Podcasts about conversely

Last time we spoke about General Zhukov's arrival to the Nomohan incident. The Kwantung Army's inexperienced 23rd Division, under General Komatsubara, suffered heavy losses in failed offensives, including Colonel Yamagata's assault and the annihilation of Lieutenant Colonel Azuma's detachment, resulting in around 500 Japanese casualties. Tensions within the Japanese command intensified as Kwantung defied Tokyo's restraint, issuing aggressive orders like 1488 and launching a June 27 air raid on Soviet bases, destroying dozens of aircraft and securing temporary air superiority. This provoked Moscow's fury and rebukes from Emperor Hirohito. On June 1, Georgy Zhukov, a rising Red Army tactician and tank expert, was summoned from Minsk. Arriving June 5, he assessed the 57th Corps as inadequate, relieved Commander Feklenko, and took charge of the redesignated 1st Army Group. Reinforcements included mechanized brigades, tanks, and aircraft. Japanese intelligence misread Soviet supply convoys as retreats, underestimating Zhukov's 12,500 troops against their 15,000. By July, both sides poised for a massive clash, fueled by miscalculations and gekokujo defiance.   #190 Zhukov Unleashes Tanks at Nomohan Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. At 4:00 a.m. on July 1, 15,000 heavily laden Japanese troops began marching to their final assembly and jump-off points. The sun rose at 4:00 a.m. and set at 9:00 p.m. that day, but the Japanese advance went undetected by Soviet/MPR commanders, partly because the June 27 air raid had temporarily cleared Soviet reconnaissance from the skies. On the night of July 1, Komatsubara launched the first phase. The 23rd Division, with the Yasuoka Detachment, converged on Fui Heights, east of the Halha River, about eleven miles north of its confluence with the Holsten. The term "heights" is misleading here; a Japanese infantry colonel described Fui as a "raised pancake" roughly one to one-and-a-half miles across, about thirty to forty feet higher than the surrounding terrain. For reasons not fully explained, the small Soviet force stationed on the heights was withdrawn during the day on July 1, and that night Fui Heights was occupied by Komatsubara's forces almost unopposed. This caused little stir at Zhukov's headquarters. Komatsubara bided his time on July 2.   On the night of July 2–3, the Japanese achieved a brilliant tactical success. A battalion of the 71st Infantry Regiment silently crossed the Halha River on a moonless night and landed unopposed on the west bank opposite Fui Heights. Recent rains had swollen the river to 100–150 yards wide and six feet deep, making crossing difficult for men, horses, or vehicles. Combat engineers swiftly laid a pontoon bridge, completing it by 6:30 a.m. on July 3. The main body of Komatsubara's 71st and 72nd Infantry Regiments (23rd Division) and the 26th Regiment (7th Division) began a slow, arduous crossing. The pontoon bridge, less than eight feet wide, was a bottleneck, allowing only one truck at a time. The attackers could not cross with armored vehicles, but they did bring across their regimental artillery, 18 x 37-mm antitank guns, 12 x 75-mm mountain guns, 8 x 75-mm field guns, and 4 x 120-mm howitzers, disassembled, packed on pack animals, and reassembled on the west bank. The crossing took the entire day, and the Japanese were fortunate to go without interception. The Halha crossing was commanded personally by General Komatsubara and was supported by a small Kwantung Army contingent, including General Yano (deputy chief of staff), Colonel Hattori, and Major Tsuji from the Operations Section. Despite the big air raid having alerted Zhukov, the initial Japanese moves from July 1–3 achieved complete tactical surprise, aided by Tsuji's bold plan. The first indication of the major offensive came when General Yasuoka's tanks attacked predawn on July 3. Yasuoka suspected Soviet troops south of him attempting to retreat across the Halha to the west bank, and he ordered his tanks to attack immediately, with infantry not yet in position. The night's low clouds, no moon, and low visibility—along with a passing thunderstorm lighting the sky—made the scene dramatic. Seventy Japanese tanks roared forward, supported by infantry and artillery, and the Soviet 149th Infantry Regiment found itself overwhelmed. Zhukov, hearing of Yasuoka's assault but unaware that Komatsubara had crossed the Halha, ordered his armor to move northeast to Bain Tsagan to confront the initiative. There, Soviet armor clashed with Japanese forces in a chaotic, largely uncoordinated engagement. The Soviet counterattacks, supported by heavy artillery, halted much of the Japanese momentum, and by late afternoon Japanese infantry had to dig in west of the Halha. The crossing had been accomplished without Soviet reconnaissance detecting it in time, but Zhukov's counterattacks, the limits of Japanese armored mobility across the pontoon, and the heat and exhaustion of the troops constrained the Japanese effort. By the afternoon of July 3, Zhukov's forces were pressing hard, and the Japanese momentum began to stall. Yasuoka's tanks, supported by a lack of infantry and the fatigue and losses suffered by the infantry, could not close the gap to link with Komatsubara's forces. The Type 89 tanks, designed for infantry support, were ill-suited to penetrating Soviet armor, especially when faced with BT-5/BT-7 tanks and strong anti-tank guns. The Type 95 light tanks were faster but lightly armored, and suffered heavily from Soviet fire and air attacks. Infantry on the western bank struggled to catch up with tanks, shot through by Soviet artillery and armor, while the 64th Regiment could not keep pace with the tanks due to the infantry's lack of motorized transport. By late afternoon, Yasuoka's advance stalled far short of the river junction and the Soviet bridge. The infantry dug in to withstand Soviet bombardment, and the Japanese tank regiments withdrew to their jump-off points by nightfall. The Japanese suffered heavy losses in tanks, though some were recovered and repaired; by July 9, KwAHQ decided to withdraw its two tank regiments from the theater. Armor would play no further role in the Nomonhan conflict. The Soviets, by contrast, sustained heavier tank losses but began to replenish with new models. The July offensive, for Kwantung Army, proved a failure. Part of the failure stemmed from a difficult blend of terrain and logistics. Unusually heavy rains in late June had transformed the dirt roads between Hailar and Nomonhan into a mud-filled quagmire. Japanese truck transport, already limited, was so hampered by these conditions that combat effectiveness suffered significantly. Colonel Yamagata's 64th Infantry Regiment, proceeding on foot, could not keep pace with or support General Yasuoka's tanks on July 3–4. Komatsubara's infantry on the west bank of the Halha ran short of ammunition, food, and water. As in the May 28 battle, the main cause of the Kwantung Army's July offensive failure was wholly inadequate military intelligence. Once again, the enemy's strength had been seriously underestimated. Moreover, a troubling realization was dawning at KwAHQ and in the field: the intelligence error was not merely quantitative but qualitative. The Soviets were not only more numerous but also far more potent than anticipated. The attacking Japanese forces initially held a slight numerical edge and enjoyed tactical surprise, but the Red Army fought tenaciously, and the weight of Soviet firepower proved decisive. Japan, hampered by a relative lack of raw materials and industrial capacity, could not match the great powers in the quantitative production of military materiel. Consequently, Japanese military leaders traditionally emphasized the spiritual superiority of Japan's armed forces in doctrine and training, often underestimating the importance of material factors, including firepower. This was especially true of the army that had carried the tactic of the massed bayonet charge into World War II. This "spiritual" combat doctrine arose from necessity; admitting material superiority would have implied defeat. Japan's earlier victories in the Sino-Japanese War, Russo-Japanese War, the Manchurian incident, and the China War, along with legendary medieval victories over the Mongol hordes, seemed to confirm the transcendent importance of fighting spirit. Only within such a doctrine could the Imperial Japanese Army muster inner strength and confidence to face formidable enemies. This was especially evident against Soviet Russia, whose vast geography, population, and resources loomed large. Yet what of its spirit? The Japanese military dismissed Bolshevism as a base, materialist philosophy utterly lacking spiritual power. Consequently, the Red Army was presumed to have low morale and weak fighting effectiveness. Stalin's purges only reinforced this belief. Kwantung Army's recent experiences at Nomonhan undermined this outlook. Among ordinary soldiers and officers alike, from the 23rd Division Staff to KwAHQ—grim questions formed: Had Soviet materiel and firepower proven superior to Japanese fighting spirit? If not, did the enemy possess a fighting spirit comparable to their own? To some in Kwantung Army, these questions were grotesque and almost unthinkable. To others, the implications were too painful to face. Perhaps May and July's combat results were an aberration caused by the 23rd Division's inexperience. Nevertheless, a belief took hold at KwAHQ that this situation required radical rectification. Zhukov's 1st Army Headquarters, evaluating recent events, was not immune to self-criticism and concern for the future. The enemy's success in transporting nearly 10,000 men across the Halha without detection—despite heightened Soviet alert after the June 27 air raid—revealed a level of carelessness and lack of foresight at Zhukov's level. Zhukov, however, did not fully capitalize on Komatsubara's precarious position on July 4–5. Conversely, Zhukov and his troops reacted calmly in the crisis's early hours. Although surprised and outnumbered, Zhukov immediately recognized that "our trump cards were the armored detachments, and we decided to use them immediately." He acted decisively, and the rapid deployment of armor proved pivotal. Some criticized the uncoordinated and clumsy Soviet assault on Komatsubara's infantry on July 3, but the Japanese were only a few hours' march from the river junction and the Soviet bridge. By hurling tanks at Komatsubara's advance with insufficient infantry support, Mikhail Yakovlev (11th Tank Brigade) and A. L. Lesovoi (7th Mechanized Brigade) incurred heavy losses. Nonetheless, they halted the Japanese southward advance, forcing Komatsubara onto the defensive, from which he never regained momentum. Zhukov did not flinch from heavy casualties to achieve his objectives. He later told General Dwight D. Eisenhower that if the enemy faced a minefield, their infantry attacked as if it did not exist, treating personnel mine losses as equal to those that would have occurred if the Germans defended the area with strong troops rather than minefields. Zhukov admitted losing 120 tanks and armored cars that day—a high price, but necessary to avert defeat. Years later, Zhukov defended his Nomonhan tactics, arguing he knew his armor would suffer heavy losses, but that was the only way to prevent the Japanese from seizing the bridge at the river confluence. Had Komatsubara's forces advanced unchecked for another two or three hours, they might have fought through to the Soviet bridge and linked with the Yasuoka detachment, endangering Zhukov's forces. Zhukov credited Yakovlev, Lesovoi, and their men with stabilizing the crisis through timely and self-sacrificing counterattacks. The armored car battalion of the 8th MPR Cavalry Division also distinguished itself in this action. Zhukov and his tankmen learned valuable lessons in those two days of brutal combat. A key takeaway was the successful use of large tank formations as an independent primary attack force, contrary to then-orthodox doctrine, which saw armor mainly as infantry support and favored integrating armor into every infantry regiment rather than maintaining large, autonomous armored units. The German blitzkrieg demonstrations in Poland and Western Europe soon followed, but, until then, few major armies had absorbed the tank-warfare theories championed by Basil Liddell-Hart and Charles de Gaulle. The Soviet high command's leading proponent of large-scale tank warfare had been Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky. His execution in 1937 erased those ideas, and the Red Army subsequently disbanded armored divisions and dispersed tanks among infantry, misapplying battlefield lessons from the Spanish Civil War. Yet Zhukov was learning a different lesson on a different battlefield. The open terrain of eastern Mongolia favored tanks, and Zhukov was a rapid learner. The Russians also learned mundane, but crucial, lessons: Japanese infantry bravely clambering onto their vehicles taught Soviet tank crews to lock hatch lids from the inside. The BT-5 and BT-7 tanks were easily set aflame by primitive hand-thrown firebombs, and rear deck ventilation grills and exhaust manifolds were vulnerable and required shielding. Broadly, the battle suggested to future Red Army commander Zhukov that tank and motorized troops, coordinated with air power and mobile artillery, could decisively conduct rapid operations. Zhukov was not the first to envision combining mobile firepower with air and artillery, but he had rare opportunities to apply this formula in crucial tests. The July offensive confirmed to the Soviets that the Nomonhan incident was far from a border skirmish; it signaled intent for further aggression. Moscow's leadership, informed by Richard Sorge's Tokyo network, perceived Japan's renewed effort to draw Germany into an anti-Soviet alliance as a dangerous possibility. Stalin and Vyacheslav Molotov began indicating to Joachim von Ribbentrop and Adolf Hitler that Berlin's stance on the Soviet–Japanese conflict would influence Soviet-German rapprochement considerations. Meanwhile, Moscow decided to reinforce Zhukov. Tens of thousands of troops and machines were ordered to Mongolia, with imports from European Russia. Foreign diplomats traveling the Trans-Siberian Railway reported eastbound trains jammed with personnel and matériel. The buildup faced a major bottleneck at Borzya, the easternmost railhead in the MPR, about 400 miles from the Halha. To prevent a logistics choke, a massive truck transport operation was needed. Thousands of trucks, half-tracks, gun-towing tractors, and other vehicles were organized into a continuous eight-hundred-mile, five-day shuttle run. The Trans-Baikal Military District, under General Shtern, supervised the effort. East of the Halha, many Japanese officers still refused to accept a failure verdict for the July offensive. General Komatsubara did not return to Hailar, instead establishing a temporary divisional HQ at Kanchuerhmiao, where his staff grappled with overcoming Soviet firepower. They concluded that night combat—long a staple of Japanese infantry tactics—could offset Soviet advantages. On July 7 at 9:30 p.m., a thirty-minute Japanese artillery barrage preceded a nighttime assault by elements of the 64th and 72nd Regiments. The Soviet 149th Infantry Regiment and supporting Mongolian cavalry were surprised and forced to fall back toward the Halha before counterattacking. Reinforcements arrived on both sides, and in brutal close-quarters combat the Japanese gained a partial local advantage, but were eventually pushed back; Major I. M. Remizov of the 149th Regiment was killed and later posthumously named a Hero of the Soviet Union. Since late May, Soviet engineers had built at least seven bridges across the Halha and Holsten Rivers to support operations. By July 7–8, Japanese demolition teams destroyed two Soviet bridges. Komatsubara believed that destroying bridges could disrupt Soviet operations east of the Halha and help secure the border. Night attacks continued from July 8 to July 12 against the Soviet perimeter, with Japanese assaults constricting Zhukov's bridgehead while Soviet artillery and counterattacks relentlessly pressed. Casualties mounted on both sides. The Japanese suffered heavy losses but gained some positions; Soviet artillery, supported by motorized infantry and armor, gradually pushed back the attackers. The biggest problem for Japan remained Soviet artillery superiority and the lack of a commensurate counter-battery capability. Japanese infantry had to withdraw to higher ground at night to avoid daytime exposure to artillery and tanks. On the nights of July 11–12, Yamagata's 64th Regiment and elements of Colonel Sakai Mikio's 72nd Regiment attempted a major assault on the Soviet bridgehead. Despite taking heavy casualties, the Japanese managed to push defenders back to the river on occasion, but Soviet counterattacks, supported by tiresome artillery and armor, prevented a decisive breakthrough. Brigade Commander Yakovlev of the 11th Armored, who led several counterattacks, was killed and later honored as a Hero of the Soviet Union; his gun stands today as a monument at the battlefield. The July 11–12 action marked the high-water mark of the Kwantung Army's attempt to expel Soviet/MPR forces east of the Halha. Komatsubara eventually suspended the costly night attacks; by that night, the 64th Regiment had suffered roughly 80–90 killed and about three times that number wounded. The decision proved controversial, with some arguing that he had not realized how close his forces had come to seizing the bridge. Others argued that broader strategic considerations justified the pause. Throughout the Nomonhan fighting, Soviet artillery superiority, both quantitative and qualitative, became painfully evident. The Soviet guns exacted heavy tolls and repeatedly forced Japanese infantry to withdraw from exposed positions. The Japanese artillery, in contrast, could not match the Red Army's scale. By July 25, Kwantung Army ended its artillery attack, a humiliating setback. Tokyo and Hsinking recognized the futility of achieving a decisive military victory at Nomonhan and shifted toward seeking a diplomatic settlement, even if concessions to the Soviet Union and the MPR were necessary. Kwantung Army, however, opposed negotiations, fearing it would echo the "Changkufeng debacle" and be read by enemies as weakness. Tsuji lamented that Kwantung Army's insistence on framing the second phase as a tie—despite heavy Soviet losses, revealed a reluctance to concede any territory. Differences in outlook and policy between AGS and Kwantung Army—and the central army's inability to impose its will on Manchukuo's field forces—became clear. The military establishment buzzed with stories of gekokujo (the superiority of the superior) within Kwantung Army and its relations with the General Staff. To enforce compliance, AGS ordered General Isogai to Tokyo for briefings, and KwAHQ's leadership occasionally distanced itself from AGS. On July 20, Isogai arrived at General Staff Headquarters and was presented with "Essentials for Settlement of the Nomonhan Incident," a formal document outlining a step-by-step plan for Kwantung Army to maintain its defensive position east of the Halha while diplomatic negotiations proceeded. If negotiations failed, Kwantung Army would withdraw to the boundary claimed by the Soviet Union by winter. Isogai, the most restrained member of the Kwantung Army circle, argued against accepting the Essentials, insisting on preserving Kwantung Army's honor and rejecting a unilateral east-bank withdrawal. A tense exchange followed, but General Nakajima ended the dispute by noting that international boundaries cannot be determined by the army alone. Isogai pledged to report the General Staff's views to his commander and take the Essentials back to KwAHQ for study. Technically, the General Staff's Essentials were not orders; in practice, however, they were treated as such. Kwantung Army tended to view them as suggestions and retained discretion in implementation. AGS hoped the Essentials would mollify Kwantung Army's wounded pride. The August 4 decision to create a 6 Army within Kwantung Army, led by General Ogisu Rippei, further complicated the command structure. Komatsubara's 23rd Division and nearby units were attached to the 6 Army, which also took responsibility for defending west-central Manchukuo, including the Nomonhan area. The 6 Army existed largely on paper, essentially a small headquarters to insulate KwAHQ from battlefield realities. AGS sought a more accountable layer of command between KwAHQ and the combat zone, but General Ueda and KwAHQ resented the move and offered little cooperation. In the final weeks before the last battles, General Ogisu and his small staff had limited influence on Nomonhan. Meanwhile, the European crisis over German demands on Poland intensified, moving into a configuration highly favorable to the Soviet Union. By the first week of August, it became evident in the Kremlin that both Anglo-French powers and the Germans were vying to secure an alliance with Moscow. Stalin knew now that he would likely have a free hand in the coming war in the West. At the same time, Richard Sorge, the Soviet master spy in Tokyo, correctly reported that Japan's top political and military leaders sought to prevent the escalation of the Nomonhan incident into an all-out war. These developments gave the cautious Soviet dictator the confidence to commit the Red Army to large-scale combat operations in eastern Mongolia. In early August, Stalin ordered preparations for a major offensive to clear the Nomonhan area of the "Japanese samurai who had violated the territory of the friendly Outer Mongolian people." The buildup of Zhukov's 1st Army Group accelerated still further. Its July strength was augmented by the 57th and 82nd Infantry Divisions, the 6th Tank Brigade, the 212th Airborne Brigade, numerous smaller infantry, armor, and artillery units, and two Mongolian cavalry divisions. Soviet air power in the area was also greatly strengthened. When this buildup was completed by mid-August, Zhukov commanded an infantry force equivalent to four divisions, supported by two cavalry divisions, 216 artillery pieces, 498 armored vehicles, and 581 aircraft. To bring in the supplies necessary for this force to launch an offensive, General Shtern's Trans-Baikal Military District Headquarters amassed a fleet of more than 4,200 vehicles, which trucked in about 55,000 tons of materiel from the distant railway depot at Borzya. The Japanese intelligence network in Outer Mongolia was weak, a problem that went unremedied throughout the Nomonhan incident. This deficiency, coupled with the curtailment of Kwantung Army's transborder air operations, helps explain why the Japanese remained ignorant of the scope of Zhukov's buildup. They were aware that some reinforcements were flowing eastward across the Trans-Siberian Railway toward the MPR but had no idea of the volume. Then, at the end of July, Kwantung Army Intelligence intercepted part of a Soviet telegraph transmission indicating that preparations were under way for some offensive operation in the middle of August. This caused a stir at KwAHQ. Generals Ueda and Yano suspected that the enemy planned to strike across the Halha River. Ueda's initial reaction was to reinforce the 23rd Division at Nomonhan with the rest of the highly regarded 7th Division. However, the 7th Division was Kwantung Army's sole strategic reserve, and the Operations Section was reluctant to commit it to extreme western Manchukuo, fearing mobilization of Soviet forces in the Maritime Province and a possible attack in the east near Changkufeng. The Kwantung Army commander again ignored his own better judgment and accepted the Operations Section's recommendation. The main strength of the 7th Division remained at its base near Tsitsihar, but another infantry regiment, the 28th, was dispatched to the Nomonhan area, as was an infantry battalion from the Mukden Garrison. Earlier, in mid-July, Kwantung Army had sent Komatsubara 1,160 individual replacements to make up for casualties from earlier fighting. All these reinforcements combined, however, did little more than replace losses: as of July 25, 1,400 killed (including 200 officers) and 3,000 wounded. Kwantung Army directed Komatsubara to dig in, construct fortifications, and adopt a defensive posture. Colonel Numazaki, who commanded the 23rd Division's Engineer Regiment, was unhappy with the defensive line he was ordered to fortify and urged a slight pullback to more easily defensible terrain. Komatsubara, however, refused to retreat from ground his men had bled to take. He and his line officers still nourished hope of a revenge offensive. As a result, the Japanese defensive positions proved to be as weak as Numazaki feared. As Zhukov's 1st Army Group prepared to strike, the effective Japanese strength at Nomonhan was less than 1.5 divisions. Major Tsuji and his colleagues in the Operations Section had little confidence in Kwantung Army's own Intelligence Section, which is part of the reason why Tsuji frequently conducted his own reconnaissance missions. Up to this time it was gospel in the Japanese army that the maximum range for large-scale infantry operations was 125–175 miles from a railway; anything beyond 200 miles from a railway was considered logistically impossible. Since Kwantung Army had only 800 trucks available in all of Manchukuo in 1939, the massive Soviet logistical effort involving more than 4,200 trucks was almost unimaginable to the Japanese. Consequently, the Operations Staff believed it had made the correct defensive deployments if a Soviet attack were to occur, which it doubted. If the enemy did strike at Nomonhan, it was believed that it could not marshal enough strength in that remote region to threaten the reinforced 23rd Division. Furthermore, the 7th Division, based at Tsitsihar on a major rail line, could be transported to any trouble spot on the eastern or western frontier in a few days. KwAHQ advised Komatsubara to maintain a defensive posture and prepare to meet a possible enemy attack around August 14 or 15. At this time, Kwantung Army also maintained a secret organization codenamed Unit 731, officially the Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department of the Kwantung Army. Unit 731 specialized in biological and chemical warfare, with main facilities and laboratories in Harbin, including a notorious prison-laboratory complex. During the early August lull at Nomonhan, a detachment from Unit 731 infected the Halha River with bacteria of an acute cholera-like strain. There are no reports in Soviet or Japanese accounts that this attempted biological warfare had any effect. In the war's final days, Unit 731 was disbanded, Harbin facilities demolished, and most personnel fled to Japan—but not before they gassed the surviving 150 human subjects and burned their corpses. The unit's commander, Lieutenant General Ishii Shiro, kept his men secret and threatened retaliation against informers. Ishii and his senior colleagues escaped prosecution at the Tokyo War Crimes Trials by trading the results of their experiments to U.S. authorities in exchange for immunity. The Japanese 6th Army exerted some half-hearted effort to construct defensive fortifications, but scarcity of building materials, wood had to be trucked in from far away—helped explain the lack of enthusiasm. More importantly, Japanese doctrine despised static defense and favored offense, so Kwantung Army waited to see how events would unfold. West of the Halha, Zhukov accelerated preparations. Due to tight perimeter security, few Japanese deserters, and a near-absence of civilian presence, Soviet intelligence found it hard to glean depth on Japanese defensive positions. Combat intelligence could only reveal the frontline disposition and closest mortar and artillery emplacements. Aerial reconnaissance showed photographs, but Japanese camouflage and mock-ups limited their usefulness. The new commander of the 149th Mechanized Infantry Regiment personally directed infiltration and intelligence gathering, penetrating Japanese lines on several nights and returning crucial data: Komatsubara's northern and southern flanks were held by Manchukuoan cavalry, and mobile reserves were lacking. With this information, Zhukov crafted a plan of attack. The main Japanese strength was concentrated a few miles east of the Halha, on both banks of the Holsten River. Their infantry lacked mobility and armor, and their flanks were weak. Zhukov decided to split the 1st Army Group into three strike forces: the central force would deliver a frontal assault to pin the main Japanese strength, while the northern and southern forces, carrying the bulk of the armor, would turn the Japanese flanks and drive the enemy into a pocket to be destroyed by the three-pronged effort. The plan depended on tactical surprise and overwhelming force at the points of attack. The offensive was to begin in the latter part of August, pending final approval from Moscow. To ensure tactical surprise, Zhukov and his staff devised an elaborate program of concealment and deception, disinformation. Units and materiel arriving at Tamsag Bulak toward the Halha were moved only at night with lights out. Noting that the Japanese were tapping telephone lines and intercepting radio messages, 1st Army Headquarters sent a series of false messages in an easily decipherable code about defensive preparations and autumn-winter campaigning. Thousands of leaflets titled "What the Infantryman Should Know about Defense" were distributed among troops. About two weeks before the attack, the Soviets brought in sound equipment to simulate tank and aircraft engines and heavy construction noises, staging long, loud performances nightly. At first, the Japanese mistook the sounds for large-scale enemy activity and fired toward the sounds. After a few nights, they realized it was only sound effects, and tried to ignore the "serenade." On the eve of the attack, the actual concentration and staging sounds went largely unnoticed by the Japanese. On August 7–8, Zhukov conducted minor attacks to expand the Halha bridgehead to a depth of two to three miles. These attacks, contained relatively easily by Komatsubara's troops, reinforced Kwantung Army's false sense of confidence. The Japanese military attaché in Moscow misread Soviet press coverage. In early August, the attaché advised that unlike the Changkufeng incident a year earlier, Soviet press was largely ignoring the conflict, implying low morale and a favorable prognosis for the Red Army. Kwantung Army leaders seized on this as confirmation to refrain from any display of restraint or doubt, misplaced confidence. There were, however, portents of danger. Three weeks before the Soviet attack, Colonel Isomura Takesuki, head of Kwantung Army's Intelligence Section, warned of the vulnerability of the 23rd Division's flanks. Tsuji and colleagues dismissed this, and General Kasahara Yukio of AGS also went unheeded. The "desk jockey" General Staff officers commanded little respect at KwAHQ. Around August 10, General Hata Yuzaburo, Komatsubara's successor as chief of the Special Services Agency at Harbin, warned that enemy strength in the Mongolian salient was very great and seriously underestimated at KwAHQ. Yet no decisive action followed before Zhukov's attack. Kwantung Army's inaction and unpreparedness prior to the Soviet offensive appear to reflect faulty intelligence compounded by hubris. But a more nuanced explanation suggests a fatalistic wishful thinking rooted in the Japanese military culture—the belief that their spiritual strength would prevail, leading them to assume enemy strength was not as great as reported, or that victory was inevitable regardless of resources. Meanwhile, in the rational West, the Nazi war machine faced the Polish frontier as Adolf Hitler pressed Stalin for a nonaggression pact. The German-Soviet Nonaggression Pact would neutralize the threat of a two-front war for Germany and clear the way for Hitler's invasion of Poland. If the pact was a green light, it signaled in both directions: it would also neutralize the German threat to Russia and clear the way for Zhukov's offensive at Nomonhan. On August 18–19, Hitler pressed Stalin to receive Ribbentrop in Moscow to seal the pact. Thus, reassured in the West, Stalin dared to act boldly against Japan. Zhukov supervised final preparations for his attack. Zhukov held back forward deployments until the last minute. By August 18, he had only four infantry regiments, a machine gun brigade, and Mongolian cavalry east of the Halha. Operational security was extremely tight: a week before the attack, Soviet radio traffic in the area virtually ceased. Only Zhukov and a few key officers worked on the plan, aided by a single typist. Line officers and service chiefs received information on a need-to-know basis. The date for the attack was shared with unit commanders one to four days in advance, depending on seniority. Noncommissioned officers and ordinary soldiers learned of the offensive one day in advance and received specific orders three hours before the attack.   Heavy rain grounded Japanese aerial reconnaissance from August 17 to midday on the 19th, but on August 19 Captain Oizumi Seisho in a Japanese scout plane observed the massing of Soviet forces near the west bank of the Halha. Enemy armor and troops were advancing toward the river in dispersed formations, with no new bridges but pontoon stocks spotted near the river. Oizumi sent a warning to a frontline unit and rushed back to report. The air group dispatched additional recon planes and discovered that the Japanese garrison on Fui Heights, near the northern end of Komatsubara's line, was being encircled by Soviet armor and mechanized infantry—observed by alarmed Japanese officers on and near the heights. These late discoveries on August 19 were not reported to KwAHQ and had no effect on the 6th Army and the 23rd Division's alertness on the eve of the storm. As is common in militaries, a fatal gap persisted between those gathering intelligence and those in a position to act on it. On the night of August 19–20, under cover of darkness, the bulk of the Soviet 1st Army Group crossed the Halha into the expanded Soviet enclave on the east bank.  I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. By August, European diplomacy left Moscow confident in a foothold against Germany and Britain, while Sorge's intelligence indicated Japan aimed to avoid a full-blown war. Stalin ordered a major offensive to clear Nomonhan, fueling Zhukov's buildup in eastern Mongolia. Kwantung Army, hampered by limited logistics, weak intelligence, and defensive posture, faced mounting pressure. 

