Slashdot Mirror
Russia Honors the Spy Who Stole the A-Bomb
An anonymous reader writes "The New York Times reports on the life of George Koval, codenamed Delmar, one of the most important spies to have infiltrated the Manhattan Project, the secret program that created the world's first nuclear weapon. President Putin recently granted Koval a posthumous Hero of the Russian Federation award, the highest honorary title that can be given to a Russian citizen. Koval was born in Iowa, spoke fluent American English, and played baseball. But he was also recruited and trained by the GRU, Russia's largest intelligence agency."
That is one strange concept of 'pride.' I could name countless other Russians that deserve this kind of recognition more than a cold war spy.
My work here is dung.
1) yes, war sucks 2) the japs started it, and did FAR worse 3) dont be such a hippy pussy
One man's hero is another man's terrorist.
how you can find only one side responsible in a two sided fight
you do realize the japanese were slaughtering millions themselves in the name of imperialism? you do realize that if no A bomb was dropped, that more japanese and americans would have died in a land invasion of japan?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Said already enough. All these actions - playing Antiamerican cards, claiming Russia "best nation in the world", trying to "correct" international thinking about Stalin etc. etc. at absurdum - is to get already tired people from all this bullshit to vote for Putin comrades. Economy is going down (nevermind huge sales of oil and gas), inflation goes trough the roof, common people only see that one type of oligarchs have been replaced by another, more nationalistic/militaristic, but still don't caring much about nation. But Russians dies out as a people, trough heavy drinking/hunger/strong disillusion about the country. They become more dangerous than any radical Islamists, who cause at least could be understood.
Imperialists don't want to admit simply that Russia as "strong arm dictarionship" is dead horse, which will never work in modern time settings. I just hope their last resort won't be trying to play "hard" with the rest of the world. As we easily know how it is to have people who have nothing to loose.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
This man was a thief, a traitor
No, that's the nuance between a traitor and a spy. From the Russian point of vue, this guy helped shape history in their favour, by tremendously helping them get the tool required to afford to make the USA crap their pants for about 40 years.
You just got troll'd!
who set them up the bomb?
But how does this fit into the Rosenberg trial and other people the US executed for passing on state secrets?
I know that post cold war pretty convincing evidence has come out saying they did perform spying for the Soviet Russian state.
But how does this all fit together?
ACK
Ok, so the spies of our countries that did successfull, dangerous and sometime very important missions should also be considered "bad guys"??
No, the main difference here is maybe the different culture that allows the public honoring of this people to which you can have a lot of opinions.
There are probably a lot of horrible spies that did sometimes good stuff and sometimes horrible stuff on both sides, but either way they were doing what they considered their job, loyal to THEIR country.
And in this case I think we can at least appreciate what an undertaking this kind of mission must have been?
From the article: "Historians say Mr. Putin may have cited Dr. Koval's accomplishments as a way to rekindle Russian pride."
Huh. Well, I'd be the last to say that Russia has nothing to be proud of. There's a long history of great achievements there (as well as some horrific crimes).
But, rekindling Russian pride by honoring the guy who... um... helped them leach from American R&D and achievement?
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be that proud of it!
I guess Putin, given his own unsavoury background, probably has different ideas about counts as a "great achievement".
'he was also recruited and trained by the GRU, Russia's largest intelligence agency'
When you're an English-speaking, baseball-playing, corn-on-the cab chewing, native-Iowan, those young Prussian female recruiting babes, I mean 'agents', are pretty hard to resist.
They should be the ones getting the honors, actually...
Putin honors YOU!
The man is possibly one of the greatest heroes of all time, he equalised the power balance and prevented the Americans from bombing whoever they wished.
What's the news for nerds angle here?
That Russia Honors the Spy Who Stole the A-Bomb . Duh...
Yeah, some nerds like to take a break from playing D&D and are actually interested in what's happening in the real world.
Millions of japanese? 140.000 at Horishima 80.000 at Nagasaki, several thousand afterwards. That is a quarter million from the results of the way. The cities in question would have had to been wiped out from fallout and after effects SEVERAL times to even reach one million.
So where do you get your millions from? The total death toll of WW2 is estimated around 50 million, the americans accounted for a small fraction of that. Major culprits where the germans, the russians and the japanese. It is often forgotten but they had a regime as brutal as the holocaust.
The A-bombs are noteworthy because they killed a lot of people with just one device. Before that you needed large bomber formations or massive organisation to achieve the same amount of killing, but compare it to the slaughter on the eastern front, the japanese death camps, the german concentration camps or even carpet bombing, and they were just a small note on that huge ledger of lost lives that we call WW2.
Millions of japanese lives, geez. Grow up and read a book.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I suppose they could have used east germans, but I think for something that impoatant they would have used their own people.
The game.
....Russian traitor, imo. Assuming your home country isn't nazi Germany or the equivalent.
Camping on quad since 1996.
As I dislike arm race of Cold war, we must admit that US started it, because they hated Commies so much. If Russia won't have nuclear arsenal, I think it would be matter of time before US would try to sweep them out. And then lot of people would be dead for sure.
So this man somehow bring balance (yes, rather unpleasant, but still) in the world again. USSR having nukes stopped any other nuclear attacks just because US didn't want to risk with it.
I don't admire or celebrate what he did, but definitely it wasn't easy time for anyone, because both countries were at constant readiness to blow each other in pieces.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
> I see nothing in this story that could be considered geeky
Trinity was the biggest physics experiment ever until George. Your definition of 'geeky' must be very sectarian.
Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
watch out for people. Keep an eye on your fellow Americans and do your duty to the Government. Do not trust anyone, not even your loved ones! In fact, the terrorists will probably dress up like someone you love, just to make it worse when they kill you. They are everywhere, they even play baseball. Do your part and report non-baseball activities to your local authorities right away.
Chances are, given the considerable security, he did not learn a whole lot.
Even the top designers of the Oak Ridge gas separation plant did not know exactly what they were doing. What are the chances this guy got the goods?
And half of what they did at Oak Ridge was electromagnetic separation, which turned out to be way too inefficient. If he gave the Soviets that info, he did us a huge favor.
The Polonium separation that went on at a scientist's mother's house in Dayton was straightforward chemistry, nothing particularly novel or secret.
No James Bond here.
not russia.
USSR had agreed to come in to help the US in Japan on such a date and as the date grew nearer, it looked more likely that the US would need their help. Or, if they could manage it themselves, the russians would be there helping anyway.
To stop the russians getting credit, they dropped the A bomb.
And so the US got Japan.
Wow, what a sucky article. After logging in (cheers bugmenot), the article is on multiple pages. Well, here's all of TFA. Please mod this post up if you can.... it might make some slashdotters RTFA ;)
The New York Times
Printer Friendly Format Sponsored By
November 12, 2007
A Spy's Path: Iowa to A-Bomb to Kremlin Honor
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
He had all-American cover: born in Iowa, college in Manhattan, Army buddies with whom he played baseball.
George Koval also had a secret. During World War II, he was a top Soviet spy, code named Delmar and trained by Stalin's ruthless bureau of military intelligence.
Atomic spies are old stuff. But historians say Dr. Koval, who died in his 90s last year in Moscow and whose name is just coming to light publicly, was probably one of the most important spies of the 20th century.
On Nov. 2, the Kremlin startled Western scholars by announcing that President Vladimir V. Putin had posthumously given the highest Russian award to a Soviet agent who penetrated the Manhattan Project to build the atom bomb.
The announcement hailed Dr. Koval as "the only Soviet intelligence officer" to infiltrate the project's secret plants, saying his work "helped speed up considerably the time it took for the Soviet Union to develop an atomic bomb of its own."
Since then, historians, scientists, federal officials and old friends have raced to tell Dr. Koval's story -- the athlete, the guy everyone liked, the genius at technical studies. American intelligence agencies have known of his betrayal at least since the early 1950s, when investigators interviewed his fellow scientists and swore them to secrecy.
The spy's success hinged on an unusual family history of migration from Russia to Iowa and back. That gave him a strong commitment to Communism, a relaxed familiarity with American mores and no foreign accent.
