What's the most realistic solution to Russia-Ukraine crisis?

[Gary Childress]

I already have. So, do you mean who 'else' among you human beings is ...?

In what way have you "taken responsibility" for the problem, Age?

By doing all I can to change 'it'.

When have you EVER said "we" instead of "you humans"?

When 'you' human beings also learn and understand who and what the 'I' is, exactly, in the question, 'Who am 'I'?' then 'you' will also learn and understand why 'I' speak and write 'the way' that 'I' do, here.

You said once after my own prodding that you were also responsible, but you quickly reverted back to "you adult humans" as though you had achieved some great feat of intellectual reasoning.

Okay.

Has anyone else said that 'they' were human some times, as well as something else at other times?

If yes, then there is a reason why 'we' did and do 'this'.

How does that help anyone but yourself?

It all 'leads up to' some thing "gary childress".

How is that "taking responsibility" for anything?

Who ever said that 'that' was, exactly?

In what way are you "taking responsibility"?

As I just said and wrote above, here, 'By doing all I can to change things', and for the better, I will add.

I can only show and teach you how to change, for the better. I obviously could never 'make you' do it.

Well, I beg to differ. I don't think you are able to teach anything regarding changing the world. That's something we all have to do ourselves. You are not helping. Sitting on the Internet preaching how we can all become as enlightened as you are, isn't changing the world, Age.

[Age]

Which accord or treaty was this?

There was no signed treaty, but the debate and its conclusions were quite public. Even if they had not been, there would be something quite dishonest about any pretense that Russia did not have more than adequate reason to be concerned over its security. Russia paid a heavier price than any other country in crushing the monster Nazi war machine. Where America and Britain each lost about half a million souls in that war, Russia lost twenty-seven million and was the main agent in winning World War II. Eighty-six percent of Germany's losses during that war were fighting the Russians on the Eastern Front. This present situation puts the whole world in jeopardy. America wishes to remain an empire, and the West in general wishes to maintain its colonial tradition. More than half the world is united to change the unipolar world with America as its dictator to a multipolar world of cooperating nations, all maintaining their sovereignty in international trade. I am afraid that this world will become a multipolar world of cooperating nations, or we shall perish as a species; that is our grim reality.

How many Ukrainians did Stalin kill in the Holodomor and how many of "Russia's" twenty seven million dead were Ukrainian?

It seems to me there is every reason for Ukraine to want protection against their historically abusive invaders.

What do you mean by the 'invaders', let alone 'historically abusive invaders'.

Did you ever aware that it is reported that the capital of 'current' "ukraine", "kyiv", once served as the capital of the Rus' and that "kyiv" would later be called the mother or center of "russia"?

Russia is Ukraine's historical colonial master,

Where is this belief and claim coming from, exactly?

It has been reported that "kyiv" prospered in the Russian industrial revolution of the late 19th century. In the conflicts and turbulence that followed the October Revolution of 1917, it became the capital of several short-lived "ukrainian" states. From December 1922 on, "Kyiv" was part of the "soviet union", and from 1934 the capital of "soviet ukraine". In world war 2 the city was again destroyed, almost completely, but quickly recovered post-war, to become the third-most important "soviet" city and the capital of the second-most populous "soviet republic". kyiv" remains the capital of "ukraine", independent since the 1991 dissolution of the "soviet union". But, like with all of 'history', what the actual Truth and irrefutable Facts are, exactly, 'we' may well never know, for sure.

Which could be construed as "kyiv", which is an area of land 'currently' called "ukraine", was a part of "soviet union" and which might well have played 'some sort of role' in forming the "the union of soviet socialist republics".

So, just maybe, some people in the "union of soviet socialist republics" are just 'fighting' to keep and not have 'stolen' what they believe was part of "theirs" first.

Would the so-called "leader", and people, of the "united states of america" just 'sit back' and let be taken what they believed was part of "theirs".

If yes, then are you really sure?

But, if no, then why appear to be surprised when people in other countries are just doing the exact same thing?

why are you ignoring that history?

Were you even aware that what some people think or believe is 'history' is, actually, their own made up or learned distorted 'story'?