Record Numbers Shatter Post-Pandemic Expectations Six years after the pandemic first disrupted American life, a troubling trend emerges across rural Virginia. The Blue Ridge Area Food Bank now serves approximately 180,000 people every month—a staggering 39,000 more than the pandemic's peak. Les Sinclair, the organization's Communications and PR Manager, reveals this sobering reality during a recent conversation on The Valley Today with host Janet Michael. Initially, food bank officials believed the pandemic would represent the worst crisis they'd ever face. When government assistance programs temporarily lifted many families out of poverty, demand dropped slightly to around 141,000 monthly visits. However, this optimism proved short-lived. "We thought the numbers would never go up beyond the pandemic max," Les explains. "That just didn't pan out." Instead, inflation took hold with devastating consequences. While prices soared across every sector, wages failed to keep pace. Consequently, more working families find themselves unable to afford basic necessities, forcing them to seek food assistance for the first time in their lives. A Massive Rural Footprint The Blue Ridge Area Food Bank operates across an impressive territory that spans 25 counties and eight cities throughout Virginia. Stretching from Winchester and Frederick County in the north to beyond Lynchburg and Bedford County in the south, the organization covers approximately 12,000 square miles—roughly the size of Maryland or one-third of Virginia's total area. To manage this vast region effectively, the food bank maintains four strategic warehouse locations. Their headquarters sits in Verona, just outside Staunton, while additional distribution centers operate in Winchester, Charlottesville, and Lynchburg. Notably, the Winchester facility alone serves Frederick, Clarke, Fauquier, Warren, Shenandoah, Page, and Rappahannock Counties, including the densely populated Loudoun County. Moreover, the organization represents a groundbreaking experiment in food banking. When founded in 1981, most food banks concentrated on urban areas where dense populations made distribution easier. The Blue Ridge Area Food Bank, however, pioneered rural food distribution—a critical distinction since nine out of ten food-insecure Americans live in rural communities rather than urban centers. The Partnership Model That Makes It Work The food bank functions as a sophisticated logistics operation, partnering with Feeding America nationally and hundreds of local food pantries regionally. Les compares their role to a Walmart warehouse, buying food by the truckload and storing massive quantities. Meanwhile, local pantries like Winchester CCAP serve as the "customer-facing" locations, directly distributing food to families in need. This partnership proves essential for reaching scattered rural populations. "We couldn't do what we do without them," Les emphasizes. "They couldn't do what they do without us." Furthermore, the organization sources food from diverse channels. Retail grocers contribute 36% of donations through partner pickup programs, where pantries collect excess inventory directly from stores like Food Lion, Kroger, and Giant. Additionally, the USDA provides government-purchased food from American farmers, while large manufacturers donate products with misprinted labels or excess inventory. Local and regional farmers also contribute fresh produce to the network. The Grocery Store Challenge Recently, however, the retail partnership faced unexpected pressure. During October and November, and again during winter snowstorms, consumers cleared grocery store shelves completely. When stores have no excess inventory, they have nothing left to donate. Compounding this challenge, grocery chains have become remarkably efficient at predicting demand. Using AI technology, they now anticipate that shoppers will buy strawberry Pop-Tarts before storms and adjust inventory accordingly. While this efficiency benefits retailers and consumers, it reduces the surplus available for food banks. Simultaneously, USDA food supplies have dropped 30% year-over-year, forcing the food bank to purchase more food directly. Although they cannot fully replace the high-quality proteins and vegetables the government typically provides, they continue prioritizing nutritious options for their partner pantries. Shattering Misconceptions About Food Pantry Users Perhaps the most persistent myth surrounding food insecurity involves who actually needs assistance. Many people assume food pantry visitors are simply lazy and should "get a job." The reality, however, tells a dramatically different story. Most people seeking food assistance are working. They're trying to improve their lives but living on financial margins so thin that a single unexpected expense creates crisis. In fact, more than a quarter of the food bank's guests visit only once per year—they simply need help getting over a temporary hump. Les shares the story of a convenience store worker who injured her wrist on the job. Unable to work while waiting for workers' compensation, she has zero income and cares for a paralyzed son. She's not lazy—she's injured, uninsured temporarily, and desperately trying to survive until she can return to work. Even when workers' compensation arrives, it typically covers only 70% of regular wages and takes considerable time to process. For families living paycheck to paycheck, missing even one payment creates cascading financial disasters. The Government Shutdown Ripple Effect Currently, partial government shutdowns compound these challenges. Federal workers, particularly TSA agents, continue reporting to work without paychecks. They still pay for childcare, gas, and other necessities, but many receive payment only monthly—making it extraordinarily difficult to stretch resources from one paycheck to the next. Contrary to popular belief, landlords cannot always wait patiently for delayed rent payments. Many landlords depend on rental income to pay their own mortgages. When a tenant misses a $2,000 rent payment, the landlord must still cover their mortgage. Moreover, the economic impact extends far beyond government employees. When federal workers stop dining out, restaurants lose business. Wait staff lose tips. Restaurant owners order less food from suppliers like Sysco. Truck drivers haul fewer loads. The entire economic system suffers. Sarah Cohen of Route 11 Chips experienced this firsthand. During COVID and government shutdowns, her sales to DC cafes plummeted because federal workers weren't coming to the office for lunch. These ripple effects reach deep into Virginia's economy, affecting businesses and workers far from the capital. The Impossible Choice: Heat or Eat Winter brings particularly cruel dilemmas for struggling families. Les recently spoke with William, a roofer injured on the job who lives in a mobile home with his dog, Cocoa. Unable to afford heating, William and Cocoa "just sort of curl up" together while he waits for surgeries that will allow him to return to work. Another woman caring for three disabled grandchildren faces $400 monthly electric bills. With both she and her husband experiencing serious health issues and the children's parents out of the picture, they constantly struggle with the impossible choice between heating their home and feeding their family. These aren't isolated cases. Across the food bank's service area, families regularly face this devastating decision. When $600 heating bills arrive after cold snaps, many choose to keep the lights on and visit food pantries to feed their families. Food as Medicine: A Holistic Approach The Blue Ridge Area Food Bank takes a progressive stance on nutrition, viewing food as medicine rather than mere sustenance. They prioritize fresh produce, which comprised 30% of their distribution last year, because they understand that proper nutrition helps people thrive. Nutritious food keeps medical bills down across entire communities. Children pay better attention in school when properly nourished. People can manage chronic illnesses and diseases through better nutrition. Conversely, when families can only afford high-calorie processed foods, they face increased health risks despite consuming adequate calories—debunking the myth that overweight individuals cannot be food insecure. Additionally, access to food reduces stress, which itself functions as a health intervention. When people live on the edge of a financial cliff, they cannot make good long-term decisions. They're too focused on simply not falling. However, when food security removes one major stressor, families can step back from that precipice and begin making better choices for their futures. Quality Food for Everyone Another common misconception suggests that food bank offerings are somehow subpar. In reality, the food distributed through this network maintains high-quality standards. While well-meaning donors sometimes contribute items like ramen noodles during food drives, the bulk of distributed food comes from retail grocers, USDA programs, and direct purchases of nutritious items. The food bank specifically prioritizes produce because people crave fresh fruits and vegetables. Although produce represents one of the most expensive food categories—often making it a luxury for families on tight budgets—the organization believes everyone deserves access to healthy, nutritious food regardless of their economic circumstances. How Communities Can Help Fortunately, community members have multiple ways to support this critical mission. Volunteering provides valuable assistance, and notably, many food bank guests themselves volunteer, giving back to the community that supported them during difficult times. Financial donations prove particularly effective. Just $1 helps provide more than three meals, meaning $10 supplies a month of meals for someone in need, while $100 provides 300 meals. The food bank's purchasing power and logistics expertise amplify every dollar donated. Beyond time and money, advocacy matters tremendously. Currently, the Federation of Virginia Food Banks—representing all seven food banks across the state—works to promote "food as medicine" initiatives with the state legislature. Community members can support these efforts through the food bank's website at BRAFB.org/actnow or BRAFB.org/getinvolved. Finally, social media engagement amplifies the message. Following the food bank's social media accounts, resharing posts, and commenting helps spread awareness that hunger relief remains an urgent community need. Finding Help When You Need It For individuals and families currently struggling with food insecurity, Les offers an important message: "You're not alone, and we are here with you. We are here to walk with you through this challenge in your life." The food bank's website features an easy-to-use food finder tool. Visitors to BRAFB.org can click "Find Food," enter their address, and immediately see all nearby pantries with contact information, open hours, and everything needed to access food quickly. Alternatively, Virginians can call 211 for phone-based assistance connecting them with local resources. A Community Responsibility As this conversation reveals, food insecurity affects far more people than most realize—one in nine people across the food bank's service area. These aren't strangers or statistics; they're neighbors, coworkers, and community members facing temporary crises that could happen to anyone. The Blue Ridge Area Food Bank stands ready to help, but they cannot do it alone. Through partnerships with local pantries, support from community donors and volunteers, and advocacy for systemic solutions, the organization continues fighting to ensure everyone has enough to eat. In Janet Michael's words, it's "a responsibility I do not take lightly"—and neither should any of us.

In this episode of the DecaMillionaire Decoded podcast, host Justin Goodbread is joined by Dan Romer, a multifaceted leader who serves as a pastor, business owner, husband, and father of seven. They discuss how a leader's internal character and spiritual alignment are the true drivers of external business success and personal freedom. Dan explains that if a business owner sows shortcuts, dishonesty, or ego, the harvest will eventually reflect those choices. Conversely, sowing discipline and spiritual obedience leads to divine order and financial acceleration. WWW: Goshenites.com LinkedIn: Dan Romer YouTube: Dan Romer Instagram: @dan_romer_ Learn more about Relentless Value Coaching:  https://www.justingoodbread.com/coaching/

Tax Refunds and the Consumer Spending Boost There is encouraging news on the tax front. Tax refunds for 2026 are already running approximately $3 billion ahead of last year, reflecting a 17% increase driven in part by recent tax legislation. While that growth rate is slightly below earlier projections, it remains strong and meaningful. Historically, refund season begins to accelerate in late February and continues through May. Current data show this year's refunds are already tracking ahead of prior years, suggesting that a meaningful influx of cash into households is just beginning. Why does this matter for investors? Consumer spending is a major engine of the U.S. economy and a key contributor to corporate revenue and profit growth. With interest rates trending lower and refunds rising, more money in consumers' pockets could translate into stronger spending. Increased spending supports corporate profitability, which in turn underpins stock market performance. We are monitoring refund trends closely, as they may provide an important tailwind for economic growth and equities in the months ahead. The Supreme Court Ruling and the Future of Tariffs Tariff policy shifted dramatically following a recent Supreme Court ruling regarding the administration's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEPA). While IEPA has traditionally been used for sanctions and embargoes, it had been applied in this case to implement tariffs. The Court ruled that using IEPA in this way was unconstitutional. Importantly, the decision does not eliminate the executive branch's authority to impose tariffs. Congress has granted tariff powers through other established mechanisms. In response to the ruling, the administration moved quickly to replace IEPA-based tariffs with alternative authorities, including Section 122 for a broad 15% tariff framework, as well as Sections 301 and 232 for more targeted, country- and industry-specific tariffs. Existing tariffs on industries such as steel and aluminum, as well as tariffs imposed on China beginning in 2018 under Section 301, remain in place. The ruling also raises questions about roughly $130 billion in tariffs previously collected under IEPA. Corporations are expected to pursue litigation seeking refunds, a process that could take months or even years to resolve. While companies may fight aggressively for those funds, consumers should not expect direct reimbursement for tariff-related price increases on retail goods. For markets, the key takeaway is that while the legal pathway has changed, the overall revenue expectations from tariffs are projected to remain similar. However, the structure has become more complex, and policy developments in this area will continue to warrant close attention. Earnings Growth: The Market's Lifeblood Amid political noise and policy debates, it is important to remember that corporate earnings ultimately drive market performance. With approximately 75% of companies reporting, revenue growth is coming in at roughly 8.5%, exceeding earlier expectations of 6% to 7.5%. Even more impressive is earnings growth, currently tracking around 13.5%, well above prior projections in the 7.5% to 9% range. Strong earnings help justify elevated market valuations. When companies deliver accelerating profits, investors are often willing to pay higher multiples. However, rising earnings also bring rising expectations. Current projections call for approximately 14% earnings growth in 2026 and 15% in 2027, ambitious targets that will require sustained economic strength. Markets often react not just to results, but to the gap between expectations and reality. A solid 10% earnings growth rate could disappoint if investors expected 15%. Conversely, modest expectations that are exceeded can support continued market gains. That is why we monitor both present results and forward-looking projections. Managing expectations is just as important as measuring performance. Greg Powell, CIMA® President and CEO Wealth Consultant Email Greg Powell here Bobby Norman, CFP®, AIF®, CEPA® Managing Director Wealth Consultant Email Bobby Norman here Trey Booth, CFA®, AIF® Chief Investment Officer Wealth Consultant Email Trey Booth here Ty Miller, AIF® Vice President Wealth Consultant Email Ty Miller here Fi Plan Partners is an independent investment firm in Birmingham, AL, with a team of professionals serving clients across the nation through financial planning, wealth management and business consulting. The team at Fi Plan Partners creates strategies in the best interest of their clients using fee based investing. The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. All performance referenced is historical and is no guarantee of future results. All indices are unmanaged and may not be invested into directly. Economic forecasts set forth in this presentation may not develop as predicted. No strategy can ensure success or protect against a loss. Stock investing involves risk including potential loss of principal. Securities and advisory services offered through LPL Financial, Member FINRA/SIPC and a registered investment advisor.The post Tariffs, Taxes, and Earnings, Oh My! first appeared on Fi Plan Partners.

People are freaking out these days, and they're about to freak out even more.  We are in the early days of the 4th Turning, and you aint seen nothing yet.  If you're ever going to make good decisions in a time of crisis, you need to set the table NOW so these events don't affect you much, and you can keep your heads about you when it comes time to make critical moves.  I do feel like I've done a good job of this, and I share how I've done it, here in Episode 244.   Recommended Crypto Trading Platform (And Bonus Eligibility) - https://nononsenseforex.com/cryptocurrencies/best-crypto-trading-platform/   For Decentralized Crypto Trading (US Citizens Can Join) - https://nononsenseforex.com/decentralized-trading-platform/   Blueberry Markets Blog (Top FX Broker) - https://nononsenseforex.com/uncategorized/blueberry-markets-review-my-top-broker-for-2019/   Get a Discount On Any Trading View Package - https://www.tradingview.com/?aff_id=159841   The Blog Has Moved to My New Free Substack - https://thecontrarianinvestorblog.substack.com/p/what-to-expect-and-what-not-to?r=16orow   Follow VP on Twitter https://twitter.com/This_Is_VP4X   Check out my Forex trading material too! https://nononsenseforex.com/   The host of this podcast is not a licensed financial advisor, and nothing heard on this podcast should be taken as financial advice.  Do your own research and understand all financial decisions and the results therein are yours and yours alone.  The host is not responsible for the actions of their sponsors and/or affiliates.  Conversely, views expressed on this podcast are that of the host only and may not reflect the views of any companies mentioned. Trading Forex involves risk.  Losses can exceed deposits. We are not taking requests for episode topics at this time.  Thank you for understanding.

This conversation delves into the complexities of property law, focusing on servitudes, easements, real covenants, and equitable servitudes. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding how these legal concepts bind future property owners and the implications of various legal doctrines. The speakers provide insights into the creation, classification, and termination of these interests, as well as modern reforms in property law. The conversation also emphasizes practical strategies for law students preparing for exams.Unlock the secrets of property law's most powerful tools—servitudes—that enable land use restrictions to survive generations. Whether you're a law student preparing for the bar, a property lawyer navigating complex land disputes, or a developer interested in future-proof land use, this episode reveals how easements, covenants, and equitable servitudes shape our neighborhoods, preserve conservation efforts, and balance individual freedom against community stability.Most land use restrictions are more than just promises—they're durable rights that bind successors, often lasting for decades or even centuries. But how do these interests connect with modern land development? And why do some restrictions stick while others fade away? We dive into the legal architecture behind easements, real covenants, and equitable servitudes, explaining how they're created, enforced, and terminated. You'll learn frameworks to identify, classify, and analyze land use agreements swiftly—crucial skills for exam success and real-world application.We start with easements—the quintessential right to use land without owning it. You'll discover: what distinguishes an easement from a license, the four methods of creation including express, implication, necessity, and prescription, and how to avoid common pitfalls like scope overreach. For example, how an old dirt path evolves into a modern driveway and what limits overburdening an easement today. Plus, the critical difference between appurtenant and in-gross easements and how transferability depends on purpose.Next, we explore covenants—promises enforced through law—and their modern counterpart, equitable servitudes. You'll understand the classic legal tests: what it takes for a promise to run with land, the hurdles of horizontal and vertical privity, and why courts prefer equitable remedies that focus on fairness and notice rather than rigid formalities. For instance, how a developer's neighborhood-wide restrictions are enforced even if not explicitly recorded, thanks to the common scheme doctrine and inquiry notice.The episode then unpacks the ambitious reforms proposed by the Restatement Third of Property, which seek to unify covenants and equitable servitudes into a single enforceable doctrine. You'll see: why the courts are skeptical of formalistic privity rules, the move toward a public policy approach, and the potential to streamline land use restrictions—plus the critical debate over conservation easements that are forever and how courts are rethinking their termination when environmental conditions change.Why does this matter? Because improperly drafted or overly rigid restrictions can cripple land markets and hinder development. Conversely, properly understood and wielded servitudes promote efficient, stable communities and safeguard natural resources. But with tools like conservation easements locking up millions of acres in perpetuity, a profound question emerges: are we creating a "dead hand" that outlasts societal needs, freezing land use for centuries? Perfect for property law students, attorneys, landowners, developers, environmentalists, or anyone curious about how land use restrictions influence the physical and legal landscape of communities. property law, servitudes, easements, real covenants, equitable servitudes, land use, legal rights, property rights, law students, bar exam

Garth Heckman The David Alliance TDAgiantSlayer@Gmail.com      Proverbs 3: 31  Don't envy violent people     or copy their ways. 32  Such wicked people are detestable to the Lord,     but he offers his friendship to the godly. 33  The Lord curses the house of the wicked,     but he blesses the home of the upright. 34  The Lord mocks the mockers     but is gracious to the humble.[c]     Proverbs 3:31–34 serves as the "sharp turn" at the end of a chapter famous for its beautiful imagery of wisdom as a "tree of life." While the earlier verses focus on the internal benefits of wisdom—peace, long life, and favor—these final verses pivot to how we should view others, specifically those who seem to get ahead through ruthlessness.   The Biblical Context Chapter 3 is a fatherly discourse intended to guide a young person through the complexities of social and spiritual life. At this point in the text, the author is contrasting two very different lifestyles: the covenant-keeper (the righteous) and the covenant-breaker (the wicked/scoffer). Verse 31: The Trap of Envy "Do not envy a violent man and do not choose any of his ways." The Background: In the ancient world (much like today), it was easy to look at the "strongman"—the person who used force, intimidation, or exploitation—and admire their results. They often gained wealth and power quickly. The Wisdom: Wisdom warns that "success" built on violence or oppression is a mirage. To "choose his ways" is to adopt a mindset that people are tools to be used rather than neighbors to be loved. Verse 32: The Divine Reaction "For the devious man is an abomination to the Lord, but He is intimate with the upright." The Contrast: The word "devious" refers to someone who is crooked or slippery in their dealings. The Reward: The "upright" receive something far more valuable than the spoils of violence: intimacy with God. The Hebrew word used here for "intimacy" (sôd) refers to a confidential, friendly conversation or a secret counsel. While the wicked get "stuff," the righteous get "God's ear." Verse 33: The Home and the Heart "The curse of the Lord is on the house of the wicked, but He blesses the dwelling of the righteous." The Scope: This verse suggests that the consequences of our character leak into our environment. A "house" in the biblical sense isn't just the architecture; it's the lineage, the family, and the legacy. The Reality: The wicked may have a mansion, but it carries a "curse" (instability and spiritual decay), while even a humble "dwelling" of the righteous is a place of divine favor. Verse 34: The Law of Reciprocity "Toward the scorners he is scornful, but to the humble he gives favor." The Principle: This is one of the most famous verses in the Old Testament, later quoted by both James (4:6) and Peter (1 Peter 5:5). The Mechanics: God mirrors the attitude of the heart. If you are a "scorner" (someone who thinks they are above the rules and looks down on others), you will eventually find yourself looking up at a God who opposes you. Conversely, "favor" (grace) is a gift that flows to the lowest point—the humble.   Summary Table Verse The Human Action The Divine Response 31 Envy/Violence (Warning) Avoid these paths 32 Deviousness vs. Uprightness Abomination vs. Intimacy 33 Wickedness vs. Righteousness Curse vs. Blessing 34 Scorn vs. Humility Scorn vs. Favor/Grace   Modern Application The "background" of these verses is essentially a reality check. They remind us that character is more than just personal morality; it is a social and spiritual trajectory. We are encouraged not to be "gaslit" by the visible success of the ruthless, but to value the quiet, steady blessing of walking in integrity. Would you like me to look into the original Hebrew meanings of any specific words in these verses to give you a deeper look?

The comparison between Tesla's vision-only approach and Waymo's use of LIDAR highlights a fundamental disagreement in self-driving philosophy. Tesla relies exclusively on visual cameras, while Waymo utilizes LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) as a primary sensor to map the vehicle's surroundings.The sources provide the following insights into how these two systems compare:Technical Philosophy and Sensor Suite• Tesla (Vision-Only): Tesla's strategy is based on the belief that vision is the only necessary input for self-driving, similar to how the human nervous system functions. However, critics in the sources argue that Tesla has "blown what could have been a data advantage" by refusing to use additional sensors like LIDAR.• Waymo (LIDAR-based): Waymo's system is often viewed as "far superior" in its current state because LIDAR provides precise depth and spatial data that cameras alone may struggle to replicate.Safety and Performance Records• Crash Rates: Reports indicate that Tesla's robotaxis have a crash rate approximately four times higher than human drivers, based on data from Austin where the fleet logged four crashes in four months. Conversely, some users suggest that Waymo operates with fewer accidents than human drivers.• Reliability: User experiences with Waymo are frequently described as "almost flawless" or working "pretty flawlessly" in cities like San Francisco and Austin. In contrast, Tesla's system is described by some as "lagging on roads" and currently under investigation for incidents, such as those involving railroads.Current Limitations• Waymo's Weaknesses: Despite its perceived superiority, Waymo still faces challenges. Users have noted that the vehicles can struggle in heavy rain or become confused by temporary road closures for events. Additionally, some reports suggest Waymo may rely on remote operators in other countries to assist the vehicles.• Tesla's Weaknesses: Critics argue that it is impossible to compete with LIDAR using only visual cameras. Further, there are reports that Tesla's "driverless" tests still involve human safety monitors following the robotaxis in trailing cars.The Debate on "Vision-Only"While some argue that a vision-only system will "never ever" be as good as LIDAR, others suggest that technology may eventually advance to a point where vision is sufficient. However, the current consensus among the provided sources is that LIDAR provides a level of safety and reliability that Tesla's camera-based system has yet to achieve