"He was very friendly, compassionate and very smart," said Arnold Kramish, a retired physicist who studied with Dr. Koval at City College and later worked with him on the bomb project. "He never did homework."
Stewart D. Bloom, a senior physicist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, who also studied with Dr. Koval, called him a regular guy.
"He played baseball and played it well," usually as shortstop, Dr. Bloom recalled. "He didn't have a Russian accent. He spoke fluent English, American English. His credentials were perfect."
Once, Dr. Bloom added, "I saw him staring off in the distance and thinking about something else. Now I think I know what it was."
Over the years, scholars and federal agents have identified a half-dozen individuals who spied on the bomb project for the Soviets, especially at Los Alamos in New Mexico. All were "walk ins," spies by impulse and sympathetic leaning rather than rigorous training.
By contrast, Dr. Koval was a mole groomed in the Soviet Union by the feared G.R.U., the military intelligence agency. Moreover, he gained wide access to America's atomic plants, a feat unknown for any other Soviet spy. Nuclear experts say the secrets of bomb manufacturing can be more important than those of design.
Los Alamos devised the bomb, while its parts and fuel were made at secret plants in such places as Oak Ridge, Tenn., and Dayton, Ohio -- sites Dr. Koval not only penetrated, but also assessed as an Army sergeant with wide responsibilities and authority.
"He had access to everything," said Dr. Kramish, who worked with Dr. Koval at Oak Ridge and now lives in Reston, Va. "He had his own Jeep. Very few of us had our own Jeeps. He was clever. He was a trained G.R.U. spy." That status, he added, made Dr. Koval unique in the history of atomic espionage, a judgment historians echo.
Washington has known about Dr. Koval's spying since he fled the United States shortly after the war but kept it secret.
"It would have been highly embarrassing for the U.S. government to have had this divulged," said Robert S. Norris, au
It was WWII, and Germany hadn't been split up yet - all the 18 yr. old English-speaking strutters came out of East Prussia - the Russian talent was busy building horse-drawn mortars.
And when they recruited the guy, they had no idea what he would bring in.
we must admit that US started it, because they hated Commies so much
Not really. Americans started to hate communists as a result of the Cold War, not the other way around. Conflicts of this importance don't start off an ideological different. And as you seem to think that USSR was just being bullied around, it's necessary for me to recall you that the leader of USSR was Joseph Stalin, the most proficient genocidaire ever.
You just got troll'd!
Although lots of people seem to think him a traitor, he really wasn't (although it depends heavily on how your read the history). His father at one point emigrated to the US, then moved back to russia, taking his american born son with him. So while the guy was american born, when he became an agent he was a soviet citizen.
Using people as agents who have lived in the country they are supposed to work in is nothing new. But he worked as an agent for the country of which he was a citizen. He entered the US as a spy and as such did NOT commit treason.
That is an important difference to make.
Odd by the way that a lot of americans seem to condemn hailing this guy as a hero, when their own space program was built upon a nazi war criminal. Russian spy vs nazi, oh yeah the ruskies are the baddies alright. Working people to their death vs taking a dangerous mission to protect your home country.
For those of us with a mind (american, Idol is on) this guy and others helped created the policy of mutually assured destruction. While nukes are scary, they ain't half as scary as they would have been if only one side had them. Would you have trusted the US as the only country with nuclear weapons?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Let's balance things a bit, shall we?
If he did not steal it USSR would have had no bomb for 3-4 more years until the early 50-es. USA may have probably stated WW3 by that time. Just around the time the bomb was ready. I would rather not guess the location for "testing" the prototype under those circumstances.
It is the same as with Beria. Regardless of what do I think about him and regardless of the fact that he sentenced to death many millions he has to be given the credit for "Stalin passing away in his sleep from a stroke". If that did not happen Koba would have started WW3 around 54.
So morals aside as a result of such happy or less happy circumstances we are not all glowing in the dark. Let's drink to that.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
What they should be doing is restoring democracy and remembering those who died for it instead of bringing toasts to thieves.
Putin and his clique have caused the death of Anna Politkovskaya and many other journalists, that's what the FSB is up to now, i doubt those killers will be celebrated in 50 years.
at least 1917, well before the "Cold War".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Red_Scare
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmer_Raids
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Communism
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
So why is it importand to mention that he, as a born American, spoke American Enlish? It would be more surprising would he have talked with a russian dialect.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
A spy works works for their government, their country, and works to benefit their country by being engaging in authorized missions. A traitor betrays their country, by selling their own people out for financial gain, ideological drive or whatever.
Well in this case, it all depends on which country we consider was that man's.
Don't forget it wasn't just the Americans that were "crapping their pants" during the Cold War.
Thanks I know but it's irrelevant. My point was that thanks to his work, USSR could enter the pissing contest against the USA and thus scare them, despite their might. I wasn't trying to establish an exhaustive list of countries who were scared of USSR.
No you are WRONG.
Thanks for rubbing that undoubtful fact in my face.
You just got troll'd!
If The Soviet Union hadn't acquired the A-bomb, they wouldn't have had the chance to engage into a ridiculous arms race with the US. Thus, they wouldn't exhaust their economy. Witch so elegantly created a prerequisite for the collapse of the Soviet Union, giving the Baltic States a chance to become independent. So thank you Mr. George Koval! But still what's next? Giving national awards to car thieves?
to a range of reasons, but the most cynical reason is the one you will consider to be the deciding factor
which only means you are a cynic, not a historian
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The enemy has captured our intelligence.
Also, it's funny how the article is spun to consider this man a "thief", but honours those who originally created the A-bomb (who, although their efforts ended a horrific war, were indirectly responsible for the death of millions of Japanese civilians).
Let's see, how many wars between major world powers have there been since nuclear weapons were developed? And the killing rate of all of the wars that have happened since WWII would account for exactly how many days at the rate of WWII?
Perhaps those scientists knew more than you do. And perhaps creating the most destructive weapon that mankind had ever seen and then immediately protesting its use were not contradictions.
What those scientists did and why they are celebrated is that they made war too expensive to be fought between world powers. That is why only proxy wars and wars between minor powers are fought today. The world is a violent place today. But it is nothing compared to the first half of the 20th century. And it is not because there haven't been plenty of reasons to go to war.
the japanese were pretty hardcore on defense
the japanese, in their actions throughout southeast asia and the island hopping campaign, made it abundantly clear time and again that they were not going to give up one inch of land without fierce resistance to the death, even when that meant suicide by the thousands of personnel, down to the individual decisions of individual japanese soldiers
consider japanese actions on iwo jima, saipan, etc, by the truckload of examples. now ask yourself at the time what any level headed allied personnel would have prudently gauged the japanese attitude to be like in reaction to a land invasion of their mainland
and now you're going to tell me that there was some mysterious watershed change in their attitude?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
And you are naive if you think the Russian space program had no former nazi scientists working on their projects.
ARTIST: Tom Lehrer
TITLE: Who's Next
First we got the bomb, and that was good
'Cause we love peace and motherhood
Then Russia got the bomb, but that's okay
'Cause the balance of power's maintained that way
Who's next
France got the bomb, but don't you grieve
'Cause they're on our side, I believe
China got the bomb, but have no fears
They can't wipe us out for at least five years
Who's next
Then Indonesia claimed that they
Were gonna get one any day
South Africa wants two, that's right
One for the black and one for the white
Who's next
Egypt's gonna get one too
Just to use on you know who
So Israel's getting tense
Wants one in self defense
"The Lord's our shepherd," says the psalm
But just in case, we better get a bomb
Who's next
Luxembourg is next to go
And, who knows, maybe Monaco
We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb
Who's next, who's next, who's next, who's next
which is fine, go ahead, hate america. but hate america for genuine bad american intentions, not propagandistic misreadings of intentions
the japanese, in their actions throughout southeast asia and the island hopping campaign, made it abundantly clear time and again that they were not going to give up one inch of land without fierce resistance to the death, even when that meant suicide by the thousands of personnel, down to the individual decisions of individual japanese soldiers
consider japanese actions on iwo jima, saipan, etc, by the truckload of examples. now ask yourself at the time what any level headed allied personnel would have prudently gauged the japanese attitude to be like in reaction to a land invasion of their mainland
now ask yourself, when faced with the decision to drop this bomb, compared with the number of certain deaths, of americans AND japanese, in a mainland invasion, what YOU would have decided (as opposed to what a "typical american" would have decided)
and now you want to say that some future cold war, that no one knew was coming, that geopolitical posturing, was going to be more prevalent in the minds of allied personnel in making that decision than simply considering the number of lives lost in a mainland invasion?
that's called a hindsight bias
what nationality are you? because i want to call you a "typical {}ian" for your idiotic propagandized thinking
which would of course be a grave insult to your fellow countrymen, who are most probably a lot less propagandized and jingoistic than you are. but it would be fitting to hurl that insult at you anyways, to make you aware of how stupid and unfair your propaganda is
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
If it was WWII then germany and russia were enemies... surely?
