Джон будучи его потомком смог и смог защищать её. Okay, I've seen theories that some part of the Atlantis expedition could be descendants of Janus. I think I'm exactly who his descendant is. 1) Kind 2) Not an asshole 3) Wolf ears 5) Violates the order of his superiors to save people. I am waiting for your counter arguments 4) He loves Weir OLOLOLOL Just think about the fact that Janus couldn't be around his iteration of Weir, couldn't get to know her better. But John, being his descendant, was able to be by her side and was able to protect her.

Sga stargate theory

LOL

Is UNIT just a pyramid scheme at this point. Kate my love you cannot hire everyone you meet.

Если Злого Волка одомашнить и выдрессировать, будет Гуд Дог) Если бы Сутех стал Гуд Догом, Кейт пригласила бы его работать в ЮНИТ? )))))

If the Bad Wolf is domesticated and trained, it will be a Good Dog) If Sutekh had become a Good Dog, would Kate have invited him to work at UNIT?)))))

The proud pose of a schizophrenic patient with delusional ideas of greatness

bones and spock both strike me as people who are likely to skip breakfast in the morning. they both know better, of course, but some habits are hard to kick. maybe it’s morning nausea, maybe they’re trying to squeeze just a bit more work into their day - who knows

they both notice, however, that jim seems to be a bit twitchier on the days where spock skips breakfast to go to the labs for a bit before reporting to the bridge. or mornings where bones shows up just to have some coffee and nothing else. it’s not super noticeable, they probably only notice because they pay a Lot of attention to him, but he’s just a bit jumpier, a bit more distracted

maybe they discuss it with each other, maybe they both notice it independently. maybe it’s something they noticed about him even before the 5 year mission, but just really fell into place after they semi-established their breakfast routine. he’s usually fine after lunch anyways, and he doesn’t generally get like that if they just skip lunch or dinner. spock tested this, of course. logically.

so it’s probably not worth worrying about; just a weird little quirk of their captain’s. but they start trying to be a bit better about making themselves eat at least an apple or something with jim before work every morning. it seems to get better, and the new habit is mostly sticking, so they kinda stop thinking about it

that doesn’t last, of course. ‘conscience of the king’ happens. they learn about jim and kodos and tarsus, and now all of a sudden the prospect of jim being in a weird mood whenever the two of them skip breakfast seems to be a much higher priority.

because if they skip breakfast, jim has no way of knowing for certain if they’ve eaten anything until at least lunch - if not dinner, if they’re too busy to have a proper lunch break together. jim, who probably regularly went without food to make absolutely sure that kevin riley and the others had something to eat, because making sure everyone else is okay is far more important to him.

i don’t think they really talk about it, after. at least not for another few years. but they stop skipping breakfast.

Ермолов, 1812

Алексей Ермолов × Undertale AU Ермолов по характеру похож на Санса. Подумайте об этом. Ермолов — артиллерист. Думойте) EN: Ermolov is similar in character to Sans. Think about it. Ermolov is an artilleryman. Think)