JCO PO author Dr. Foldi at UPMC Hillman Cancer Center and University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine shares insights into the JCO PO article, "Personalized Circulating Tumor DNA Testing for Detection of Progression and Treatment Response Monitoring in Patients With Metastatic Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast." Host Dr. Rafeh Naqash and Dr. Foldi discuss how serial ctDNA testing in patients with mILC is feasible and may enable personalized surveillance and real-time therapeutic monitoring. TRANSCRIPT Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Hello, and welcome to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations, where we bring you engaging conversations with authors of clinically relevant and highly significant JCO PO articles. I am your host, Dr. Rafeh Naqash, podcast editor for JCO Precision Oncology and Associate Professor at the OU Health Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma. Today, we are thrilled to be joined by Dr. Julia Foldi, Assistant Professor of Medicine in the Division of Hematology-Oncology at University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and the Magee-Womens Hospital of the UPMC. She is also the lead and corresponding author of the JCO Precision Oncology article entitled "Personalized Circulating Tumor DNA Testing for Detection of Progression and Treatment Response Monitoring in Patients with Metastatic Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast." At the time of this recording, our guest's disclosures will be linked in the transcript. Julia, welcome to our podcast, and thank you for joining us today. Dr. Julia Foldi: Thank you so much for having me. It is a pleasure. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Again, your manuscript and project address a few interesting things, so we will start with the basics, since we have a broad audience that comprises trainees, community oncologists, and obviously precision medicine experts as well. So, let us start with invasive lobular breast carcinoma. I have been out of fellowship for several years now, and I do not know much about invasive lobular carcinoma. Could you tell us what it is, what some of the genomic characteristics are, why it is different, and why it is important to have a different way to understand disease biology and track disease status with this type of breast cancer? Dr. Julia Foldi: Yes, thank you for that question. It is really important to frame this study. So, lobular breast cancers, which we shorten to ILC, are the second most common histologic subtype of breast cancer after ductal breast cancers. ILC makes up about 10 to 15 percent of all breast cancers, so it is relatively rare, but in the big scheme of things, because breast cancer is so common, this represents actually over 40,000 new diagnoses a year in the US of lobular breast cancers. What is unique about ILC is it is characterized by loss of an adhesion molecule, E-cadherin. It is encoded by the CDH1 gene. What it does is these tumors tend to form discohesive, single-file patterns and infiltrate into the tumor stroma, as opposed to ductal cancers, which generally form more cohesive masses. As we generally explain to patients, ductal cancers tend to form lumps, while lobular cancers often are not palpable because they infiltrate into the stroma. This creates several challenges, particularly when it comes to imaging. In the diagnostic setting, we know that mammograms and ultrasounds have less sensitivity to detect lobular versus ductal breast cancer. When it comes to the metastatic setting, conventional imaging techniques like CT scans have less sensitivity to detect lobular lesions often. One other unique characteristic of ILC is that these tumors tend to have lower proliferation rates. Because our glucose-based PET scans depend on glucose uptake of proliferating cells, often these tumors also are not avid on conventional FDG-PET scans. It is a challenge for us to monitor these patients as they go through treatment. If you think about the metastatic setting, we start a new treatment, we image people every three to four cycles, about every three months, and we combine the imaging results with clinical assessment and tumor markers to decide if the treatment is working. But if your imaging is not reliable, sometimes even at diagnosis, to really detect these tumors, then really, how are we following these patients? This is really the unique challenge in the metastatic setting in patients with lobular breast cancer: we cannot rely on the imaging to tell if patients are responding to treatment. This is where liquid biopsies are really, really important, and as the field is growing up and we have better and better technologies, lobular breast cancer is going to be a field where they are going to play an important role. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you for that easy-to-understand background. The second aspect that I would like to have some context on, to help the audience understand why you did what you did, is ctDNA, tumor informed and non-informed. Could you tell us what these subtypes of liquid biopsies are and why you chose a tumor informed assay for your study? Dr. Julia Foldi: Yes, it is really important to understand these differences. As you mentioned, there are two main platforms for liquid biopsy assays, circulating tumor DNA assays. I think what is more commonly used in the metastatic setting are non-tumor informed assays, or agnostic assays. These are generally next-generation sequencing-based assays that a lot of companies offer, like Guardant, Tempus, Caris, and FoundationOne. These do not require tumor tissue; they just require a blood sample, a plasma sample, essentially. The next-generation sequencing is done on cell-free DNA that is extracted from the plasma, and it is looking for any cell-free DNA and essentially, figuring out what part of the cell-free DNA comes from the tumor is done through a bioinformatics approach. Most of these assays are panel tests for cancer-associated mutations that we know either have therapeutic significance or biologic significance. So, the results we receive from these tests generally read out specific mutations in oncogenic genes, or sometimes things like fusions where we have specific targeted drugs. Some of the newer assays can also read out tumor fraction; for example, the newest generation Guardant assay that is methylation-based, they can also quantify tumor fraction. But the disadvantage of the tumor agnostic approach is that it is a little bit less sensitive. Opposed to that, we have our tumor informed tests, and these require tumor tissue. Essentially, the tumor is sequenced; this can either be whole exome or whole genome sequencing. The newer generation assays are now using whole genome sequencing of the tumor tissue, and a personalized, patient-specific panel of alterations is essentially barcoded on that tumor tissue. This can be either structural variants or it can be mutations, but generally, these are not driver mutations, but sort of things that are present in the tumor tissue that tend to stay unchanged over time. For each particular patient, a personalized assay, if you want to call it a fingerprint or barcode, is created, and then that is what then is used to test the plasma sample. Essentially, you are looking for that specific cancer in the blood, that barcode or fingerprint in the blood. Because of this, this is a much more sensitive way of looking for ctDNA, and obviously, this detects only that particular tumor that was sequenced originally. So, it is much more sensitive and specific to that tumor that was sequenced. You can argue for both approaches in different settings. We use them in different settings because they give us different information. The tumor agnostic approach gives us mutations, which can be used to determine what the next best therapy to use is, while the tumor informed assay is more sensitive, but it is not going to give us information on therapeutic targets. However, it is quantified, and we can follow it over time to see how it changes. We think that it is going to tell us how patients respond to treatment because we see our circulating tumor DNA levels rise and fall as the cancer burden increases or decreases. We decided to use the tumor informed approach in this particular study because we were really interested in how to determine if patients are having response to treatment versus if they are going to progress on their treatment, more so than looking for specific mutations. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: When you think about these tumor informed assays and you think about barcoding the mutations on the original tumor that you try to track or follow in subsequent blood samples, plasma samples, in your experience, if you have done it in non-lobular cancers, do you think shedding from the tumor has something to do with what you capture or how much you capture? Dr. Julia Foldi: Absolutely. I think there are multiple factors that go into whether someone has detectable ctDNA or not, and that has to do with the type of cancer, the location, right, where is the metastatic site? This is something that we do not fully understand yet: what are tumors that shed more versus not? There is also clearance of ctDNA, and so how fast that clearance occurs is also something that will affect what you can detect in the blood. ctDNA is very short-lived, only has a half-life of hours, and so you can imagine that if there is little shedding and a lot of excretion, then you are not going to be detecting a lot of it. In general, in the metastatic setting, we see that we can detect ctDNA in a lot of cases, especially when patients are progressing on treatment, because we imagine their tumor burden is higher at that point. Even with the non-tumor informed assays, we detect a lot of ctDNA. Part of this study was to actually assess: what is the proportion of patients where we can have this information? Because if we are only going to be able to detect ctDNA in less than 50 percent of patients, then it is not going to be a useful method to follow them with. Because this field is new and we have not been using a lot of tumor informed assays in the metastatic setting, we did not really know what to expect when we set out to look at this. We did not know what was going to be the baseline detection rate in this patient population, so that was one of the first things that we wanted to answer. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Excellent. Now going to this manuscript in particular, what was the research question, what was the patient population, and what was the strategy that you used to investigate some of these questions? Dr. Julia Foldi: So, we partnered with Natera, and the reason was that their Signatera tumor-informed assay was the first personalized, tumor-informed, really an MRD assay, minimal residual disease detection assay. It has been around the longest and has been pretty widely used commercially already, even though some of our data is still lacking. but we know that people are using this in the real world. We wanted to gather some real-world data specifically in lobular patients. So, we asked Natera to look at their database of commercial Signatera testing and look for patients with stage 4 lobular breast cancer. The information all comes from the submitting physicians sending in pathologic reports and clinical notes, and so they have that information from the requisitions essentially that are sent in by the ordering physician. We found 66 patients who were on first-line or close to first-line endocrine-based therapies for their metastatic lobular breast cancer and had serial collections of Signatera tests. The way we defined baseline was that the first Signatera had to be sent within three months of starting treatment. So, it is not truly baseline, but again, this is a limitation of looking at real-world data is that you are not always going to get the best time point that you need. We had over 350 samples from those 66 patients, again longitudinal ctDNA samples, and our first question was what is the baseline detection rate using this tumor informed assay? Then, most importantly, what is the concordance between changes in ctDNA and clinical response to treatment? That is defined by essentially radiologic response to treatment. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Interesting. So, what were some of your observations in terms of ctDNA dynamics, whether baseline levels made a difference, whether subsequent levels at different time points made a difference, or subsequent levels at, let us say, cycle three made a difference? Were there any specific trends that you saw? Dr. Julia Foldi: So, first, at baseline, 95 percent of patients had detectable ctDNA, which is, I think, a really important data point because it tells us that this can be a really useful test. If we can detect it in almost all patients before they start treatment, we are going to be able to follow this longitudinally. And again, these were not true baseline samples. So, I think if we look really at baseline before starting treatment, almost all patients will have detectable ctDNA in the metastatic setting. The second important thing we saw was that disease progression correlated very well with increase in ctDNA. So, in most patients who had disease progression by imaging, we saw increase in ctDNA. Conversely, in most patients who had clinical benefit from their treatment, so they had a response or stable disease, we saw decrease in ctDNA levels. It seems that what we call molecular response based on ctDNA is tracking very nicely along with the radiographic response. So, those were really the two main observations. Again, this is a small cohort, limited by its real-world nature and the time points that ctDNA assay was sent was obviously not mandated. This is a real-world data set, and so we could not really look at specific time points like you asked about, let us say, cycle three of therapy, right? We did not have all of the right time points for all of the patients. But what we were able to do was to graph out some specific patient scenarios to illustrate how changes in ctDNA correlate with imaging response. I can talk a little bit about that. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: That was going to be my question. Did you see patients who had serial monitoring using the tumor informed ctDNA assay where the assay became positive a few months before the imaging? Did you have any of those kinds of observations? Dr. Julia Foldi: Yes, so I think this is where the field is going: are we able to use this technology to maybe detect progression before it becomes clinically apparent? Of course, there are lots of questions about: does that really matter? But it seems like, based on some of the patient scenarios that we present in the paper, that this testing can do that. So, we had a specific scenario, and this is illustrated in a figure in the paper, really showing the treatment as well as the changes in ctDNA, tumor markers, and also radiographic response. So, this particular patient was on first-line endocrine therapy and CDK4/6 inhibitor with palbociclib. Initially, she had a low-level detectable ctDNA. It became undetectable during treatment, and the patient had a couple of serial ctDNA assays that were negative, so undetectable. And then we started, after about seven months on this combination therapy, the ctDNA levels started rising. She actually had three serial ctDNA assays with increasing level of ctDNA before she even had any imaging tests. And then around the time that the ctDNA peaked, this patient had radiographic evidence of progression. There was also an NGS-based assay sent to look for specific mutations at that point. The patient was found to have an ESR1 mutation, which is very common in this patient population. She was switched to a novel oral SERD, elacestrant, and the ctDNA fell again to undetectable within the first couple months of being on elacestrant. And then a very similar thing happened: while she was on this second-line therapy, she had three serial negative ctDNA assays, and then the fourth one was positive. This was two months before the patient had a scan that showed progression again. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: And Julia, like you mentioned, this is a small sample size, limited number of patients, in this case, one patient case scenario, but provides insights into other important aspects around escalation or de-escalation of therapy where perhaps ctDNA could be used as an integral biomarker rather than an exploratory biomarker. What are some of your thoughts around that and how is the breast cancer space? I know like in GI and bladder cancer, there has been a significant uptrend in MRD assessments for therapeutic decision making. What is happening in the breast cancer space? Dr. Julia Foldi: So, super interesting. I think this is where a lot of our different fields are going. In the breast cancer space, so far, I have seen a lot of escalation attempts. It is not even necessarily in this particular setting where we are looking at dynamics of ctDNA, but in the breast cancer world, of course, we have a lot of data on resistance mutations. I mentioned ESR1 mutation in a particular patient in our study. ESR1 mutations are very common in patients with ER-positive breast cancer who are on long-term endocrine therapy, and ESR1 mutations confer resistance to aromatase inhibitors. So, that is an area that there has been a lot of interest in trying to detect ESR1 mutations earlier and switching therapy early. So, this was the basis of the SERENA-6 trial, which was presented last year at ASCO and created a lot of excitement. This was a trial where patients had non-tumor-informed NGS-based Guardant assay sent every three to six months while they were on first-line endocrine therapy with a CDK4/6 inhibitor. If they had an ESR1 mutation detected, they were randomized to either continue the same endocrine therapy or switch to an oral SERD. The trial showed that the population of patients who switched to the oral SERD did better in terms of progression-free survival than those who stayed on their original endocrine therapy. There are a lot of questions about how to use this in routine practice. Of course, it is not trivial to be sending a ctDNA assay every three to six months. The rate of detection of these mutations was relatively low in that study; again, the incidence increases in later lines of therapy. So, there are a lot of questions about whether we should be doing this in all of our first-line patients. The other question is, even the patients who stayed on their original endocrine therapy were able to stay on that for another nine months. So, there is this question of: are we switching patients too early to a new line of therapy by having this escalation approach? So, there are a lot of questions about this. As far as I know, at least in our practice, we are not using this approach just yet to escalate therapy. Time will tell how this all pans out. But I think what is even more interesting is the de-escalation question, and I think that is where tumor informed assays like Signatera and the data that our study generated can be applied. Actually, our plan is to generate some prospective data in the lobular breast cancer population, and I have an ongoing study to do that, to really be able to tease out the early ctDNA dynamics as patients first start on endocrine therapy. So, this is patients who are newly diagnosed, they are just starting on their first-line endocrine therapy, and measure, with sensitive assays, measure ctDNA dynamics in the first few months of therapy. In those patients who have a really robust response, that is where I think we can really think about de-escalation. In the patients whose ctDNA goes to undetectable after just a few weeks of therapy with just an endocrine agent, they might not even need a CDK4/6 inhibitor in their first-line treatment. So, that is an area where we are very interested in our group, and I know that other groups are looking at this too, to try to de-escalate therapy in patients who clear their ctDNA early on. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Thank you so much. Well, lots of questions, but at the same time, progress comes through questions asked, and your project is one of those which is asking an interesting question in a rarer cancer and perhaps will lead to subsequent improvement in how we monitor these individuals and how we escalate or de-escalate therapy. Hopefully, we will get to see more of what you are working on in subsequent submissions to JCO Precision Oncology and perhaps talk more about it in a couple of years and see how the space and field is moving. Thanks again for sharing your insights. I do want to take one to two quick minutes talking about you as an investigator, Julia. If you could speak to your career pathway, your journey, the pathway to mentorship, the pathway to being a mentor, and how things have shaped for you in your personal professional growth. Dr. Julia Foldi: Sure, yeah, that is great. Thank you. So, I had a little bit of an unconventional path to clinical medicine. I actually thought I was going to be a basic scientist when I first started out. I got a PhD in Immunology right out of college and was studying not even anything cancer-related. I was studying macrophage signaling in inflammatory diseases, but I was in New York City. This was right around the time that the first checkpoint inhibitors were approved. Actually, some of my friends from my PhD program worked in Jim Allison's lab, who was the basic scientist responsible for ipilimumab. So, I got to kind of first-hand experience the excitement around bringing something from the lab into the clinic that actually changed really the course of oncology. And so, I got very excited about oncology and clinical medicine. So, I decided to kind of switch gears from there and I went back to medical school after finishing my PhD and got my MD at NYU. I knew I wanted to do oncology, so I did a research track residency and fellowship combined at Yale. I started working early on with the breast cancer team there. At the time, Lajos Pusztai was the head of translational research there at Yale, and I started working with him early in my residency and then through my fellowship. I worked on several trials with him, including a neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibitor trial in triple-negative breast cancer patients. During my last year in fellowship, I received a Conquer Cancer Young Investigator Award to study estrogen receptor heterogeneity using spatial transcriptomics in this subset of breast cancers that have intermediate estrogen receptor expression. From there, I joined the faculty at the University of Pittsburgh in 2022. So, I have been there about almost four years at this point. My interests really shifted slowly from triple-negative breast cancers towards ER-positive breast cancers. When I arrived in Pittsburgh, I started working very closely with some basic and translational researchers here who are very interested in estrogen signaling and mechanisms of resistance to endocrine therapy, and there is a large group here interested in lobular breast cancers. During my training, I was not super aware even that lobular breast cancer was a unique subtype of breast cancers, and that is, I think, changing a little bit. There is a lot more awareness in the breast cancer clinical and research community about ILC being a unique subtype, but it is not even really part of our training in fellowship, which we are trying to change. But I have become a lot more aware of this because of the research team here and through that, I have become really interested also on the clinical side. And so, we do have a Lobular Breast Cancer Research Center of Excellence here at the University of Pittsburgh and UPMC, and I am the leader on the clinical side. We have a really great team of basic and translational researchers looking at different aspects of lobular breast cancers, and some of the work that I am doing is related to this particular manuscript we discussed and the next steps, as I mentioned, a prospective study of early ctDNA dynamics in lobular patients. I also did some more clinical research work in collaboration with the NSABP looking at long-term outcomes of patients with lobular versus ductal breast cancers in some of their older trials. And so, that is, in a nutshell, a little bit about how I got here and how I became interested in ILC. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: Well, thank you for sharing those personal insights and personal journey. I am sure it will inspire other trainees, fellows, and perhaps junior faculty in trying to find their niche. The path, as you mentioned, is not always straight; it often tends to be convoluted. And then finding an area that you are interested in, taking things forward, and being persistent is often what matters. Dr. Julia Foldi: Thank you so much for having me. It was great. Dr. Rafeh Naqash: It was great chatting with you. And thank you for listening to JCO Precision Oncology Conversations. Don't forget to give us a rating or review, and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. You can find all ASCO shows at asco.org/podcasts. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.  

What was God thinking when He created marriage? Marriage is God's genius method for transforming us into Christ-likeness. Men have a deep-seated need to be believed in and respected by their wives—a need they cannot meet themselves. Conversely, women need to be cherished above all else, to know they never have to compete for their husband's affection with hobbies, careers, or even good things. When we stop chasing marital bliss as a feeling and embrace marriage as a crucible for becoming more like Jesus, we discover that the very friction we resist is actually God's tool for our sanctification. Pastor Jim Wiegand continues in week three of our new series; "Hands Open, Full of Expectation".

A sermon preached by Rev. Wanda Bynum-Duckett with Foundry UMC January 18, 2026. “Piece Us Together” series.   Isaiah 61: 1-8 [a]The spirit of the Lord God is upon me,     because the Lord has anointed me; He has sent me to bring good news to the afflicted,     to bind up the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives,     release to the prisoners, 2 To announce a year of favor from the Lord     and a day of vindication by our God; To comfort all who mourn; 3     to place on those who mourn in Zion     a diadem instead of ashes, To give them oil of gladness instead of mourning,     a glorious mantle instead of a faint spirit. They will be called oaks of justice,     the planting of the Lord to show his glory. 4 They shall rebuild the ancient ruins,     the former wastes they shall raise up And restore the desolate cities,     devastations of generation upon generation. 5 Strangers shall stand ready to pasture your flocks,     foreigners shall be your farmers and vinedressers. 6 [b]You yourselves shall be called “Priests of the Lord,”     “Ministers of our God” you shall be called. You shall eat the wealth of the nations     and in their riches you will boast. 7 Because their shame was twofold[c]     and disgrace was proclaimed their portion, They will possess twofold in their own land;     everlasting joy shall be theirs.   As your pastor has been leading you in the brilliance of a sermon series entitled  Piece Us Together, I've been wrestling with the notion that life is to a great extent a series of choices…pieces, deposits, decisions made by us (and others connected to us) that when congruent, consistent and courageously aligned with God's Spirit, can not only be called good choices, but can bear the designation of GOD CHOICES. We know those moments when the Spirit speaks and we actually listen, and we do or resist doing or saying a thing, moving in a certain direction or keeping still, and we know in our knower that it wasn't us, it was GOD. Some choices we know we can't take credit for. We didn't have enough information or wisdom or fortitude on our own and yet sometimes you just know: that was God's leading - even ordaining - a particular path or decision. So my wrestling isn't about whether those kinds of choices are possible, it's more about how we might more intentionally posture ourselves to make them. What are the foundational pieces, the underlying preparation for making God choices? In some situations, seasons, and circumstances, it can be difficult to know what good is, let alone where GOD is. Especially when it seems like everyone is screaming and streaming their rightness, even assigning to it the name and the will of GOD, how do we individually and collectively choose rightly, even GODLY.    I picked up this little knick-knack at a thrift store in Greenville, North Carolina – my mother's hometown – and it simply says, “Make good choices.” So I chose to buy it for a whopping 99 cents. I believe that purchase was a God choice because ever since, this statement, this mantra that has become so popular, has had me wrestling. It sounds good, but it also raises a challenge: how do we know? Hindsight can sometimes be 20/20, sometimes we can look back with satisfaction and say that was a good choice, or we can look back with regret and say this or that was a bad move, but how do we really know the ultimate goodness of a choice, with our limited retroactive vision, and with a future yet unfolding before us?  Sometimes options are so plentiful that the gift of choice (God's free will) feels like a burden. And yet for some, life is such that options are few and choices become a luxury. Sometimes the choice is between what we might call two evils, and the struggle is to discern which is less so. Like a choice of whether to steal or starve, or a choice of whether to go to work and risk being kidnapped from a parking lot or staying home and facing the certainty of no income at all. And every morning when my daughter sends my seven-year-old grandson and my 13-year-old granddaughter to school with lunch, and a kiss, and a prayer that no shooter, no bully, no weapon formed against them will prosper, she also sends them off with these words: Make good choices. And so it is from pre-K to reWirement…how do we know which is which? Some decisions are negligible like sushi or soul food, and God bless you if you have access to both. Some choices are weightier and defining of the trajectory of not only our own lives, but the lives of others… like ballot choices. Anybody rethinking these days how much every vote matters? Consider choices like whether to respond to the sign our unhoused sibling is holding at the traffic light, or to roll up our car windows when we dare to drive through that neighborhood…that is if we even dare choose to drive through that neighborhood. After all, that's what beltways are for, right? To avoid the discourse and dilemmas of Samaria? The bible gives us some help, doesn't it? Choose ye this day who you will serve. (Joshua 24:15) Spoiler alert, choose GOD! Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and God's righteousness. (Matthew 6:33) The bible helps us to know that, God's word is a lamp unto our feet, and a light unto our pathway (Psalm 119:105), and meanwhile there are some people who believe - or at least say - that they are following a path illumined by God's word even as they CHOOSE to be, or to follow a path that looks more like darkness than light.  The bible is helpful in many ways, even as it lets us know that there is a way that seems right to a man, or a woman or a human, but its end is not life, but death. (Proverbs 14:12) To put it more simply, just because we place a cross on a path, a way, or a choice, does not mean it's a GOD choice, because our nation's history tells us that some have carried their crosses and others have burned them.  The bible helps us with our discernment, but it does not take away the need for that discernment. The scriptures give us examples of heroes and sheroes and they-roes whose choices are stamped with God's approval. Conversely, but equally as helpful, the bible also offers us examples of choices that we can see from our pews were not God choices. Choices like: Barrabas over Jesus, to wash our hands amidst the bloodshed in our communities, and to entertain the conversation of a snake. Yet in the moment, in the mission field, on our jobs - if we are so blessed in this administration to have and keep a job - and even in the church, we have struggled (often with the best of intentions) to make the good choice, the GOD choice. Good people are also capable of bad choices. So how do we know, and even when we know, how do we move in the direction of what we know is good and what is GOD? This Human Relations Sunday, on the eve of a day when we honor the life, work, and ministry of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, JR, it's a good time to have this conversation. Because the pieces, the choices, the decisions, the moves that Dr. King made, we can look at now and say that they were good, and even that they were GOD, but can we also agree that were hard, and they did not reflect the usual metrics of success. They were not financial choices that led to wealth. They were not safe choices that led to longevity. They were not choices that led to comfort for him or his family. As a young scholar and theologian out of Boston University, the world was Dr. King's oyster. He spoke well, he married well, he could have lived well by most standards even for the time, with the cushion of education, and perhaps some ability to escape the ravages and brutality of life as a black man in the Jim Crow south, or – if he chose - the more liberal and more subtly racist north. But like so many other freedom fighters, peacemakers, and GOD-choosers, King chose differently. He used his gifts and his anointing, not to live a successful life but, to live and ultimately give a life that was good. How and why did he choose as he chose, live as he lived, and die as he died. With four fatherless children, a weeping widow, bomb threats from his enemies, and the voices of his friends saying wait for justice to arrive slowly, when the scripture calls for it to roll down like mighty waters.  What's the framework for such a life? Where's the groundwork and the foundation for making those kinds of God choices? And, considering where we are now, some might even argue what's the point? Because the task of evil is to overwhelm us, and numb us so that we give up and give in. But we are those who understand that only light confounds darkness and only love drives out hate. (Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s 1957 sermon entitled Loving Your Enemies) We are those who must keep the work of Dr. King and other GOD-choosers from unraveling, because it's becoming quite clear that the very fabric of our nation is really more loosely stitched together than we realized, and the fuller we get of ourselves, the more likely we are to come apart at the very (s.e.e.m.s.).  Well, this morning I want to offer a few ideas for your consideration as we seek to piece together our choices, our contributions to a tapestry of goodness and God-ness. These ideas do not form a magic bullet, or fast-working formula, but offer a bit of profiling of two prophetic God choosers: Dr. King and the Prophet Isaiah. In our scripture reading, Isaiah is making a profound declaration that I would imagine sounded a bit grandiose, perhaps even arrogant or delusional for Isaiah to declare, “the Spirit of the LORD is upon ME.” But Friends, this is not mere self-confidence. Isaiah is not pontificating his own opinions or positioning himself for re-election. He is not operating under the advisement of any renegade dictator, partisan pundit, or complacent church. This is not ego, or hubris. This is clarity of call. Isaiah is clear from whom his call comes, and he is clear about those to whom he is called. We have all perhaps witnessed the reduction of the work of prophecy to fortune telling, and sometimes misguided proclamations wrapped in boldness of the flesh. But the real work of prophecy lies in the clearly motivated execution of a call that comes from God to speak and act with truth and justice. Isaiah has seen the Lord high and lifted up. (Isaiah 6:1) He has heard the Lord's call and answered, Here I Am, send me. (Isaiah 6:8) And out of this connection and experience with God comes clarity! It's the kind of clarity that Dr. King testified to, declaring, “I've been to the mountaintop…I just want to do God's will.” (Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, JR.'s 1968 speech, I've Been to the Mountaintop) And the good news for us is that clarity of call and the capacity to see GOD is not limited to a pulpit, or an appointment, or a title. It is the God-given opportunity for all of us who purport to be God's people to discover, discern and be deployed for the mission from whom and to whom we are called. You want to see Jesus? Look in the eyes of your neighbor. You want to see the Lord? Recognize that we are all made in God's image. You want to have a mountaintop experience? Spend some time in the valley with those who are hurting and get some clarity! Maybe that's what my little plaque is trying to say. Maybe choices become a whole lot easier and godlier when we have clarity about who is calling us and why.  We may feel inadequate, like Isaiah did when he was first called. We may face opposition from our peers and elders as Dr. King did. But clarity will help us show up anyhow, even if its stammering like Moses, running like Jonah, wrestling like Jacob, weeping at a tomb like Mary or Coretta, staying seated like Rosa, speaking out like Father Oscar Romero, running for office like Kamala, speaking truth to power like Jasmine, singing like Mahalia and our choir today, speaking on NPR like Ginger, and marching like Martin. Afraid? Yes, sometimes. Called? Absolutely! God is compelling us to offer our piece to the work for such a time as this, whether our call is to teach, or speak, or organize, or march or pray or sing or write, or cook a meal, or wipe a tear, or serve in the church and in the community. Know that separation of church and state does not require us to be isolated or silenced or detached from the world. The church is a place of worship and equipping; the church is no place to hide. And the good news is that the anointing - the clear call to make God choices - is not only for those we call Reverend, or Doctor, or prophet, or priest, but the book of Joel helps us to know that GOD pours out God's spirit on ALL FLESH! (Joel 2:28), to dream like Martin, and to proclaim like Isaiah a new and hopeful reality of rebuilt ruins, restored cities and everlasting joy. The powerful thing about clarity of call is that it grounds us with the ability to make GOD choices. It is the foundational YES that makes everything else clearer.  Listen to the clarity of Isaiah's call. He's not anointed just to be anointed, but it is to bring good news in bad times, to bind up the wounds of the hurting, to comfort those who mourn. Praise God that the call is a call of hope, of captives set free and chains broken. The audacity, the unmitigated gall and the amazing and dangerous opportunity for GOD-choosers like Isaiah, like Martin, like all of us to participate in a holy exchange of beauty for ashes, oil for tears, and the bible says a glorious mantle instead of a faint spirit.  Secondly, foundational to the capacity to make God choices is consciousness of context: knowing what the people and the times call for, with the bible in one hand, media device in the other. Isaiah was well aware of the self-indulgence and wickedness of the powerful, and the turning away of Judah's collective heart from God. Dr. King may have been studying in Boston, but he was preparing for Selma, Birmingham, Memphis and Washington. He was well-versed in the dehumanization of Jim Crow, the economic echoes of chattel slavery, and the need for change. There was an urgency that called him to a movement and a moment. Our call - and the choices that flow from that call- likewise connect to our time and context in pivotal moments where our choices matter in ways that lead to life or death, both literally and figuratively.  These are Kairos moments, not mere hours on a clock or dates on a calendar, but these are times for decisions and God-inspired choices when we need to know the difference between being disrespectful, and having one's life disrespected and taken too soon. These are times when we need to call out the difference between feigned self-defense and excessive and homicidal force. These are times when our immigrant siblings are experiencing the similarly motivated and equally evil kidnapping that once populated the slave trade around the globe. These are times and moments when hard-fought liberties are being dismantled, when fear rules the day, and politics plague the culture. These are the times that ought to try our souls and inform and inspire our choices…like whether to speak up or opt out of the conversation, to step up or to stand by as we take steps back to parts of our history of which we ought to be ashamed. This is the context in which we must choose to love our neighbors, all of them…locally, globally, radically and unapologetically. Not me first, but Humanity first. Love first. Justice First. Peace first. This is not merely a time to reminisce about Isaiah's call, or to romanticize about Martin's dream. This is not Isaiah's Judah or Martin's south. Although the parallels with the past are present, and the pieces are connected for sure, this is our time, and these choices are on US! And finally, to make GOD choices, not only would we do well to be grounded by clarity of call, and consciousness of context, but we also need courage beyond consequences. Every choice comes with some consequence. Even, and especially GOD choices. Sometimes those consequences look like discouragement, isolation, ridicule, black-listing, or even danger. Neither the clarity of our call, nor the consciousness of our context, exempt us from the need for courage. Isaiah's courage called him to speak truth to fou kings over his lifetime, and we know that even the subtlest of pleas for justice and mercy to leadership that is not so inclined can have major consequences. Martin advocated and demonstrated for peace - not violence - as the way to bring about change and it earned him a Nobel Peace Prize. But he didn't live to see his children pick up the mantle for justice, or his birthday become a national holiday, or a black man become President of the United States. Are we not tired of Good dying young? But death does not have the final say, nor does hatred, nor does violence, and - the sacred text reminds us - nor do kings or kingdoms. (Daniel 2:44) I heard a song that I believe says, Every storm runs out of rain. Every lie runs out of gas. There is a GOD who chose us, who chose love, who chose the cup of Calvary so that we might choose to be clear, and conscious, and courageous as well. That God has the final say. Jesus, Emmanuel, God with us, chose to weep, walk, heal and speak truth in perilous times. And one Sabbath day he stood in the synagogue to teach, and he found the words of the prophet Isaiah and said, the Spirit of the Lord is upon ME! Because GOD has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor, to proclaim freedom for the prisoners, and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.” (Luke 4:18-19) Then Jesus rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant (the word is now in our hands), and the people stared at him. The audacity, the unmitigated gall! Isn't this just Joseph's son. Didn't they know that God uses and chooses those others deem unlikely and even unworthy? Our Jesus declared, TODAY…. this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” My friends TODAY is the time to live and to choose in alignment with the fulfilment of the gospel of peace. TODAY is not just to reminisce, or to recite the speeches and choices of the prophets of old, but TODAY is the time for making GOD choices of our own, to answer the call God has on our lives, to do and bring our piece to the work. And we too shall be called priests of the Lord, ministers of our God, and everlasting joy will be our witness, because God is not just good. God is GOD! God bless you.