So if a prussian (ie german, possibly polish) did it, then surely the results would have gone to the reich?
Perhaps I'd better actually RTFA!
What's the news for nerds angle here?
This is a "progressive" site. This means that showcasing the haters of America (namely, China and the USSR/Russia) and their accomplishments is red meat. Call me "jingoistic" all you want, but there is no doubt that feeling some degree of negative feeling, from simple skepticism to full-blown hatred, toward America and/or capitalism is a very "progressive" thing to do.
And that's why you'll see articles like this posted on this site. Articles which extol the glory of China or the USSR are what "progressives" like to read, and there are lots of "progressives" here. Yes, it's not necessarily "news for nerds". It's red meat, and that's never a bad thing for keeping your site active and popular.
The responses to this post will probably attempt to appease chronic Bush Derangement Syndrome. I'm going to get called a "Bush lover" and they'll bring up the war in Iraq and all that. Or I'll just get modded a "troll" for answering your question in the entirely accurate and truthful way.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
Think in terms of American Revolution. We were ALL British citizens. But a minority revolted and we broke away from Britain. Today, We proudly claim British traitors as our pride and they rightly deserve.
From Russia's POV, Koval deserved to be honored. He almost single handedly was able to put USSR on the same footing as America. That is fine. One day, we may be doing something similar with an ex-Chinese ( or an Ex-Russian).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
fuck you - you fucking commie scumbag!
AMERICA FUCK YEAH!
are you willing to talk about what the japanese did to chinese, filipino, korean, etc. civilians? how about the germans? how about the russians? how about everyone who fought in the war? no, but you are willing to talk about the americans doing terrible things, and find them guilty of various crimes. but no one else
i always wondered what the point was with people who are willing to try americans and find them guilty for crimes every single nation that has ever existed and ever will exist are guilty of. on the flipside, it would be of course equally stupid for a jingoistic american to forgive the usa it's crimes. blindly loving your country is no replacement for a valid human conscience
so because some stupid jingoistic americans are propagandized, you are going to be stupid and propagandized too? loving the usa is stupid. hating it is equally stupid. especially when your reasons for hating it are no worse than what any other country has done. do you hate the chinese? the russians? the germans? well, based on your rationale for hating the usa, you should
no: the allies looked at the costs involved in a mainland attack, and decided the bomb cost less lives. please feel free to spin that anyway you like to hate the usa. feel free to ignore the crimes of everyone else in that war. it's ok to hate the usa, go ahead, be my guest
but it would be more valid if you hated the usa for real and genuine bad american intentions in the world. there are many to choose from throughout history, especially recent history
spinning wwii history into propagandistic misreadings doesn't make the usa look bad. it only makes you look desperate and braindead
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
agreed
if the war was progressing where japan was confronted with stopping an imperialistic and rabidly nationalistic usa that promised rabid defense of the mainland, and that had invaded mexico and canada and were killing and torturing millions of civilians in those countries, then yes, dropping the a bomb on san francisco and los angeles would have been prudent
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
you're going to have to justify that
your swimming strongly against historical fact now, friend
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
i think that if the american tanks in a land invasion were rolling towards nagasaki and hiroshima (after many times more japanese soldiers and civilians and american soldiers were dead in the mainland invasion than the nuclear bombs), the local militia there in defense of the japanese homeland would have to disagree with you
the japanese were hardcore nationalists in wwii. they fought tooth and nail, down to the individual decision making, regardless of what the japanese generals ordered
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
and all of the top generals had ordered a surrender, japanese civilians themselves would have mounted fierce resistance to the death, on an individual by individual basis
you forget how propagandized and rabidly nationalistic people were in those days
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
"then surely the results would have gone to the reich?
:)
I'm certain they were talented girls and ready to go either way
Seriously... as bad as the cold war was- I shudder to think how being the only holder of that kind of power might have corrupted america. It's bad enough as it is.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
ok, let's say you convinced the americans to hold off on a mainland invasion and not drop the a bomb
now convince the russians not to invade
now convince the chinese not to
no convince the koreans, filipinos, etc.
good luck
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
or at churchill: consider the firebombing of dresden, for example. fire bombing dresden was worse than a bombing hiroshima and nagasaki, but it used ocnventional bombs
or is your high holy righteous outrage only pointed at the usa? even when others do worse or no better?
why is that?
how can you consider yourself angry in the name of justice when you yourself do not apply it fairly?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
as if that discrimination decides this matter, or even intelligently comments on it
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Quick post, I am not sure that many of you realise that the Americans and Russians were allies at the end of the 2nd world war. With the cold war not beginning because of Russia possessing nuclear arms (or because of the theft of that information), but instead being due to them being communists and not fascists. The USA and most of the European nations hated communism with a passion unparalleled to their apparent hate of Hitler and his is mass genocide of the Jewish population. Mod me -1 flamebait/troll because you learnt your history from a cereal box.
You do not think that is honorable to be a spy? We have our fair share of spies spread out everywhere. Are you trying to say that those who work for the CIA or NSA have no honor? I have no issue with spying for YOUR country. Where I have issues is when you turn over YOUR countries secrets for money. That is not honorable.
But the man WAS a Russian and always saw himself as such. We did not have a decent enough anti-spying system set-up on one of our most important programs. That was a HUGE mistake on our part. Do not get me wrong. I wish that we had caught the man and put him in a prison (for life). But we did not. Even now, we are catching Chinese spies amongst us, and I am guessing that we are catching just a fraction. We should be looking very carefully at ALL ppl who work for the DOD, esp. when they are not native born or have spent time elsewhere.
As I said in the earlier posting, we HONOR those that were considered traitors to what was then our king. We also honor those who spied for us, when they did it for the right reason.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
because there are americans in the heartland who actually believe 9/11 on new york city is valid punishment for wickedness and decadence
which only proves that social conservatives are willing to repay mild sins with grave sins in their mind, and think that that somehow puts them on the side of justice or puts them in the good graces of God(tm) and his teachings
likewise, those who hate the usa: that 9/11 is somehow a valid resposne for american cold war crimes
if you believe any of these things about 9/11, you yourself are worse than all of the cold war american crimes/ decadence that you dislike when you look at the usa/ new york city
you don't beat someone by sinking to their level. plenty of people understand this when considering rendition, torture, guantanamo, the giving up of liberties and rights in the name of the war on terror, abu ghraib, etc. but plenty of those same people, in a blink of an eye, are also willing to rationalize 9/11 as somehow just deserves for cold war american crimes. which is, of course, sinking to the level of your enemy. which is, of course, something they are willing to howl about when talking about water boarding. which means such people's human conscience is SECONDARY to their hatred of the usa. which is more important? the search for justice? or hating the usa? get it right, then open your mouth.
america haters are sad and pathetic. america lovers are no better. but, you do not make yourself better than a blind lover and apologist of the usa by committing the same propagandistic crimes they do in reverse
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
is rewriting world war ii history in the name of anti-american propaganda something you condone or deplore? i don't understand your attitude on the subject matter
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I really don't know why we are against each other...
Or maybe you did not have family who was involved with what happened?
I don't know, but to hear a Philippine against a Japanese when I am saying that the the whole end to the WWII was senseless is absolutley insane./..?..
The whole beginning was senseless. You will please notice that I capitalized your country name.
If it wasn't for Koval, the US probably would have destroyed every country in the world by now several times over. Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) turned out to be a good policy after all...we are still here because MAD is still working.