If you want a multipolar world, why does Ukraine have to be enslaved to Russia for that?

Would being 'enslaved' to another country or to the "north atlantic treaty organization" be any better?

If yes, then how, exactly?

[Age]

In what way have you "taken responsibility" for the problem, Age?

By doing all I can to change 'it'.

When have you EVER said "we" instead of "you humans"?

When 'you' human beings also learn and understand who and what the 'I' is, exactly, in the question, 'Who am 'I'?' then 'you' will also learn and understand why 'I' speak and write 'the way' that 'I' do, here.

You said once after my own prodding that you were also responsible, but you quickly reverted back to "you adult humans" as though you had achieved some great feat of intellectual reasoning.

Okay.

Has anyone else said that 'they' were human some times, as well as something else at other times?

If yes, then there is a reason why 'we' did and do 'this'.

How does that help anyone but yourself?

It all 'leads up to' some thing "gary childress".

How is that "taking responsibility" for anything?

Who ever said that 'that' was, exactly?

In what way are you "taking responsibility"?

As I just said and wrote above, here, 'By doing all I can to change things', and for the better, I will add.

I can only show and teach you how to change, for the better. I obviously could never 'make you' do it.

Well, I beg to differ. I don't think you are able to teach anything regarding changing the world.

Of course people like 'you' would not.

That's something we all have to do ourselves.

So, well according to 'this one' anyway, even when one finds, works out, or uncovers, 'the formula' and/or 'the solution', which will solve all of 'the problems', which are caused and created by human beings, absolutely every one has to 'just wait' until absolutely every one finds, works out, and/or uncovers 'the formula' and/or 'solution'. Which, obviously, is unachievable.

Also, some might be wondering why 'the others' did not 'just stop', and 'listen to', 'the one' making 'the claim/s'. Obviously, 'the others' have 'the ability' to 'question' and/or 'challenge' 'the one's making 'the claims', to actually find and out see if 'that one's could actually back up and support 'its claim/s' with irrefutable Facts and proofs.

But, then again, some people really did just preferred to 'hear' and 'listen to' their own 'current' assumptions, beliefs, and conclusions, only.

You are not helping.

If 'this' is what you believe is absolutely true, then 'this' is only what you will see, and hear.

It is so blatantly obviously why 'these people' are taking so, so long. But not a one of them could see 'it', yet.

Sitting on the Internet preaching how we can all become as enlightened as you are, isn't changing the world, Age.

Have 'I' ever once said or claimed that 'I' was enlightened?

And, obviously, and once again, what the irrefutable Truth is, exactly, can be clearly seen and proved through and from 'my writings', here.

Look "Gary childress" if you do not want to do what it takes to become a Truly responsible and mature human being, and help in changing and making a 'better place', for even just "your" own 'self', let alone for every one, then absolutely no said that you had to. But, 'sitting back' and continually 'blaming another' for how bad or 'miserable your own life' is, and/or making 'excuses' for not even attempting to change for the better, is certainly not what other people want to do.

Also, explaining how you can all become 'more enlightened' is actually 'changing the world', for the very simple Fact that absolutely every thing happening and occurring is 'changing the world', in one way or another. For the better, or, for the worse, just has to wait, to be seen.

What is also completely obvious having no curiosity and/or no interest in learning and obtaining understanding has certainly never sped up obtaining wisdom.

How to 'change the world', for the better, for every one, so that every one can live in peace and harmony is about one of the most simplest and easiest things to learn, comprehend, and understand. But, of course, one has to first, really, 'want to' learn, comprehend, and understand, and the quickest, simplest, and easiest way to learn, comprehend, and understand is by just removing absolutely all beliefs, presumptions, and preconceived ideas.

Also, the speed of 'the change', which can and will create a Truly peaceful world for every one, as One, is exponential as 'doing this' aligns with ', 'every fiber and being' of 'the body' ', as some would say, here, now.