Last time we spoke about the beginning of the Nomohan incident. On the fringes of Manchuria, the ghosts of Changkufeng lingered. It was August 1938 when Soviet and Japanese forces locked in a brutal standoff over a disputed hill, claiming thousands of lives before a fragile ceasefire redrew the lines. Japan, humiliated yet defiant, withdrew, but the Kwantung Army seethed with resentment. As winter thawed into 1939, tensions simmered along the Halha River, a serpentine boundary between Manchukuo and Mongolia. Major Tsuji Masanobu, a cunning tactician driven by gekokujo's fire, drafted Order 1488: a mandate empowering local commanders to annihilate intruders, even luring them across borders. Kwantung's leaders, bonded by past battles, endorsed it, ignoring Tokyo's cautions amid the grinding China War. By May, the spark ignited. Mongolian patrols crossed the river, clashing with Manchukuoan cavalry near Nomonhan's sandy hills. General Komatsubara, ever meticulous, unleashed forces to "destroy" them, bombing west-bank outposts and pursuing retreats. Soviets, bound by pact, rushed reinforcements, their tanks rumbling toward the fray. What began as skirmishes ballooned into an undeclared war.   #189 General Zhukov Arrives at Nomohan Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. Though Kwantung Army prided itself as an elite arm of the Imperial Japanese Army, the 23rd Division, formed less than a year prior, was still raw and unseasoned, lacking the polish and spirit typical of its parent force. From General Michitaro Komatsubara downward, the staff suffered a collective dearth of combat experience. Intelligence officer Major Yoshiyasu Suzuki, a cavalryman, had no prior intel background. While senior regimental commanders were military academy veterans, most company and platoon leaders were fresh reservists or academy graduates with just one or two years under their belts. Upon arriving in Manchukuo in August 1938, the division found its Hailar base incomplete, housing only half its troops; the rest scattered across sites. Full assembly at Hailar occurred in November, but harsh winter weather curtailed large-scale drills. Commanders had scant time to build rapport. This inexperience, inadequate training, and poor cohesion would prove costly at Nomonhan. Japan's army held steady at 17 divisions from 1930 to 1937, but the escalating China conflict spurred seven new divisions in 1938 and nine in 1939. Resource strains from China left many under-equipped, with the 23rd, stationed in a presumed quiet sector, low on priorities. Unlike older "rectangular" divisions with four infantry regiments, the 23rd was a modern "triangular" setup featuring the 64th, 71st, and 72nd. Materiel gaps were glaring. The flat, open terrain screamed for tanks, yet the division relied on a truck-equipped transport regiment and a reconnaissance regiment with lightly armored "tankettes" armed only with machine guns. Mobility suffered: infantry marched the final 50 miles from Hailar to Nomonhan. Artillery was mostly horse-drawn, including 24 outdated Type 38 75-mm guns from 1907, the army's oldest, unique to this division. Each infantry regiment got four 37-mm rapid-fire guns and four 1908-era 75-mm mountain guns. The artillery regiment added 12 120-mm howitzers, all high-angle, short-range pieces ill-suited for flatlands or anti-tank roles. Antitank capabilities were dire: beyond rapid-fire guns, options boiled down to demolition charges and Molotov cocktails, demanding suicidal "human bullet" tactics in open terrain, a fatal flaw against armor. The division's saving grace lay in its soldiers, primarily from Kyushu, Japan's southernmost main island, long famed for hardy warriors. These men embodied resilience, bravery, loyalty, and honor, offsetting some training and gear deficits. Combat at Nomonhan ramped up gradually, with Japanese-Manchukuoan forces initially outnumbering Soviet-Mongolian foes. Soviets faced severe supply hurdles: their nearest rail at Borzya sat 400 miles west of the Halha River, requiring truck hauls over rough, exposed terrain prone to air strikes. Conversely, Hailar was 200 miles from Nomonhan, with the Handagai railhead just 50 miles away, linked by three dirt roads. These advantages, plus Europe's brewing Polish crisis, likely reassured Army General Staff and Kwantung Army Headquarters that Moscow would avoid escalation. Nonetheless, Komatsubara, with KwAHQ's nod, chose force to quash the Nomonhan flare-up. On May 20, Japanese scouts spotted a Soviet infantry battalion and armor near Tamsag Bulak. Komatsubara opted to "nip the incident in the bud," assembling a potent strike force under Colonel Takemitsu Yamagata of the 64th Infantry Regiment. The Yamagata detachment included the 3rd Battalion, roughly four companies, 800 men, a regimental gun company, three 75-mm mountain guns, four 37-mm rapid-fires, three truck companies, and Lieutenant Colonel Yaozo Azuma's reconnaissance group, 220 men, one tankette, two sedans, 12 trucks. Bolstered by 450 local Manchukuoan troops, the 2,000-strong unit was tasked with annihilating all enemy east of the Halha. The assault was set for May 22–23. No sooner had General Komatsubara finalized this plan than he received a message from KwAHQ: "In settling the affair Kwantung Army has definite plans, as follows: For the time being Manchukuoan Army troops will keep an eye on the Outer Mongolians operating near Nomonhan and will try to lure them onto Manchukuoan territory. Japanese forces at Hailar [23rd Division] will maintain surveillance over the situation. Upon verification of a border violation by the bulk of the Outer Mongolian forces, Kwantung Army will dispatch troops, contact the enemy, and annihilate him within friendly territory. According to this outlook it can be expected that enemy units will occupy border regions for a considerable period; but this is permissible from the overall strategic point of view". At this juncture, Kwantung Army Headquarters advocated tactical caution to secure a more conclusive outcome. Yet, General Michitaro Komatsubara had already issued orders for Colonel Takemitsu Yamagata's assault. Komatsubara radioed Hsinking that retracting would be "undignified," resenting KwAHQ's encroachment on his authority much as KwAHQ chafed at Army General Staff interference. Still, "out of deference to Kwantung Army's feelings," he delayed to May 27 to 28. Soviet air units from the 57th Corps conducted ineffective sorties over the Halha River from May 17 to 21. Novice pilots in outdated I 15 biplanes suffered heavily: at least 9, possibly up to 17, fighters and scouts downed. Defense Commissar Kliment Voroshilov halted air ops, aiding Japanese surprise. Yamagata massed at Kanchuerhmiao, 40 miles north of Nomonhan, sending patrols southward. Scouts spotted a bridge over the Halha near its Holsten junction, plus 2 enemy groups of ~200 each east of the Halha on either Holsten side and a small MPR outpost less than a mile west of Nomonhan. Yamagata aimed to trap and destroy these east of the river: Azuma's 220 man unit would drive south along the east bank to the bridge, blocking retreat. The 4 infantry companies and Manchukuoan troops, with artillery, would attack from the west toward enemy pockets, herding them riverward into Azuma's trap. Post destruction, mop up any west bank foes near the river clear MPR soil swiftly. This intricate plan suited early MPR foes but overlooked Soviet units spotted at Tamsag Bulak on May 20, a glaring oversight by Komatsubara and Yamagata. Predawn on May 28, Yamagata advanced from Kanchuerhmiao. Azuma detached southward to the bridge. Unbeknownst, it was guarded by Soviet infantry, engineers, armored cars, and a 76 mm self propelled artillery battery—not just MPR cavalry. Soviets detected Azuma pre dawn but missed Yamagata's main force; surprise was mutual. Soviet MPR core: Major A E Bykov's battalion roughly 1000 men with 3 motorized infantry companies, 16 BA 6 armored cars, 4 76 mm self propelled guns, engineers, and a 5 armored car recon platoon. The 6th MPR Cavalry Division roughly 1250 men had 2 small regiments, 4 76 mm guns, armored cars, and a training company. Bykov arrayed north to south: 2 Soviet infantry on flanks, MPR cavalry center, unorthodox, as cavalry suits flanks. Spread over 10 miles parallel to but east of the Halha, 1 mile west of Nomonhan. Reserves: 1 infantry company, engineers, and artillery west of the river near the bridge; Shoaaiibuu's guns also west to avoid sand. Japanese held initial edges in numbers and surprise, especially versus MPR cavalry. Offsets: Yamagata split into 5 weaker units; radios failed early, hampering coordination; Soviets dominated firepower with self propelled guns, 4 MPR pieces, and BA 6s, armored fighters with 45 mm turret guns, half track capable, 27 mph speed, but thin 9 mm armor vulnerable to close heavy machine guns. Morning of May 28, Yamagata's infantry struck Soviet MPR near Nomonhan, routing lightly armed MPR cavalry and forcing Soviet retreats toward the Halha. Shoaaiibuu rushed his training company forward; Japanese overran his post, killing him and most staff. As combat neared the river, Soviet artillery and armored cars slowed Yamagata. He redirected to a low hill miles east of the Halha with dug in Soviets—failing to notify Azuma. Bykov regrouped 1 to 2 miles east of the Halha Holsten junction, holding firm. By late morning, Yamagata stalled, digging in against Soviet barrages. Azuma, radio silent due to faults, neared the bridge to find robust Soviet defenses. Artillery commander Lieutenant Yu Vakhtin shifted his 4 76 mm guns east to block seizure. Azuma lacked artillery or anti tank tools, unable to advance. With Yamagata bogged down, Azuma became encircled, the encirclers encircled. Runners reached Yamagata, but his dispersed units couldn't rally or breakthrough. By noon, Azuma faced infantry and cavalry from the east, bombardments from west (both Halha sides). Dismounted cavalry dug sandy defenses. Azuma could have broken out but held per mission, awaiting Yamagata, unaware of the plan shift. Pressure mounted: Major I M Remizov's full 149th Regiment recent Tamsag Bulak arrivals trucked in, tilting odds. Resupply failed; ammo dwindled. Post dusk slackening: A major urged withdrawal; Azuma refused, deeming retreat shameful without orders, a Japanese army hallmark, where "retreat" was taboo, replaced by euphemisms like "advance in a different direction." Unauthorized pullback meant execution. Dawn May 29: Fiercer Soviet barrage, 122 mm howitzers, field guns, mortars, armored cars collapsed trenches. An incendiary hit Azuma's sedan, igniting trucks with wounded and ammo. By late afternoon, Soviets closed to 50 yards on 3 fronts; armored cars breached rear. Survivors fought desperately. Between 6:00 and 7:00 p.m., Azuma led 24 men in a banzai charge, cut down by machine guns. A wounded medical lieutenant ordered escapes; 4 succeeded. Rest killed or captured. Komatsubara belatedly reinforced Yamagata on May 29 with artillery, anti tank guns, and fresh infantry. Sources claim Major Tsuji arrived, rebuked Yamagata for inaction, and spurred corpse recovery over 3 nights, yielding ~200 bodies, including Azuma's. Yamagata withdrew to Kanchuerhmiao, unable to oust foes. Ironically, Remizov mistook recovery truck lights for attacks, briefly pulling back west on May 30. By June 3, discovering the exit, Soviet MPR reoccupied the zone. Japanese blamed:  (1) poor planning/recon by Komatsubara and Yamagata,  (2) comms failures,  (3) Azuma's heavy weapon lack. Losses: ~200 Azuma dead, plus 159 killed, 119 wounded, 12 missing from main force, total 500, 25% of detachment. Soviets praised Vakhtin for thwarting pincers. Claims: Bykov 60 to 70 casualties; TASS 40 killed, 70 wounded total Soviet/MPR. Recent Russian: 138 killed, 198 wounded. MPR cavalry hit hard by Japanese and friendly fire. Soviet media silent until June 26; KwAHQ censored, possibly misleading Tokyo. May 30: Kwantung Chief of Staff General Rensuke Isogai assured AGS of avoiding prolongation via heavy frontier blows, downplaying Soviet buildup and escalation. He requested river crossing gear urgently.   This hinted at Halha invasion (even per Japanese borders: MPR soil). AGS's General Gun Hashimoto affirmed trust in localization: Soviets' vexations manageable, chastisement easy. Colonel Masazumi Inada's section assessed May 31: 1. USSR avoids expansion.  2. Trust Kwantung localization.  3. Intervene on provocative acts like deep MPR air strikes. Phase 1 ended: Kwantung called it mutual win loss, but inaccurate, Azuma destroyed, heavy tolls, remorse gnawing Komatsubara. On June 1, 1939, an urgent summons from Moscow pulled the young deputy commander of the Byelorussian Military District from Minsk to meet Defense Commissar Marshal Kliment Voroshilov. He boarded the first train with no evident concern, even as the army purges faded into memory. This rising cavalry- and tank-expert, Georgy Konstantinovich Zhukov, would later help defend Moscow in 1941, triumph at Stalingrad and Kursk, and march to Berlin as a Hero of the Soviet Union.Born in 1896 to a poor family headed by a cobbler, Zhukov joined the Imperial Army in 1915 as a cavalryman. Of average height but sturdy build, he excelled in horsemanship and earned the Cross of St. George and noncommissioned status for bravery in 1916. After the October Revolution, he joined the Red Army and the Bolshevik Party, fighting in the Civil War from 1918 to 1921. His proletarian roots, tactical skill, and ambition propelled him: command of a regiment by 1923, a division by 1931. An early advocate of tanks, he survived the purges, impressing superiors as a results-driven leader and playing a key role in his assignment to Mongolia. In Voroshilov's office on June 2, Zhukov learned of recent clashes. Ordered to fly east, assess the situation, and assume command if needed, he soon met acting deputy chief Ivan Smorodinov, who urged candid reports. Europe's war clouds and rising tensions with Japan concerned the Kremlin. Hours later, Zhukov and his staff flew east. Arriving June 5 at Tamsag Bulak (57th Corps HQ), Zhukov met the staff and found Corps Commander Nikolai Feklenko and most aides clueless; only Regimental Commissar M. S. Nikishev had visited the front. Zhukov toured with Nikishev that afternoon and was impressed by his grasp. By day's end, Zhukov bluntly reported: this is not a simple border incident; the Japanese are likely to escalate; the 57th Corps is inadequate. He suggested holding the eastern Halha bridgehead until reinforcements could enable a counteroffensive, and he criticized Feklenko. Moscow replied on June 6: relieve Feklenko; appoint Zhukov. Reinforcements arrived: the 36th Mechanized Infantry Division; the 7th, 8th, and 9th Mechanized Brigades; the 11th Tank Brigade; the 8th MPR Cavalry Division; a heavy artillery regiment; an air wing of more than 100 aircraft, including 21 pilots who had earned renown in the Spanish Civil War. The force was redesignated as the First Army Group. In June, these forces surged toward Tamsag Bulak, eighty miles west of Halha. However, General Michitaro Komatsubara's 23rd Division and the Kwantung Army Headquarters missed the buildup and the leadership change, an intelligence failure born of carelessness and hubris and echoing May's Azuma disaster, with grave battlefield consequences. Early June remained relatively quiet: the Soviet MPR expanded the east-bank perimeter modestly; there was no major Japanese response. KwAHQ's Commander General Kenkichi Ueda, hoping for a quick closure, toured the Fourth Army from May 31 to June 18. Calm broke on June 19. Komatsubara reported two Soviet strikes inside Manchukuo: 15 planes hit Arshan, inflicting casualties on men and horses; 30 aircraft set fire to 100 petroleum barrels near Kanchuerhmiao. In fact, the raids were less dramatic than described: not on Kanchuerhmiao town (a 3,000-person settlement, 40 miles northwest of Nomonhan) but on a supply dump 12 miles south of it. "Arshan" referred to a small village near the border, near Arshanmiao, a Manchukuoan cavalry depot, not a major railhead at Harlun Arshan 100 miles southeast. The raids were strafing runs rather than bombs. Possibly retaliation for May 15's Japanese raid on the MPR Outpost 7 (two killed, 15 wounded) or a response to Zhukov's bridgehead push. Voroshilov authorized the action; motive remained unclear. Nonetheless, KwAHQ, unused to air attacks after dominating skies in Manchuria, Shanghai (1932), and China, was agitated. The situation resembled a jolt akin to the 1973 North Vietnamese strike on U.S. bases in Thailand: not unprovoked, but shocking. Midday June 19, the Operations Staff met. Major Masanobu Tsuji urged swift reprisal; Colonel Masao Terada urged delay in light of the Tientsin crisis (the new Japanese blockade near Peking). Tsuji argued that firmness at Nomonhan would impress Britain; inaction would invite deeper Soviet bombardments or invasion. He swayed Chief Colonel Takushiro Hattori and others, including Terada. They drafted a briefing: the situation was grave; passivity risked a larger invasion and eroded British respect for Japanese might. After two hours of joint talks, most KwAHQ members supported a strong action. Tsuji drafted a major Halha crossing plan to destroy Soviet MPR forces. Hattori and Terada pressed the plan to Chief of Staff General Rensuke Isogai, an expert on Manchukuo affairs but not operations; he deferred to Deputy General Otozaburo Yano, who was absent. They argued urgency; Isogai noted delays in AGS approval. The pair contended for local Kwantung prerogative, citing the 1937 Amur cancellation; AGS would likely veto. Under pressure, Isogai assented, pending Ueda's approval. Ueda approved but insisted that the 23rd Division lead, not the 7th. Hattori noted the 7th's superiority (four regiments in a "square" arrangement versus the 23rd's three regiments, with May unreliability). Ueda prioritized Komatsubara's honor: assigning another division would imply distrust; "I'd rather die." The plan passed on June 19, an example of gekokujo in action. The plan called for reinforcing the 23rd with: the 2nd Air Group (180 aircraft, Lieutenant General Tetsuji Gigi); the Yasuoka Detachment (Lieutenant General Masaomi Yasuoka: two tank regiments, motorized artillery, and the 26th Infantry of the 7th). Total strength: roughly 15,000 men, 120 guns, 70 tanks, 180 aircraft. KwAHQ estimated the enemy at about 1,000 infantry, 10 artillery pieces, and about 12 armored vehicles, expecting a quick victory. Reconnaissance to Halha was curtailed to avoid alerting the Soviets. Confidence ran high, even as intel warned otherwise. Not all leaders were convinced: the 23rd's ordnance colonel reportedly committed suicide over "awful equipment." An attaché, Colonel Akio Doi, warned of growing Soviet buildup, but operations dismissed the concern. In reality, Zhukov's force comprised about 12,500 men, 109 guns, 186 tanks, 266 armored cars, and more than 100 aircraft, offset by the Soviets' armor advantage. The plan echoed Yamagata's failed May 28 initiative: the 23rd main body would seize the Fui Heights (11 miles north of Halha's Holsten junction), cross by pontoon, and sweep south along the west bank toward the Soviet bridge. Yasuoka would push southeast of Halha to trap and destroy the enemy at the junction. On June 20, Tsuji briefed Komatsubara at Hailar, expressing Ueda's trust while pressing to redeem May's failures. Limited pontoon capacity would not support armor; the operation would be vulnerable to air power. Tsuji's reconnaissance detected Soviet air presence at Tamsag Bulak, prompting a preemptive strike and another plan adjustment. KwAHQ informed Tokyo of the offensive in vague terms (citing raids but withholding air details). Even this caused debate; Minister Seishiro Itagaki supported Ueda's stance, favoring a limited operation to ease nerves. Tokyo concurred, unaware of the air plans. Fearing a veto on the Tamsag Bulak raid (nearly 100 miles behind MPR lines), KwAHQ shielded details from the Soviets and Tokyo. A June 29–30 ground attack was prepared; orders were relayed by courier. The leak reached Tokyo on June 24. Deputy Chief General Tetsuzo Nakajima telegrammed three points: 1) AGS policy to contain the conflict and avoid West MPR air attacks;  2) bombing risks escalation;  3) sending Lieutenant Colonel Yadoru Arisue on June 25 for liaison. Polite Japanese diplomatic phrasing allowed Operations to interpret the message as a suggestion. To preempt Arisue's explicit orders, Tsuji urged secrecy from Ueda, Isogai, and Yano, and an advanced raid to June 27. Arisue arrived after the raid on Tamsag Bulak and Bain Tumen (deeper into MPR territory, now near Choibalsan). The Raid resulted in approximately 120 Japanese planes surprising the Soviets, grounding and destroying aircraft and scrambling their defense. Tsuji, flying in a bomber, claimed 25 aircraft destroyed on the ground and about 100 in the air. Official tallies reported 98 destroyed and 51 damaged; ground kills estimated at 50 to 60 at Bain Tumen. Japanese losses were relatively light: one bomber, two fighters, one scout; seven dead. Another Japanese bomber was shot down over MPR, but the crew was rescued. The raid secured air superiority for July.   Moscow raged over the losses and the perceived failure to warn in time. In the purge era, blame fell on suspected spies and traitors; Deputy Mongolian Commander Luvsandonoi and ex-57th Deputy A. M. Kushchev were accused, arrested, and sent to Moscow. Luvsandonoi was executed; Kushchev received a four-year sentence, later rising to major general and Hero. KwAHQ celebrated; Operations notified AGS by radio. Colonel Masazumi Inada rebuked: "You damned idiot! What do you think the true meaning of this little success is?" A withering reprimand followed. Stunned but unrepentant, KwAHQ soon received Tokyo's formal reprimand: "Report was received today regarding bombing of Outer Mongolian territory by your air units… . Since this action is in fundamental disagreement with policy which we understood your army was taking to settle incident, it is extremely regretted that advance notice of your intent was not received. Needless to say, this matter is attended with such farreaching consequences that it can by no means be left to your unilateral decision. Hereafter, existing policy will be definitely and strictly observed. It is requested that air attack program be discontinued immediately" By Order of the Chief of Staff  By this time, Kwantung Army staff officers stood in high dudgeon. Tsuji later wrote that "tremendous combat results were achieved by carrying out dangerous operations at the risk of our lives. It is perfectly clear that we were carrying out an act of retaliation. What kind of General Staff ignores the psychology of the front lines and tramples on their feelings?" Tsuji drafted a caustic reply, which Kwantung Army commanders sent back to Tokyo, apparently without Ueda or other senior KwAHQ officers' knowledge: "There appear to be certain differences between the Army General Staff and this Army in evaluating the battlefield situation and the measures to be adopted. It is requested that the handling of trivial border-area matters be entrusted to this Army." That sarcastic note from KwAHQ left a deep impression at AGS, which felt something had to be done to restore discipline and order. When General Nakajima informed the Throne about the air raid, the emperor rebuked him and asked who would assume responsibility for the unauthorized attack. Nakajima replied that military operations were ongoing, but that appropriate measures would be taken after this phase ended. Inada sent Terada a telegram implying that the Kwantung Army staff officers responsible would be sacked in due course. Inada pressed to have Tsuji ousted from Kwantung Army immediately, but personnel matters went through the Army Ministry, and Army Minister Itagaki, who knew Tsuji personally, defended him. Tokyo recognized that the situation was delicate; since 1932, Kwantung Army had operated under an Imperial Order to "defend Manchukuo," a broad mandate. Opinions differed in AGS about how best to curb Kwantung Army's operational prerogatives. One idea was to secure Imperial sanction for a new directive limiting Kwantung Army's autonomous combat actions to no more than one regiment. Several other plans circulated. In the meantime, Kwantung Army needed tighter control. On June 29, AGS issued firm instructions to KwAHQ: Directives: a) Kwantung Army is responsible for local settlement of border disputes. b) Areas where the border is disputed, or where defense is tactically unfeasible, need not be defended. Orders: c) Ground combat will be limited to the border region between Manchukuo and Outer Mongolia east of Lake Buir Nor. d) Enemy bases will not be attacked from the air. With this heated exchange of messages, the relationship between Kwantung Army and AGS reached a critical moment. Tsuji called it the "breaking point" between Hsinking and Tokyo. According to Colonel Inada, after this "air raid squabble," gekokujo became much more pronounced in Hsinking, especially within Kwantung Army's Operations Section, which "ceased making meaningful reports" to the AGS Operations Section, which he headed. At KwAHQ, the controversy and the perception of AGS interference in local affairs hardened the resolve of wavering staff officers to move decisively against the USSR. Thereafter, Kwantung Army officers as a group rejected the General Staff's policy of moderation in the Nomonhan incident. Tsuji characterized the conflict between Kwantung Army and the General Staff as the classic clash between combat officers and "desk jockeys." In his view, AGS advocated a policy of not invading enemy territory even if one's own territory was invaded, while Kwantung Army's policy was not to allow invasion. Describing the mindset of the Kwantung Army (and his own) toward the USSR in this border dispute, Tsuji invoked the samurai warrior's warning: "Do not step any closer or I shall be forced to cut you down." Tsuji argued that Kwantung Army had to act firmly at Nomonhan to avoid a larger war later. He also stressed the importance, shared by him and his colleagues, of Kwantung Army maintaining its dignity, which he believed was threatened by both enemy actions and the General Staff. In this emotionally charged atmosphere, the Kwantung Army launched its July offensive. The success of the 2nd Air Group's attack on Tamsag Bulak further inflated KwAHQ's confidence in the upcoming offensive. Although aerial reconnaissance had been intentionally limited to avoid alarming or forewarning the enemy, some scout missions were flown. The scouts reported numerous tank emplacements under construction, though most reports noted few tanks; a single report of large numbers of tanks was downplayed at headquarters. What drew major attention at KwAHQ were reports of large numbers of trucks leaving the front daily and streaming westward into the Mongolian interior. This was interpreted as evidence of a Soviet pullback from forward positions, suggesting the enemy might sense the imminent assault. Orders were issued to speed up final preparations for the assault before Soviet forces could withdraw from the area where the Japanese "meat cleaver" would soon dismember them. What the Japanese scouts had actually observed was not a Soviet withdrawal, but part of a massive truck shuttle that General Grigori Shtern, now commander of Soviet Forces in the Far East, organized to support Zhukov. Each night, Soviet trucks, from distant MPR railway depots to Tamsag Bulak and the combat zone, moved eastward with lights dimmed, carrying supplies and reinforcements. By day, the trucks returned westward for fresh loads. It was these returning trucks, mostly empty, that the Japanese scouts sighted. The Kwantung interpretation of this mass westbound traffic was a serious error, though understandable. The Soviet side was largely ignorant of Japanese preparations, partly because the June 27 air raid had disrupted Soviet air operations, including reconnaissance. In late June, the 23rd Division and Yasuoka's tank force moved from Hailar and Chiangchunmiao toward Nomonhan. A mix of military and civilian vehicles pressed into service, but there was still insufficient motorized transport to move all troops and equipment at once. Most infantry marched the 120 miles to the combat zone, under a hot sun, carrying eighty-pound loads. They arrived after four to six days with little time to recover before the scheduled assault. With Komatsubara's combined force of about 15,000 men, 120 guns, and 70 tanks poised to attack, Kwantung Army estimated Soviet-MPR strength near Nomonhan and the Halha River at about 1,000 men, perhaps ten anti-aircraft guns, ten artillery pieces, and several dozen tanks. In reality, Japanese air activity, especially the big raid of June 27, had put the Soviets on alert. Zhukov suspected a ground attack might occur, though nothing as audacious as a large-scale crossing of the Halha was anticipated. During the night of July 1, Zhukov moved his 11th Tank Brigade, 7th Mechanized Brigade, and 24th Mechanized Infantry Regiment (36th Division) from their staging area near Tamsag Bulak to positions just west of the Halha River. Powerful forces on both sides were being marshaled with little knowledge of the enemy's disposition. As the sun scorched the Mongolian steppes, the stage was set for a clash that would echo through history. General Komatsubara's 23rd Division, bolstered by Yasuoka's armored might and the skies commanded by Gigi's air group, crept toward the Halha River like a predator in the night. Fifteen thousand Japanese warriors, their boots heavy with dust and resolve, prepared to cross the disputed waters and crush what they believed was a faltering foe. Little did they know, Zhukov's reinforcements, tanks rumbling like thunder, mechanized brigades poised in the shadows, had transformed the frontier into a fortress of steel. Miscalculations piled like sand dunes: Japanese scouts mistook supply convoys for retreats, while Soviet eyes, blinded by the June raid, underestimated the impending storm. Kwantung's gekokujo spirit burned bright, defying Tokyo's cautions, as both sides hurtled toward a brutal reckoning. What began as border skirmishes now threatened to erupt into full-scale war, testing the mettle of empires on the edge. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Patrols in May led to failed Japanese offensives, like Colonel Yamagata's disastrous assault and the Azuma detachment's annihilation. Tensions rose with air raids, including Japan's June strike on Soviet bases. By July, misjudged intelligence set the stage for a major confrontation, testing imperial ambitions amid global war clouds.

