Slashdot Mirror

Yes Young People of today - however bad today's music may sometimes be, the greatest musical horrors lie in the past where they should be left to moulder. The greatest horror of them all, the very worst song of all time, so bad the Vogons wouldn't claim it, is from 1914. See http://www.firstworldwar.com/audio/abadabahoneymoon.htm if you must but I recommend against it for your sanity is at risk if you do. I swear that this song is what drove Gavril Princip's assassination and started the Great War.

Kind of creepy, but not quite the physical stature of Churchill:

http://www.firstworldwar.com/bio/beaverbrook.htm

I'm sorry, but that's BS. It was a nasty piece of ethnic cleansing for sure (though it was made largely worse by the bombings), but refugees were going mostly to Albania, and a few to Macedonia, neither country being a NATO member at the time.

What is missing from your analysis is an appreciation for the dynamics of this region. Historically, wider wars have a tendency to start there. It is a hub where large powers meet. Serbia has ties with Russia. Turkey also borders the region, and has interests in, for example Macedonia. And Turkey is a member of NATO. Greece also has interests in Macedonia. With a rogue Serbian leader throwing his military weight around the region, there was always a risk of a wider conflagration. Balkan stability is definitely within the interests of NATO.

Since you didn't include a link to the text of the act in question, here is the text of the Espionage Act of 1917.

Section 1, paragraph (e) pretty clearly applies to the person who leaked all of the documents in question.

Section 1, paragraph (d) MIGHT have applied to Wikileaks... EXCEPT for the fact that they provided the State Department with copies of all of the documents that had been leaked, prior to publication.

What's more, not only are they redacting the documents prior to publication, they're redacting the documents EVEN MORE HEAVILY than the declassified versions being published by the Department of Defense.

So, yeah. Granted, IANAL, but I'd say that doesn't apply.

If you'll have a look at the declaration of war from World War 1 and World War 2, you will notice that they both contain the words 'declare' and 'war' in close proximity to one another. Authorizing the president to use military force is simply *not* a declaration of war, and the president should have no war powers without a real declaration.

sorry to break your bubble.. but the Brits did outsource some of WWI work to India
India produced between 900,000 to 1.5 million troops for combat by 1919.
http://www.firstworldwar.com/features/lionsofthegr eatwar.htm

Just for completeness, I'll mention that it's the 'Vickers' machine gun, not 'Vicars.'

http://www.firstworldwar.com/atoz/mgun_vickers.htm

Yes, I realize it's a pun, but it would have worked either way, really.

... like the Q-Ships of WW1, the cops could deploy a few laptops that, when attacked by a thief, would deploy Taser darts....

... to be followed by lawsuits, of course.

Am I missing something or is this just another case of connecting wildly unrelated dots?

Why not say it's the scheduled to attack on the 91st anniversary of the French blowing up 1/2 a mile of German trenches?

Oh wait, that doesn't generate fear like the original claim...

The same way other aircraft do, and are less vulnerable, een when flying low (and no need to flylow except at takeoff and landing). The little shoulder-fired missiles are heat-seekers, and can be spoofed with flares. What's more, I bet this thing could take a couple of hits and still be able to land safely. That, and a little airfield security and the risk is low. They're not for artillery observation.

Before mouthing off about how great USA is at winning wars get som facts right a simple look a the casualties of WW I http://www.firstworldwar.com/features/casualties.h tm

should put the US influence on the out come of this war into perspective, WW II had a greater US influence but there were still more French military casualties from a smaller population. http://www.valourandhorror.com/DB/BACK/Casualties. php

The famous Sandia Z-machine is more of a quarter shrinker than a rail gun.

Sadly, the evolution of the English language nowadays seems to be directed by bad science fiction and gory video games. Real rail guns were projectile weapons so large they must be transported by rail - they can't be towed or moved with a truck without being disassembled because they are too heavy for roadbeds - and they have names like "Gustav", "Big Bertha" and "Schlanke Emma".

If the Z-machine was a gun (which it's not) it oughta be called a capacitive discharge cannon, not a rail gun. But I guess that's too hard to spell for kids today?

Those who ignore history are apparently in charge of revising the english language. Wikipedia and dictionary.com both use the "new" definition of railgun (although at least wiki has the grace to mention real railguns in passing).

Future historians are going to hate us for this one.

Japan was well involved in WW1 on the allied side.

Quote from

http://www.firstworldwar.com/origins/causes.htm

Japan, honouring a military agreement with Britain, declared war on Germany on 23 August 1914. Two days later Austria-Hungary responded by declaring war on Japan.

Newton Baker Served as U.S. President Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of War from March 1916.

Google is your friend!


-Nivag

The first tanks were developed by the British and first saw action on 15 September 1916. The US did not deploy tanks until 1918.

See First world war tanks for more information.