That does look like a bitcoin private key except that it is missing 2 characters since the correct length of an uncompressed private key is 51 not 49.
How did you "find" this anyway? Because if it really did contain 2.9 BTC you wouldn't just come across it. This looks like a fake thing since I checked and no combination of these characters with 2 at different positions could be a valid private key either.

It is not possible to "crack" a bitcoin address. Besides, if anyone wanted to waste their time on an impossible task they would have chosen one of the existing addresses with large balance instead of a burn address that would have far less.
For example 1P5ZEDWTKTFGxQjZphgWPQUpe554WKDfHQ contains about $4 billion worth of bitcoin.

Because if anybody modifies the spending script the corresponding hash would change and the evaluation fails there. It's similar to P2SH, you can't modify the redeem script without changing the hash. Of course it's a bit more complicated in Taproot due to the way Tapleaf and Tapbranch hashes are computed but the principle is the same; if you modify the spending script the following check called VerifyTaprootCommitment should fail before we even start evaluating the OP_SUCCESS:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/1c7ef0abd11f35a27cc860ceb7e075b78f53cecf/src/script/interpreter.cpp#L1925-L1928

Yes, it doesn't even execute the script to reach OP_VERIFY or any other OP code, it first goes through the script and looks for OP_SUCCESS if it founds any it will return true:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/1c7ef0abd11f35a27cc860ceb7e075b78f53cecf/src/script/interpreter.cpp#L1792-L1808
A funny side-effect of this is that if the script is invalid after the OP_SUCCESS (like having a wrong push data) it is not even going to reject it and will still pass! Like this:

OP_SUCEESS is only non-standard because if it were invalid we wouldn't be able to achieve backward compatibility when new OP code is introduced through one of these.
Since SCRIPT_VERIFY_DISCOURAGE_OP_SUCCESS is part of the standard policy and the flag is not active when on testnet I suppose you should be able to send a transaction containing this OP code on testnet.

War is not a computer game to have an easy outcome.
US invaded Afghanistan more than 20 years ago and spent $7 trillion and couldn't achieve anything at all there. They were fighting cavemen (literally) who had no airforce, no radar, no missiles, no tanks, so support from any other country, not even half decent weapons.
In comparison Ukraine has a military, has airforce, radars, tanks, missiles, and receives billions of dollars of support.

The goal was never to occupy entire Ukraine. The goal was to annex east and south of Ukraine that are strategically important to Russia and leave the rest. Half of Ukraine doesn't want Russia while the other half does. They can never rule over that first half, so they would remove Zelensky with someone who that other half can accept but is at the very least anti-NATO if not pro-Russia. The first part of the plan is already over.
Funny enough, this is similar to what US tried to do in Afghanistan and failed because unlike Ukraine, nobody wanted US in Afghanistan so they were kicked out in defeat.

Lots of others are saying the same thing as I do, you are just not looking.
It's like during those times when price drops a little and the internet is filled with idiots saying "bitcoin is dead" then I call them on their bullshit on bitcointalk. If you only look at the mass FUD and my comment alone you'd think I'm the only one saying the opposite!!!

Here are a handful of examples I found with a quick search on the internet:

Some of them are saying pretty much the same thing as I said (no correlations before whatsoever, then a weak correlation in past 2 years starting from pandemic crash coincidence)

Finally here is an article on Forbes with some quotes from different people in it representing another view:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/benjaminpirus/2020/03/20/contrary-to-popular-belief-bitcoin-isnt-consistently-correlated-to-anything/

Of course there are lots more and these were some of the examples. There are many opinions out there, some just like mine, some opposite and some in between...

This is a problem I've been talking about for a couple of years now. A large number of shitcoins were created and some people looking from outside look at the whole thing that is also overshadowing bitcoin so they end up judging the whole thing and make an statement about the whole thing that includes thousands of shitcoins.
In other words they look at altcoins and judge bitcoin!

Otherwise every single statement they made is wrong a bout bitcoin but 100% correct about altcoins. Not just that, we've been saying pretty much the same things about altcoins ourselves, we didn't need some outsiders comment on them.

Anyone could spend your coins if the script contains OP_SUCCESS since it overrides everything including the signature check and returns true when evaluating the script.
Additionally the scripts containing OP_SUCCESS are also considered non-standard and will be rejected by bitcoin core nodes.

Your arguments don't sound correct to me although I don't claim to be good at this type of math. Here is a quote from Electrum docs though:

Time has to come before OP_CLV not after it since the OP code will have to fetch it from the stack.
Also it's usual to move locktime stuff to the start, although it doesn't make a technical difference but it would reduce the burden on nodes for rejecting invalid transactions.

Wallets barely support uncommon scripts like the above, and they don't yet support regular Taproot scripts with a single key

You are right it will make a difference but for importers such as EU not exporters such as Russia.