Romans 2 The Universal Principle (vv. 1-11) Universal guilt Universal standard Universal opportunity Universal result The Non-Religious Response (vv.12-16) Ignorance of the Law Internal law of the conscience The Religious Response (vv. 17-29) We know the Law and teach it. You know the Law and break it. More To Consider A person's habitual conduct, whether good or evil, reveals the condition of his heart. Eternal life is not rewarded for good living; that would contradict many other Scriptures which clearly state that salvation is not by works, but is all of God's grace to those who believe (e.g., Rom. 6:23; 10:9-10; 11:6; Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5). A person's doing good shows that his heart is regenerate. Such a person, redeemed by God, has eternal life. Conversely a person who continually does evil and rejects the truth shows that he is unregenerate and therefore will be an object of God's wrath. The Bible Knowledge Commentary We are split spiritual personalities. We swear allegiance to one set of principles and live by another. We extol self-control and practice self-indulgence. We proclaim brotherhood and harbor prejudice. We laud character but strive to climb to the top at any cost. We erect houses of worship, but our shrines are our places of business and recreation. We are suffering from a distressing cleavage between the truths we affirm and the values we live by. Our souls are the battlegrounds for civil wars, but we are trying to live serene lives in houses divided against themselves. Melvin F. Wheatley This is the bitterest of all--to know that suffering need not have been; that it has resulted from indiscretion and inconsistency; that it is the harvest of one's own sowing; that the vulture which feeds on the vitals is a nestling of one's own rearing. Ah me! This is pain! There is an inevitable Nemesis in life. The laws of the heart and home, of the soul and human life, cannot be violated with impunity. Sin may be forgiven; the fire of penalty may be changed into the fire of trial: the love of God may seem nearer and dearer than ever and yet there is the awful pressure of pain; the trembling heart; the failing of eyes and pining of soul; the harp on the willows; the refusal of the lip to sing the Lord's song. F. B.. Meyer in Charles Swindoll, Living Above the Level of Mediocrity, p. 246.

A lot of your best opportunities to cash in huge in the crypto market could very well be on the stock market itself for a number of reasons.  If you can get in early, big money can more easily follow you compared to the blockchain.  And have you seen these prices??   Recommended Crypto Trading Platform (And Bonus Eligibility) - https://nononsenseforex.com/cryptocurrencies/best-crypto-trading-platform/   For Decentralized Crypto Trading (US Citizens Can Join) - https://nononsenseforex.com/decentralized-trading-platform/   Blueberry Markets Blog (Top FX Broker) - https://nononsenseforex.com/uncategorized/blueberry-markets-review-my-top-broker-for-2019/   Get a Discount On Any Trading View Package - https://www.tradingview.com/?aff_id=159841   The Blog Has Moved to My New Free Substack - https://thecontrarianinvestorblog.substack.com/p/what-to-expect-and-what-not-to?r=16orow   Follow VP on Twitter https://twitter.com/This_Is_VP4X   Check out my Forex trading material too! https://nononsenseforex.com/   The host of this podcast is not a licensed financial advisor, and nothing heard on this podcast should be taken as financial advice.  Do your own research and understand all financial decisions and the results therein are yours and yours alone.  The host is not responsible for the actions of their sponsors and/or affiliates.  Conversely, views expressed on this podcast are that of the host only and may not reflect the views of any companies mentioned. Trading Forex involves risk.  Losses can exceed deposits. We are not taking requests for episode topics at this time.  Thank you for understanding.    

fWotD Episode 3206: Saxe–Goldstein hypothesis Welcome to featured Wiki of the Day, your daily dose of knowledge from Wikipedia's finest articles.The featured article for Friday, 13 February 2026, is Saxe–Goldstein hypothesis.In archaeology, the Saxe–Goldstein hypothesis is a prediction about the relationship between a society's funerary practices and its social organization. It predicts a correlation between two phenomena: the use of specific areas to dispose of the dead, and the legitimation of control over restricted resources through claims of descent from dead ancestors. The hypothesis was first formulated by the American anthropologist Arthur Saxe in 1970, as the last in a series of eight, and was refined by Lynne Goldstein later in the 1970s. In reference to its origin, it is sometimes known as Hypothesis Eight.Saxe's work drew on the ethnographic work of Mervyn Meggitt and the role theory developed by Ward Goodenough. He predicted that, if a society contained groups of people with a shared identity (known as "corporate groups") that legitimized their claims to important, restricted resources by claiming ties to ancestors, that society would be more likely to use formal areas, such as cemeteries, for the disposal of the dead. Conversely, societies using such areas would be more likely to contain such corporate groups. His work coincided with that of Lewis Binford, who argued that funerary practices provided useful evidence for social organization and for the status of the deceased in life. Studying the treatment of the dead to investigate these areas came to be known as the Saxe–Binford program. Lynne Goldstein modified the hypothesis to stipulate that formal disposal areas were only one possible means of claiming ties to ancestors, and therefore that the lack of such areas need not imply the lack of corporate groups using those ties to compete over resources. As a result, it became known as the Saxe–Goldstein hypothesis. The Saxe–Goldstein hypothesis was credited with revitalizing interest in funerary archaeology. It was widely adopted, particularly by adherents of processual archaeology, a body of theory that sought to bring archaeology closer to the natural sciences. In the 1980s and 1990s, it was applied to (among others) the distribution of megalithic tombs in the European Stone Age, to prehistoric Aboriginal burial grounds near Australia's Murray River, and to the different levels of state control over cemeteries in classical Athens and ancient Rome. Within the processual movement, it was criticized for failing to account for practices that do not leave traces in the archaeological record. It was also criticized by post-processual archaeologists, such as Ian Hodder, who viewed it as ignoring the beliefs, motivations and competing interests of those responsible for disposing of the dead. By the twenty-first century, explicit use of the hypothesis was considered a minority pursuit. However, it was also described as part of the "theoretical unconscious" of Neolithic archaeologists by James Whitley in 2002, and as part of "the realm of archaeological common sense" by Robert Rosenswig, Margaret Briggs, and Marilyn Masson in 2020.This recording reflects the Wikipedia text as of 00:29 UTC on Friday, 13 February 2026.For the full current version of the article, see Saxe–Goldstein hypothesis on Wikipedia.This podcast uses content from Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.Visit our archives at wikioftheday.com and subscribe to stay updated on new episodes.Follow us on Mastodon at @wikioftheday@masto.ai.Also check out Curmudgeon's Corner, a current events podcast.Until next time, I'm long-form Ruth.

Thank you to our sponsors! Figure Crypto Tax Girl Are bitcoiners underestimating the quantum threat to Bitcoin? That's the question Castle Island Ventures Partner Nic Carter has posed with some recent posts gauging the views of several leading Bitcoin developers on quantum computing. To help answer the question, Unchained reached out to Ethereum Foundation Researcher Justin Drake and Michigan University Professor Chris Peikert. In this episode, Justin and Chris, who is one of the foremost experts on lattice cryptography, break down the quantum computing threat to crypto and the potential timelines. Justin theorizes that Bitcoin developers may not be incentivized to talk about the quantum computing risk while still saying that a number of smart people are already taking it seriously and that may be enough. Conversely, Chris highlights the constraints that come with uncertainty around risks and timelines. Listen to find out what they conclude. Plus, could AI do crypto in before quantum computers? Guests: Justin Drake, Researcher at the Ethereum Foundation Chris Peikert, Professor, Computer Science and Engineering, University of Michigan Links: Ethereum and Optimism Lay the Groundwork for a Post-Quantum Future Q-Day Is Imminent. Can Bitcoin Survive the Quantum Threat? Solana Deploys Post-Quantum Signatures on Testnet Cracking Bitcoin Encryption Is Getting Much Easier, Google Says Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Garth Heckman The David Alliance TDAgiantSlayer@Gmail.com    Would you rather game: Would you rather put your hand in a blender with lemon juice or kneel on a drill bit in salt water?  Would you rather have a billion dollars and be the fattest ugliest person in the world, or be poor the rest of your life but be absolutely ravishingly beautiful?      Proverbs 15:16 Better is a little with the fear of the Lord Than great treasure, and turmoil with the treasure. 17  Better is a portion of vegetables where there is love, Than a fattened ox served with hatred.   Proverbs 15:16–17 offers a profound "this is better than that" comparison, focusing on the relationship between material wealth, spiritual peace, and emotional health. Here are the verses for reference: 16 Better is a little with the fear of the Lord than great treasure and trouble with it. 17 Better is a dinner of herbs where love is than a fattened ox and hatred with it.   The Philosophy of "Better Than" These verses belong to a category of wisdom literature known as comparative proverbs. They don't argue that being poor is inherently superior to being rich; rather, they argue that the quality of your inner life and relationships is the true multiplier of your happiness. Verse 16: The Spiritual Math "Better is a little with the fear of the Lord than great treasure and trouble with it.” I had the profound privilege of working for some of the richest people in the world when I was just 18. They had it all, everything, there was no want in their life… and they were miserable!  The Component of Peace: The "fear of the Lord" in Proverbs refers to a deep reverence and alignment with divine wisdom. This creates a psychological and spiritual foundation of security. The Hidden Cost of Wealth: The "trouble" mentioned often refers to the anxiety, ethical compromises, or sleepless nights that can accompany amassing wealth without a moral compass. The more stuff you have the more stuff you have to take care of, watch over, worry about,  The Takeaway: $Small Assets + High Peace > Large Assets + High Stress$. It's an argument for contentment over accumulation. Verse 17: The Social Climate "Better is a dinner of herbs where love is than a fattened ox and hatred with it." The Dinner of Herbs: In the ancient world, a meal of herbs (vegetables) was the "budget" option—the food of the commoner or the poor. The Fattened Ox: This represents the height of luxury—a "choice cut" reserved for royalty or major celebrations. The Emotional Environment: This verse points out that our physical environment is secondary to our emotional environment. A feast tastes like ash if you are eating it with someone you despise, or who despises you. Conversely, the simplest meal is elevated by genuine connection.   Why This Matters Today In a modern context, these verses act as a warning against "the grind" at the expense of everything else. They remind us of two things: Wealth cannot buy a quiet conscience. If the pursuit of "treasure" creates "trouble" (broken integrity, legal issues, or chronic anxiety), the treasure is actually a net loss. Relationships are the ultimate seasoning. We often spend our lives trying to provide the "fattened ox" for our families, but these verses suggest that our families would much rather have "herbs" and a present, loving version of us.

There is a unique and powerful dynamic at work in God's kingdom. It appears to operate in tandem to our behavior and thoughts. If we forgive, we are forgiven. Conversely, if we don't forgive, neither are we forgiven. Our nature is to hold judgement over another, yet we then are judged. To reconcile is to bring freedom, to return the scale to a place of equilibrium. There's only one way - to let go and keep no records of wrong.Daylight Meditations is a daily podcast from CFO North America. Please visit CFONorthAmerica.org to learn more about our retreats, and online courses. If you are encouraged by this podcast, please consider supporting us. Contributors: Michelle DeChant, Nancy Holland, and Adam Maddock

https://teachhoops.com/ Teachhoops.com⁠ ⁠WintheSeason.com⁠ ⁠CoachingYouthHoops.com⁠ ⁠https://forms.gle/kQ8zyxgfqwUA3ChU7⁠ ⁠Coach Collins Coaching Store⁠ Check out.  [Teachhoops.com](⁠https://teachhoops.com/⁠) 14 day Free Trial Youth Basketball Coaches Podcast Apple link: ⁠https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/coaching-youth-hoops/id1619185302⁠ Spotify link: ⁠https://open.spotify.com/show/0g8yYhAfztndxT1FZ4OI3A⁠ ⁠Funnel Down Defense Podcast⁠ ⁠https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/funnel-down-defense/id1593734011⁠ Want More ⁠Funnel Down Defense⁠ ⁠https://coachcollins.podia.com/funnel-down-defense⁠ [Facebook Group . Basketball Coaches](⁠https://www.facebook.com/groups/basketballcoaches/)⁠ [Facebook Group . Basketball Drills](⁠https://www.facebook.com/groups/321590381624013/)⁠ Want to Get a Question Answered? [ Leave a Question here](⁠https://www.speakpipe.com/Teachhoops⁠) Check out our other podcast [High School Hoops ](⁠https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/high-school-hoops-coaching-high-school-basketball/id1441192866⁠) Teaching shot selection is one of the most challenging aspects of coaching because it requires a player to balance individual confidence with collective offensive efficiency. A "good shot" isn't just about the distance from the hoop; it's about the context of the game, the time on the shot clock, and the specific skill set of the player taking it. To improve your team's decision-making, establish a "Green, Yellow, Red" light system that clearly defines which shots are acceptable for each individual athlete. By creating these boundaries, you remove the ambiguity that often leads to hesitation or forced "heat-check" heaves, ensuring that every possession results in a high-percentage look that fits your team's identity. Effective shot selection instruction must transition from the whiteboard to "Games-Based" drills where players are rewarded for making the right read under pressure. Instead of just charting makes and misses during practice, start charting "Shot Quality." If a player takes a contested, off-balance jumper with 20 seconds on the shot clock, it should be marked as a "loss" even if the ball goes in. Conversely, an open, rhythm three-pointer from a designated shooter should be celebrated as a "win" regardless of the outcome. This shift in focus teaches players to value "the process" over the result, building a mental framework where they understand that great teams don't just take the first shot available—they work to find the best shot available. Finally, utilize film study to reinforce these lessons. Sitting down with a player to watch a montage of their shots allows them to see the floor from a coach's perspective, noticing the open teammate they missed or the defender they failed to read. Use these sessions to discuss "Time and Score" management—the difference between a shot you take when you're up ten versus a shot you take when you're down two. When players understand the why behind shot selection, they develop a higher Basketball IQ and a sense of accountability to their teammates. This level of maturity is what allows a program to thrive in the postseason, where one disciplined decision often determines the difference between a win and a loss. Basketball shot selection, coaching basketball, offensive efficiency, basketball IQ, player development, high school basketball, youth basketball, basketball shooting drills, shooting percentage, basketball decision making, coach development, team culture, basketball strategy, basketball tactics, basketball film study, shooting mechanics, basketball offense, basketball coaching tips, game management, basketball skills, shot quality, basketball practice, mental toughness, offensive spacing, coach unplugged, teach hoops, basketball success, shooting zones, basketball mentorship, basketball scoring. SEO Keywords Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Understanding your client relationships is more crucial than ever in today's fast-paced business environment. The Annual Client Audit is a powerful tool that can help you gain clarity on your client base, enhance your business relationships, and ultimately drive growth. In this episode, Brian Thompson focuses on how a thoughtful client audit can transform your business. He emphasizes that this process is not about hastily cutting ties with clients but rather about thoughtfully evaluating client relationships to enhance business growth and personal well-being with a simple three-step process.   The Importance of a Client Audit The concept of an Annual Client Audit may seem uncomfortable at first, but it can lead to significant positive changes in your business. Brian shares a compelling story about a client who went from burnout to a newfound clarity and joy in his work, and even an increase in revenue through higher charges to those valuable clients. Not all revenue is created equal. Some clients energize you, while others leave you questioning your business decisions.   Identifying your Ideal Clients  Every client interaction teaches you something valuable. Brian encourages business owners to reflect on their client relationships by asking key questions: Who energizes you? Who pays on time? Who respects your boundaries? Conversely, who causes anxiety when they reach out? This reflection is crucial for defining your ideal client and shaping your marketing strategy.   A Simple Three-Step Process for Your Client Audit   To conduct an effective Annual Client Audit, Brian outlines a straightforward three-step process: Make a List: Document every client you've worked with over the past year. Score: Rate each client on a scale from one to five based on criteria such as revenue, energy drain, alignment with your mission, ease of communication, enjoyment of the work, and whether they are worth the effort.  Categorize: Group clients into three categories - Core Clients (those you would clone), Neutral Clients (acceptable but not ideal), and Drain Clients (high maintenance and misaligned).  This structured approach allows you to make informed decisions about which clients to keep, develop, or let go, ultimately leading to a more fulfilling business.   Your action step to understanding your client base Set aside 30-60 minutes and go through the Annual Client Audit process. Use it to reset your client relationships and start the year with clarity and confidence. If you've already done your year-end financial review, this is your next step to align your time and energy with your vision.   Resources + Links Free Client Audit Spreadsheet template Newsletter Sign Up Follow Brian Thompson Online: Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, X, Forbes Follow & review the podcast: on Spotify and Apple Podcasts   About Brian and the Mission Driven Business Podcast Brian Thompson, JD/CFP®, is a tax attorney and Certified Financial Planner® who specializes in providing comprehensive financial planning to LGBTQ+ entrepreneurs who run mission-driven businesses. The Mission Driven Business podcast was born out of his passion for helping social entrepreneurs create businesses with purpose and profit. On the podcast, Brian talks with diverse entrepreneurs and the people who support them. Listeners hear stories of experiences, strength, and hope and get practical advice to help them build businesses that might just change the world, too.

The salient point of this discourse revolves around the ongoing transformations within the furniture industry, particularly marked by notable ownership changes, closures of long-established retailers, and innovative experiments in consumer financing. As we delve into the intricacies of the marketplace, we discern the acquisition of Buddy's Home Furnishings by Skyline Investors, a shift emblematic of a broader trend towards stability amidst the tumult of ownership transitions. Concurrently, we lament the dissolution of Circle Furniture, which highlights the pressures faced by independent retailers despite their historical significance within their communities. Furthermore, we explore the experimental foray into tokenized home financing by Bed Bath and Beyond, a strategic maneuver aimed at appealing to a technologically adept consumer base. Collectively, these developments underscore a dynamic landscape in which manufacturers and retailers alike are compelled to adapt to evolving market conditions and consumer expectations. The unfolding dynamics within the furniture industry reveal a landscape marked by significant ownership transitions and the sobering reality of retail failures. A pivotal development of note is the acquisition of Buddy's Home Furnishings by Skyline Investors, a move that underscores the importance of long-term stability in the rent-to-own sector. Previously, Buddy's had faced uncertainty under the Franchise Group, which sought reorganization through Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The new ownership, in collaboration with Standard Communities, aims to inject capital and operational focus into the brand, indicating a strategic shift towards supporting franchisees rather than merely seeking short-term financial gains. This trend towards stability is particularly salient in an industry plagued by upheaval, offering a glimmer of hope to franchise operators who have been navigating turbulent waters in recent years. Conversely, the retail segment is experiencing a stark contrast, as evidenced by the recent bankruptcy filing of Circle Furniture, a venerable New England retailer. This Chapter 7 bankruptcy, leading directly to liquidation, is a distressing reminder of the pressures that independent and regional retailers face, regardless of their historical prominence. Circle's closure, alongside the retirement-induced shuttering of a 95-year-old Maine store, illustrates a generational shift within the industry, where seasoned owners find it increasingly challenging to pass on their businesses. These developments paint a complex picture of an industry at a crossroads, grappling not only with economic pressures but also with the imperatives of succession and continuity in a rapidly changing marketplace.Takeaways:The acquisition of Buddy's Home Furnishings by Skyline Investors marks a significant ownership change, reflecting a strategic focus on long-term stability rather than immediate profitability.Circle Furniture's abrupt transition into Chapter 7 bankruptcy underscores the mounting pressures faced by independent retailers in today's competitive landscape, highlighting the fragility of established businesses.The closure of a 95-year-old furniture store in Maine due to the owner's retirement exemplifies the generational shifts impacting the industry, as long-time proprietors grapple with succession challenges.Bed Bath and Beyond's experimental tokenized home financing initiative represents a noteworthy attempt to adapt to evolving consumer preferences and the tightening of traditional credit options.Kinkaid Custom...

