Slashdot Mirror

"You mean an oil spill which was the result of engineering, judgement and training errors of the operators and had absolutely nothing to do with time pressures"

Uhhh... nope.

I'm talking about oil spills that even the government comission in charge said that were due to cost-cutting malpractices, i.e. "Whether purposeful or not, many of the decisions that BP, Halliburton, and Transocean made that increased the risk of the Macondo blowout clearly saved those companies significant time (and money)": http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fin.... While the report itself can't be so clear-cut on that, it's very easy to read between lines that conflicting interests (time and money versus security) just as stated. http://ccrm.berkeley.edu/pdfs_...

"Or the nuclear power plant which survived the tsunami just fine [...] and only went under due to the engineering error of putting emergency power in the basement?"

Uhhh... nope again.

I'm talking about nuclear power plants that were positively known not to be properly maintained and where whistleblowers were systematically shut down because hearing them would cost money, i.e. "It is important to remember that in February 2011, shortly before the meltdowns, NISA extended the operating license of Fukushima Daiichi despite expressing reservations about a dubious maintenance record and eerily prescient concerns about stress cracks in the back-up diesel generators that left them vulnerable to inundation." or "Telltale warnings began accumulating over the decade prior to 3/11[...] In 2009 NISA and TEPCO discussed the possibility of a 9.2 meter tsunami based on new simulations and archaeological evidence, but NISA did not press TEPCO to take countermeasures. Clearly, there is no basis to TEPCO's claim that the scale of the 3/11 tsunami was inconceivable [...] In terms of tsunami-related risk management, it turns out that TEPCO and two other utilities actually lobbied the government's Earthquake Research Committee on March 3, 2011 to water down wording in a report warning that a massive tsunami could hit the Tohoku coast". http://www.japanfocus.org/-Jef...

"Please if you're going cite major disasters to support your case for management attempting to maximise profit at the expense of safety then at least cite some correct ones."

I did.

The comments by the above are often made decades after the war, one in particular admits "I arrived at this conclusion after talking with a number of Japanese officials who had been closely associated with the decision of the then Japanese government, to reject the ultimatum, as it was presented."

Yes, some of these quotes are evidence that hindsight is 20/20, but that still counters your claims in your previous post that the Japanese would have continued to fight on. And then there are the quotes like these:

When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb.

That's right, MacArthur said that if he was asked his opinion at that time he would not have seen a reason to use the bomb.

the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary

In this one Eisenhower said that he thought the dropping of the bomb was completely unnecessary as soon as he heard the news.

While the Emperor's safety and symbolic position was permitted to continue after occupation it was done so **after** an investigation into whether the Emperor was responsible for war crimes. We could not have determined the Emperor's status with respect to being a war criminal until after boots on the ground, i.e. after surrender.

The actual instrument of surrender said nothing about an investigation into war crimes. In fact, there was no mention of crimes at all. Regarding the Emperor, it said

We hereby undertake for the Emperor, the Japanese Government, and their successors to carry out the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration in good faith, and to issue whatever orders and take whatever action may be required by the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers or by any other designated representative of the Allied Powers for the purpose of giving effect to that declaration.

There was also a tacit agreement along with the final surrender that the Emperor would not under any circumstances be investigated for war crimes:
http://www.pacificwar.org.au/J...
http://www.japanfocus.org/-her...

Your reference suggests no such thing, unless you are making a very strange interpretation of Halsey's flippant comment about scientists and their toys. While the value of deterring possible Russian aggression was a consideration it was secondary, and as history shows not necessarily an unfounded fear.

No, this reference does not suggest it, but it is widely known that Hiroshima was spared conventional bombing so that if it was attacked with a nuclear device, it would be easier to analyze the effects. Since several generals from the previous source said was of limited strategic value, this seems to be the only reason for the bombing Hiroshima over a more militarily significant target, or (if demoralizing the Japanese was the only objective) an unpopulated area.

You've gone from strange interpretations to just plain making up nonsense. In the future you may want to restate your irrational belief that Truman considered them experimental subjects into perha

The [dropped nuclear] bombs are why Japan surrendered. It's pretty damn clear. Would Japan have lost without the bombs? yes, but it would have cost millions of lives.

You've merely repeated the propagandized supposition put forth by Truman and US middle-school textbooks. Those claims aren't "clear;" they're very highly suspect. If you decide to investigate and understand the circumstances leading to Japan's surrender, you will find a substantial body of evidence and insights that call your claims into serious question.

Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: [Opposition: [Militarily unnecessary]]

The Real Reason America Used Nuclear Weapons Against Japan (It Was Not to End the War or Save Lives)

The Atomic Bombs and the Soviet Invasion: What Drove Japan’s Decision to Surrender?

Oliver Stone's Untold History of the United States [s01e03]; [x264 SD torrent] [x264 720p torrent]
 

The government declares a 20 km evacuation zone around nuclear disaster site causing mass panic and everyone leaves, including rescue workers. The unrescued, sick and elderly are stranded and left to die.

"drivers and transportation company workers fled or refused to come to Okuma because of radiation fears."
"We knew there would be risks, but we were left with no choice," Sakashita told the AP. "There is no doubt in my mind that if there had been better planning in advance by the city, this person would not have died. The same is true for the people who died while being evacuated from Futaba. Their deaths were a direct result of the nuclear accident." Masahiro Sakashita - nursing home director in Minami-Soma whose residents faced starvation and lack of medicine because of the evacuation.

Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear evacuation fatal for old, sick
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765558622/Fukushima-Dai-ichi-nuclear-evacuation-fatal-for-old-sick.html?pg=all

"Nevertheless, rumor spread quickly that the radiation emitted by the explosion was so deadly that it would kill everyone in the vicinity unless they escaped immediately.... Much later, elderly people, hospital patients and physically and mentally handicapped people were evacuated. A lack of suitable accommodation for these unfortunate souls meant that they were transferred from one place to another, sometimes spending long hours in cars. Some were moved to large cities hundreds of kilometers away. By March 15, 50 elderly people had died. On that day, the No 2 and No 3 reactor buildings also exploded, causing anxiety among people in other regions of Fukushima prefecture, as well as neighboring prefectures and even Tokyo. In addition, 1,800 people were missing as a result of the tsunami, but high levels of radiation prevented search and rescue work."

"6,600 deaths resulted from the devastating effects of the aftermath of the earthquake and the nuclear power accident. Many people committed suicide, like the 64-year-old farmer, who had produced organic cabbages for more than 30 years in Sugagawa, 70 km away. He took his life on March 24. Prior to the disaster, Fukushima Prefecture had 150,000 hectares of rice and vegetable fields and 80,000 farming households.... The nuclear explosion subjected the entire region, as well as areas far beyond, to radiation levels equivalent to 20 times that inflicted on Hiroshima by the atomic bomb. Radiation continues to permeate the surrounds. The damage to the agricultural and fishery industries is beyond speculation. In addition to the initial destruction, “hot spots” - places contaminated with high levels of radiation, such as the village of Iidate – outside the 20km zone continue to cause great concern. It is most unlikely that those who lived within the 20km zone or in these hot-spot areas will ever be able to return to their homes and resume their interrupted lives."

An interesting bit...

"People in Fukushima are also facing “social discrimination,” in the same way that atomic bombing survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki have done for decades. In Japan it is widely believed that many children born to victims of the atomic bombings carry genetic defects, caused by their parents’ exposure to high levels of radiation. As yet there is no clear medical or scientific evidence to prove such claims. However, many people still try to avoid marrying the descendants of atomic bomb survivors. Sadly, this same myth is now emerging with regard to Fukushima. Such discrimination is also happening in schools, where children from Fukushima are being bullied by their classmates, who think radiation is contaminating."

A Lesson from the Fukushima Nuclear Accident
http://www.japanfocus.org/events/view/149

Loss of life after evacuation: lessons learned from the Fukushima accid

I'm getting pretty sick of people talking about how the technology failed, or the earthquake and tsunami overwhelmed the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant. It certainly didn't help, but the situation could have conceivably been put under control if TEPCO had even the slightest disaster planning prepared.

TEPCO did not have manuals for basic emergency procedures in the plants control room

TEPCO did not have safety equipment (protective suits, personal dosimeters, etc) stored on site

TEPCO did not have the equipment required to carry out emergency operations on site (eg. an air compressor to manually open a pneumatic valve)

TEPCO did not have any clear plans in place for severe emergencies

TEPCO had not run drills or training for disaster response

TEPCO didn't even have a clear crisis management, response and responsibility plan

Any single one of these points is horrific. All together, to me, it is just mind numbing that this isn't just happening at Fukushima Daiichi, but at 17 plants and many more nuclear material handling companies.

What is absolutely sickening about the whole situation is that a few documents and some very basic equipment, and the application of basic disaster planning essentials could have taken Fukushima from being what it is today to simply being a messy close-call. Had they been able to manually open the valves and provide even a small amount of power within a reasonable timeframe it would have been dramatically different.

Risk management isn't about throwing technology at a problem until you feel invulnerable, but nor is it about making excuses why you shouldn't have to bother. This failure was a simple results of a failure of policy and planning.

Anyone wanting solid sources for any of the above, feel free to ask, I'll get them. I just don't want to look them all up now :S

Here is a good start if you want to know more, again, I'm happy to source any claim in here too: http://www.japanfocus.org/-Jeff-Kingston/3724

Regulation is what got us in the financial mess to begin with.

Yes, never let the facts get in the way of an ideology!

Yes, I know hindsight is 20/20, but really, Fukushima was designed to withstand the vast majority of earthquakes, it was only a freak disaster that caused this.

But it was not hindsight. Prior to the tsunami there were already experts warning about safety of nuclear power plants in Japan and of the type of plant used at Fukushima specifically. A freak disaster was exactly the thing that you should be planning for.

... or read this: American chamber of commerce opposes new Chinese Labour Law:

Quoting from the article:

AmCham criticizes the proposed changes in the law for making it harder to fire workers

...

Now who is enslaving who?

I would also like to see you defend your comment about most of the space research budget has been diverted to militarizing space. That just sounds like a whole lot of bunk.

Nasa's 2005 budget was $16 billion
In 2005, the US spent $10 billion on Space Weapons R&D

A great collection of articles on Social Change in Japan on japanfocus.org.

Some articles relevant to the present discussion:

• The Lost "Human Country"
• Time running out for shrinking Japan

A great collection of articles on Social Change in Japan on japanfocus.org.

Some articles relevant to the present discussion:

• The Lost "Human Country"
• Time running out for shrinking Japan

A great collection of articles on Social Change in Japan on japanfocus.org.

Some articles relevant to the present discussion:

• The Lost "Human Country"
• Time running out for shrinking Japan

A great collection of articles on Social Change in Japan on japanfocus.org.

Some articles relevant to the present discussion:

• The Lost "Human Country"
• Time running out for shrinking Japan