The reason why it has been such a very long drawn out down hill spiral to what 'you' are 'now' 'living in', in the days when this is being written, is because the cause of 'it', namely dishonesty, abuse, greed and selfishness goes against every 'fiber and being' of 'being human'. Which means that 'the turn around' to making, creating, and achieving 'the world', in which 'we' ALL want and wish to 'live in' and desire, comes about in only a generation, two, or a few, only. As every one is 'working' on and towards the 'exact same goal', where absolutely no one gets disadvantaged or is disadvantaged.

The completely natural flow, progression, and speed of 'this' is, again, at an exponential rate, and an absolutely smooth, easy, and simple transgression. And, which absolutely every one agrees with, accepts, and does so with absolute voluntary enthusiasm.

[Gary Childress]

By doing all I can to change 'it'.


When 'you' human beings also learn and understand who and what the 'I' is, exactly, in the question, 'Who am 'I'?' then 'you' will also learn and understand why 'I' speak and write 'the way' that 'I' do, here.



Okay.

Has anyone else said that 'they' were human some times, as well as something else at other times?

If yes, then there is a reason why 'we' did and do 'this'.



It all 'leads up to' some thing "gary childress".


Who ever said that 'that' was, exactly?


As I just said and wrote above, here, 'By doing all I can to change things', and for the better, I will add.

I can only show and teach you how to change, for the better. I obviously could never 'make you' do it.

Well, I beg to differ. I don't think you are able to teach anything regarding changing the world.

Of course people like 'you' would not.

That's something we all have to do ourselves.

So, well according to 'this one' anyway, even when one finds, works out, or uncovers, 'the formula' and/or 'the solution', which will solve all of 'the problems', which are caused and created by human beings, absolutely every one has to 'just wait' until absolutely every one finds, works out, and/or uncovers 'the formula' and/or 'solution'. Which, obviously, is unachievable.

Also, some might be wondering why 'the others' did not 'just stop', and 'listen to', 'the one' making 'the claim/s'. Obviously, 'the others' have 'the ability' to 'question' and/or 'challenge' 'the one's making 'the claims', to actually find and out see if 'that one's could actually back up and support 'its claim/s' with irrefutable Facts and proofs.

But, then again, some people really did just preferred to 'hear' and 'listen to' their own 'current' assumptions, beliefs, and conclusions, only.

You are not helping.

If 'this' is what you believe is absolutely true, then 'this' is only what you will see, and hear.

It is so blatantly obviously why 'these people' are taking so, so long. But not a one of them could see 'it', yet.

Sitting on the Internet preaching how we can all become as enlightened as you are, isn't changing the world, Age.

Have 'I' ever once said or claimed that 'I' was enlightened?

And, obviously, and once again, what the irrefutable Truth is, exactly, can be clearly seen and proved through and from 'my writings', here.

Look "Gary childress" if you do not want to do what it takes to become a Truly responsible and mature human being, and help in changing and making a 'better place', for every one, then absolutely no said that you had to. But, 'sitting back' and continually 'blaming another' for how bad or 'miserable your own life' is, and/or making 'excuses' for not even attempting to change for the better, is certainly not what other people want to do.

So you're not enlightened, Age. But you are going to teach us how to change for the better? Doesn't teaching us all something imply that you are enlightened about something we are not? And if it's changing the whole world for the better, then it sounds incredibly important for the rest of us to learn from you. I mean, clearly, we aren't enlightened because we need to learn from you.

[Age]

Well, I beg to differ. I don't think you are able to teach anything regarding changing the world.

Of course people like 'you' would not.

That's something we all have to do ourselves.

So, well according to 'this one' anyway, even when one finds, works out, or uncovers, 'the formula' and/or 'the solution', which will solve all of 'the problems', which are caused and created by human beings, absolutely every one has to 'just wait' until absolutely every one finds, works out, and/or uncovers 'the formula' and/or 'solution'. Which, obviously, is unachievable.

Also, some might be wondering why 'the others' did not 'just stop', and 'listen to', 'the one' making 'the claim/s'. Obviously, 'the others' have 'the ability' to 'question' and/or 'challenge' 'the one's making 'the claims', to actually find and out see if 'that one's could actually back up and support 'its claim/s' with irrefutable Facts and proofs.

But, then again, some people really did just preferred to 'hear' and 'listen to' their own 'current' assumptions, beliefs, and conclusions, only.