They did not volunteer, they were drafted.
If you're going to comment on something like this as though your opinion should be considered, you'd better make sure you don't make an obvious and glaring mistake like that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_the_United_States#World_War_I_and_World_War_II
"Conscription was next used after the United States entered World War I in 1917. The first peacetime conscription came with the Selective Service Act of 1940, which established the Selective Service System as an independent agency. The duration of service was originally twelve months. It was expanded to eighteen months in 1941. When the United States entered World War II, service was required until six months after the end of the war."
Learn about the subject before you pretend to knowledge you obviously don't have.
I would argue the "Cold War" started with the Bolshevik revolution itself. However, the person above us who argued the "fact" the United States started the Cold War is confused. Deeply confused.
Actually, nothing got the United States more focused than the Soviet bomb. I submit that the United States would not have "started World War III" under those circumstances.
if you ask someone to choose from a range bad choices and ask them to pick the least bad choice, you cannot hold that person guilty for choosing a bad choice. they are all bad. you are saying that the usa made the prudent choice, but not the correct one. huh?
i'm going to put aside the obvious argument i could have with you about your depiction of the difference between prudent and correct. instead i'm going to say: how is your observation supposed to matter meaningfully in any way whatsoever to the reality of the situation?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
While nukes are scary, they ain't half as scary as they would have been if only one side had them. Would you have trusted the US as the only country with nuclear weapons?
It's worth noting that it would be far worse if the USSR was the sole nuclear power in the world. Any rational evaluation of the mass starvations and outright idealistic purges that mark communism can only conclude that it's wrong and evil.
Even today, 20 years after the fall of the wall, Ex-soviet bloc countries continue to pay the price of a soviet legacy.
"The United States is the source of all evil" passes for 'enlightenment' and 'educated' these days, but such a shallow stance doesn't hold up to any serious scrutiny.
"Wrong" exists. "Evil" exists. Both exist outside of and regardless of the United States. It's not nuanced, it's not sophisticated, but when you take a look at Pol Pot's killing fields, Mao's mass starvation or soviet gulags there is no other conclusion.
There is a tendancy in these comments to paint the Soviet Union as a cuddly, legitimate alternative to the 'nasty US capitilistic-imperialistic hegemon of doom.' Such a stance is utterly naive and either blind to history or indifferent to communism's millions of internal victims.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
That guy may be singlehandedly responsible for the cold war being exactly that - cold.
Cause... come on... why not drop a couple of them on those communist bastards. It isn't like they are people. I heard they don't even believe in god.
And that Stalin fellow... a brutal dictator if I ever saw one. Just look at that mustache. Do you know that in the beginning of the WWII he was palls with Hitler?
I say lets nuke 'em. We can't just sit around while Russian people suffer under the iron heel of communism. Let's bring them the gift of freedom.
Only we gotta be quick... before they build some of their own... They might even give some of them to Chinese.
And we KNOW that they are just NOT like us. Can you even tell them apart from those Japanese? I sure can't.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
you are saying american crimes were worse than japanese crimes in world war ii
justify that comment, or apologize and say you are wrong
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Remember the Connery's character? Captain Marko Ramius?
Would you call him a hero and his act (though imaginary) a great achievement?
Stealing an undetectable (super-silent nuclear sub) first strike weapon and running away with it to the enemy?
Or does the analogy only work if you steal from Russians?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
One can fuel a reactor with unrefined uranium if one uses heavy water as a moderator, but they were unable to get enough heavy water because some commandos blew up the Norsk Hydro heavy water plant in Norway, then when they were trying to ship their existing inventory to Germany, the commandos sunk the ship it was on. Their heroics were portrayed in the movie The Heroes of Telemark.
After the war, the Allies found a sub-critical heavy water reactor in Germany.
Saddam Hussein really was trying to build a bomb before the first Gulf War - arms inspectors found calutrons, as well as buried power cables going from power plants to the calutrons (they require prodigous amounts of electricity to power their electromagnets).
The arms inspectors also found copies of World War II-era US patents on improvements to Calutron technology. They had been declassified, you see.
I discuss these and other fun facts in my essay Kiss Your Sorry Ass Goodbye, The Atom Bomb Is Gonna Fly.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
one of the reasons the usa and the uk were victorious in wwii is that they had liberalized notions of how society should function as opposed to the autocratic ones in germany, japan, and the ussr (which eventually collapsed). that is, imperial japan, nazi germany, and communist russia were inherently weaker societies due to oppression and autocracy
what i am saying is the usa and the uk won not because of random luck, but because of their governmental structures and values, which were superior to their enemies
for example, you just said the usa and the uk did crimes in wwii, and they don't have to answer for it
and in fact, anyone in the usa and the uk can publicize and illustrate those crimes, and do so without fear of governmental punishment
you yourself feel comfortable criticizing the usa and the uk without fear of retribution
that means something
you would not feel comfortable right now criticizing the ussr/ germany/ japan if they had won wwii. because you would be punished by those autocratic regimes
and, in no small part, that difference is one of the reasons why the usa and the uk won the war: stronger, more stable societies
the usa and uk, unlike the ussr, germany, and japan allowed (and still allow, in spite of all the propaganda to the contrary) dissent
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
"US troops (who had volunteered to be used in such a fashion"
First, the US Troops were drafted.
But second, in a Democracy, it is expected that the military leaders will be competent enough, and be able to make the decision to win with the smallest cost to their own country.
Imagine after the war if the available weapons were not deployed to assure victory and significant American lives were lost because of a vague notion that we should not use the Atomic bomb, then those generals should have (and likely would have) been court martialed for gross negligence and incompetence. Truman might have been impeached, as he was not terribly popular.
You're ignoring the whole point of the Atomic bomb was *NOT as a MAD deterrent. That was later. The point of the Atomic bomb was about making a weapon to make the Germans and Japanese knuckle under. In fact as a MAD deterrent, the Atomic bomb wasn't particularly good, because it wasn't powerful enough. That's why the hydrogen bomb was developed; to make MAD a workable military strategy.
I think you forget how terrible war is! Worse, you forget that once started, it must be ended quickly by any means, civilian, diplomatic, military at your disposal.
so forgive me
i don't know how to not be angry at propaganda and not speak out at it. i envy your reticence on the question, you have a more placid life. but at the same time, i don't think i could live with myself with your attitude
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Only problem is... small, cheap subs are not big enough to land with an jet on and declare "Mission Accomplished".
They are kind of... smallish... and... cheapish. Who is going to make money making those for the military?
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
USA may have probably stated WW3 by that time.
Very unlikely, since the citizens were pretty anti-war back then. You might have noticed how long it took us to get into WW2, and what circumstance it took?
=
Given the way the Japanese fought in the Marianas, on Iwo Jima, and on and around Okinawa, I'd claim the US knew all too well what the Japanese were made of. Did you know that by far the bloodiest fight in the history of the US Navy was the invasion of Okinawa? From what? Kamikazi attacks. (Interesting aside: The fight in the seas around Okinawa was so vicious the US Navy has never forgotten the lessons it learned there about keeping damaged ships afloat. Remember the USS Samuel B. Roberts? It hit a mine in the Persian Gulf that was designed to sink a 300,000 ton supertanker. The 4,000-ton Roberts survived. Remember the USS Stark? She was hit by two Exocet missiles and survived - easily. The bigger HMS Sheffield was hit by one Exocet and sank. Why? The Brits forgot the lessons learned off Okinawa - they had ships there too - but they put crap like flammable wood paneling in their ships, and to save money put all the fire pumps in one compartment. Guess where the missile hit...)
The nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki gave the Japanese a way to end the war without shame. And people don't realize it, but any claim made about how many casualties the Japanese suffered from non-nuclear attacks in order to try to explain why the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not needed actually strengthens the case for dropping the bombs.
Why?
Because the Japanese had been suffering those casualties for over a year by the summer of 1945 and hadn't surrendered. Add in the fact that Germany had suffered similar bombings and hadn't surrendered (Germany literally had to be almost entirely overrun by the combined armies of the USSR, US, and Great Britain), and it's easy to see why it would have been shameful to the Japanese warrior mentality to give up when they could still fight, even though that fighting would have been terribly bloody. The Germans hadn't stopped just because the war looked lost.