Last time we spoke about The Battle of Suixian–Zaoyang-Shatow. Following the brutal 1938 capture of Wuhan, Japanese forces aimed to solidify their hold by launching an offensive against Chinese troops in the 5th War Zone, a rugged natural fortress in northern Hubei and southern Henan. Under General Yasuji Okamura, the 11th Army deployed three divisions and cavalry in a pincer assault starting May 1, 1939, targeting Suixian and Zaoyang to crush Nationalist resistance and secure flanks. Chinese commander Li Zongren, leveraging terrain like the Dabie and Tongbai Mountains, orchestrated defenses with over 200,000 troops, including Tang Enbo's 31st Army Group. By May 23, they recaptured Suixian and Zaoyang, forcing a Japanese withdrawal with heavy losses, over 13,000 Japanese casualties versus 25,000 Chinese, restoring pre-battle lines. Shifting south, Japan targeted Shantou in Guangdong to sever supply lines from Hong Kong. In a massive June 21 amphibious assault, the 21st Army overwhelmed thin Chinese defenses, capturing the port and Chao'an despite guerrilla resistance led by Zhang Fakui. Though losses mounted, Japan tightened its blockade, straining China's war effort amid ongoing attrition.   #188 From Changkufeng to Nomonhan Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. Well hello again, and yes you all have probably guessed we are taking another detour. Do not worry I hope to shorten this one a bit more so than what became a sort of mini series on the battle of Changkufeng or Battle of Lake Khasan. What we are about to jump into is known in the west as the battle of khalkin Gol, by the Japanese the Nomohan incident. But first I need to sort of set the table up so to say. So back on August 10th, 1938 the Litvinov-Shigemitsu agreement established a joint border commission tasked with redemarcating the disputed boundary between the Soviet Union and Japanese-controlled Manchukuo. However, this commission never achieved a mutually agreeable definition of the border in the contested area. In reality, the outcome was decided well before the group's inaugural meeting. Mere hours after the cease-fire took effect on the afternoon of August 11, General Grigory Shtern convened with a regimental commander from Japan's 19th Division to coordinate the disengagement of forces. With the conflict deemed "honorably" concluded, Japan's Imperial General Headquarters mandated the swift withdrawal of all Japanese troops to the west bank of the Tumen River. By the night of August 13, as the final Japanese soldier crossed the river, it effectively became the de facto border. Soviet forces promptly reoccupied Changkufeng Hill and the adjacent heights—a move that would carry unexpected and profound repercussions. Authoritative Japanese military analyses suggest that if negotiations in Moscow had dragged on for just one more day, the 19th Division would likely have been dislodged from Changkufeng and its surrounding elevations. Undoubtedly, General Shtern's infantry breathed a sigh of relief as the bloodshed ceased. Yet, one can't help but question why Moscow opted for a cease-fire at a juncture when Soviet troops were on the cusp of total battlefield triumph. Perhaps Kremlin leaders deemed it wiser to settle for a substantial gain, roughly three-quarters of their objectives, rather than risk everything. After all, Japan had mobilized threatening forces in eastern Manchuria, and the Imperial Army had a history of impulsive, unpredictable aggression. Moreover, amid the escalating crisis over Czechoslovakia, Moscow may have been wary of provoking a broader Asian conflict. Another theory posits that Soviet high command was misinformed about the ground situation. Reports of capturing a small segment of Changkufeng's crest might have been misinterpreted as control over the entire ridge, or an imminent full takeover before midnight on August 10. The unexpected phone call from Foreign Minister Maxim Litvinov to the Japanese embassy that night—proposing a one-kilometer Japanese retreat in exchange for a cease-fire along existing lines—hints at communication breakdowns between Shtern's headquarters and the Kremlin. Ironically, such lapses may have preserved Japanese military honor, allowing the 19th Division's evacuation through diplomacy rather than defeat. Both sides endured severe losses. Initial Japanese press reports claimed 158 killed and 740 wounded. However, the 19th Division's medical logs reveal a grimmer toll: 526 dead and 914 injured, totaling 1,440 casualties. The true figure may have climbed higher, possibly to 1,500–2,000. Following the armistice, the Soviet news agency TASS reported 236 Red Army fatalities and 611 wounded. Given Shtern's uphill assaults across open terrain against entrenched positions, these numbers seem understated. Attackers in such scenarios typically suffered two to three times the defenders' losses, suggesting Soviet casualties ranged from 3,000 to 5,000. This aligns with a Soviet Military Council investigation on August 31, 1938, which documented 408 killed and 2,807 wounded. Japanese estimates placed Soviet losses even higher, at 4,500–7,000. Not all victims perished in combat. Marshal Vasily Blyukher, a decorated Soviet commander, former warlord of the Far East, and Central Committee candidate, was summoned to Moscow in August 1938. Relieved of duty in September and arrested with his family in October, he faced charges of inadequate preparation against Japanese aggression and harboring "enemies of the people" within his ranks. On November 9, 1938, Blyukher died during interrogation a euphemism for torture-induced death.Other innocents suffered as well. In the wake of the fighting, Soviet authorities deported hundreds of thousands of Korean rice farmers from the Ussuri region to Kazakhstan, aiming to eradicate Korean settlements that Japanese spies had allegedly exploited. The Changkufeng clash indirectly hampered Japan's Wuhan offensive, a massive push to subdue China. The influx of troops and supplies for this campaign was briefly disrupted by the border flare-up. Notably, Kwantung Army's 2nd Air Group, slated for Wuhan, was retained due to the Soviet threat. Chiang Kai-shek's drastic measure, breaching the Yellow River dikes to flood Japanese advance routes—further delayed the assault. By October 25, 1938, when Japanese forces captured Hankow, Chiang had relocated his capital to distant Chungking. Paradoxically, Wuhan's fall cut rail links from Canton inland, heightening Chiang's reliance on Soviet aid routed overland and by air from Central Asia. Japan secured a tactical win but missed the decisive blow; Chinese resistance persisted, pinning down a million Japanese troops in occupation duties. What was the true significance of Changkufeng? For General Koiso Suetaka and the 19th Division, it evoked a mix of bitterness and pride. Those eager for combat got their share, though not on their terms. To veterans mourning fallen comrades on those desolate slopes, it might have felt like senseless tragedy. Yet, they fought valiantly under dire conditions, holding firm until a retreat that blended humiliation with imperial praise, a bittersweet inheritance. For the Red Army, it marked a crucial trial of resolve amid Stalin's purges. While Shtern's forces didn't shine brilliantly, they acquitted themselves well in adversity. The U.S. military attaché in Moscow observed that any purge-related inefficiencies had been surmounted, praising the Red Army's valor, reliability, and equipment. His counterpart in China, Colonel Joseph Stilwell, put it bluntly: the Soviets "appeared to advantage," urging skeptics to rethink notions of a weakened Red Army. Yet, by World War II's eve, many British, French, German, and Japanese leaders still dismissed it as a "paper tiger." Soviet leaders appeared content, promoting Shtern to command the Transbaikal Military District and colonel general by 1940, while honoring "Heroes of Lake Khasan" with medals. In a fiery November 7, 1938, speech, Marshal Kliment Voroshilov warned that future incursions would prompt strikes deep into enemy territory. Tokyo's views diverged sharply. Many in the military and government saw it as a stain on Imperial Army prestige, especially Kwantung Army, humiliated on Manchukuo soil it swore to protect. Colonel Masanobu Tsuji Inada, however, framed it as a successful reconnaissance, confirming Soviet border defense without broader aggression, allowing the Wuhan push to proceed safely. Critics, including Major General Gun Hashimoto and historians, questioned this. They argued IGHQ lacked contingency plans for a massive Soviet response, especially with Wuhan preparations underway since June. One expert warned Japan had "played with fire," risking Manchuria and Korea if escalation occurred. Yet, Japanese commanders gleaned few lessons, downplaying Soviet materiel superiority and maintaining disdain for Red Army prowess. The 19th Division's stand against outnumbered odds reinforced this hubris, as did tolerance for local insubordination—attitudes that would prove costly. The Kremlin, conversely, learned Japan remained unpredictable despite its China quagmire. But for Emperor Hirohito's intervention, the conflict might have ballooned. Amid purges and the Czech crisis, Stalin likely viewed it as a reminder of eastern vulnerabilities, especially with Munich advancing German threats westward. Both sides toyed with peril. Moderation won in Tokyo, but Kwantung Army seethed. On August 11, Premier Fumimaro Konoye noted the need for caution. Kwantung, however, pushed for and secured control of the disputed salient from Chosen Army by October 8, 1938. Even winter's chill couldn't quench their vengeful fire, setting the stage for future confrontations. A quick look at the regional map reveals how Manchukuo and the Mongolian People's Republic each jut into the other's territory like protruding salients. These bulges could be seen as aggressive thrusts into enemy land, yet they also risked encirclement and absorption by the opposing empire. A northward push from western Manchuria through Mongolia could sever the MPR and Soviet Far East from the USSR's heartland. Conversely, a pincer movement from Mongolia and the Soviet Maritime Province might envelop and isolate Manchukuo. This dynamic highlights the frontier's strategic volatility in the 1930s. One particularly tense sector was the broad Mongolian salient extending about 150 miles eastward into west-central Manchukuo. There, in mid-1939, Soviet-Japanese tensions erupted into major combat. Known to the Japanese as the Nomonhan Incident and to the Soviets and Mongolians as the Battle of Khalkhin Gol, this clash dwarfed the earlier Changkufeng affair in scale, duration, and impact. Spanning four months and claiming 30,000 to 50,000 casualties, it amounted to a small undeclared war, the modern era's first limited conflict between great powers. The Mongolian salient features vast, semiarid plains of sandy grassland, gently rolling terrain dotted with sparse scrub pines and low shrubs. The climate is unforgivingly continental: May brings hot days and freezing nights, while July and August see daytime highs exceeding 38°C (100°F in American units), with cool evenings. Swarms of mosquitoes and massive horseflies necessitate netting in summer. Rainfall is scarce, but dense morning fogs are common in August. Come September, temperatures plummet, with heavy snows by October and midwinter lows dipping to –34°C. This blend of North African aridity and North Dakotan winters supports only sparse populations, mainly two related but distinct Mongol tribes. The Buriat (or Barga) Mongols migrated into the Nomonhan area from the northwest in the late 17th to early 18th centuries, likely fleeing Russian expansion after the 1689 Treaty of Nerchinsk. Organized by Manchu emperors between 1732 and 1735, they settled east of the river they called Khalkhin Gol (Mongolian for "river"), in lands that would later become Manchukuo. The Khalkha Mongols, named for the word meaning "barrier" or "shield," traditionally guarded the Mongol Empire's northern frontiers. Their territories lay west of the Buriats, in what would become the MPR. For centuries, these tribes herded livestock across sands, river crossings, and desert paths, largely oblivious to any formal borders. For hundreds of years, the line dividing the Mongolian salient from western Manchuria was a hazy administrative divide within the Qing Empire. In the 20th century, Russia's detachment of Outer Mongolia and Japan's seizure of Manchuria transformed this vague boundary into a frontline between rival powers. The Nomonhan Incident ignited over this contested border. Near the salient's northeastern edge, the river, called Khalkhin Gol by Mongols and Soviets, and Halha by Manchurians and Japanese, flows northwest into Lake Buir Nor. The core dispute: Was the river, as Japan asserted, the historic boundary between Manchukuo and the MPR? Soviet and MPR officials insisted the line ran parallel to and 10–12 miles east of the river, claiming the intervening strip. Japan cited no fewer than 18 maps, from Chinese and Japanese sources, to support the river as the border, a logical choice in such barren terrain, where it served as the sole natural divider. Yet, Soviets and Mongolians countered with evidence like a 1919 Chinese postal atlas and maps from Japanese and Manchukuoan agencies (1919–1934). Unbeknownst to combatants, in July 1939, China's military attaché in Moscow shared a 1934 General Staff map with his American counterpart, showing the border east of the river. Postwar Japanese studies of 18th-century Chinese records confirm that in 1734, the Qing emperor set a boundary between Buriat and Khalkha Mongols east of the river, passing through the hamlet of Nomonhan—as the Soviets claimed. However, Kwantung Army Headquarters dismissed this as non-binding, viewing it as an internal Qing affair without Russian involvement. Two former Kwantung Army officers offer a pragmatic explanation: From 1931 to 1935, when Soviet forces in the Far East were weak, Japanese and Manchukuoan authorities imposed the river as the de facto border, with MPR acquiescence. By the mid- to late 1930s, as Soviet strength grew, Japan refused to yield, while Mongolians and Soviets rejected the river line, sparking clashes. In 1935, Kwantung Army revised its maps to align with the river claim. From late that year, the Lake Buir Nor–Halha sector saw frequent skirmishes between Manchukuoan and MPR patrols. Until mid-1938, frontier defense in northwestern Manchukuo fell to the 8th Border Garrison Unit , based near Hailar. This 7,000-man force, spread thin, lacked mobility, training, and, in Kwantung Army's eyes, combat readiness. That summer, the newly formed 23rd Division, under Kwantung Army, took station at Hailar, absorbing the 8th BGU under its command, led by Lieutenant General Michitaro Komatsubara. At 52, Komatsubara was a premier Russian specialist in the Imperial Army, with stints as military attaché in the USSR and head of Kwantung's Special Services Agency in Harbin. Standing 5'7" with a sturdy build, glasses, and a small mustache, he was detail-oriented, keeping meticulous diaries, writing lengthy letters, and composing poetry, though he lacked combat experience. Before departing Tokyo in July 1938, Komatsubara received briefings from Colonel Masazumi Inada, AGS Operations Section chief. Amid planning for Changkufeng, Inada urged calm on the Manchukuo-MPR border given China's ongoing campaigns. Guidelines: Ignore minor incidents, prioritize intelligence on Soviet forces east of Lake Baikal, and study operations against the Soviet Far East's western sector. Familiar with the region from his Harbin days, Komatsubara adopted a low-key approach. Neither impulsive nor aggressive, he kept the green 23rd Division near Hailar, delegating patrols to the 8th BGU. An autumn incident underscores his restraint. On November 1, 1938, an 8th BGU patrol was ambushed by MPR forces. Per Japanese accounts, the three-man team, led by a lieutenant, strayed too close to the border and was attacked 50 meters inside Manchukuo. The lieutenant escaped, but his men died. Komatsubara sent an infantry company to secure the site but forbade retaliation. He pursued body recovery diplomatically, protested to MPR and Soviet officials, and disciplined his officers: garrison leaders got five days' confinement for poor troop training, the lieutenant thirty days. Despite this caution, pressures at AGS and KwAHQ were mounting, poised to thrust the 23rd Division into fierce battle. Modern militaries routinely develop contingency plans against potential adversaries, and the mere existence of such strategies doesn't inherently signal aggressive intentions. That said, shifts in Japan's operational planning vis-à-vis the Soviet Union may have inadvertently fueled the Nomonhan Incident. From 1934 to 1938, Japanese war scenarios emphasized a massive surprise assault in the Ussuri River region, paired with defensive holding actions in northwestern Manchuria. However, between mid-1938 and early 1939, a clandestine joint task force from the Army General Staff  and Kwantung Army's Operations Departments crafted a bold new blueprint. This revised strategy proposed containing Soviet forces in the east and north while unleashing a full-scale offensive from Hailar, advancing west-northwest toward Chita and ultimately Lake Baikal. The goal: sever the Transbaikal Soviet Far East from the USSR's core. Dubbed Plan Eight-B, it gained Kwantung Army's endorsement in March 1939. Key architects—Colonels Takushiro Hattori and Masao Terada, along with Major Takeharu Shimanuki—were reassigned from AGS to Kwantung Army Headquarters to oversee implementation. The plan anticipated a five-year buildup before execution, with Hattori assuming the role of chief operations staff officer.  A map review exposes a glaring vulnerability in Plan Eight-B: the Japanese advance would leave its southern flank exposed to Soviet counterstrikes from the Mongolian salient. By spring 1939, KwAHQ likely began perceiving this protrusion as a strategic liability. Notably, at the outbreak of Nomonhan hostilities, no detailed operational contingencies for the area had been formalized. Concurrently, Japan initiated plans for a vital railroad linking Harlun Arshan to Hailar. While its direct tie to Plan Eight-B remains unclear, the route skirted perilously close to the Halha River, potentially heightening KwAHQ's focus on the disputed Mongolian salient. In early 1939, the 23rd Division intensified reconnaissance patrols near the river. Around this time, General Grigory Shtern, freshly appointed commander of Soviet Far Eastern forces, issued a public warning that Japan was gearing up for an assault on the Mongolian People's Republic. As Plan Eight-B took shape and railroad proposals advanced, KwAHQ issued a strikingly confrontational set of guidelines for frontier troops. These directives are often cited as a catalyst for the Nomonhan clash, forging a chain linking the 1937 Amur River incident, the 1938 Changkufeng debacle, and the 1939 conflict.Resentment had festered at KwAHQ over perceived AGS meddling during the Amur affair, which curtailed their command autonomy. This frustration intensified at Changkufeng, where General Kamezo Suetaka's 19th Division endured heavy losses, only for the contested Manchukuoan territory to be effectively ceded. Kwantung Army lobbied successfully to wrest oversight of the Changkufeng salient from Chosen Army. In November 1938, Major Masanobu Tsuji of KwAHQ's Operations Section was sent to survey the site. The audacious officer was dismayed: Soviet forces dominated the land from the disputed ridge to the Tumen River. Tsuji undertook several winter reconnaissance missions. His final outing in March 1939 involved leading 40 men to Changkufeng's base. With rifles slung non-threateningly, they ascended to within 200 yards of Soviet lines, formed a line, and urinated in unison, eliciting amused reactions from the enemy. They then picnicked with obentos and sake, sang army tunes, and left gifts of canned meat, chocolates, and whiskey. This theatrical stunt concealed Tsuji's real aim: covert photography proving Soviet fortifications encroached on Manchukuoan soil. Tsuji was a singular figure. Born of modest means, he embodied a modern samurai ethos, channeling a sharp intellect into a frail, often ailing body through feats of extraordinary daring. A creative tactician, he thrived in intelligence ops, political scheming, aerial scouting, planning, and frontline command—excelling across a tumultuous career. Yet, flaws marred his brilliance: narrow bigotry, virulent racism, and capacity for cruelty. Ever the ambitious outsider, Tsuji wielded outsized influence via gekokujo—Japan's tradition of subordinates steering policy from below. In 1939, he was a major, but his pivotal role at Nomonhan stemmed from this dynamic. Back in Hsinking after his Changkufeng escapade, Tsuji drafted a response plan: negotiate border "rectification" with the Soviets; if talks failed, launch an attack to expel intruders. Kwantung Army adopted it. Deputy Chief of Staff Major General Otozaburo Yano flew to Tokyo with Tsuji's photos, seeking AGS approval. There, he was rebuffed—Changkufeng was deemed settled, and minor violations should be overlooked amid Tokyo's aversion to Soviet conflict. Yano's plea that leniency would invite aggression was countered by notes on Europe's tensions restraining Moscow. Yano's return sparked outrage at KwAHQ, seen as AGS thwarting their imperial duty to safeguard Manchukuo. Fury peaked in the Operations Section, setting the stage for Tsuji's drafting of stringent new frontier guidelines: "Principles for the Settlement of Soviet-Manchukuoan Border Disputes." The core tenet: "If Soviet troops transgress the Manchukuoan frontiers, Kwantung Army will nip their ambitions in the bud by completely destroying them." Specific directives for local commanders included: "If the enemy crosses the frontiers … annihilate him without delay, employing strength carefully built up beforehand. To accomplish our mission, it is permissible to enter Soviet territory, or to trap or lure Soviet troops into Manchukuoan territory and allow them to remain there for some time… . Where boundary lines are not clearly defined, area defense commanders will, upon their own initiative, establish boundaries and indicate them to the forward elements… . In the event of an armed clash, fight until victory is won, regardless of relative strengths or of the location of the boundaries. If the enemy violates the borders, friendly units must challenge him courageously and endeavor to triumph in their zone of action without concerning themselves about the consequences, which will be the responsibility of higher headquarters." Major Tsuji Masanobu later justified the new guidelines by pointing to the "contradictory orders" that had hamstrung frontier commanders under the old rules. They were tasked with upholding Manchukuo's territorial integrity yet forbidden from actions that might spark conflict. This, Tsuji argued, bred hesitation, as officers feared repercussions for decisive responses to incursions. The updated directives aimed to alleviate this "anxiety," empowering local leaders to act boldly without personal liability. In truth, Tsuji's "Principles for the Settlement of Soviet-Manchukuoan Border Disputes" were more incendiary than conciliatory. They introduced provocative measures: authorizing commanders to unilaterally define unclear boundaries, enforce them with immediate force "shoot first, ask questions later", permit pursuits into enemy territory, and even encourage luring adversaries across the line. Such tactics flouted both government policy and official army doctrine, prioritizing escalation over restraint. The proposals sparked intense debate within Kwantung Army's Operations Section. Section chief Colonel Takushiro Hattori and Colonel Masao Terada outranked Tsuji, as did Major Takeharu Shimanuki, all recent transfers from the Army General Staff. Tsuji, however, boasted longer tenure at Kwantung Army Headquarters since April 1936 and in Operations since November 1937, making him the de facto veteran. Hattori and Terada hesitated to challenge the assertive major, whose reputation for intellect, persuasion, and deep knowledge of Manchuria commanded respect. In a 1960 interview, Shimanuki recalled Tsuji's dominance in discussions, where his proactive ideas often swayed the group. Unified, the section forwarded Tsuji's plan to Kwantung Army Command. Commander Lieutenant General Kenkichi Ueda consulted Chief of Staff General Rensuke Isogai and Vice Chief General Otozaburo Yano, seasoned leaders who should have spotted the guidelines' volatility. Yet, lingering grudges from AGS "interference" in past incidents like the Amur River and Changkufeng clouded their judgment. Ueda, Isogai, and Tsuji shared history from the 1932 Shanghai Incident: Tsuji, then a captain, led a company in the 7th Regiment under Colonel Isogai, with Yano as staff officer and Ueda commanding the 9th Division. Tsuji was wounded there, forging bonds of camaraderie. This "clique," which grew to include Hattori, Terada, and Shimanuki, amplified Tsuji's influence. Despite Isogai's initial reservations as the group's moderate voice, the guidelines won approval. Ueda issued them as Kwantung Army Operations Order 1488 on April 25, 1939, during a division commanders' conference at KwAHQ. A routine copy reached AGS in Tokyo, but no formal reply came. Preoccupied with the China War and alliance talks with Germany, AGS may have overlooked border matters. Colonel Masazumi Inada, AGS Operations head, later noted basic acceptance of Order 1488, with an informal expectation—relayed to Hattori and Terada—of prior consultation on violations. KwAHQ dismissed this as another Tokyo intrusion on their autonomy. Some Japanese analysts contend a stern AGS rejection might have prevented Nomonhan's catastrophe, though quelling Kwantung's defiance could have required mass staff reassignments, a disruptive step AGS avoided. Tsuji countered that permitting forceful action at Changkufeng would have deterred Nomonhan altogether, underscoring the interconnectedness of these clashes while implicitly critiquing the 1939 battle's location. Undeniably, Order 1488's issuance on April 25 paved the way for conflict three weeks later. Japanese records confirm that Khalkha Mongols and MPR patrols routinely crossed the Halha River—viewed by them as internal territory, 10 miles from the true border. Such crossings passed uneventfully in March and April 1939. Post-Order 1488, however, 23rd Division commander General Michitaro Komatsubara responded aggressively, setting the stage for escalation. The Nomonhan Incident ignited with a border clash on May 11–12, 1939, that rapidly spiraled into a major conflict. Over a dozen "authoritative" accounts exist, varying in viewpoint, focus, and specifics. After cross-referencing these sources, a coherent timeline emerges. On the night of May 10–11, a 20-man Mongolian People's Republic border patrol crossed eastward over the Halha River (known as Khalkhin Gol to Mongols and Soviets). About 10 miles east, atop a 150-foot sandy hill, lay the tiny hamlet of Nomonhan, a cluster of crude huts housing a few Mongol families. Just south flowed the Holsten River, merging westward into the broader Halha. By morning on May 11, Manchukuoan forces spotted the MPR patrol north of the Holsten and west of Nomonhan. In the MPR/Soviet perspective, Nomonhan Hill marked the Mongolia-Manchuria border. To Manchukuoans and Japanese, it sat 10 miles inside Manchukuo, well east of the Halha. A 40-man Manchukuoan cavalry unit repelled the Mongolians back across the river, inflicting initial casualties on both sides—the Manchukuoans drawing first blood. The MPR patrol leader exaggerated the attackers as 200 strong. The next day, May 12, a 60-man MPR force under Major P. Chogdan evicted the Manchukuoans from the disputed zone, reestablishing positions between the Halha and Nomonhan. The Manchukuoans, in turn, reported facing 700 enemies. Sporadic skirmishes and maneuvering persisted through the week. On May 13, two days post-clash, the local Manchukuoan commander alerted General Michitaro Komatsubara's 23rd Division headquarters in Hailar. Simultaneously, Major Chogdan reported to Soviet military command in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia's capital. What began as a Mongolian-Manchukuoan spat was poised to draw in Soviet and Japanese patrons. Attributing the May 10–11 violation hinges on border interpretations: both sides claimed the Halha-Nomonhan strip. Yet, most accounts concur that Manchukuoan forces initiated the fighting. Post-May 13 notifications to Moscow and Tokyo clarify the record thereafter. Midday on May 13, Komatsubara was leading a staff conference on the newly issued Kwantung Army Operations Order 1488—Major Tsuji Masanobu's aggressive border guidelines. Ironically, the first Nomonhan combat report arrived mid-discussion. Officers present recall Komatsubara deciding instantly to "destroy the invading Outer Mongolian forces" per Order 1488. That afternoon, he informed Kwantung Army Headquarters of the incident and his intent to eradicate the intruders, requesting air support and trucks. General Kenkichi Ueda, Kwantung commander, approved Komatsubara's "positive attitude," dispatching six scout planes, 40 fighters, 10 light bombers, two anti-aircraft batteries, and two motorized transport companies. Ueda added a caveat: exercise "extreme caution" to prevent escalation—a paradoxical blend of destruction and restraint, reflective of KwAHQ's fervent mood. Ueda relayed the details to Tokyo's Army General Staff, which responded that Kwantung should handle it "appropriately." Despite Kwantung's impulsive reputation, Tokyo deferred, perhaps trusting the northern strategic imbalance, eight Japanese divisions versus 30 Soviet ones from Lake Baikal to Vladivostok, would enforce prudence. This faith proved misguided. On May 14, Major Tsuji flew from KwAHQ for aerial reconnaissance over Nomonhan, spotting 20 horses but no troops. Upon landing, a fresh bullet hole in his plane confirmed lingering MPR presence east of the Halha. Tsuji briefed 23rd Division staff and reported to Ueda that the incident seemed minor. Aligning with Order 1488's spirit, Komatsubara deployed a force under Lieutenant Colonel Yaozo Azuma: an armored car company, two infantry companies, and a cavalry troop. Arriving at Nomonhan on May 15, Azuma learned most MPR forces had retreated westward across the Halha the prior night, with only token elements remaining, and those withdrawing. Undeterred, he pursued. The advance met scant resistance, as foes had crossed the river. However, Japanese light bombers struck a small MPR concentration on the west bank, Outpost Number 7, killing two and wounding 15 per MPR reports; Japanese claimed 30–40 kills. All agree: the raid targeted undisputed MPR territory. Hearing of May 15's events, Komatsubara deemed the Mongolians sufficiently rebuked and recalled Azuma to Hailar on May 16. KwAHQ concurred, closing the matter. Soviet leaders, however, saw it differently. Mid-May prompted Soviet support for the MPR under their 1936 Mutual Defense Pact. The Red Army's 57th Corps, stationed in Mongolia, faced initial disarray: Commander Nikolai Feklenko was hunting, Chief of Staff A. M. Kushchev in Ulan Ude with his ill wife. Moscow learned of clashes via international press from Japanese sources, sparking Chief of Staff Boris Shaposhnikov's furious inquiry. Feklenko and Kushchev rushed back to Ulaanbaatar, dispatching a mixed force—a battalion from the 149th Infantry Regiment (36th Division), plus light armor and artillery from the 11th Tank Brigade—to Tamsag Bulak, 80 miles west of the Halha. Led by Major A. E. Bykov, it bolstered the MPR's 6th Cavalry Division. Bykov and Cavalry Commander Colonel Shoaaiibuu inspected the site on May 15, post-Azum's departure. The cavalry arrived two days later, backed by Bykov (ordered to remain west of the river and avoid combat if possible). Some MPR troops recrossed, occupying the disputed zone. Clashes with Manchukuoan cavalry resumed and intensified. Notified of renewed hostilities, Komatsubara viewed it as defiance, a personal affront. Emboldened by Order 1488, he aimed not just to repel but to encircle and annihilate. The incident was on the verge of major expansion. I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. The ghosts of the Changufeng incident have come back to haunt both the USSR and Japan. Those like Tsuji Masanobu instigated yet another border clash that would erupt into a full blown battle that would set a precedent for both nations until the very end of WW2. 

Guest: Jeremy Zakis. While New England freezes, Sydney enjoys mild 70°F temperatures and rain following a heatwave. Conversely, Western Australia faces Tropical Cyclone Mitchell, a Category 3 storm threatening Karrathawith high winds and storm surges. Locals prepared extensively, likely minimizing damage, though the system remains dangerous as it moves south toward Exmouth.

Professor Sandra Walklate, Emeritus and honorary professor at the University of Liverpool, discusses her work in victimology and violence against women, including her work in the field of femicide. Drawing upon historical paradigms where the concept of feminicide has been previously employed, Walklate notes various examples from the Americas where femicide was used as a tool in drawing attention to the complicity of the state in hiding the numbers of women's deaths at the hands of men, only then to be disappeared by the state “with no compunction on the part of the state to pursue why those lives were disappeared.” Noting how some scholars and writers have attempted to extend the definition of the way in which we count femicide into femininicide, she argues the merits of “slow femicide” and accounting for the number of women's lives lost because of the illnesses that follow on from living with the stress of violence—from their propensity to commit suicide to the long-term effects of experiencing strangulation as a feature of that violence to the associated diseases. Conversely, Walklate questions whether creating a separate legal category for “femicide” in addition to related concepts like “coercive control” in cases of domestic violence truly benefits victims or simply expands the power of a system that has already failed these victims. Underscoring how the law cannot always offer respite to the victims of IPA (Intimate Partner Abuse) due to the reality that the number of people prosecuted for such crimes is infinitesimally small, Walklate observes how “the power of the advocacy voice over the reality of the evidence” has also affected the ways in which policing and the judiciary react towards specific types of violence. Get full access to Savage Minds at savageminds.substack.com/subscribe

Theoretical Models of the CorporationScholars debate the fundamental nature of the public corporation through several lenses:The Principal-Agent vs. Team Production Models: The traditional "principal-agent" model views shareholders as owners who hire managers (agents) to maximize their wealth. In contrast, the "Team Production Theory" suggests the corporation is a "mediating hierarchy". In this model, stakeholders like shareholders, employees, and creditors voluntarily yield control over their firm-specific investments to an independent board of directors to coordinate production and prevent wasteful "rent-seeking" or "shirking".The Efficiency vs. Power Models: Adherents to the "efficiency model" view the firm as a "nexus of contracts" where market forces naturally select governance structures that minimize transaction costs. Conversely, the "power model" depicts the firm as an organic institution where management holds a strategic position and uses tools like board representation to legitimate its own autonomy and discretion.Fiduciary Duties and the Business Judgment RuleCorporate management is constrained and protected by specific legal doctrines:Fiduciary Obligations: Directors owe a triad of duties: good faith, loyalty, and due care. While these are often described as running to shareholders, case law clarifies that these duties are primarily owed to the corporate entity itself.Presumption of Regularity: The Business Judgment Rule creates a strong presumption that directors act on an informed basis and in the honest belief that their actions serve the corporation's best interests. This rule effectively insulates directors from personal liability for bad business decisions unless a plaintiff proves fraud, self-dealing, or gross negligence in the decision-making process.Derivative Suits: Shareholders may sue on the corporation's behalf for breaches of duty, but procedural barriers—such as the "demand" requirement—ensure these suits remain a "safety valve" rather than a tool for direct shareholder control.Limited LiabilityA cornerstone of the corporate form is limited liability, which stipulates that shareholders are generally not personally responsible for corporate debts beyond their initial investment.Justification: This status encourages risk-taking and large-scale capital formation.Critique and Externalities: Critics argue that limited liability encourages excessive risk-taking and allows corporations to "socialize" losses, such as environmental damage from fossil fuel production. Some propose redefining this status for sectors that generate significant negative externalities to ensure investors have "skin in the game".Regulatory Dynamics and LegitimacyThe sources highlight an increasing convergence between corporate governance and public government institutional features.Federal vs. State Rulemaking: The SEC provides broad federal disclosure regulations, while the Delaware Court of Chancery often fills gaps through case-by-case transactional jurisprudence. Laws like Sarbanes-Oxley (2002) and Dodd-Frank (2010) have further federalized governance by imposing standards for director independence, audit committees, and whistleblower protections.Legitimacy through Process: Corporate legitimacy is increasingly derived from procedural mechanisms common in democratic states, such as the separation of powers, transparency (disclosure), and ethics codes.Case Study: Government as Regulator-ShareholderThe Bank of America (BOA)-Merrill Lynch merger during the 2008 financial crisis serves as a case study for the "shotgun wedding" dynamic. When the federal government acts as both a regulator and a powerful shareholder, traditional fiduciary analysis becomes strained. In the BOA case, the Treasury effectively compelled the merger by threatening to remove the board, highlighting a "post-bailout reality" where corporate decision-making is a coordinated public-private process rather than a purely private affair.