It's pretty simple, it's a matter of supply and demand and the fact that neither of them have changed.
Just because EU doesn't [supposedly] import Russian oil it doesn't mean they don't need oil anymore. Instead it means EU is going to buy it from elsewhere. But since the production has not increased anywhere else (ie. OPEC) that means if EU is importing oil from lets say Saudis they have to replace one of Saudi customers like China (just an example) but that also doesn't mean China won't need oil; instead that means that now Russian oil is going to Saudi customers that were replaced by EU (China in this hypothetical example).
In simple terms this means if Russia was exporting for example 1 million barrels of oil, they are still exporting 1 million barrens of oil but to different customers.

So why is it screwing EU while helping Russia?
That is pretty simple too. EU is now buying oil at a much higher price (almost $120) compared to before ($40-$60) so EU is spending a lot more money while the increased prices also cause inflation in those countries.
On the other hand Russia is selling the same amount of oil for a much higher price which means their revenue is almost doubled after the "embargo".

On top of that, China (the biggest economy in the world), is going to receive a small discount on the same oil which would put their economy further ahead. Their products will be cheaper than what is produced in EU so they would take over more of world's economy while replacing EU customers. This would shrink EU's GDP...

P.S. Any comment on Germany gas being cut off and how they were predicting a $240 billion hit and a "deep recession" in Germany as Reuters put it a couple of months ago?

Another way of looking at it is the EU exports to Russia was cut by 50% which is also visible as inflation and soaring prices all around EU.

What crisis? You should seriously stop reading propaganda specially from BBC

There has been inflation in Iran but not a crisis and the inflation also had very little to do with sanctions. It was because of an incompetent government printing money non-stop. Otherwise prices were mostly stable for the past year ever since the previous president's term ended and new one took office. That is despite the increasing sanctions against Iran.

IMF puts Iran's economy as 20th largest economy, Iran's GDP is the 17th biggest in the world. And both of these are excluding the billions of dollars of trade that Iran doesn't publicize due to sanctions!
On top of that as the country with the second largest gas reserves and large oil supplies with the soaring energy prices the country's revenue has increased significantly.

For your information reaching $100k or even $180k is a tiny rise not a huge spike.
If you look at the history for example the last cycle ending in 2018, the rise was 13200%. In comparison going from $30k to $180k is tiny 500% rise.
You see, just because there are too many zeros in front of a number that doesn't make the whole rise a big one.

You can't even measure the mempool size of older blocks for it to be close to the size or not, because as I said in my post above mempool is not stored anywhere. Even if you could, when calculating target we aren't looking for a number that is close to correct one, but we are looking for exact values.

It is obvious that smart money is always entering the market when we are in a dip and accumulates while everyone else is panicking and either sell or refuse to buy at a massive discount.

But there is no "price action" yet, bitcoin price has been going up and down in the same range for the past 23 days. When price goes to $25k it is not some doomsday dump to $0 and when it goes to $35k it is not some pump to the moon reaching $100k moment. It is just normal fluctuations during an accumulation phase before the jump which can't be predicted.

Size of a project is not a characteristic you should even be looking at when wanting to decide whether the project can fail or not. Unfortunately people keep comparing things with bitcoin and think that the reason why bitcoin is so successful is because "it is big" but the fact is that bitcoin is successful because it is useful and well designed.

Comparing it with altcoins you can see that regardless of their size or rank in the list of market caps, altcoins are not useful and their design is flawed some of them have serious flaws like top altcoins including ethereum. This is why shitcoins like Luna fail, a centralized flawed design was practically guaranteed to fail.

For the past 2 or 3 years from time to time newbies also known as weak hands panic sell their bitcoins whenever there is a stock market dump but that has never been any correlations between bitcoin and any other markets.
Bitcoin is still the alternative to the traditional markets so that whenever those dump people have a safe haven.

Here is how the charts look between July and November 2021:

If you have selected each word manually and randomly and you have 12 words then each word represents 11 bits which makes the total 12*11=132 bits.

That is incorrect. Electrum actually starts with a 132-bit entropy (as an int) then increments it until it finds a correct checksum. Address type does not affect the entropy size, it only affects what checksum is expected.
https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/abe3955d916521f37e06b96d8996b270413e175f/electrum/mnemonic.py#L190

I agreed with your post except this part of it. No one country can or should have all the power ever. Take a look at US. It wasn't always this corrupt regime spreading death and destruction around in the world. The centralization of power in one place corrupted the regime and they abused the hell out of it too.
Let's not forget that Russia in Soviet era has also done a lot of shit and spread separatism in the region.

One thing that makes me happy about the emerging new world order is that no one country has all the power. Multiple powerhouses have shaped that are pursuing shared interests and those that don't fall in line are going to be left behind like Turkey that is currently too dumb to know they got stuck in a hellhole they dug for themselves in Syria simply because they refused to accept the new world order.

Exactly, another solution would be doing something similar to what Electrum does. You select 12 words and then increment the last word until you get a valid checksum. As long as the selection process is really random the entropy you get is more than 128 bits.
Same for any other word count.