You are not helping.

If 'this' is what you believe is absolutely true, then 'this' is only what you will see, and hear.

It is so blatantly obviously why 'these people' are taking so, so long. But not a one of them could see 'it', yet.

Sitting on the Internet preaching how we can all become as enlightened as you are, isn't changing the world, Age.

Have 'I' ever once said or claimed that 'I' was enlightened?

And, obviously, and once again, what the irrefutable Truth is, exactly, can be clearly seen and proved through and from 'my writings', here.

Look "Gary childress" if you do not want to do what it takes to become a Truly responsible and mature human being, and help in changing and making a 'better place', for every one, then absolutely no said that you had to. But, 'sitting back' and continually 'blaming another' for how bad or 'miserable your own life' is, and/or making 'excuses' for not even attempting to change for the better, is certainly not what other people want to do.

So you're not enlightened, Age.

Firstly, I added to 'that post' if you would like to have a read of it.

Why do you jump from first believing and claiming that 'I' preach that 'I' am enlightened, to then believing and claiming that I am completely not enlightened?

Obviously some are so-called 'more enlightened' about some things than others are, and, vice-versa.

But you are going to teach us how to change for the better?

Once again, 'I' CAN teach 'you' how to change, for the better, ONLY if you want to learn how to change, for the better.

And again, 'I' have never ever claimed that 'I' am 'going to' teach 'you' how to change, for the better.

Once more, 'I', however, CAN teach 'you' how to change, for the better.

Can you spot and see 'the differences' 'now', between what you believe 'I' am saying, and meaning, from what 'I' am actually saying, and meaning?

Doesn't teaching us all something imply that you are enlightened about something we are not?

Yes, it can.

However, when one is being accused of claiming that others were not 'as enlightened' as 'that one' is, then 'this' puts a whole 'deceptive spin' on things, here.

If absolutely any one comes to uncover, find, or work out some particular knowledge, which others have not yet obtained, then this never means that 'that one' is 'more enlightened', in and of itself, than anyone else is. Like, for example, if one discovers, works out, or finds that actually it is the earth that revolves around the sun and that 'this knowledge' has not yet been obtained by others, then this certainly does not mean that 'that one' is 'more enlightened', in and of itself. Although it may well mean that 'that one' has become 'more enlightened' only on that one tiny piece of 'new knowledge'.

Now, if 'that one' says and claims that it can teach others how they can also learn this 'new knowledge', then 'that' is more or less only what 'that one' is doing. it is never necessarily claiming that it is so-called 'enlightened', or even 'more enlightened', as doing so obviously instills a particular sort of perception, and view, in some types of people, right?

And if it's changing the whole world for the better, then it sounds incredibly important for the rest of us to learn from you.

Which some might find very, very surprising that absolute none of 'you', here, have shown absolutely any real interest nor even any curiosity at all in.

But, so to did just about no one, at first, took any real interest nor showed any real curiosity in 'the knowledge' that it is actually the earth that revolves around the sun, and thus why it took 'that one' so, so long to be 'listened to', 'heard', and 'understood', fully.

Also, and by the way, what 'this example' is referring to, showing, and proving can be shared across millions and millions of others.

I mean, clearly, we aren't enlightened because we need to learn from you.

'you' are absolutely 'free' to 'look at' 'this' in 'this way', or in absolutely 'any other way', if 'you' choose to. But, then there are 'others' who do have interest, and curiosity, in how to make 'a better world', for not just some, but for all as well.

'Those people', however, just do not appear to be in 'this forum', yet.

[Gary Childress]

Of course people like 'you' would not.



So, well according to 'this one' anyway, even when one finds, works out, or uncovers, 'the formula' and/or 'the solution', which will solve all of 'the problems', which are caused and created by human beings, absolutely every one has to 'just wait' until absolutely every one finds, works out, and/or uncovers 'the formula' and/or 'solution'. Which, obviously, is unachievable.

