With all due respect, you are wrong here. While there was a number of American's who beleived that they would have to fight the soviets soon, the vast majority of thinking was that the Soviets could be worked with like WW2. It wasn't until Stalin closed off Berlin (well after the war) that things started to go downhill.
The US and it's allies offered to share atomic power under strict guidelines. This would have been a impressive gift, had Stalin not already stolen the plans.
Actually, there are a ton of Iraqi's who say just exactly that. She is also in a extreme Minority of english speaking bloggers. Check out Iraq the model.
Because even complete destruction of two cities plus the firebombing of Tokyo plus the majority destruction of almost every other city was not enough to convience most of the leadership to surrender. Even after Hirohito overruled the cabinet and forced a surrender he was almost deposed.
Don't put a 2005 mentality on it. Look at the actual historical record. These guys were already convienced that they were going to die, and it was going to be honarable and glorious.
First of all, American's always demand unconditional surrender. It's been that way since the Civil War, and is neccessary to ensure political control at war's end. Second, even though American's publically demanded it, they did not privatly demand it. Hence the emperor stayed on after Japan's defeat.
BTW, the conditions that a _minority position_ in the Japanese government were asking for prior to the atomic bombings included keeping China. That's not surrender.
As for the atomic bombs, the alternative war plans are now public information, so I suggest that you educate yourself. Troops were already being transitioned to the pacific for the "big jump" on Japan.
There internal projections were for anything from 300,000 to 1 millon American casulties in such a invasion. Using the european ratio of 3:1 casulties between armies that translates to a millon to 3 millon Japanese dead. This view is massivly pollyanna. During the pacific island hopping phases they had seen almost 100% civilian and millitary casulties. The Japanese forced their own populations to commit suicide rather then surrender to the Americans on the islands) and less then 1% of the japanese forces surrendered.
Now imagine what it would be like if we actually invaded their homes.
This is why the Navy was calling for another starvation blockade rather then a invasion. Macarthur was pushing for a invasion, and it would have left both Japan and the United States devistated.
How could you not use the bomb knowing only what they knew then? How could you use the bomb know knowing what we know now? It's a horrible paradox.
I have no idea where you are getting your information from, but it's wrong. London was still getting blitzed by V-1 and V-2's during the Dresden raid. More to the point, Brits were still dying by troops moved on that rail, or they would not have hit it.
You have to remember that a huge chunk of the civilian leadership was in the millitary at this point. While certain people (ie, MacArthur) clearly were a few shots short of a clip, the major decisions in the war (and in fact, in ever war in American history) were pretty much made by the civilian leadership then implemented by the millitary. Note the pacific first doctrine, washington's correspondence with the CC, etc.
Nagasaki was not a civillian target. It was home to both millitary units, and a large portion of the industrial complex that drove the Japanese navy.
(BTW, that is something the article also got wrong. The reason that Nagasaki was relativly untouched prior to the atomic bombing was not because the American B-29's were inept, it was because they knew that the atomic bomb was coming and left two such cities pretty much untouched).
MacArthur btw is not a particullar good person to hang around in general. He had a facination with the atomic weapons (he was one of the last to be let in on that little secret) and was the only general in history to open fire on American civillian while not in a time of war. That he overreacted is not a surprise.
I'm sorry this is a urban legend. There were elements of the Japanese government that were trying to surrender, as they were not so inclined to go down with the island, but that did not include anyone in the central ring of power.
Disorganization marked most of Japan's governmental affairs from 1933-1945. This was also one of them.
Even after the Emperor had finally woken up to the suicidal nature of the war, once he decided to surrender after both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he was almost replaced in a coup.
These people did not want to surrender, and only another starvation blockade (if you don't know what that is, go look it up) would have stopped them.
You think Microsoft would have learned after the games they played with Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and DR. DOS. This will not make the anti-trust crowd any happier, and just serves to tick off the opponents of Microsoft more.
Microsoft is essentially creating a market for Linux by doing this. It's all about standardization and if companies have to purchase two different versions of Linux to use their hardware, they are going to look hard at the decision before doing so.
The platitude that victors write the history books is obnoxious in almost every case it is used. It discounts the fact that we have historians whose job it is to find the truth and learn from it. Contrary to the so-called revisionists, History occurred exactly one way. You can debate the meaning, debate the motives, but you can't debate the event if enough documentation exists.