But nuclear weapons were something new. Nobody had ever faced that before.
The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki gave the Japanese a face-saving way out of the war. And even then, it took all the prestige of a deified Emperor to enforce that decision.
The Soviets understood what to do - they were missing the engineering of how to do it. Similarly while the Rosenbergs go down in history as the greatest traitors, even the Soviets admit that their information sped up the development of the H Bomb by less than 2 years. Sakharov came at the problem from a completely different direction than Teller-Ulam and essentially invented a brand new branch of nuclear physics on his own.
i kiss you!
well said, you win this thread
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
"Would you have trusted the US as the only country with nuclear weapons?"
For several years, the United States WAS the only country with nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. The United States under had the means to directly dominate the entire world. It refrained from doing so.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
you find yourself in the uncomfortable position of defending your point of view with a hypothetical, contrary to what actually happened
another example: the ussr lost the cold war, for the same reasons i elucidated above
you believe "might makes right"
which is an empty, hollow, kneejerk way to view history
i ask you consider the contrary: "right makes might"
that is, a liberal society is intrinsically stronger than an illiberal one, and is better equipped to win wars
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I am saying that the the whole end to the WWII was senseless is absolutley insane./..?..
Here's a hint, don't attack American first and stuff like that won't happen.
Calling you an stupid fucking ignorant jackass would be an insult to all animals with hooves.
You're nothing but a semi-alive argument for retroactive birth control.
If you had the balls to say that to my face, I'd break your jaw and knock out half your teeth - and I'm deadly serious about that.
You may be eaten by a GRU.
(Seriously, did no one else think that?)
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Not rocket scientists - I'm pretty sure the USA bagged all of them before the USSR could.
a pro-american viewpoint on wwii: wrong (btw, that's not me)
an anti-american viewpoint on wwii: wrong
a neutral viewpoint on wwii: my opinion
sometimes, this viewpoint agrees with what the usa did. sometimes, it does not. during the times in which a neutral point of view winds up agreeing with an american point of view, why do you think therefore that the neutral point of view is no different than a jingoistic pro-american's point of view?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
After all, for some people's Point of View, America IS as bad as Nazi Germany, so falls into the "or the equivalent" proviso.
There's a nuance? He was a US citizen, wasn't he? Traitor.
C//
And yet I'm still comfortable saying that America is engaging in evil now, has before, and will again, all the while acknowledging that they aren't the sole source of this. I'm aware of the problems of my own country, too. But saying "we're the nicest country around when it comes to committing atrocities" still seems like a weak defense to me.
Then there must be something wrong. Truth isn't comfortable. Frankly, the "weak defense" sounds adequate to me. Both the UK and France had nuclear weapons, so there was a counterbalance.He took intellectual property. I thought on Slashdot that wasn't considered theft?
The counterrevolutionary destruction of the Soviet Union was a world-historic defeat for the proletariat.
Commies don't invent, they steal.
captcha? mimicked I say, stole.
but social conservatives are evil
given the choice, i'd rather be stupid than evil
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I'm glad someone else mentioned this. Some people seem to think that all we (nerds, geeks, whatever you call yourself) can possibly be interested in is science news. This is news for nerds, not science news for nerds, not space news for nerds, but all news. Certainly science and related fields are what we primarily expect to see, but I get tired of the !news tags accompanying all sorts of stories just because someone wasn't interested in it. I agree that some are very fluff-a-licious or are more advertising than news, but just like most news outlets have fluff pieces to break up the monotony, I don't mind a change of pace.
I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
Yes.
Or let me guess, the American spies are heroes and anti-American spies are traitors and thieves?
Of course.
Of course, because we are "God's" country and we are special.
You got that damn straight.
I just DESTROYED you. You got OWNED BITCH!!!!
Dumbass.
What?
you are commanding the allied forces as you approach the japanese mainland, worrying about the human costs of the invasion. someone alerts you to the potential of the atomic bomb
what do you decide?
your decision may be in line with what the americans did. maybe it isn't but agreeing with the americans in this particular instance is possible as a nonamerican, is possible from a neutral point of view
another scenario: you command the usa in 2003. you dislike saddam hussein. do you invade iraq?
if you arrive at a decision not to invade, consider your neutral point of view to be different than an american point of view in this instance
this little mental exercise of course starts with the assumption that you yourself are not a mindless propagandized anti-american to begin with
the whole point is, sometimes the americans do right, sometimes the americans do wrong. a neutral point of view understands this
a propagandized anti-american always says the americans did wrong, even when they did something right
a propagandized pro-american always says the americans did right, even when they did something wrong
the whole point is, just because you happen to agree with what the americans did in wwii in regards to japan, does not mean you are automaticlaly a pro-american brainwashed idiot
get it?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
what, what, what, whaaat???? The country that started the US-Japan theater was responsible for the deaths' of Japanese civilians. That would be Japan. I can't believe I have to put it this way, but remember Pearl Harbor?
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Thank you, Sir.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Any rational evaluation of the mass starvations and outright idealistic purges that mark communism can only conclude that it's wrong and evil.
So the only possible explanation for these atrocities is the political-economic system in use at the time, and has nothing to do with other factors, such as the people actually in charge of said system? Sounds really rational to me.
Wrong exists. Evil exists. Both existed and still exist outside and regardless of the then Soviet Union.
Why do you feel it necessary to somehow compare the US and the SU, instead of, rationally as you claim, consider each as a separate entity under different circumstances?
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
"I never said that might makes right...
Might allows you to dictate what people perceive as being the truth."
uh, what?
you just contradicted yourself directly in two sentences
the whole point of socially liberal societies is that YOU decide what the truth is, and are free to say whatever you want on the issue. not simply the military organization that wins all the battles
meanwhile, when you say the victor decides the truth after a war, you ARE saying might makes right. EXACTLY THE SAME THING
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
You are wrong. He was a traitor. There is no nuance. The CIA recruited traitors in Russia too. The people they recruited committed acts of treason, and in some cases paid the price for it. No reason to sweep this under the rug.
It had very few, not out of principle, but for the simple reason that the USA took most of them.
I'm not from America and I agree with the grandparent. So your "only american citizens believe that, I wonder why" straw man fails HA! :p
Honoring someone who's greatest feat in life is stealing another country's technology and betraying the people he lived with, served, played ball with & studied with? That is one strange concept of 'pride.'
Our own history textbooks seem to honor (or at least mention without condemnation) US industrial spies who stole manufacturing secrets from the British early in our nation's history, sparking our industrial revolution.
Table-ized A.I.
So the only possible explanation for these atrocities is the political-economic system in use at the time, and has nothing to do with other factors, such as the people actually in charge of said system? Sounds really rational to me.
Show me the national implementation of communism that hasn't involved the deaths of millions.
"The right people haven't been in charge yet." is the oldest excuse out there. How many more millions have to be murdered or starved to find the right people?
The communist philosophy is inherently flawed. This is demonstrated by the mass murder that accompanies every attempt to implement it.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
But saying "we're the nicest country around when it comes to committing atrocities" still seems like a weak defense to me.
I made no such statement on purpose. I spoke not of the actual goodness or evilness of the United States.
My aim was and is to remind people that the communist expirement is evil and wrong. These comments are dripping with moral relativism, multicultural mush, the abandonment of rational judgement and ignorance of communist attrocities.
All of these factors typically come with reflexive anti-americanism, so the USA must be mentioned in passing- but it is hardly my focus.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
> When you're an English-speaking, baseball-playing, corn-on-the cab chewing, native-Iowan, those young Prussian female recruiting babes, I mean 'agents', are pretty hard to resist.
I admit, I've never had corn-on-the-cab? I've eaten it off the cob many a time, but why would you eat corn on a cab? And who even takes cabs, save maybe to the airport? But even then, it's easier just to drive to Cedar Rapids, Des Moines, Davenport, Sioux City or wherever and use the long term parking. In all the time I lived in Iowa, I don't think I ever took a cab, so am I missing something here?
neutrality doesn't consider the philosophical and political attitude and agendas of various organizations?
so neutrality has no judgment on a japanese regime that was outwardly imperialistic, ultranationalist and racist?
it's all the same to the american regime- whatever the americna regime stood for?
so you think neutrality is morally inert?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Of course, there is always the question of whether Koval, a Communist, would have spied for Russia, vs. the Soviet Union, but that is Putin's to handle.
