Pensionato aerospazio. I commenti saranno quasi tutti cancellati. Blocco i filo 🇮🇱 , gli obbligazionisti 💉 e gli allarmisti climatici.
- Tweets 122
- Following 42
- Followers 1,394
- Likes 100,832
Segnalo a chi stia per rifare un bagno che ci sono in commercio vasi sanitari senza brida.
La brida col tempo si popola di funghi e batteri (emanando cattivo odore), si incrosta di calcare, rendendo problematica la pulizia.
😉
6
4
27
2,438
Luca Cellai retweeted
Da che parte stai?
Diffondi questo sondaggio che viene meglio.
91%
Russia
9%
Ucraina
80 votes • Final results
1
20
22
483
Da quando il mio sistema operativo 'Windows 10 home' non è più supportato da Microsoft (e NON sono passato a Windows 11) il PC è stabilissimo e va meglio di prima|
😄😄😁😁
3
2
15
311
Luca Cellai retweeted
Giorgia Meloni come fallita totale.
La CIA annuncia che la Russia intende bombardare l'Italia. Il comandante ucraino Magyar dice: “L'Italia ha bisogno di sistemi anti-drone per le sue coste”.
Povera Italia.
Capita quando un Paese è guidato da un pupazzo politico della Casa Bianca, come Giorgia Meloni, che aveva dichiarato, per le vie ufficiali, che l'Ucraina avrebbe dovuto sconfiggere la Russia sul campo di battaglia e che, a tal fine, aveva armato la controffensiva ucraina, iniziata il 5 giugno 2023 e terminata in un disastro colossale (come avevo previsto).
Cara Giorgia, voglio dire: tu hai una difesa ridicola, con quattro carri armati sbullonati, e proponi una strategia basata sulla guerra a oltranza per la sconfitta della Russia sul campo di battaglia, sapendo che non hai difesa dai suoi missili più avanzati, che trasportano testate nucleari? Nel settembre 2025, l'Italia disponeva di 200 carri Ariete, di cui soltanto 40 pronti al combattimento.
Ma sarai una fallita oppure no?
Oggi l'Italia si ritrova con i magazzini svuotati di tutte le armi che ha mandato in giro per il mondo.
Come disse Crosetto il 15 settembre 2025: "L'Italia non sarebbe in grado di difendersi non soltanto da un attacco della Russia, ma da quello di qualunque altro Paese".
Dopo una dichiarazione del genere, Crosetto ha dato un SAMP/T all'Arabia Saudita per proteggere le basi americane in quel Paese dai missili iraniani.
Capita quando un Paese è in mano a un gruppo di falliti politici o di politici falliti.
Io non ho mai visto così tanti falliti politici concentrati, nello stesso periodo storico, al vertice della Repubblica italiana.
C'è proprio un affollamento.
Io l'avevo detto che sarebbe finita male in Ucraina, ma non sono stato creduto.
Sono stato diffamato e insultato.
L'avevo detto che la guerra andava chiusa subito, quando la finestra temporale lo consentiva nella primavera del 2022.
Ora siamo messi così: la CIA annuncia che la Russia vuole bombardare l'Italia.
Io non posso credere che il mio amato Paese sia finito nelle mani di un gruppo di falliti di tal fatta.
Ma a voi sembra normale che noi italiani, che avevamo rapporti ottimi con la Russia, adesso dobbiamo vivere nella paura che i nostri bimbi vengano domani massacrati in una guerra contro una superpotenza nucleare?
Ma vi pare normale che dobbiamo essere governati da un gruppo di falliti del genere?
Esprimo la mia solidarietà a tutti i genitori di bambini piccoli che devono subire l'idiozia di questo gruppo di falliti al governo dell'Italia.
Qui la mia ultima intervista:
piped.video/watch?v=LetO-hHw…
312
486
1,618
61,157
Incredibile, ammesso che sia vero il governo Meloni ne avrebbe fatta almeno una giusta!
Dopo il cazziatone a Giorgetti si respira ormai aria di elezioni.
😂😂🤣🤣
2
7
265
Giorgetti è così 🤬 che costringe anche me a dare ragione alla Meloni!