Okay, let's play. Richard J Evan's "The Coming of The Third Reich" is one of the best and most contemporary works on this subject. He tracks Marius van der Lubbe thru the anarchist stage and into his communistic indoctrination. He had already been convicted several times of vandalism and had tried to burn down the Welfare office, the palace and the district town hall before the Reichstag. He bought the tools needed to lite the building earlier in the morning. We also have a good account him trying to light many many other things on fire before the curtains in the main chamber. He confessed to it when he was caught.
Was there a conspiracy? No serious evidence has ever surfaced to him being in the service. For that matter, while the Communists had tried several times to overthrow the government, van der Lubbe was clearly a lone arsonist. Remember that Anarchists also triggered the start of WWI and had bombed wall street during the previous thirty years. They caused trouble wherever they went.
Finally you must bear in mind that Weimar was fatally damaged well before the Reichstag fire. Hitler was already in power, and the majority of seats in the Reichstag itself were parties that did not believe that the Weimar republic should even exist. (ie, Nazi's, communists, monarchists).
You may think whatever you wish, but there is no solid evidence that the Nazi's had anything to do with the Reichstag fire at the start. If it wasn't the fire, Hitler would have gained the exact same authority soon enough.
I also disagree with your second opinion. The main provision of the patriot act is the dissolution of the FISA wall. There is absolutely nothing in the constitution that allowed for that wall in the first place. The wall was clearly established during the Clinton administration, not during the establishment of the constitution.
In fact, at the end of the day, the only thing that does worry me about the Patriot act is sections that require administrative warrants rather then judicial ones. However, even this is inline with major legislation over the last 40 years. RICO has them.
The parrallel you are looking for is there, but it is a completly different scale. The results of the reichstag fire were on a completly different scale. There were very very few protections in the Weimar constitution before the fire, and after the even the pretense (which is all it was) that Germany was some sort of republic was abandoned.
The other two factors not present was that a) The communists were just as bad as the Nazi's at this point. The Nazi's just got to power first because Hitler realized before the communists did that seizing power thru the political system was easier then by violence and b) Unlike common myth on/. the Nazi's did not set the fire.
While I could argue this, I have discovered that if there is one place where slashdotters are even more obnoxious about things that they know absolutly nothing about then politics, it's history.
In short, I know Nazi Germany, Nazi Germany was a degree of mine. Patriot Act is no Nazi Germany enableing act or anything else.
If you are going to bring Hitler into it, at least know your facts. The Patriot act has zero in common with the Enabling Act which basically allowed Hitler to pass laws directly just by signing something without the Reichstag.
Because I have actually bothered to read the books that document the white house under both the Clinton and Bush White Houses. They go into Mr. Clarke at length.
I never said that. I said that it was sad and rather pathetic that the one gentleman who had enough vision to realize that Al Qaeda was not just a annoyance didn't have enough social skills to work and make other people realize the risk.
It does very little good for Richard Clarke to say anything about this at all. Richard Clarke alianated everyone on the clinton team (see "Loosing Bin Ladin") and then alianted everyone on Bush's team (who were too focused on keeping another mid level manager from going amuck ala Ollie North). Then he said two seperate things to the 9/11 committee that just happened to change when he cachinged on his book.
It's too bad really. Imagine all of the things that Clarke could have stopped if he realized that he actually had to work with other people.
And did a quick application with Ruby on Rails already. If you are confortable with Perl, you may find this easier to deal with then Python and it's love of whitespace. The object model is much more developed then either python or perl, but it still retains much of the flexability of the other two systems.
Ruby has already inspired a few efforts to duplicate the technology in Java and in.NET. Since the core technology behind RoR is open classes, and the ability to add accessors and functionality on the fly, the other languages just don't cut it.
The usual warnings apply. Implicit code is easier 90% of the time, but that other 10% is painful to debug. With large projects you can prototype fast, but maintaining may be much more difficult.
By the way, this is a real and actual example. Turns out the sat phone Osama carried around broadcasted a locator when it was powered up. One way or another (the leading canidates are the Washington Post, a Senator and police chief in Pakistan) it got leaked that we were tracking him via the phone.
You know, how about instead of trying to score cheap political points (you are in a country that is giving over 1.2 billon? Because between private and governemtn money from the US, there will be around 700 million going in the next 2 months to asia) you instead focus on how we can help people over there? I have friends there and I find your comments disgusting in the extreme.