Let me first say that I am not disagreeing with you, but I want to offer a surprising observation I have made in the past few years.
My wife is Vietnamese and I interact with some people from Viet Nam regularly. The most astonishing thing I have ever learned about the “American War” is the near absence of animosity that is today held by the Vietnamese towards the United States for our military action there. This is in stark contrast to my own discontent with US behavior and involvement. To paraphrase my wife: people there simply recognize that brutality is inescapable in armed conflict.
This is in no way meant to justify or belittle the grotesque violence that ensues from war. Like any sane person, I hate war and firmly oppose it unless it is brought to us and we have no other choice. In addition, if we are to engage in armed conflict, I hold my country to the highest of all standards in its conduct, and remain disgusted by the use of napalm or other weaponized horrors. That being said, my point is simply that the typical Vietnamese does not single us out as an egregious violator of humanism and compassion. And after decades of occupation by foreign powers, our brief participation marked the beginning of their independence.
Why bother.
Someone forgot to give Japan the memo
Well then I take back any disparaging remarks directed at you, and we'll skip the discussion on the differences between communism and Marxist dictatorships, and economics vs. politics. It just gets uglier when that stuff starts.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
So long as you're comfortable with your country committing atrocities because they could be worse. Yet another reason why I laugh when the US decides to play police officer of the world. And yes, that's a nervous laugh, because I don't know what idiotic thing they're going to do to follow up when they actually do something right.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
The only reason that I dislike this move is because it is such a transparent bit of Nationalism and America bashing. I'm sure the only Russian's who care much are the Russian equivalent of Fox New watchers (i.e. moronic xenophobes and other cretins).
He's a spy (and a miserable one), what do you expect from him?
Yeah! And then, how long it took us to get involved in Korea! ... oh, wait.
"A liberal society gives people the impression they know what's going on"
if you honestly believe that, you are low iq, a paranoid schizophrenic, or some combination of the two
adios moron
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
...flew right over your head, I guess :)
:)
Let me s'plain...
It may sound like 'cob' (as in 'cost') to you when you or your Iowan native family/friends say it, but to West-coasters like me, it sounds like 'cab' (as in 'cat')
rockets, missiles
MIG and SU fighters
For several years, the United States WAS the only country with nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. The United States under had the means to directly dominate the entire world. It refrained from doing so.
"Several" meaning "four" (1945 to 1949). "It" meaning "Harry".
The four years were entirely within the administration of one president. Also, four years during which America was not yet at war again -- it would be another year after the Russians tested Joe-1 that Americans and Soviets were facing off in Korea.
So maybe a better question to ask would be:
"Would you have trusted the US as the only country with nuclear weapons during the Korean and Vietnam Wars?"
Did you read the article? He was was a USSR citizen along with his parents when he was recruited by GRU.
Would you call a hammer a first strike weapon?
Is a rifle a first strike weapon? Mind you, it will be used to shoot you, not club you on the head.
A silent, quick, undetectable launch platform that can be deployed inside enemies coastal area without him detecting it?
SLBMs sure as hell are not for "home protection". Its a "get them before they get you and still have a reserve"-weapon.
And FYI I did read the book. Found it boring as hell, but made through it somehow.
And while HfRO is fiction, USA, UK and France all have pump-jet driven submarines. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrojet
And all of them can carry and fire nukes.
Russians may not have pump-jet subs, but they sure do have subs equipped with SLBMs.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_Intervention_in_the_Russian_Civil_War
I agree
These days, after Vietnam and Iraq the US is seen in an entire different light. Probabely for good reason.
But back then, the world was different. Except for the Philippines and maybe some Mexican stuff the US had a clean slate. And they had just helped free the world from the Japanese and German armies. Stalin OTOH is now seen being about on par with Hitler when it comes to "evilness".
You have to see things in a historical perspective. And in this light he looks like a spy for the evil empire. But then again you also have to take into account that there was no free press in Russia and no Internet. Maybe he believed the FUD they fed him. I wouldn't judge him so quickly. But I also wouldn't call him a hero.
After it was clear that the Americans tilted the tide of the war, basically, the Americans and Russians were allied in name only. Prior to Germany attacking Russia, if you recall, Russia signed a non-agression pact with GERMANY in which they agreed to split up poland and the baltics. Of course that all fell apart when Germany finally turned and attacked Russia. If you look at the politics on the division of Berlin at the end of the War in Europe it's pretty clear nobody in the Allied front trusted Russia very much.
If you look at the Pacific Theater, you can see this mistrust in Russia in how quickly America tried to end the war with Japan with the A-bomb before Russia could come in and "help" and thus claim their occupied territory after the war.
It's pretty clear that the last few years of WWII were really just a prelude to the cold war and blind hate of communism isn't really the whole story (although it was no doubt some part of it). The Russia was dealing from both sides of the deck and got burned. Was america supposed to trust them?
Even the Communists in Russia took great issue with the anti-aggression pact with Germany. Communism is really just a convenient simplification that some cereal box readers make.
This kind of mindless rhetorical "The US hated the USSR, so the cold war was justified" crap is tragic in the extreme. We had a 4 year window to get rid of nuclear weapons. That window closed when the USSR blockaded Berlin, and refused International control... and the rest of mankind has suffered ever since.
He was recruited by GRU when he was living in USSR. His parents were Russian Jews who lived for some time in US and then returned to Russia. It's good sometimes to read the article before commenting it.
Someone mod Putin -1 for flaming.
But you have to remember something. The way the US treated the political class of both Britain and France after world war two, your two best buddies in the whole wide world at the time, directly resulted in them developing independent nuclear deterrents.
Even you have to admit that insulting the British foreign minister to the point where a generally anti-nuclear democratic socialist cabinet will spend a significant portion of a wreaked economy by going for the bomb takes some doing.
ok, a homework for you.
You are a reasonably ordinary country enjoying an interestingly efficient industrial revolution in a quite remote spot of the world with none directly worth invading. And you have an A-Bomb that has not been tested, demonstrated or exactly understood in the world at the time. How can you, exactly, 'directly' dominate the world?
Oh, and actually USA did not refrained from anything - remember that little Japanese incident? That about represent the max use that bomb could have had then - and conveniently set up the world to realize what exactly it is. A demonstration. Apart from that - there were no means, no troops, no way to actually dominate the world. Just look at the past USA attempts at 'dominating' something (fyi: track record is not in favor of USA and just about to become even worse)
your only are awarded posthumously
Well in this case, it all depends on which country we consider was that man's.
;)
It is clear this guy was really a Russian. For once the background on wiki is important.
His dad only problem with the commies was their atheism. He moved to the US out of necessity, and return to Russia as soon as possible, despite great success in the US (started his own business and bought a house in less than a year, thats "The American Dream").
His mom was a 'true commie' enrolled in the socialist party at the factory she worked since she was 10. Thats the hard core Russian communism brainwashing.
So despite him being born in the US he was certainly educated with his parents values. Just look at Italians, despite several generations and their great "American based sucess" their attachment to Itally stays incredible, more IMHO than any other community outside their country.
In any case, I would trust the 1960 American Democracy with nukes monopolie more than any other country, except perhaps Canada
--
make install -not war
It refrained from doing so.
So what? One or two presidents were either smart enough or lacked the motivation to use them or both. How long do you really think that would have kept up? How long before we had a dim bulb in power with an enemy to provoke him? We'd have never lasted until now, without using them.
Remember, the US was involved in several wars after WW2, and one the the big reasons it refrained from using nukes, or even fully committing to those wars for that matter was the threat of nuclear retaliation from the USSR if they pushed too hard.
There were posts above the 'first post?' modded troll(?)
Now they are gone.
Engage tinfoil hat. Set post to flame.
Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
It seems my understanding was skewed. Unfortunately, I hit the submit button before getting proper vetting on that comment. My wife weighed in with these comments after the fact: “I'd agree with ‘most people just treat it as the past’, not that ‘understand that both sides suffer casualties in war’. This was a war imposed upon us; we didn't look for it or ask for it. We will never forget or forgive I think, but we understand there's no point to play the blame game here.”