Joe Concha presents a populist political commentary that contrasts a thriving national economy under the Trump administration with the perceived failures of liberal governance in urban centers. He highlights historic financial milestones, such as the Dow Jones reaching 50,000, to argue that conservative fiscal policies and deregulation have successfully lowered inflation and energy costs. Conversely, Concha criticizes New York politicians for prioritizing immigrant protections over the safety of citizens during a deadly cold snap, framing the Democratic platform as out of touch with the needs of the working class. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Whether it's a sudden wild move downward, or a full on bear cycle, even real Contrarians make the same mistakes rank amateurs do.  It's time to remind ourselves what we're really doing here, by going over three of the most classic mistakes we still fall for.   Recommended Crypto Trading Platform (And Bonus Eligibility) - https://nononsenseforex.com/cryptocurrencies/best-crypto-trading-platform/   For Decentralized Crypto Trading (US Citizens Can Join) - https://nononsenseforex.com/decentralized-trading-platform/   Blueberry Markets Blog (Top FX Broker) - https://nononsenseforex.com/uncategorized/blueberry-markets-review-my-top-broker-for-2019/   Get a Discount On Any Trading View Package - https://www.tradingview.com/?aff_id=159841   The Blog Has Moved to My New Free Substack - https://thecontrarianinvestorblog.substack.com/p/what-to-expect-and-what-not-to?r=16orow   Follow VP on Twitter https://twitter.com/This_Is_VP4X   Check out my Forex trading material too! https://nononsenseforex.com/   The host of this podcast is not a licensed financial advisor, and nothing heard on this podcast should be taken as financial advice.  Do your own research and understand all financial decisions and the results therein are yours and yours alone.  The host is not responsible for the actions of their sponsors and/or affiliates.  Conversely, views expressed on this podcast are that of the host only and may not reflect the views of any companies mentioned. Trading Forex involves risk.  Losses can exceed deposits. We are not taking requests for episode topics at this time.  Thank you for understanding.

In this episode, Fran Spielman hosts a discussion between two Chicago City Council members, Ald. Anthony Beale (9th) and Ald. Walter "Red" Burnett (27th), who are on opposing sides of the debate over legalizing video gaming terminals (VGTs) in the city. Beal advocates for lifting the current ban, citing the potential for significant revenue generation to alleviate budget deficits and support local businesses. Conversely, Walter Burnett argues against VGTs, focusing on public safety risks, potential cannibalization of casino revenue, and the adverse effects of increased gambling accessibility, particularly on younger men. 

Sara Daw is Group CEO of The CFO Centre and The Liberti Group, and the author of Strategy and Leadership as Service – How the Access Economy Meets the C-Suite, which explores the fractional leadership trend and the impact on employees. The remote vs in-office workplace debate continues to burden leaders. Return-to-office mandates are on the rise, with the idea that they will boost engagement, productivity and collaboration. But do they? Worryingly, the opposite can be true. A recent Gartner survey found that among high-performing employees, their intent to stay was 16% lower with strict RTO mandates. Conversely, Gallup's latest State of the Global Workplace report reveals that remote workers are the most likely to be engaged at work (31%). Employees Work' Matters Less Than 'How They Work' While it is important for each company to decide what work arrangements work best for them – whether remote, hybrid, or in office full-time – this misses the overarching point. Instead of arguing over the 'where' of work, leaders should be focusing more on the 'how'. This is where "psychological ownership" comes in – our ability to feel that our job belongs to us. When employees feel psychologically tied to their roles, the more likely they are to be engaged and perform at their best. So how can leaders develop psychological ownership in their staff, regardless of where they work from? The Three Roots of Psychological Ownership There are three roots that underpin a sense of psychological ownership – efficacy, self-identity and having a place: 1. Efficacy – leaders, employees and their team members must understand each other's needs and feel confident that the relationship is working to meet desired goals. 2. Self-identity – work isn't just about completing tasks; it's about expressing individual skills, values and purpose. Employees need to feel that their role fits their identity and reflects who they are. 3. Having a place – individuals fundamentally want to belong. When teams work together, individuals feel part of a group of like-minded people with a shared mission, strengthening their commitment and engagement. These three roots are particularly important for a blended workforce, with employees split between working in-office and from home. So, what steps can leaders take to nurture these roots of psychological ownership in their staff? Create Control When staff have a say over their work, they achieve a sense of control in their role. This helps them to feel ownership of their tasks, boosting their motivation, engagement and performance. To increase feelings of control in employees, leaders should: Clarify the purpose and goals of staff's work but let them choose the best way to achieve them. Encourage staff to share their knowledge and insights with others – this strengthens their feeling of control by demonstrating their competence and confidence. Foster open communication channels by determining when individuals are and aren't available Build Intimacy Intimacy is a key ingredient for creating a positive and fulfilling work environment, particularly in a blended workforce. Intimacy leads to a stronger sense of belonging with colleagues, increases collaboration and conflict resolution, and deepens our appreciation of our role, its purpose and its impact. Leaders can build intimacy with and between employees by: Scheduling regular one-to-one meetings and informal catch-ups to check in on each other's well-being, goals, and challenges Be empathetic, actively listen and ask open-ended questions to show interest and understanding Arrange social events and activities that promote getting to know each other outside of work Build trust via transparency, sticking to commitments, and being consistent. Encourage self-investment How much employees invest themselves personally in their work influences their sense of ownership over their jobs. Investment can take many forms – time, skills, ideas, physical and psychological, and intellectual ener...

A blind beggar cries out for mercy while a leafy fig tree stands barren of fruit. In this penultimate episode of The Magnificent 37, we explore a stark contrast between faith and fruitlessness. Jesus heals Bartimaeus, whose physical blindness is replaced by spiritual sight and discipleship. Conversely, the cursing of the fig tree serves as a living parable of judgment against a temple system that had the appearance of life but produced no fruit of repentance. Together, these accounts teach us about the power of persistent prayer and the danger of spiritual hypocrisy.   The Rev. Peter Burfeind, pastor of Our Savior Lutheran Church in Union City, MI and Agnus Dei Lutheran Church in Marshall, MI, joins the Rev. Dr. Phil Booe to study Mark 10:46–52 and Mark 11:12–25.  To learn more about Our Savior and Agnus Dei Lutheran, visit facebook.com/oursaviorunioncity and agnusdeimarshall.com. Thy Strong Word kicks off the new year by dedicating our time to study "The Magnificent 37: The Miracles of Jesus." Christ didn't just speak the Word; He demonstrated it with power. From the quiet intimacy of water turning to wine at Cana to the earth-shaking reality of the empty tomb, the Gospels record thirty-seven distinct moments where Jesus suspended the laws of nature to reveal the power of his grace. This isn't just a list of "neat tricks" from history. It is a systematic walkthrough of how God breaks into our broken world to fix it. Why did Jesus curse a fig tree? Why did He need mud to heal a blind man? What does the coin in the fish's mouth teach us about being citizens of heaven and earth?  Host, Pastor Phil Booe and a lineup of guest pastors will take you through each event, verse by verse. We'll move past the Sunday School summary and get into the meat of the text, including the Old Testament connections, the cultural context, and the immediate comfort these signs bring to your life today.   Thy Strong Word, hosted by Rev. Dr. Phil Booe, pastor of St. John Lutheran Church of Luverne, MN, reveals the light of our salvation in Christ through study of God's Word, breaking our darkness with His redeeming light. Each weekday, two pastors fix our eyes on Jesus by considering Holy Scripture, verse by verse, in order to be strengthened in the Word and be equipped to faithfully serve in our daily vocations. Submit comments or questions to: thystrongword@kfuo.org.

The salient point of this discourse centers on the ongoing transformation within the furniture retail landscape, marked by significant ownership changes and a notable wave of closures among long-standing establishments. Our examination reveals that Buddy's Home Furnishings has recently transitioned to new ownership under Skyline Investors, a development that underscores a strategic emphasis on long-term stability amidst the tumultuous backdrop of franchise restructuring. Conversely, we must also confront the somber reality of Circle Furniture's filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, signaling an acute vulnerability faced by independent retailers despite their historical prominence in the market. This episode further explores the innovative approaches being undertaken by retailers, such as Bed Bath and Beyond's experimental foray into tokenized home financing, as they strive to adapt to evolving consumer preferences in a tightening economic environment. Collectively, these narratives illustrate a broader delineation of challenges and opportunities that characterize the current milieu in the furniture industry.Takeaways:The acquisition of Buddy's Home Furnishings by Skyline Investors signifies a strategic shift towards long-term stability and investment in the rent-to-own sector.Circle Furniture's closure, following a lengthy operational history, underscores the ongoing challenges faced by independent retailers amidst an evolving market landscape.The introduction of a tokenized home financing option by Bed Bath and Beyond reflects an innovative approach to adapt to changing consumer payment preferences in a tightening credit environment.Kinkaid Custom Upholstery's transition to an independent operation post-sale from La Z Boy indicates a potential for focused growth rather than decline following divestiture.The recent tariff reductions on imported rugs from India provide modest cost relief, potentially stabilizing pricing for retailers dependent on these goods.Overall, the furniture industry is witnessing significant transformations, marked by ownership shifts, closures of long-standing entities, and innovative financing strategies to enhance competitiveness.

Good morning from Pharma Daily: the podcast that brings you the most important developments in the pharmaceutical and biotech world. Let's dive into the latest happenings in this dynamic industry.Starting with a look at the projected launch of top drugs anticipated in 2026, it's fascinating to see how these developments are poised to influence the market. These drugs could collectively generate a substantial $45.9 billion in annual sales by 2032, underscoring their economic impact and potential to address unmet medical needs. This reflects a robust pipeline of innovative treatments, marking significant therapeutic advancements on the horizon.Regulatory actions continue to be a pivotal force in shaping market dynamics. The FDA's recent issuance of complete response letters to Aquestive Therapeutics and Pharming resulted in contrasting market reactions, with Aquestive's shares rising while Pharming's declined. This scenario highlights the critical role of regulatory decisions in shaping company fortunes and investor confidence. Additionally, the FDA has introduced a precheck manufacturing program aimed at streamlining domestic drug production processes. This initiative is part of a broader trend to bolster U.S. pharmaceutical manufacturing capabilities amid global supply chain concerns, reflecting an effort to reduce complexities associated with setting up manufacturing plants domestically.In the realm of policy debates, there's notable discord among Trump administration officials over the future of COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S. market. This internal division could have far-reaching implications for public health strategies and vaccine accessibility, emphasizing ongoing challenges in pandemic management and policy alignment.Turning to scientific innovation, Daiichi Sankyo's development of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) has faced some setbacks. The company has discontinued an internal next-wave candidate and is experiencing delays in pivotal phase 3 trial readouts for its AstraZeneca-partnered candidate, Datroway. Despite these challenges, ADCs remain a promising area of oncology research due to their targeted therapeutic potential.Positive regulatory feedback from the European Medicines Agency's Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has provided a boost for companies like Novo Nordisk and Amgen. Novo Nordisk received approval for semaglutide for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), highlighting its potential to address this liver disease with limited treatment options. Conversely, Amgen's Tavneos faces a re-review due to data integrity concerns, illustrating the rigorous scrutiny that accompanies pharmaceutical approvals and the importance of maintaining data integrity throughout development.Sanofi's pipeline reflects mixed outcomes as its GCS inhibitor failed a phase 3 trial for Fabry disease but showed promise in Gaucher disease. This underscores the inherent uncertainties and challenges faced in drug development, where promising candidates may not always meet clinical expectations.In broader scientific research, AstraZeneca identified 22 genes potentially linked to chronic diseases following Epstein-Barr virus infection. This finding advances our understanding of viral pathogenesis and its long-term health impacts, potentially guiding future therapeutic interventions.These developments illustrate a dynamic landscape where scientific innovation, regulatory oversight, and market forces converge to shape the future of healthcare. Breakthrough technologies and new therapeutic approaches hold promise for improving patient care and advancing drug development. However, navigating complex regulatory environments and addressing data integrity concerns remain critical challenges that companies must overcome to bring these innovations to market successfully.On another front, Roche's substantial $1.7 billion deal with Sanegene marks its re-engageSupport the show

Rav Mordechai reinstates the original interpretation of Shmuel's limitation on the Mishna in Shekalim 7:7 - namely, that the court permitted the kohanim to use Temple salt for salting their sacrifices (for burning on the altar) but not for salting the meat of the sacrifices for consumption. This ruling of the court follows Ben Buchri's opinion that kohanim are not obligated to pay the half-shekel (machatzit hashekel) used to fund communal items in the Temple. Since they did not contribute to the fund, one might have assumed they were ineligible to benefit from Temple salt; therefore, the court issued a specific stipulation to permit it. The Mishna in Shekalim also mentions that the kohanim could use wood from the Temple for their private sacrifices. The source for this is derived from Vayikra 1:8, which mentions the wood "which is on the fire on the altar." The phrase "on the altar" is considered superfluous, indicating that the wood shares the same status as the altar itself; just as the altar is built from communal property, so too the wood must be communal. This teaching establishes that individuals are not required to bring wood from their own homes for their voluntary offerings. Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua defines the altar differently positing that the altar must be built using stones that have never been used. This requirement would also preclude individuals from bringing wood from their own homes. Consequently, the Gemara asks: what is the practical difference between these two opinions? The answer is that the latter opinion requires the wood to be brand new and never previously used, whereas the former does not. If a kometz, which contains one log of oil, is mixed with the mincha of a kohen or a mincha of libations, which contains three log of oil, there is a debate between the rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda. They disagree on whether the mixture may be burned on the altar or if the blending disqualifies both offerings. The concern is that the oil from the mincha becomes added to the kometz, potentially disqualifying both; the kometz would then contain an excessive amount of oil, while the mincha would be left with an insufficient amount. The Gemara cites a Mishna in Zevachim 77b featuring a debate between the rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda regarding whether two similar substances (min be'mino) can nullify one another. Rabbi Yochanan explains that both parties derive their respective positions from the Yom Kippur service, during which the blood of the bull and the blood of the goat are mixed together. Despite the volume of the bull's blood being significantly greater than that of the goat, the Torah continues to refer to the mixture as both "the blood of the bull" and "the blood of the goat"—indicating that the goat's blood remains distinct and is not nullified. The rabbis derive a broad principle from this: items designated for the altar never nullify one another, regardless of their type. Conversely, Rabbi Yehuda derives a different principle: blood does not nullify blood because they are the same type of substance (min be'mino). The Gemara raises challenges against both derivations, and they are left unresolved. Rabbi Yehuda's opinion in our Mishna appears to contradict his ruling in the Mishna in Zevachim; if two similar substances (min be'mino) do not nullify each other, then the oil of the mincha should not be nullified by (or absorbed into) the kometz. Rava resolves this contradiction by explaining that this case is an exception, as it is considered a situation where one substance "adds to" the other rather than merely mixing with it.

We’re talking about where faith & DNA collide. This is a throwback episode from my 2018 interview with Dr Simon Southerton. We’ll discuss how this former LDS bishop got excommunicated over his writings about DNA problems with the Book of Mormon and his book “Losing a Lost Tribe.” Check out our conversation… https://youtu.be/N0pD5jz01OA Chapters 0:00 Faith & DNA Collision Result in Excommunication 18:41 Cohen Haplotype 36:06 DNA Shouldn’t Vanish 54:45 The Flood & Religious Beliefs Check out our other conversations on DNA & Book of Mormon: https://gospeltangents.com/lds_theology/dna-book-of-mormon/ Faith & DNA Collision: LDS Bishop to Genetic Skeptic What happens when a molecular geneticist, serving as a faithful LDS Bishop, encounters scientific data that directly contradicts the keystone of his religion? I'm excited to release the full video of our 2018 interview with Australian researcher Dr. Simon Southerton. A former Senior Research Scientist with the CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization), Dr. Southerton's journey from devout leader to vocal critic is one of the most compelling narratives in the world of Mormon studies. Dr. Southerton utilizes his expertise in population genetics to tackle apologetic theories regarding the Book of Mormon, offering a hard-hitting look at DNA, history, and the cost of following his conscience. Global Flood and “Cognitive Dissonance” Dr. Southerton's transition didn’t begin with DNA, but with the Flood. While serving as a bishop, he read an Ensign article classifying those who believe in a “local flood” (rather than a global catastrophe 4,500 years ago) as effectively denying the faith. Knowing that a global flood is scientifically impossible due to geological and genetic evidence, he felt alienated. This prompted him to research Native American DNA, hoping to find evidence supporting the Book of Mormon. Instead, he found that 99% of Native American markers are derived from Asia, with the remainder being post-Columbus European or African admixture. The realization hit him during a family night: “We chose Book of Mormon stories… by the end of that song I was pretty deeply upset… I remember thinking at the time I’m never going to sing that song again with my children because it’s wrong.” “Vanishing DNA” Theory A major portion of the interview addresses the apologetic argument—promoted by scholars like Ugo Perego—that Lehi's party was so small their DNA “vanished” or was swamped by existing populations. Southerton rejects this as inconsistent with the text. He argues that the Book of Mormon describes massive civilizations and rapid population growth, not a small family that immediately disappeared into a dominant culture. He notes that whole-genome sequencing of ancient Mayans consistently shows Asian ancestry, not Middle Eastern. Cohen Haplotype vs. The X Lineage Dr. Southerton explains why DNA can track ancient migrations if they actually occurred. He points to the Lemba tribe in Africa, who claimed Jewish ancestry. Genetic testing revealed they carried the “Cohen Haplotype,” a specific Semitic Y-chromosome marker, vindicating their oral history. Conversely, he takes aim at the theories of Rodney Meldrum, whom he characterizes as a “snake oil salesman”. Meldrum argues the “X Lineage” in North America is evidence of Middle Eastern migration. Southerton clarifies that the X lineage is an ancient marker arriving roughly 15,000 years ago—long before the Nephites—and is distantly related to Middle Eastern markers, splitting off 30,000 years ago. The Viking Argument Apologists often argue that since we can’t find Viking DNA in the Americas (despite knowing they were there), we shouldn’t expect to find Nephite DNA. Southerton dismisses this parallel. He argues that Vikings were raiders and traders who didn’t establish massive, centuries-long civilizations comparable to the Nephites and Lamanites described in the scriptures. Excommunication and Life After Faith Finally, Dr. Southerton opens up about the “draconian” process of his excommunication. While the Church charged him with “inappropriate relationships” during a separation from his wife, Southerton asserts the true motivation was his book, Losing a Lost Tribe. He describes the disciplinary council as a “15th-century” process where the outcome is decided before the accused enters the room. Today, Southerton identifies as agnostic, finding peace outside of organized religion. He emphasizes that one does not need the Church to be a “delightful, decent, good human being.” Copyright © 2026 Gospel Tangents All Rights Reserved Except for book reviews, no content may be reproduced without written permission

This podcast episode delves into a critical examination of the cinematic phenomenon that is the Avatar franchise, focusing specifically on the first installment, released in 2009. As the hosts, J.J. and Alec, express their sentiments, they contend that while the film exhibits remarkable visual artistry and groundbreaking technology, it ultimately falters due to its derivative narrative. The hosts navigate through their contrasting perspectives, with J.J. articulating profound dissatisfaction with the film's lack of originality, likening it to a rehashed tale of colonialism. Conversely, Alec acknowledges the film's merits, particularly the compelling performances of its cast, yet he echoes concerns regarding the film's pacing and over-reliance on visual spectacle. Together, they dissect the thematic and narrative shortcomings of Avatar, providing an insightful dialogue that challenges listeners to reconsider their perceptions of this celebrated cinematic work.Support us:https://www.patreon.com/whatsourverdictEmail us:hosts@whatsourverdict.comFollow us:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/whatsourverdictTwitter: @whatsourverdictInstagram: @whatsourverdictYouTube: https://youtube.com/channel/UC-K_E-ofs3b85BnoU4R6liAVisit us:www.whatsourverdict.com

Rav Mordechai reinstates the original interpretation of Shmuel's limitation on the Mishna in Shekalim 7:7 - namely, that the court permitted the kohanim to use Temple salt for salting their sacrifices (for burning on the altar) but not for salting the meat of the sacrifices for consumption. This ruling of the court follows Ben Buchri's opinion that kohanim are not obligated to pay the half-shekel (machatzit hashekel) used to fund communal items in the Temple. Since they did not contribute to the fund, one might have assumed they were ineligible to benefit from Temple salt; therefore, the court issued a specific stipulation to permit it. The Mishna in Shekalim also mentions that the kohanim could use wood from the Temple for their private sacrifices. The source for this is derived from Vayikra 1:8, which mentions the wood "which is on the fire on the altar." The phrase "on the altar" is considered superfluous, indicating that the wood shares the same status as the altar itself; just as the altar is built from communal property, so too the wood must be communal. This teaching establishes that individuals are not required to bring wood from their own homes for their voluntary offerings. Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua defines the altar differently positing that the altar must be built using stones that have never been used. This requirement would also preclude individuals from bringing wood from their own homes. Consequently, the Gemara asks: what is the practical difference between these two opinions? The answer is that the latter opinion requires the wood to be brand new and never previously used, whereas the former does not. If a kometz, which contains one log of oil, is mixed with the mincha of a kohen or a mincha of libations, which contains three log of oil, there is a debate between the rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda. They disagree on whether the mixture may be burned on the altar or if the blending disqualifies both offerings. The concern is that the oil from the mincha becomes added to the kometz, potentially disqualifying both; the kometz would then contain an excessive amount of oil, while the mincha would be left with an insufficient amount. The Gemara cites a Mishna in Zevachim 77b featuring a debate between the rabbis and Rabbi Yehuda regarding whether two similar substances (min be'mino) can nullify one another. Rabbi Yochanan explains that both parties derive their respective positions from the Yom Kippur service, during which the blood of the bull and the blood of the goat are mixed together. Despite the volume of the bull's blood being significantly greater than that of the goat, the Torah continues to refer to the mixture as both "the blood of the bull" and "the blood of the goat"—indicating that the goat's blood remains distinct and is not nullified. The rabbis derive a broad principle from this: items designated for the altar never nullify one another, regardless of their type. Conversely, Rabbi Yehuda derives a different principle: blood does not nullify blood because they are the same type of substance (min be'mino). The Gemara raises challenges against both derivations, and they are left unresolved. Rabbi Yehuda's opinion in our Mishna appears to contradict his ruling in the Mishna in Zevachim; if two similar substances (min be'mino) do not nullify each other, then the oil of the mincha should not be nullified by (or absorbed into) the kometz. Rava resolves this contradiction by explaining that this case is an exception, as it is considered a situation where one substance "adds to" the other rather than merely mixing with it.

Pastor John shares a brief message of encouragement this week. He reminds us that if there is no Jesus, there is no peace. Conversely, if we know Jesus then we know peace, the peace that surpasses all understanding. So as we navigate this time of birth pains, do you know Jesus?

So what we have here is an institution meant to continually channel the water that Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu, brought from the great ocean of mercy of Kṛṣṇa. We're kind of like civil engineers, right? Sometimes they cut channels like Mulholland; Los Angeles wouldn't be a name right now if Mulholland, a very expert engineer, hadn't figured out how to "steal" all the water from Northern California (you can tell where I'm from) and bring it down to Los Angeles to make the desert fertile. Economics, I learned from an economics book, is the science of managing scarce resources and thereafter the law of supply and demand; but we learn from the Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta that there is no scarce resource in the spiritual world. The more we channel the mercy of Nityānanda Prabhu to the world, the more the supply increases. That's a Haribol! That's a secret of success. Also, when we have an institution meant to distribute mercy, "the devil is in the details," but we can come out of the details by principles. And one of the principles that Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu exhibited and taught to the world is the principle of adoṣa-darśī. Everyone is envious in the material world—my brother gets a raise, and I think, "Darn"; somebody else leads a great kīrtana, it feels like ughh!! As Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, this is the lingering disease in the material world. Śrī Nityānanda Prabhu represents the uttama-adhikārī who sees beyond the faults of all living entities, which are cataloged by Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura in the Fourth Canto of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam in his commentary, where he says there are four kinds of people that are highly expert at finding faults, some are better at it than others. And there are four kinds of saintly persons who are expert at following finding the good qualities in others. The first fault-finder sees that there are good qualities and bad qualities and then he only sees the bad; second, he's more advanced, he sees the good and bad qualities so he brings up the bad quality to make sure everybody knows about it; the third doesn't even see any good qualities, just sees the bad; and the fourth is so expert that even in those that only have good qualities, he finds some fault. Conversely, in those who represent Lord Nityānanda to one degree or another, the first sees good and bad qualities but chooses to see the good; the second one sees good and bad and brings up the good quality; the third doesn't see the bad quality, just the good; and the fourth, even in a person who is sudurācāra, who has no good qualities factually, a person who is a representative of Lord Nityānanda finds a good quality. To connect with His Grace Vaiśeṣika Dāsa, please visit https://www.fanthespark.com/next-steps/ask-vaisesika-dasa/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=video&utm_campaign=launch2025 ------------------------------------------------------------ Add to your wisdom literature collection: https://iskconsv.com/book-store/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=video&utm_campaign=launch2025 https://www.bbtacademic.com/books/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=video&utm_campaign=launch2025 https://thefourquestionsbook.com/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=video&utm_campaign=launch2025 ------------------------------------------------------------ Join us live on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FanTheSpark/ Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sound-bhakti/id1132423868 For the latest videos, subscribe https://www.youtube.com/@FanTheSpark For the latest in SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/fan-the-spark ------------------------------------------------------------

We just experienced one of the most ridiculous price drops in history this past week.  It would be criminal not to break it all down, so we will in the first half of Episode 241, then talk about a stock I bought earlier in the week, and why I did it.  There is a pretty wild bonus to be had with this one in particular.   Recommended Crypto Trading Platform (And Bonus Eligibility) - https://nononsenseforex.com/cryptocurrencies/best-crypto-trading-platform/   For Decentralized Crypto Trading (US Citizens Can Join) - https://nononsenseforex.com/decentralized-trading-platform/   Blueberry Markets Blog (Top FX Broker) - https://nononsenseforex.com/uncategorized/blueberry-markets-review-my-top-broker-for-2019/   Get a Discount On Any Trading View Package - https://www.tradingview.com/?aff_id=159841   The Blog Has Moved to My New Free Substack - https://thecontrarianinvestorblog.substack.com/p/what-to-expect-and-what-not-to?r=16orow   Follow VP on Twitter https://twitter.com/This_Is_VP4X   Check out my Forex trading material too! https://nononsenseforex.com/   The host of this podcast is not a licensed financial advisor, and nothing heard on this podcast should be taken as financial advice.  Do your own research and understand all financial decisions and the results therein are yours and yours alone.  The host is not responsible for the actions of their sponsors and/or affiliates.  Conversely, views expressed on this podcast are that of the host only and may not reflect the views of any companies mentioned. Trading Forex involves risk.  Losses can exceed deposits. We are not taking requests for episode topics at this time.  Thank you for understanding.