Civics lession 101: We live in a contitutional democracy in which people vote. more people voted for Bush in more states representing more of the population of the united states so that george bush did win a 3% margin over his opponent.
The American people just got Bush elected. Not some group that you want to make a boogyman.
Oh, and outside of your fantasy world, we don't have an attitude towards Americans, we have an attitude towards assholes bullies, and religious maniacs. Trouble is, Bush is both. Fortunally, and unlike you, we don't make stupid generalization
How about for once we expect Europeans to actually try and understand Americans?
For example, How many Europeans understand that Kyoto was dead in the water two years before Bush came to office when it was rejected 99-0 by the senate?
How many Europeans understand that it is illegal for any United States president to give any judicial power outside of the United States authority over the Supreme Court of the United States?
How many Europeans understand just how heavily we subsidize not only them, but the middle east, and the third world?
How about the fact that Americans spend more time watching news then any other major country? We have more college graduates (not per capita mind you) then any other nation, and we pull more hours a week then any other nation?
How many Europeans would ever push for a immegration system that is as liberal as the United States?
Slashdot Mirror
With all due respect, you are wrong here. While there was a number of American's who beleived that they would have to fight the soviets soon, the vast majority of thinking was that the Soviets could be worked with like WW2. It wasn't until Stalin closed off Berlin (well after the war) that things started to go downhill.
The US and it's allies offered to share atomic power under strict guidelines. This would have been a impressive gift, had Stalin not already stolen the plans.
Actually, there are a ton of Iraqi's who say just exactly that. She is also in a extreme Minority of english speaking bloggers. Check out Iraq the model.
Because even complete destruction of two cities plus the firebombing of Tokyo plus the majority destruction of almost every other city was not enough to convience most of the leadership to surrender. Even after Hirohito overruled the cabinet and forced a surrender he was almost deposed.
Don't put a 2005 mentality on it. Look at the actual historical record. These guys were already convienced that they were going to die, and it was going to be honarable and glorious.
First of all, American's always demand unconditional surrender. It's been that way since the Civil War, and is neccessary to ensure political control at war's end. Second, even though American's publically demanded it, they did not privatly demand it. Hence the emperor stayed on after Japan's defeat.
BTW, the conditions that a _minority position_ in the Japanese government were asking for prior to the atomic bombings included keeping China. That's not surrender.
As for the atomic bombs, the alternative war plans are now public information, so I suggest that you educate yourself. Troops were already being transitioned to the pacific for the "big jump" on Japan.
There internal projections were for anything from 300,000 to 1 millon American casulties in such a invasion. Using the european ratio of 3:1 casulties between armies that translates to a millon to 3 millon Japanese dead. This view is massivly pollyanna. During the pacific island hopping phases they had seen almost 100% civilian and millitary casulties. The Japanese forced their own populations to commit suicide rather then surrender to the Americans on the islands) and less then 1% of the japanese forces surrendered.
Now imagine what it would be like if we actually invaded their homes.
This is why the Navy was calling for another starvation blockade rather then a invasion. Macarthur was pushing for a invasion, and it would have left both Japan and the United States devistated.
How could you not use the bomb knowing only what they knew then? How could you use the bomb know knowing what we know now? It's a horrible paradox.
I have no idea where you are getting your information from, but it's wrong. London was still getting blitzed by V-1 and V-2's during the Dresden raid. More to the point, Brits were still dying by troops moved on that rail, or they would not have hit it.
You have to remember that a huge chunk of the civilian leadership was in the millitary at this point. While certain people (ie, MacArthur) clearly were a few shots short of a clip, the major decisions in the war (and in fact, in ever war in American history) were pretty much made by the civilian leadership then implemented by the millitary. Note the pacific first doctrine, washington's correspondence with the CC, etc.
Nagasaki was not a civillian target. It was home to both millitary units, and a large portion of the industrial complex that drove the Japanese navy.
(BTW, that is something the article also got wrong. The reason that Nagasaki was relativly untouched prior to the atomic bombing was not because the American B-29's were inept, it was because they knew that the atomic bomb was coming and left two such cities pretty much untouched).
MacArthur btw is not a particullar good person to hang around in general. He had a facination with the atomic weapons (he was one of the last to be let in on that little secret) and was the only general in history to open fire on American civillian while not in a time of war. That he overreacted is not a surprise.
I'm sorry this is a urban legend. There were elements of the Japanese government that were trying to surrender, as they were not so inclined to go down with the island, but that did not include anyone in the central ring of power.