Why bother.
For several years, the United States WAS the only country with nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. The United States under had the means to directly dominate the entire world. It refrained from doing so.
According to the Quebec Agreement, the USA was bound to not use them without the consent of Canada and the United Kingdom.
That also means that Canada and the UK were just as guilty as the USA for the bombing of Japan.
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
As the GP said, the A-Bombs probably saved more Japanese lives than they killed (considering the alternative was a land invasion).
Although there was a plan for an invasion, the fact is that it was not the only alternative, and in fact was not the most seriously considered alternatives. The choices on the table were:
1) Drop atom bombs on targets on the Japanese mainland.
2) Detonate atom bombs off the shore as a demonstration of the bomb's power.
3) Accept a conditional surrender offered by the Japanese.
4) Wait for Russia to enter the war against Japan, which it was strongly believed would compel Japan to surrender.
5) Land invasion by Allied forces.
1 is what we actually did.
2 has the most obvious practical/tactical problems. While you can show someone a blast like they or precious few others have ever seen, and tell them that this can level a city, they might not really believe it and then there aren't any bombs left to carry out the threat. Actually annihilate a city, and you've made your point in an undeniable fashion. Plus it makes no sense to waste such an expensive weapon.
3 is very interesting. There was actually a point not long before the bombing where the Japanese did offer a conditional surrender. While there was little in the way of engagement from our side to determine exactly what that meant, their primary request appeared to be to maintain a role for their emperor. Now we were against conditional surrender for a variety of reasons, such as it not seeming an appropriate end to the war they started, and we certainly didn't want the emperor to maintain power and be able to continue the imperialistic tradition. What it seems they really wanted, though, was more of a face-saving gesture for the nation in the form of maintaining the Emperor as a symbolic and ceremonial leader. What I find especially interesting about this option is that, ultimately, this is what General McArthur gave them.
The problem from 4 from the position of Truman's cabinet had nothing to do with Japan who they were sure would surrender as soon as the Russian army was fully brought to bear in addition to the other Allies. The problem was that this would necessarily entail Japan surrendering in part to Russia, and we didn't want Russia to have any say in the matter. Already we were maneuvering against our so-called Ally. The Cold War began before WWII ended.
5, the land invasion, was actually considered behind these other options for the very reason that it was going to be so costly and do little more than leave the nation of Japan in ruins. There was of course a plan established just like there is for any military eventuality, but Truman strongly disfavored this over every other choice.
There are some really good links out there that I should dredge up that includes statements from Truman and his cabinet members regarding these things; it's really fascinating.
Also let me point out that it is not my belief that the choice to use the bomb was "wrong". For one I would not ever want to put myself in Truman's shoes, and for two what we did had some strategic advantages, including one they probably never considered which is that we now live in a world in which the actual use of nukes against cities is not just a theory but actual history, so we're all much more aware of the real consequences of using nukes than we would have been otherwise.
The only thing I really object to is the way the decision is sold by saying "our only other option was a land invasion that would have killed so many more!". This allows us to apply a simple moral calculus to the decision and assure ourselves that we were morally correct when the situation and the decision were much more complex than that.
The enemies of Democracy are
I seem to have forgotten what this discussion was about...
"...Sleep comes like a drug in God's country Sad eyes, crooked crosses in God's country..."
It just demonstrates that US citizens make better quality Russians that Russia does...go figure.
That isn't correct. The US bagged the best of them but both programs were based on German scientists. The Russian approach was different: they split up the scientists, got them working with groups of Russian scientists to pick their brains. Once they knew all they needed to know, the dropped with the Germans.
meh
Politkovskaya had spent most of her career in helping the victims of horrific human-rights abuses. She was their only voice in an icy land of indifference. Commenting on the murder of Politkovskaya, Putin insulted her, "The level of her influence on political life in Russia was utterly insignificant."
By contrast, Koval helped the Soviet Union to develop weapons of mass destruction. They included nuclear weapons that can incinerate millions of victims within seconds. Commenting on his death, Putin heaps lavish praise and posthumously gives him the "Hero of Russia" medal, the highest Russian award.
I am almost at a loss for words to describe my utter disgust at the Kremlin.
Show me the national implementation of capitalism that hasn't involved the deaths of millions. The capitalist philosophy is inherently flawed. This is demonstrated by the mass murder that accompanies every attempt to implement it.
Dungeon Tactics : Free Open Source SRPG
Hundreds of thousands of German civilians died in other carpet-bombing attacks. Overall if you add up the deaths due to "strategic bombing" during the two theatres of WWII, the estimate ranges come out fairly similar--in the range of 300,000 to 600,000 deaths per theatre. That includes the two atomic bombs in Japan. Yet, the firebombing of Germany does not draw nearly the focus of attention that the nuclear bombs due. I believe that is a form of hindsight bias--nuclear weapons went on to define fear for the next 60 years, while firebombs did not.
In comparison, the Holocaust alone resulted in the deaths of 5 million non-combatant citizens, an order of magnitude greater than the deaths due to strategic bombing. In the Pacific theatre the deaths of Chinese citizens alone numbered into the millions, although I don't have the estimates off hand.
The number that always stuck with me was that Russia is estimated to have sustained about 25 million (!) deaths during WWII.
The nuclear attacks were horrible and I hope such a thing never happens again. As an American I will do my part to ensure that is true. But they are only one of many aspects of mass killing during WWII, that we should all hope to prevent in the future.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
hey even with Internet most Russian believe US is evil and many that Soviet Union was good
Marxism: The opiate of the intelligentsia.
Please, do point out where anyone claiming to be progressive advocates rape, murder, and torture. This is classic psychological projection.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Killing civilians indiscriminately will never be right. Never.
This kinda reminds of the "Rockies". Going into the world series, they were god's team. God was on their side
Then god pissed all over them. I guess s/he wasn't on their side after all. In fact, it looked like he didn't side with self righteous christian assholes much at all. Maybe s/he favors the undeclared and the atheists?
I awlays thought Dr.Klaus Fuchs was the main spy who did it.
You're not willing to stand up for yourself.
Or anyone else.
Because you will automatically lose if you're not willing to fight against someone willing to kill you.
Your dead. Your family is dead. Your way of life is dead.
Your smug moral superiority is useless.
One also wonders why you seem only to be concerned about civilian casualties caused by US actions...
And one wonders why you're so dismissive of the civilians the Japanese killed and were killing. Like what they did to Nanking, what they were doing to women kidnapped from Korea and forced into prostitution, or the horrors perpetrated by Unit 731 on Chinese and other civilians.
So take your concern for the civilians killed at Hiroshima and Nagasaki and compare it to just that.
Never mind how many Japanese civilians would have been killed in a invasion of Japan itself, and invasion that would have happened if the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki hadn't given them a way to surrender without loss of honor.
Er, no.
Yes, we had the technology earlier than everyone else, but we did not have effective global delivery systems, nor did we have very many. To "dominate the entire world" we would have needed a HUGE standing army (preferably one that had not just been in a war) and many more weapons. At that point it would have been an almost entirely conventional war with much of the world opposing us. We would have lost. Badly.
So no, we did not have the means.
It's telling your response is to deflect the coversation away from communism. Scientoligists do the same thing when their religion is under attack, and now that I'm attacking your religion, you do the same.
Pathetic.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Back then, the world was indeed different...
Please read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket
Written by Smedley Darlington Butler (July 30, 1881 - June 21, 1940), nicknamed "The Fighting Quaker" and "Old Gimlet Eye," he was a Major General in the U.S. Marine Corps and, at the time of his death, the most decorated Marine in U.S. history. He was involved in US wars with The Boxer Rebellion (china), Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, and world World War I. He also infiltrated and stopped a US grown fascist plot to overthrow the government:
http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/53/Plot1.html
Not disagreeing with your premise that there was evil in the world, but there was plenty of it in the USA too. The brave people with enough good sense to stand up to it was the redeeming factor of that era, sorely lacking today.
Joseph Stalin, the most proficient genocidaire ever.