Spiace ma qui ha ragione la melona: posto che il limite UE del 3% al deficit è una stronzata, se sei fuori di 0,1% e vuoi uscire dalla procedura di infrazione, alzi il telefono, chiami chi di dovere e FAI RISULTARE CHE SEI SOTTO AL 3%. Altro che "prendo atto con rammarico".
2
11
204
Il sogno di sir Bertrand Russel.
Eliminare i lavori gravosi e dedicare il tanto tempo libero al 'dolce far niente'.
Da pensionato posso dire che con una buona pensione si sta proprio bene.
Pensionati a 20 anni?
Chissà.
piped.video/watch?v=mJZqG2OL…
Il combinato disposto di droni umanoidi e IA trasforma inesorabilmente il "lavoratore" in "consumatore".
Credo che un socialista scientifico (comunista) ne debba prendere atto e riorientare la propria azione a rappresentare, tutelare ed emancipare i "consumatori", a partire dalla
3
2
165
Luca Cellai retweeted
Electoral democracy is the psychic disease. If you believe your vote can change anything you are toddler or crazy. They own you.
170
908
4,377
83,328
La Groenlandia è USA.
Ok, we now have the actual text of the Greenland deal (whitehouse.gov/briefings-sta…), so we can say how it compares to the existing 1951 arrangement and who, between Trump and Denmark, lied the most in their framing of it.
Long story short - which may surprise some - the Danes lied the most: Trump is pretty much correct in saying that this new deal grants the US control of Greenland.
Let's look into what changed compared to the 1951 deal.
1) This is now a permanent arrangement: whereas the existing 1951 deal only lasted as long as NATO existed, this one "does not have an end date and may only be amended by mutual consent."
It even survives a hypothetical future independence of Greenland: in that event, Denmark and Greenland must ensure that the independent Greenlandic state "affirmatively assume[s] all of the rights and obligations of the Kingdom of Denmark specified in this Agreement."
2) In the 1951 agreement, the US could set up bases only where both governments agreed, and only on the basis of NATO planning. The new deal locks in three bases: the US can "modernize and expand its activities" at Pituffik, its only base in Greenland until now, and "shall be allowed to establish an additional Defense Area at Narsarsuaq and Mestersvig." Further bases beyond these 3 can be justified by the defense of "the American continent," a US interest rather than a NATO one.
Also, quite subtle but this is interesting: Article IV(iii) says that "the United States may establish additional defense areas in Greenland" and that consultations are then held "to decide implementation details based on mutual agreement." What this means is that the principle of a new base is automatically granted and only the implementation details require agreement.
Article VII also gives the US "the right to raise concerns regarding construction, or change of use" of any building near a US base, after which the parties decide together what to do. Which means that the US has a say over civilian planning around its bases.
3) On US military movement across Greenland, the wording change between the 1951 agreement and this new one is quite funny.
The 1951 text said (Art. V(3)): the US "may enjoy... the right of free access to and movement between the defense areas through Greenland, including territorial waters, by land, air and sea," but only "in accordance with general rules mutually agreed upon and issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland."
The new one says: "the United States of America shall enjoy... the right of free access to and movement between the Defense Areas through Greenland, including the Territorial Waters, by land, air and sea."
That's it: "May" becomes "shall," and the US military movement no longer has to follow rules "issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland." The US also gets something new on top: "undersea access to and movement within the Territorial Waters," i.e. submarines.
4) Non-NATO exclusion: non-NATO states are barred from military installations or a persistent presence in Greenland unless all three parties approve, giving the US an effective permanent veto. The 1951 deal had no equivalent clause.
5) Investment screening: this is entirely new. "States or investors from a state that is not a member of NATO, a NATO partner, or an EU member state" (i.e. Russia, China, India, the Gulf States, etc.), "shall not be allowed to have (i) control, (ii) significant influence, or (iii) access to non-public information...within Particularly Sensitive Sectors or Activities in the territory of Greenland (including the Territorial Waters), unless agreed between the Parties."
Again, it basically means that the US has a permanent veto over who can invest in strategic sectors in Greenland, as far as non-NATO or EU states are concerned.
6) Lastly, in stark contrast with the 1951 deal, the framing of the deal changes significantly: this new deal is largely framed around the US.