Also, some might be wondering why 'the others' did not 'just stop', and 'listen to', 'the one' making 'the claim/s'. Obviously, 'the others' have 'the ability' to 'question' and/or 'challenge' 'the one's making 'the claims', to actually find and out see if 'that one's could actually back up and support 'its claim/s' with irrefutable Facts and proofs.

But, then again, some people really did just preferred to 'hear' and 'listen to' their own 'current' assumptions, beliefs, and conclusions, only.


If 'this' is what you believe is absolutely true, then 'this' is only what you will see, and hear.

It is so blatantly obviously why 'these people' are taking so, so long. But not a one of them could see 'it', yet.


Have 'I' ever once said or claimed that 'I' was enlightened?

And, obviously, and once again, what the irrefutable Truth is, exactly, can be clearly seen and proved through and from 'my writings', here.

Look "Gary childress" if you do not want to do what it takes to become a Truly responsible and mature human being, and help in changing and making a 'better place', for every one, then absolutely no said that you had to. But, 'sitting back' and continually 'blaming another' for how bad or 'miserable your own life' is, and/or making 'excuses' for not even attempting to change for the better, is certainly not what other people want to do.

So you're not enlightened, Age.

Firstly, I added to 'that post' if you would like to have a read of it.

Why do you jump from first believing and claiming that 'I' preach that 'I' am enlightened, to then believing and claiming that I am completely not enlightened?

Obviously some are so-called 'more enlightened' about some things than others are, and, vice-versa.

But you are going to teach us how to change for the better?

Once again, 'I' CAN teach 'you' how to change, for the better, ONLY if you want to learn how to change, for the better.

And again, 'I' have never ever claimed that 'I' am 'going to' teach 'you' how to change, for the better.

Once more, 'I', however, CAN teach 'you' how to change, for the better.

Can you spot and see 'the differences' 'now', between what you believe 'I' am saying, and meaning, from what 'I' am actually saying, and meaning?

Doesn't teaching us all something imply that you are enlightened about something we are not?

Yes, it can.

However, when one is being accused of claiming that others were not 'as enlightened' as 'that one' is, then 'this' puts a whole 'deceptive spin' on things, here.

If absolutely any one comes to uncover, find, or work out some particular knowledge, which others have not yet obtained, then this never means that 'that one' is 'more enlightened', in and of itself, than anyone else is. Like, for example, if one discovers, works out, or finds that actually it is the earth that revolves around the sun and that 'this knowledge' has not yet been obtained by others, then this certainly does not mean that 'that one' is 'more enlightened', in and of itself. Although it may well mean that 'that one' has become 'more enlightened' only on that one tiny piece of 'new knowledge'.

Now, if 'that one' says and claims that it can teach others how they can also learn this 'new knowledge', then 'that' is more or less only what 'that one' is doing. it is never necessarily claiming that it is so-called 'enlightened', or even 'more enlightened', as doing so obviously instills a particular sort of perception, and view, in some types of people, right?

And if it's changing the whole world for the better, then it sounds incredibly important for the rest of us to learn from you.

Which some might find very, very surprising that absolute none of 'you', here, have shown absolutely any real interest nor even any curiosity at all in.

But, so to did just about no one, at first, took any real interest nor showed any real curiosity in 'the knowledge' that it is actually the earth that revolves around the sun, and thus why it took 'that one' so, so long to be 'listened to', 'heard', and 'understood', fully.

Also, and by the way, what 'this example' is referring to, showing, and proving can be shared across millions and millions of others.

I mean, clearly, we aren't enlightened because we need to learn from you.

'you' are absolutely 'free' to 'look at' 'this' in 'this way', or in absolutely 'any other way', if 'you' choose to. But, then there are 'others' who do have interest, and curiosity, in how to make 'a better world', for not just some, but for all as well.

'Those people', however, just do not appear to be in 'this forum', yet.

So you are enlightened, then. Is that correct?

[Age]

So you're not enlightened, Age.

Firstly, I added to 'that post' if you would like to have a read of it.

Why do you jump from first believing and claiming that 'I' preach that 'I' am enlightened, to then believing and claiming that I am completely not enlightened?

Obviously some are so-called 'more enlightened' about some things than others are, and, vice-versa.

But you are going to teach us how to change for the better?