1. Stalin didn't highscore the execution stakes, Mao did. Stalin only got silver, and Onkel Adolf bronze.
2. It is a falsehood to describe Stalin as a "genocidaire." While some of Stalin's victims suffered because of their race, most suffered because of the class (eg. the Kulaks) or because of political expediency and paranoia (overwhelmingly fellow party members). Clearly Hitler (despite the lower number of overall kills) was the most proficient genocidaire ever.
Now had you called Stalin "the most proficient killer of communists ever" you would have been quite accurate.
"Are you sure you meant Prussian?
:)
Again, specifically 'Eastern' Prussia [details above]... when I think of 'prussian', I tend to think back to 'eastern prussian', sorry to confuse you
> So what?
Hmm. You probably miss the point. It means that the spy in question is not some kind of savior of the world how some slashdotters are suggesting since he didn't even prevent the U.S. from being the sole steward of atomic bombs. The fact that we did not continue this dominance is irrelevant since at that time we had the power to assert that we would be the only ones with this power, but we chose not to. That's the point.
> How long do you really think that would have kept up?
It wouldn't (or more accurately didn't) hold up at all because we chose not to enforce U.S. dominance using atomic weapons, the cost of which would have meant much bloodshed.
> Remember, the US was involved in several wars after WW2, and one the the big reasons it
> refrained from using nukes, or even fully committing to those wars for that matter was
> the threat of nuclear retaliation from the USSR if they pushed too hard.
Again, this is a power the USSR had only because the U.S. let atomic bombs exist in other countries rather than blowing them up and preserving U.S. dominance; it has much less to do with Soviet spies. The point is, we had atomic dominance for years and _chose_ not to use these weapons to retain that dominance. It's interesting that many people will not enjoy considering this since liberal education in most of our public schools has ironically become predominantly anti-American, but it's true..
This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
Many whites are afraid to talk about the results from the most recent Jewish genetic trace because the moment they open their mouth they would be criticized by the Jews as anti-semite. But there are studies that are serious academically. The Muslims have been focused on proving the modern day Jews are not ancient Jews, and there are Jews that tried to prove the opposite is true. The latest studies seem make matter even more
complicated.
Latest studies seem to put the modern day Jews a mix of Khazars, Turks, Kurds, Armenians, and Syrians. Many studies have concluded that the many modern day middle eastern Jews(Jews that lived in Palestine) have genes that are similar to the Arabs and Palestian. Some modern day Jews are also close to Yemenites. Jews, as the current studies implicated, are a mix of everything around the Kurds.
The stuides are unable to establish the modern day Jews have any
correlation to the ancient Isrealites. The reason is that we do not have reference samples of ancient day Israelites. A few earlier studies did conclude the Jews have correlation with ancient Jews but all these studies were not based on comparison of the gene of ancient Jews because there is simply no reference samples available for the comparison.
These gene studies have turned into a fiasco. Because of the sensitive nature of the results, concerned parties would try to spin the results for their own politcal advantages.
As an Asian, I have always wonder how can red and blonde hair Jews come from a small area that is surrounded by Arabs, Lebanese, and Palestians.
In 2000, a BBC special reported that the mitochrondria-genes from the European Jew could be traced back to four women in Europe. Some Jews concluded that these four European women were from modern day Israel. Their conclusion seems to be stretched and based on very weak reasons.
I personally found that the lastest stuides, by scentists including Jews, are most believable. The modern day Jews are actually decendent from the tribes around Khazar, Turkey, Kurds, and Syrian.
The real Jews, in my opinion, have already fused with the Palestians, the Arabs, the Lebanese, and the Syrians.
Therefore, if this is true, the Arabs should forget about hating Jews for real Jewish blood could be flowing in their vein.
The Christian circles in USA are gradually accepting these studies.
Therefore, anti zionism could be based on scientific facts. The European Jews really should not build a homeland in Isreal. If they wish to build a homeland, they should build it in the region between Khazarstan, Turkey, Armenia, and Kurdistan, which, turns out to be in Russia.
So the modern day Jews could be Russian too.
"For several years, the United States WAS the only country with nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. The United States under had the means to directly dominate the entire world. It refrained from doing so."
And for those 4 years (Soviets had them in 1949), the number of devices they had were few, and the yeild was quite small. This combined with the fact that their military might had been worn down by WW2, means that the US was not in a position to launch an offensive. The bombs they had were nothing more than a deterrent.
If you were project the same scenerio onto a 1950s America, I wouldn't be betting on Nagasaki being the last use of a nuclear weapon in anger.
who knew there were so many racists who read slashdot? eye-opener to be sure.
p.s. there never would have been an invasion - because the japanese were trying to surrender. anyone who doesn't know that needs to have their citizenship revoked.
Again, this is a power the USSR had only because the U.S. let atomic bombs exist in other countries rather than blowing them up and preserving U.S. dominance; it has much less to do with Soviet spies. The point is, we had atomic dominance for years and _chose_ not to use these weapons to retain that dominance.
... kaboom. With M-A-D all but the a complete lunatic would be held in check.
No, I understand that, but it only "chose" not to use those weapons and allow the the weapons to spread for a short while. After that it was too late. And whether or not you give credit to a russian spy or the first couple post WW2 US presidents makes no difference to me.
The important thing is that the weapons spread, because there is no way the US would have continued to -choose- not to use them indefinately. Sooner or later we'd have elected an aggressive war mongering president, and
It's interesting that many people will not enjoy considering this since liberal education in most of our public schools has ironically become predominantly anti-American, but it's true..
If Russian wants to celebrate the spy who brought them nuclear weapons. Why not? So its a half truth or less at best.
America celebrates the first "discovery" by a white guy on behalf of a european superpower, despite America being visited by Asians, Vikings, and even Portuguese fishermen prior to Columbus' discovery of the bahamas. Never mind that columbus was an immoral greedy racist mass murdering rapist who used torture routinely. Even by the standards of the day he was pretty vile.
But history loves heroes. America is full of them, and most of them don't deserve the accolades heaped upon them. From Columbus onwards.
It doesn't matter who we celebrate for spreading nukes, what matters is that they got spread.
You continually gloss over events like Unit 731, but harp on America's ills.
I hate to pull the redneck card, but GTFO.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
You got a +5, insightful for this rubbish? WTF are the mods smoking and can I have some?
The US started the cold war? That's funny. I always thought Stalin started it when he refused to honor the agreements he made at Yalta and Tehran and effectively annexed Eastern Europe. Go read about the Berlin blockade. Or the Soviet pause during the Warsaw Uprising. In fact, go ask somebody from Poland (or Eastern Europe as a whole) who they think started the Cold War. Or maybe somebody from South Korea, because it was Stalin that gave Kim Il Sung the green-light for the invasion of the South.
Both sides share measure of blame for the distrust that followed WW2. This distrust set the stage for the Cold War. But you can't deny the fact that if Stalin had allowed the people of Eastern Europe to pick their own destiny (as he promised at Yalta and the other conferences) the Cold War probably doesn't happen.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
The Germans had an A-bomb project, and I think the Japanese had one... Didn't the Russians have their own, or were they waiting for the spies to report back...?
True, but just because Truman refrained doesn't mean that succeeding administrations would.
This happens all the time. One side will see the person/group as traitors, spies, terrorists, ...etc. The other side will see you as a hero, role model, ...etc.
...
The same happened in the Lavon Affair, where bombings were conducted in Cairo by Egyptian Jews at the instigation of the government of Israel to destabilize Nasser's hard line regime. One surgeon, Moshe Marzouk was found to be a spy and a terrorist, and was executed by hanging. After half a century of denial, Israel honored the perpetrators as heroes.
The affair left a lasting legacy of conspiracy theories as a precedent
Compare and contrast with other cases in other places, and more recent times.
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
Odd by the way that a lot of americans seem to condemn hailing this guy as a hero, when their own space program was built upon a nazi war criminal. Russian spy vs nazi, oh yeah the ruskies are the baddies alright. Working people to their death vs taking a dangerous mission to protect your home country.
Um, the Soviets worked people to death, too.
Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
Concur. Go, Garry Kasparov!
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Request your free CD of my piano music.