The 1951 agreement existed only "for the benefit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization." The new one lists the defense of "the American continent" as an objective, celebrates "the irreplaceable role" of the United States military as well as "the United States' indispensable historical and ongoing contributions to the security and defense of Greenland," and names the establishment of Trump's "Golden Dome" missile defense system as a key goal.
So, to sum up:
- The US secured a permanent military foothold that even an independent Greenland would inherit whether it likes it or not
- The US now has veto power over any non-NATO military presence in Greenland, and over who can invest in its strategic infrastructure and resources (beyond NATO and the EU)
- Denmark signed away its say over the principle of new US bases, with only the right to discuss the "implementation details"
- Danish authorities no longer set the rules for US military movement across the island
- And all of it is now justified by the defense of "the American continent"
I don't know in which universe this even remotely "recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people's right to self-determination," as Danish PM Mette Frederiksen put it (stm.dk/en/press/press-releas…).
Yes, the preamble of the text cynically "reaffirms" Danish sovereignty but, in my book, when you let a foreign country put bases on your soil, move its troops without following your rules and veto who else can come in, in perpetuity, after it spent two years threatening to take you by force, the word for that is anything but "recognized sovereignty" 🤷
9
10
459
Non vedo errori.
I ponti sul Dnepr sono sempre in piedi.
I reiterate, all major modern wars are theatre and orchestrated to fit in a framework of a larger agenda
In any real war, Kiev would of had it's lights knocked out completely years ago and houses of government turned to ash
Instead it is a contrived meat grinder for slavic men.
3
3
7
436
Luca Cellai retweeted
The Churchills were both financed by the jews and Winston Churchill had a jewish handler Bernard Baruch.
The more you know WW2 starts to make sense.
55
363
834
12,883
Luca Cellai retweeted
Everyone says Napoleon's greatest mistake was Russia.
Napoleon didn't.
Years later, marooned on St. Helena with nothing left to protect, he named a different war. Spain. "That unfortunate war destroyed me." He called it the first cause of all the misfortunes of France.
Here is what he actually did.
In 1808, Spain was his ally. Not a rival, not a threat. An ally whose ports and armies he already had use of. He decided he wanted it outright anyway. He summoned the Spanish royal family to Bayonne, browbeat both the father and the son into signing away the crown, and handed the throne to his brother Joseph, a man who had never asked for it and did not want it.
He expected the country to shrug. Spain had been governed badly for decades. He believed he was offering an upgrade.
On the second of May, Madrid rose. French cavalry cleared the streets, and the next morning the firing squads went to work in the dark outside the city. Goya painted that night six years later, the man in the white shirt with his arms thrown out, and the image has outlived every dispatch Napoleon ever wrote.
The rising did not stop in Madrid. It spread to towns with no garrison, no orders, and no plan. In July a French corps of roughly 18,000 men was surrounded in the heat at Bailén and surrendered in the open field to a Spanish army. Europe had spent a decade being told this could not happen. Austria read the news and started rearming.
Then came the part that killed him slowly. Small bands, local men, no uniforms, hitting couriers and supply columns and stragglers and vanishing into country they had known since childhood. The Spanish called it the little war, guerrilla, and the word entered English in those years because English had no use for it before. A French soldier in Spain was safe in camp and nowhere else. Messages needed an escort of hundreds. Food had to be taken from people who would rather burn it.
Meanwhile a British army under Wellington held on in Portugal and refused to be cornered. In 1810 he pulled behind the Lines of Torres Vedras, a belt of fortifications the French did not know existed until they walked up to them. Masséna sat in front of that wall through the winter and watched his army starve, then withdrew without a battle.
By 1812 Napoleon had somewhere around a quarter of a million men tied down on the peninsula. That summer he crossed into Russia with the largest army Europe had ever seen and still left his best marshals and a fifth of his strength behind in Spain. In the same weeks he was burning through the Grande Armée at Borodino, Wellington broke a French army at Salamanca and rode into Madrid.
June 1813, Vitoria. Joseph's army came apart and abandoned the treasury of the kingdom in the road. Wellington's men stopped to loot it and let the French escape. Beethoven wrote a piece about it. Weeks later Austria joined the coalition, and by 1814 there were British troops inside France coming up from the south while everyone else came from the east.