Once again, 'I' CAN teach 'you' how to change, for the better, ONLY if you want to learn how to change, for the better.

And again, 'I' have never ever claimed that 'I' am 'going to' teach 'you' how to change, for the better.

Once more, 'I', however, CAN teach 'you' how to change, for the better.

Can you spot and see 'the differences' 'now', between what you believe 'I' am saying, and meaning, from what 'I' am actually saying, and meaning?

Doesn't teaching us all something imply that you are enlightened about something we are not?

Yes, it can.

However, when one is being accused of claiming that others were not 'as enlightened' as 'that one' is, then 'this' puts a whole 'deceptive spin' on things, here.

If absolutely any one comes to uncover, find, or work out some particular knowledge, which others have not yet obtained, then this never means that 'that one' is 'more enlightened', in and of itself, than anyone else is. Like, for example, if one discovers, works out, or finds that actually it is the earth that revolves around the sun and that 'this knowledge' has not yet been obtained by others, then this certainly does not mean that 'that one' is 'more enlightened', in and of itself. Although it may well mean that 'that one' has become 'more enlightened' only on that one tiny piece of 'new knowledge'.

Now, if 'that one' says and claims that it can teach others how they can also learn this 'new knowledge', then 'that' is more or less only what 'that one' is doing. it is never necessarily claiming that it is so-called 'enlightened', or even 'more enlightened', as doing so obviously instills a particular sort of perception, and view, in some types of people, right?

And if it's changing the whole world for the better, then it sounds incredibly important for the rest of us to learn from you.

Which some might find very, very surprising that absolute none of 'you', here, have shown absolutely any real interest nor even any curiosity at all in.

But, so to did just about no one, at first, took any real interest nor showed any real curiosity in 'the knowledge' that it is actually the earth that revolves around the sun, and thus why it took 'that one' so, so long to be 'listened to', 'heard', and 'understood', fully.

Also, and by the way, what 'this example' is referring to, showing, and proving can be shared across millions and millions of others.

I mean, clearly, we aren't enlightened because we need to learn from you.

'you' are absolutely 'free' to 'look at' 'this' in 'this way', or in absolutely 'any other way', if 'you' choose to. But, then there are 'others' who do have interest, and curiosity, in how to make 'a better world', for not just some, but for all as well.

'Those people', however, just do not appear to be in 'this forum', yet.

So you are enlightened, then. Is that correct?

So-called 'enlightened' in regards to 'what', exactly?

For example, I know how you people can change "yourselves" for the better, which, in turn, will change 'the world' also, for the better, for every one. However, I, still, have absolutely no idea nor clue in how to get you human beings to just get rid of and lose 'your preconceptions, beliefs and assumptions' so that you will then be interested and curious in learning, and understanding, what you believe and/or presume is not even a possibility.

So, exactly like 'you' 'i' am enlightened in 'some things', but not in 'others'.

Does 'this' answer and clarify 'your question', to me, above, here, satisfactory, for you?

Or, if you were referencing some exact or particular thing, then you will have to inform me of what 'that' is, exactly, first.

[Gary Childress]

Firstly, I added to 'that post' if you would like to have a read of it.

Why do you jump from first believing and claiming that 'I' preach that 'I' am enlightened, to then believing and claiming that I am completely not enlightened?

Obviously some are so-called 'more enlightened' about some things than others are, and, vice-versa.



Once again, 'I' CAN teach 'you' how to change, for the better, ONLY if you want to learn how to change, for the better.

And again, 'I' have never ever claimed that 'I' am 'going to' teach 'you' how to change, for the better.

Once more, 'I', however, CAN teach 'you' how to change, for the better.

Can you spot and see 'the differences' 'now', between what you believe 'I' am saying, and meaning, from what 'I' am actually saying, and meaning?



Yes, it can.

However, when one is being accused of claiming that others were not 'as enlightened' as 'that one' is, then 'this' puts a whole 'deceptive spin' on things, here.