Why Tackle Tops the Lions' Offseason List Senior Bowl week set the tone in Mobile. The Shrine Bowl wrapped the other night. Scott Bischoff and Russell Brown are deep in practice tape on the Detroit Lions Podcast. The conversation zeroed in on offensive tackle and how it drives every Detroit Lions decision. Offensive tackle is the biggest need for this roster. Outside of Penei Sewell, the future at left or right tackle is unclear. Decker's status is not defined. That uncertainty elevates tackle above every other position. You can patch the interior with a veteran and a younger center. Graham Glasgow remains in place. That worst case is manageable. The priority is tackle. Sewell at Left or Right: Where the Value Lives In a perfect world, you would not move what might be the best right tackle in football. Sewell fits that bill. Disrupting that matters. Yet it is easier to find a right tackle than a premium left tackle in the NFL. Sewell can be a strong left tackle. The best team-first move could be shifting him left if the rookie fits better on the right. Conversely, if pick 17 yields a true college left tackle, keep Sewell at right tackle. Let the rookie learn and possibly sit behind Decker for a half season. The player dictates the plan. The larger question remains whether you should move a foundational piece at all. Draft Board at 17 and Beyond At pick 17, a few intriguing tackles could reach Detroit. One or two at the very top likely will not. The board will decide how aggressive the Lions must be. This offensive line class looks deeper than expected. There may be fewer elite names at the top, but there is quality through the first two rounds. Options exist at 17 and again around pick 50. The further down the list you go, the more developmental tackles you can target. Interior paths also exist. The mix could include Chris Mahogany, Kate Ratlitsch, and Mills Frazier, with Graham Glasgow in the room. That flexibility allows a rookie tackle to grow while the line holds together opposite Sewell. Senior Bowl practices are on day three, technically day four of the week. Shrine Bowl work is in the books. Those sessions shape the board and the fit at tackle. A fuller recap of both events comes next week. #detroitlions #lions #detroitlionspodcast #nfl #seniorbowl #shrinebowl #pick17 #peneisewell #decker #righttackle #lefttackle #interioroffensiveline #grahamglasgow #offensivelineclass #offensivetackle #practicetape Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SHOW NOTES 535MotoMorini Vettore 450 will be in attendanceTriumph Triple Updates: The Trident 660 and Tiger Sport 660 received significant updates for 2026, featuring "punchier" engine layouts and revised chassis. They are expected in dealerships by March 2026.Honda Entry-Level Changes: The 2026 Rebel 300 has been updated with Honda's E-Clutch technology Yamaha's New Era: Yamaha has officially debuted its first full-factory V4-powered M1 for the 2026 MotoGP season, signaling a major technical shift from its traditional inline-four engine.Dakar Victory: Luciano Benavides and Red Bull KTM have beeKTM/Bajaj Restructuring: Following a major post-insolvency reset, Bajaj Auto has officially taken controlling interest of KTM AG. The company has announced plans to cut approximately 500 jobs as part of a global cost-reduction strategy.Market Trends: Reports indicate a challenging start to 2026, with nearly 120 U.S. dealerships closing due to sagging sales and rising costs. Conversely, BMW Motorrad reported record success, clearing 200,000 worldwide sales for the fourth consecutive year.New Brake Systems: WP Suspension (owned by KTM/Bajaj) has launched a new performance braking division, moving toward more in-house component integration for future models like the 390 DukeSupport the showRemember folks...Ride Fast and Take Chances! check out our Youtube channel at https://www.youtube.com/c/ClevelandMoto

Numerous different theories have been advanced to explain why the Kaddish prayer was written in Aramaic, and not in Hebrew. One reason given is based on the tradition that angels do not understand Aramaic. Kaddish is such a precious and valuable prayer that the angels would feel envious if they heard us recite it and they understood its meaning. This prayer was therefore composed in a language which the angels cannot understand. The Mahzor Vitri (Rabbenu Simha of Vitri, France, d. 1105) questioned this explanation, noting that there are many other beautiful and precious prayers which we recite that were written in Hebrew, without any concern that the angels might become envious. (We might also question how angels, which are perfect beings, can experience jealousy, a human flaw. Perhaps, envy over spiritual achievements is a laudable quality, and this feeling can be experienced by angels.) A second theory is that Kaddish is written in Aramaic as a reminder of the Babylonian exile. We emphasize to Hashem that He destroyed the Bet Ha'mikdash and drove us into a foreign land, where we spoke a foreign language, and we hope that this will lead Hashem to regret His decision and bring us back. If the angels understood this prayer, they would respond by pointing out our misdeeds, arguing that we are unworthy of redemption, and so we recite Kaddish in a language which the angels do not understand. Another reason given is that many of the people who would attend Torah classes were simple laymen who did not understand Hebrew. Therefore, the Kaddish recited after Torah classes was written in Aramaic for their benefit, so they would understand this prayer. It seems that according to this reason, the other Kaddish recitations were modeled after the Kaddish recited after Torah classes. The Maharam Me'Rotenberg (c. 1215-1293) suggested that we recite Kaddish in Aramaic to express our grief over the destruction of the Bet Ha'mikdash. Just as a mourner changes out of his fine garments and wears simple clothing as an expression of mourning, we, too, change the language from Hebrew, the sacred tongue, to the inferior Aramaic, as an expression of anguish. (Incidentally, some sources explain similarly why we begin the Haggadah at the Seder in Aramaic, reciting "Ha Lahma Anya." As we sit down to the Seder, we are cognizant of the fact that we are meant to celebrate this occasion in Jerusalem, with the Korban Pesach. We therefore begin the Seder in a foreign language, expressing our grief that we observe Pesach in exile.) Rabbi Binyamin Ben Abraham (Italy, 13 th century), as cited by his brother, the Shiboleh Ha'leket (Rabbi Sidkiya Ha'rofeh), suggested that the gentile authorities at a certain point forbade the Jews from reciting Kaddish. The Jews therefore began reciting it in Aramaic, so the authorities would not realize that they were reciting this prayer. The Kolbo (anonymous work from the period of the Rishonim) offered two explanations, one assuming that Aramaic was widely known at the time of Kaddish's composition, and one assuming that it was not. If it was widely known, he writes, then Kaddish may have been written in this language specifically for the purpose of spreading its message far and wide, to demonstrate to the entire world, including the gentiles, our belief in our ultimate redemption, when Hashem's Name will be glorified throughout the world. Conversely, if Aramaic was not widely known, then perhaps it is recited in Aramaic because the angels might otherwise understand the prayer and thus prosecute against us. The Kaddish speaks of the time of the future redemption, and at that time, the righteous will be granted a greater position of stature than the angels. Since we human beings must struggle against our evil inclination to faithfully observe G-d, those who succeed and serve G-d properly deserve far more reward than the angels, who are created perfect, without sinful impulses. If the angels would understand the Kaddish, which speaks of the time of the final redemption, they might proceed to prosecute against us to ensure that the righteous would not be given a more distinguished position in the future. Kaddish is therefore recited in Aramaic, a language which the angels do not understand.

Most traders have some form of debt hanging over their heads.  This will affect you one way or the other, regardless of how much you have.  But what should be done about it?  Well, it depends.  Robb and VP go deep, because a lot needs to be discussed here.   #TradingPsychology   Maverick Links   Click Here To Learn More about Maverick Forex Trading:  URL: https://maverickfx.com/application-3-a/?utm_source=vpyt   Click Here To Learn More about Maverick Currencies: URL: https://maverickcurrencies.com/application-3-a/?utm_source=VPPodPsych   Click Here To Learn More about Maverick Trading's Stock/Options Division: URL: https://mavericktrading.com/application-3-a/?utm_source=VPPodPsych   Maverick Trading YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@mavericktrading   Robb's Flat Earth Trading Society https://www.youtube.com/@FlatEarthTradingSociety   No Nonsense Forex Links   VP's Trading Psychology Book https://nononsenseforex.com/forex-psychology-book/   Recommended Crypto Trading Platform (Bonus and Contest Eligibility) - https://nononsenseforex.com/cryptocurrencies/best-crypto-trading-platform/   Blueberry Markets Blog (Top FX Broker) - https://nononsenseforex.com/uncategorized/blueberry-markets-review-my-top-broker-for-2019/   Follow VP on Twitter https://twitter.com/This_Is_VP4X   The hosts of this podcast are not licensed financial advisors, and nothing heard on this podcast should be taken as financial advice.  Do your own research and understand all financial decisions and the results therein are yours and yours alone.  The host is not responsible for the actions of their sponsors and/or affiliates.  Conversely, views expressed on this podcast are that of the host only and may not reflect the views of any companies mentioned. Trading anything involves risk.  Losses can exceed deposits.

In this episode of the Millionaire Car Salesman Podcast, Sean V. Bradley and LA Williams sit down with Kelley Koliopulos for a conversation every dealer should be paying attention to, especially if your sales and service departments feel busy… but the results don't match the effort. "The blind spot that dealers have is that they're still making money… but there's going to be a ceiling there." – Kelley Koliopulos This isn't another "business as usual" discussion. It's a candid look at what's quietly changing inside dealerships right now, and why the stores that adapt will pull further ahead while others fall behind. From fixed operations to BDC structure, the conversation challenges long-held assumptions about how dealerships operate, staff, and retain customers. "Anybody could have a great idea. But what dealers want and need in 2026 and beyond is some continuity." – Sean V. Bradley They explore why retention is becoming the real battleground in automotive, what happens when the right people aren't in the right seats, and how technology like AI can either be a powerful advantage, or a costly distraction, depending on how it's implemented. "AI can't fix or answer every question, so you still need that human element." – Kelley Koliopulos If you've noticed service traffic slipping, customer loyalty weakening, or your BDC struggling to gain traction, this episode will hit close to home. It doesn't just point out the problems dealers are facing… it forces a hard look at why they're happening! This one makes you rethink how your dealership is actually run.   If you're attending NADA 2026, be sure to stop by the Dealer Synergy Booth [#3315W] for Prizes from us and to enter CallSource's Bourbon Dealer Giveaway at: https://callsourceauto.com/giveaways/   Key Takeaways: ✅ People-Centric Solutions: The current dealership climate requires a strong focus on recruiting and retaining quality staff, while also providing them with the tools and training necessary to excel. ✅ Innovative Fixed Operations: Fixed operations now require more strategic approaches in communication and engagement with customers to enhance retention and service conversion rates. ✅ BDC Strategic Integration: Properly setting up and managing a BDC is pivotal for handling leads effectively, driving more traffic to dealerships, and improving overall sales performance. ✅ Leveraging AI and Technology: While AI can improve efficiencies, it cannot yet fully replace human involvement in complex problem-solving scenarios, especially in service departments. ✅ Focus on Customer Retention: Using data-driven methodologies to retain customers through consistent follow-up is crucial, particularly as competition from independent service centers intensifies. About Kelley Koliopulos Kelley Koliopulos is a seasoned automotive industry expert, currently working with Call Source, where she primarily focuses on analytics and improving dealerships' fixed operations. Kelley's impressive career spans roles from F&I to dealership marketing with AMSI, and her vendor-side experience includes positions at Call Source and Call Revu. Her expertise centers around using data to refine processes and enhance efficiencies within the automotive sector.     Unlocking Efficiency: Overcoming Dealership Challenges with BDC Solutions Key Takeaways: High-level dealership operations can benefit significantly from a well-designed Business Development Center (BDC) strategy, optimizing both sales and fixed operations. A combined approach utilizing human resources and AI in service departments can enhance customer retention and satisfaction significantly. Outsourcing BDC services can be a more cost-effective, strategic, and results-oriented decision, delivering superior outcomes compared to traditional in-house setups. Navigating Dealership Dynamics: The Power of a BDC The automotive industry is a space brimming with potential, yet awash in complexity. This is especially evident when examining the intricate operations within a dealership. As Kelley Koliopulos and Sean V. Bradley discuss in their engaging conversation, pulling the right levers - particularly in terms of business development - can make all the difference. As highlighted, a dealership's success lies not just in selling cars but in crafting a seamless, customer-centric experience that persists long after the sale. "For every OEM dealership, there's 12 independents right in their back door," Kelley states, emphasizing the fierce competition that demands dealerships maintain exceptional service levels. The conversation initiates by exploring the fundamental issues within sales and fixed operations, where optimizing human resources and understanding the potency of a BDC play crucial roles. Sean underscores the critical role of a precise BDC framework: "If you are not a BDC architect with real BDC experience, this is not going to be easy." He highlights that the apparent complexity of creating a BDC can be simplified if one has the foresight to leverage external expertise effectively. It's all about recognizing which elements facilitate the operational efficiency and concentrating on those. Enhancing Customer Retention through Strategic Service BDC Implementation Among the many challenges dealerships face, customer retention remains a top concern, especially when analyzing fixed operations. Kelley artfully points out that maintaining service customers is pivotal for long-term success. Despite dealerships increasing their revenue by raising labor rates, she warns, "There's going to be a ceiling there," suggesting dealerships can't rely solely on price hikes for sustained growth. The conversation touches on significant research revelations: client retention decreased from 41% in 2018 to a mere 29% in 2025. This stark statistic signals the pressing need for dealerships to reassess their service strategies. Implementing a robust Service BDC could potentially reverse this trend. By restructuring service departments to better handle inbound and outbound calls efficiently, dealerships can drive transactional growth and enhance customer loyalty. Highlighting the collaborative potential of AI and human effort, Kelley asserts, "AI can't fix or answer every question. You still need that human element." Therefore, an outsourced BDC like Call Source becomes valuable, where the marriage of technology and human interaction meets customer needs, bolstering satisfaction and ensuring service longevity. The Economic Advantage of Outsourcing Your BDC Dealers frequently grapple with whether to manage BDC operations in-house or to look outward for solutions. Sean and Kelley underscore a prevalent misconception: many feel the latter is more costly. Conversely, with a closer look, outsourcing often emerges as the more economical and effective solution. "I think the perception is that it's cheaper to bring it in-house," Kelley notes, but as Sean aptly counters, when factoring in all associated costs, investing in an external BDC can unburden dealerships, reduce costs, and ultimately increase sales. Outsourcing offers none of the egocentric challenges of internal management and training, providing instead immediate expertise and scalability. "Not only do we have the agents that are making all the dials… but once they got a live person, they have a strong road to the appointment process," Sean adds, emphasizing the dynamic advantage offered by Dealer Synergy's proven model. This approach ensures leads are converted efficiently, and potential sales pitfalls due to insufficient follow-up or lack of expertise are circumvented entirely. Embracing a Virtuous Cycle of Learning and Growth The enlightening exchange between Sean V. Bradley and Kelley Koliopulos underscores the essence of thriving in today's competitive dealership landscape: seek clarity, apply strategic foresight, and choose partnerships that propel efficiency. As dealerships navigate an era characterized by digital transformation and shifting consumer expectations, aligning operations with services like those offered by Dealer Synergy and Call Source could serve as a definitive competitive edge. Ultimately, it is the prudent application of an expert-built BDC that enables dealerships to thrive — cultivating not just profitable enterprises, but vibrant, enduring legacies. By focusing on strategic partnerships and adopting a robust BDC framework, dealerships can unlock greater efficiency, higher sales, and improved customer satisfaction — key pillars paving the way for enduring success in the automotive industry.     Resources + Our Proud Sponsors:   ➼ The Millionaire Car Salesman Facebook Group: Join the #1 Automotive Sales Mastermind Facebook Group with over 29,000 automotive professionals worldwide. The Millionaire Car Salesman Facebook Group is the go-to community for car salespeople, BDC agents, sales managers, general managers, and dealer principals looking to increase performance, income, and leadership skills. Inside the group, members collaborate daily on automotive sales strategies, lead handling, phone scripts, closing techniques, CRM best practices, dealership leadership, and accountability systems. Learn directly from top automotive trainers, industry mentors, and high-performing sales leaders who are actively winning in today's market. If you're serious about growing your automotive career, increasing car sales, and building long-term success, join The Millionaire Car Salesman Facebook Group today! ➼ Dealer Synergy: Dealer Synergy is the automotive industry's #1 Sales Training, Consulting, and Accountability Firm, with over 20 years of proven dealership success nationwide. We specialize in helping car dealerships increase sales, improve processes, and build high-performing Sales, Internet, and BDC departments from the ground up. Our expertise includes automotive phone scripts, rebuttals, CRM action plans, lead handling strategies, BDC workflows, Internet sales processes, management training, and accountability systems. Dealer Synergy partners directly with dealership leadership to align people, process, and technology, ensuring consistent results and scalable growth. From independent dealers to large dealer groups and OEM partnerships, Dealer Synergy delivers measurable performance improvements, stronger teams, and sustainable profitability. ➼ Bradley On Demand: Bradley On Demand is the automotive industry's most advanced interactive training, tracking, testing, and certification platform for car dealerships — built to develop top-performing teams across Sales, Internet Sales, BDC, CRM, Phone Skills, Leadership, and Management. In addition to LIVE virtual automotive training classes and a library of 9,000+ on-demand dealership training modules, Bradley On Demand now includes AI Phone Roleplaying and Coaching to help salespeople and BDC agents practice real dealership conversations before they ever get on the phone with customers. This AI-powered roleplay technology strengthens phone scripts, objection handling, appointment setting, lead follow-up, and closing skills, while providing measurable coaching feedback for continuous improvement. Bradley On Demand empowers dealerships to train faster, coach smarter, improve call performance, increase closing ratios, and sell more cars more profitably — all through structured, trackable, modern automotive training.  

For more positivity, good news, and uplifting messages visit: www.guidinglights.org Thank you for listening! If you like, please subscribe for more! Healthy Sleep Hygiene: The Foundation of Overall Well-being In our fast-paced, high-stress world, getting a good night's sleep often takes a backseat to the demands of work, family, and social obligations. However, sleep is a critical component of overall well-being, influencing everything from our mood and cognitive function to our physical health. Developing healthy sleep hygiene habits is essential for ensuring we get the restorative sleep our bodies need to function at their best. What is Sleep Hygiene? Sleep hygiene refers to a set of practices and habits that promote consistent, uninterrupted, and high-quality sleep. Good sleep hygiene can help you fall asleep more easily, stay asleep throughout the night, and wake up feeling refreshed and energized. Here are some key elements of healthy sleep hygiene: 1. Maintain a Consistent Sleep Schedule Going to bed and waking up at the same time every day helps regulate your body's internal clock. This consistency makes it easier to fall asleep at night and wake up in the morning. Aim to keep this schedule even on weekends to avoid disrupting your sleep pattern. 2. Create a Relaxing Bedtime Routine Establishing a calming pre-sleep routine can signal to your body that it's time to wind down. Activities such as reading a book, taking a warm bath, or practicing relaxation techniques like deep breathing or meditation can help prepare your mind and body for sleep. 3. Optimize Your Sleep Environment Your bedroom should be a sanctuary for sleep. Ensure your sleeping environment is cool, quiet, and dark. Invest in a comfortable mattress and pillows, and consider using blackout curtains or a white noise machine if you're sensitive to light or noise. 4. Limit Exposure to Screens Before Bed The blue light emitted by phones, tablets, and computers can interfere with the production of melatonin, a hormone that regulates sleep. Try to avoid screens at least an hour before bedtime. Instead, opt for activities that help you relax without the stimulating effects of screens. 5. Be Mindful of Food and Drink What you consume before bed can significantly impact your sleep. Avoid large meals, caffeine, and alcohol in the hours leading up to bedtime. While alcohol might make you feel sleepy initially, it can disrupt your sleep cycle later in the night. 6. Stay Active During the Day Regular physical activity can help you fall asleep faster and enjoy deeper sleep. However, try to complete your workout at least a few hours before bedtime, as exercising too close to bedtime can have the opposite effect. 7. Manage Stress and Anxiety Stress and anxiety are common culprits of poor sleep. Incorporating stress-reducing practices into your daily routine, such as mindfulness meditation, yoga, or journaling, can help calm your mind and improve your sleep quality. The Benefits of Healthy Sleep Hygiene Prioritizing healthy sleep hygiene can have a profound impact on your overall well-being. Here are some of the key benefits: Improved Cognitive Function Adequate sleep enhances cognitive processes such as memory, attention, and problem-solving skills. It also supports creativity and learning by allowing the brain to process and consolidate information. Better Emotional Regulation Good sleep is essential for emotional stability. It helps regulate mood, reduces irritability, and enhances the ability to cope with stress. Conversely, poor sleep is associated with increased risk of mood disorders like depression and anxiety. Enhanced Physical Health Sleep plays a crucial role in physical health. It supports immune function, helps regulate hormones, and contributes to cardiovascular health. Poor sleep is linked to an increased risk of various health issues, including obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. Increased Productivity and Performance When well-rested, individuals are more alert, focused, and efficient in their tasks. Good sleep improves overall performance, whether in professional settings, academic pursuits, or personal endeavors. Healthy sleep hygiene is the cornerstone of overall well-being. By incorporating simple yet effective habits into your daily routine, you can significantly improve the quality of your sleep and, consequently, your quality of life. Remember, sleep is not a luxury but a necessity. Prioritize it, and you'll reap the benefits of a healthier, happier, and more productive life.

https://teachhoops.com/ Teaching shot selection is one of the most challenging aspects of coaching because it requires a player to balance individual confidence with collective offensive efficiency. A "good shot" isn't just about the distance from the hoop; it's about the context of the game, the time on the shot clock, and the specific skill set of the player taking it. To improve your team's decision-making, you must first establish a "Green, Yellow, Red" light system that clearly defines which shots are acceptable for each individual athlete. By creating these boundaries, you remove the ambiguity that often leads to hesitation or "heat-check" heaves, ensuring that every possession results in a high-percentage look that fits your team's identity. Effective shot selection instruction must transition from the whiteboard to "Games-Based" drills where players are rewarded for making the right read under pressure. Instead of just charting makes and misses during practice, start charting "Shot Quality." If a player takes a contested, off-balance jumper with 20 seconds on the shot clock, it should be marked as a "loss" even if the ball goes in. Conversely, an open, rhythm three-pointer from a designated shooter should be celebrated as a "win" regardless of the outcome. This shift in focus teaches players to value "the process" over the result, building a mental framework where they understand that great teams don't just take the first shot available—they work to find the best shot available. Finally, January and February are the critical months to use film study to reinforce these lessons. Sitting down with a player to watch a montage of their shots allows them to see the floor from a coach's perspective, noticing the open teammate they missed or the defender they failed to read. Use these sessions to discuss "Time and Score" management—the difference between a shot you take when you're up ten versus a shot you take when you're down two. When players understand the why behind shot selection, they develop a higher Basketball IQ and a sense of accountability to their teammates. This level of maturity is what allows a program to thrive in the postseason, where one disciplined decision often determines the difference between a win and a loss. Basketball shot selection, coaching basketball, offensive efficiency, basketball IQ, player development, high school basketball, youth basketball, basketball shooting drills, shooting percentage, basketball decision making, coach development, team culture, basketball strategy, basketball tactics, basketball film study, shooting mechanics, basketball offense, basketball coaching tips, game management, basketball skills, shot quality, basketball practice, mental toughness, offensive spacing, coach unplugged, teach hoops, basketball success, shooting zones, basketball mentorship, basketball scoring. SEO Keywords Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Strap in Contrarians, we have a monster on our hands today.  The world has already signaled how important energy will be in the next decade, starting now.  The demand is insatiable, and the supply often is not.  This went from a relatively sleepy and frustrating sector, to the most obvious move on the board.  We're talking multiple silver scenarios yet to come here, it's far from too late. We break down the big picture, and the individual case for 7 different sectors in a mammoth Episode 240.   Recommended Crypto Trading Platform (And Bonus Eligibility) - https://nononsenseforex.com/cryptocurrencies/best-crypto-trading-platform/   For Decentralized Crypto Trading (US Citizens Can Join) - https://nononsenseforex.com/decentralized-trading-platform/   Blueberry Markets Blog (Top FX Broker) - https://nononsenseforex.com/uncategorized/blueberry-markets-review-my-top-broker-for-2019/   Get a Discount On Any Trading View Package - https://www.tradingview.com/?aff_id=159841   The Blog Has Moved to My New Free Substack - https://thecontrarianinvestorblog.substack.com/p/what-to-expect-and-what-not-to?r=16orow   Follow VP on Twitter https://twitter.com/This_Is_VP4X   Check out my Forex trading material too! https://nononsenseforex.com/   The host of this podcast is not a licensed financial advisor, and nothing heard on this podcast should be taken as financial advice.  Do your own research and understand all financial decisions and the results therein are yours and yours alone.  The host is not responsible for the actions of their sponsors and/or affiliates.  Conversely, views expressed on this podcast are that of the host only and may not reflect the views of any companies mentioned. Trading Forex involves risk.  Losses can exceed deposits. We are not taking requests for episode topics at this time.  Thank you for understanding.

https://teachhoops.com/ Picking a defense is not about what you, as a coach, like to run; it is about what your current roster is physically and mentally capable of executing at a high level. A successful defensive identity begins with an honest "personnel audit" where you evaluate your team's lateral quickness, interior rim protection, and overall basketball IQ. If you have a roster full of long, rangy athletes but lack a traditional "big," a disruptive, switching Man-to-Man or a high-pressure 1-2-2 zone may be your best bet to force turnovers. Conversely, if you have a slower, more disciplined group, a "Pack Line" style or a 2-3 zone can help you wall off the paint and force opponents into low-percentage outside shots. By aligning your system with your players' natural strengths, you ensure they play with the confidence and aggression required to get stops. Beyond your own roster, selecting a defense for a specific game requires a deep dive into the opponent's "shot profile" and offensive tendencies. In the heart of conference play in January, you must be prepared to pivot your defensive strategy to neutralize an opponent's primary threat. If you are facing an elite scoring guard who thrives on ball screens, you might choose to "Hard Hedge" or "Blitz" those actions to get the ball out of their hands. If the opponent struggles with perimeter shooting but dominates the glass, a sagging zone that prioritizes rebounding positioning might be the tactical edge you need. The best coaches have a "base" defense that defines their culture, but they possess the flexibility to implement "junk defenses" like a Box-and-One or a Triangle-and-Two to disrupt the rhythm of an elite individual scorer. Finally, the defense you pick must be sustainable and scalable throughout the duration of a long season. It is better to be elite at one defensive system than mediocre at four different ones. Simplicity in your defensive rules allows your players to communicate more effectively and react instinctively rather than thinking their way through a possession. As you move toward the postseason, your defense should become your team's "safety net"—the one thing they can rely on when the shots aren't falling. By using member calls and film study to refine your rotations and "closeout contain" techniques, you build a defensive unit that is difficult to scout and even harder to score against. Ultimately, the right defense is the one that your players "own" and believe in with absolute conviction. Basketball defense, picking a defense, 2-3 zone, man-to-man defense, pack line defense, basketball coaching, defensive strategy, youth basketball, high school basketball, defensive rotations, basketball tactics, personnel audit, box and one, triangle and two, defensive intensity, basketball drills, coach development, team culture, basketball IQ, ball pressure, defensive systems, scouting reports, match-up zone, rim protection, lateral quickness, coaching philosophy, coach unplugged, teach hoops, basketball success, defensive communication. SEO Keywords Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

 INTELLIGENCE AND CALCULATION IN THE CRUCIBLE OF COMMAND Colleague Admiral James Stavridis. Admiral Stavridis discusses leadership lessons from his book To Risk It All. He highlights Admiral George Dewey's victory at Manila Bay, which relied on gathering human intelligence from diplomats in the absence of modern technology. Conversely, he analyzes Admiral Bill Halsey's failure at Leyte Gulf, where poor communication and impulsive decision-making led him to abandon the landing force based on misleading intelligence. Stavridis also profiles Admiral Michelle Howard's calculated risk-taking during the Maersk Alabama rescue, noting her ability to weigh the life-or-death consequences for Captain Phillips without letting career anxieties paralyze her decision-making. STAVRIDIS NUMBER 11978: MOTHBALLD AT PHILADELPHIA. SHANGRI-LA, IOWA, WISCONSIN.

THE EMPEROR'S IMMUNITY AND MACARTHUR'S SWIFT JUSTICE Colleague Professor Gary J. Bass. Following the surrender on the USS Missouri, General Douglas MacArthur faced the challenge of implementing the Potsdam Declaration's call for justice. A political decision was made to shield Emperor Hirohito from prosecution to utilize his authority for disarming troops and legitimizing the occupation, despite his complicity in the war effort. Conversely, MacArthur pursued swift, vengeful justice against his personal enemies, Generals Homma and Yamashita. Ignoring standard military court procedures, MacArthur established a precedent for the coming trials by rushing their convictions and executions for atrocities in the Philippines, an approach the Supreme Court refused to block. NUMBER 21931 TOKYO