Russia destroyed the army he had.
Spain is the reason he never got another one, spent six years being bled by a country he did not need to fight, and handed his enemies the proof that he could lose.
67
334
1,775
144,795
Luca Cellai retweeted
Everyone says winter killed Napoleon in Russia. The numbers say otherwise.
He crossed the Niemen on June 24, 1812 with around 450,000 men in the main force. He walked into Moscow on September 14 with about 100,000. That is three quarters of an army gone before a single snowflake fell, and only one major battle fought.
So what was actually eating it?
Disease, mostly. His men picked up lice marching through Poland and Lithuania, and the lice carried typhus. Dysentery came from bad water and worse camp hygiene. In 2001 a construction crew in Vilnius dug up a mass grave holding roughly 3,000 of his soldiers. Researchers tested the dental pulp and found DNA from typhus and trench fever in about a third of the samples they could work with. The army was dying of infection while it was still winning.
Then the weather, and not the kind you are picturing. The summer of 1812 was punishing. Men in wool marching 20 miles a day in heat near 95 degrees, drinking from the same ponds their horses stood in. Thousands dropped from heatstroke before they ever saw a Russian.
Then the horses. Napoleon brought somewhere around 180,000 of them and lost most over the campaign. Cavalry mounts need grain, not just grass, and there was no grain. A horse that starves does not just die, it dies slowly and uselessly, pulling less every day. Lose the horses and you lose the cavalry screen that tells you where the enemy is, you lose the teams that move the guns, and you lose the wagons that carry the food. An army that cannot move cannot forage, and an army that cannot forage starves. That spiral started in July.
The Russians understood this better than he did. Barclay de Tolly refused the decisive battle Napoleon needed and kept backing up, burning grain stores, driving off livestock, emptying the road. Napoleon had built the best supply system in Europe for campaigning in Germany, where a village every few miles could feed a passing column. Russia had no such thing. His supply train fell behind almost immediately on roads that turned to soup in the rain, and he went ahead anyway.
Borodino on September 7 was the battle he had wanted since June. Something like 70,000 men fell in a single day, the bloodiest day of the entire Napoleonic era. He won it and it bought him nothing. The Russian army withdrew intact, which was the whole point of Kutuzov's plan.
Moscow was the real blunder. He expected Alexander to negotiate the moment the city fell, because that is how it had always worked. Vienna fell, Austria talked. Berlin fell, Prussia talked. Moscow burned instead, two thirds of it gone in four days, and Alexander never answered a single letter. Napoleon sat in the ashes for five weeks with a strategic clock running, waiting on a reply that was never coming.
He left on October 19. At Maloyaroslavets on the 24th the Russians blocked the southern route through untouched farmland, and rather than force it he turned back onto the Smolensk road, the same road his own army had already stripped bare on the way in. He marched his starving men through their own wreckage, past their own unburied dead.
The first real snow came in early November. That is when winter enters the story, and it enters against a force already down to maybe 50,000 effectives. The cold did not defeat an army. It disassembled a column of sick, hungry stragglers. The horses had no frost caulks on their shoes and could not keep footing on ice, so guns and wagons were abandoned by the hundred. Men burned their muskets for warmth. Discipline stopped meaning anything.
At the Berezina in late November, Eblé's engineers stood chest deep in freezing water building two trestle bridges by hand so the remnant could cross. Almost none of those engineers survived. Around 40,000 organized troops made it over. Thousands of stragglers did not, and drowned or were cut down on the east bank when the bridges were fired.
Napoleon left the army on December 5 and rode for Paris to hold his government together. Of the central force that crossed in June, roughly 25,000 recrossed the Niemen in December in any organized state.
If you want the whole thing in one image, look up Charles Minard's 1869 chart of the campaign. One thick band going in, one thin thread coming out, with the temperature scale running along the bottom. It has been called the best statistical graphic ever made, and it makes the point without a word: the line is already collapsing long before the cold shows up.
Winter did not beat Napoleon. Disease, logistics, dead horses, and a Russian refusal to play his game beat him. Winter just buried the body.
102
633
3,118
285,716