If absolutely any one comes to uncover, find, or work out some particular knowledge, which others have not yet obtained, then this never means that 'that one' is 'more enlightened', in and of itself, than anyone else is. Like, for example, if one discovers, works out, or finds that actually it is the earth that revolves around the sun and that 'this knowledge' has not yet been obtained by others, then this certainly does not mean that 'that one' is 'more enlightened', in and of itself. Although it may well mean that 'that one' has become 'more enlightened' only on that one tiny piece of 'new knowledge'.

Now, if 'that one' says and claims that it can teach others how they can also learn this 'new knowledge', then 'that' is more or less only what 'that one' is doing. it is never necessarily claiming that it is so-called 'enlightened', or even 'more enlightened', as doing so obviously instills a particular sort of perception, and view, in some types of people, right?


Which some might find very, very surprising that absolute none of 'you', here, have shown absolutely any real interest nor even any curiosity at all in.

But, so to did just about no one, at first, took any real interest nor showed any real curiosity in 'the knowledge' that it is actually the earth that revolves around the sun, and thus why it took 'that one' so, so long to be 'listened to', 'heard', and 'understood', fully.

Also, and by the way, what 'this example' is referring to, showing, and proving can be shared across millions and millions of others.



'you' are absolutely 'free' to 'look at' 'this' in 'this way', or in absolutely 'any other way', if 'you' choose to. But, then there are 'others' who do have interest, and curiosity, in how to make 'a better world', for not just some, but for all as well.

'Those people', however, just do not appear to be in 'this forum', yet.

So you are enlightened, then. Is that correct?

So-called 'enlightened' in regards to 'what', exactly?

For example, I know how you people can change "yourselves" for the better, which, in turn, will change 'the world' also, for the better, for every one. However, I, still, have absolutely no idea nor clue in how to get you human beings to just get rid of and lose 'your preconceptions, beliefs and assumptions' so that you will then be interested and curious in learning, and understanding, what you believe and/or presume is not even a possibility.

So, exactly like 'you' 'i' am enlightened in 'some things', but not in 'others'.

Does 'this' answer and clarify 'your question', to me, above, here, satisfactory, for you?

Or, if you were referencing some exact or particular thing, then you will have to inform me of what 'that' is, exactly, first.

So we are not "better" yet? Or we have not yet made the change from what we are to what we can become in order to be better. Is that correct?

[Age]

So you are enlightened, then. Is that correct?

So-called 'enlightened' in regards to 'what', exactly?

For example, I know how you people can change "yourselves" for the better, which, in turn, will change 'the world' also, for the better, for every one. However, I, still, have absolutely no idea nor clue in how to get you human beings to just get rid of and lose 'your preconceptions, beliefs and assumptions' so that you will then be interested and curious in learning, and understanding, what you believe and/or presume is not even a possibility.

So, exactly like 'you' 'i' am enlightened in 'some things', but not in 'others'.

Does 'this' answer and clarify 'your question', to me, above, here, satisfactory, for you?

Or, if you were referencing some exact or particular thing, then you will have to inform me of what 'that' is, exactly, first.

So we are not "better" yet?

'Who' and/or 'what' is, supposedly, 'not better' yet, in regards to 'what', exactly?

And, once again, why do you write so many statements, and claim they are true, but put a question mark at the end?

Or we have not yet made the change from what we are to what we can become in order to be better. Is that correct?

If, here, you are just asking me,
'Have 'we', human beings, not yet made the change from what 'we' are, to what 'we' can become, in order to be 'better'?'

Be-coming better is a process. Either a slower or a faster one, if the Truth be known.

Now, just as 'you' human beings 'evolved' into 'creation', so to will 'you' human beings keep 'evolving' into just be-coming 'what is next', as some might say.

If 'you' want to be-come 'better', or, if 'you' want to be-come 'worse', is entirely up to 'you'.

Unless, of course, 'you' are one who believes, absolutely, that 'you' do not have the ability to choose, and thus are absolutely pre-determined and destined to be-come what has been set out by some thing as 'your destiny', then 'this' is what will happen. Otherwise, 'you' can 'choose' to be, be-come, and come-to-be a 'better individual', which, in turn, will obviously make 'the world' a better place.

[Martin Peter Clarke]

For Europe to prepare for war with Russia.