Disorganization marked most of Japan's governmental affairs from 1933-1945. This was also one of them.
Even after the Emperor had finally woken up to the suicidal nature of the war, once he decided to surrender after both Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he was almost replaced in a coup.
These people did not want to surrender, and only another starvation blockade (if you don't know what that is, go look it up) would have stopped them.
I asked Jewel Saite the question at one of the showings.
There will not be a TV series if Serenity does well. Rather there will be two more movies as most of the actors are under contract for all three.
They have the option of doing a TV series at some point in the future, but only after the movie has been out for some period of time.
You think Microsoft would have learned after the games they played with Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and DR. DOS. This will not make the anti-trust crowd any happier, and just serves to tick off the opponents of Microsoft more.
Microsoft is essentially creating a market for Linux by doing this. It's all about standardization and if companies have to purchase two different versions of Linux to use their hardware, they are going to look hard at the decision before doing so.
The platitude that victors write the history books is obnoxious in almost every case it is used. It discounts the fact that we have historians whose job it is to find the truth and learn from it. Contrary to the so-called revisionists, History occurred exactly one way. You can debate the meaning, debate the motives, but you can't debate the event if enough documentation exists.
Okay, let's play. Richard J Evan's "The Coming of The Third Reich" is one of the best and most contemporary works on this subject. He tracks Marius van der Lubbe thru the anarchist stage and into his communistic indoctrination. He had already been convicted several times of vandalism and had tried to burn down the Welfare office, the palace and the district town hall before the Reichstag. He bought the tools needed to lite the building earlier in the morning. We also have a good account him trying to light many many other things on fire before the curtains in the main chamber. He confessed to it when he was caught.
Was there a conspiracy? No serious evidence has ever surfaced to him being in the service. For that matter, while the Communists had tried several times to overthrow the government, van der Lubbe was clearly a lone arsonist. Remember that Anarchists also triggered the start of WWI and had bombed wall street during the previous thirty years. They caused trouble wherever they went.
Finally you must bear in mind that Weimar was fatally damaged well before the Reichstag fire. Hitler was already in power, and the majority of seats in the Reichstag itself were parties that did not believe that the Weimar republic should even exist. (ie, Nazi's, communists, monarchists).
You may think whatever you wish, but there is no solid evidence that the Nazi's had anything to do with the Reichstag fire at the start. If it wasn't the fire, Hitler would have gained the exact same authority soon enough.
I also disagree with your second opinion. The main provision of the patriot act is the dissolution of the FISA wall. There is absolutely nothing in the constitution that allowed for that wall in the first place. The wall was clearly established during the Clinton administration, not during the establishment of the constitution.
In fact, at the end of the day, the only thing that does worry me about the Patriot act is sections that require administrative warrants rather then judicial ones. However, even this is inline with major legislation over the last 40 years. RICO has them.
The parrallel you are looking for is there, but it is a completly different scale. The results of the reichstag fire were on a completly different scale. There were very very few protections in the Weimar constitution before the fire, and after the even the pretense (which is all it was) that Germany was some sort of republic was abandoned.
The other two factors not present was that
a) The communists were just as bad as the Nazi's at this point. The Nazi's just got to power first because Hitler realized before the communists did that seizing power thru the political system was easier then by violence and
b) Unlike common myth on
While I could argue this, I have discovered that if there is one place where slashdotters are even more obnoxious about things that they know absolutly nothing about then politics, it's history.
In short, I know Nazi Germany, Nazi Germany was a degree of mine. Patriot Act is no Nazi Germany enableing act or anything else.
If you are going to bring Hitler into it, at least know your facts. The Patriot act has zero in common with the Enabling Act which basically allowed Hitler to pass laws directly just by signing something without the Reichstag.
Thank you for posting this. Most people don't get past a knee jerk reaction and bother to look at what is really in Patriot beyond the FUD.
Exactly, but for the record, we are in the middle of a generational change in our sub fleet (688 to Seawolf and Virgina) as well.
Because I have actually bothered to read the books that document the white house under both the Clinton and Bush White Houses. They go into Mr. Clarke at length.
I never said that. I said that it was sad and rather pathetic that the one gentleman who had enough vision to realize that Al Qaeda was not just a annoyance didn't have enough social skills to work and make other people realize the risk.
It does very little good for Richard Clarke to say anything about this at all. Richard Clarke alianated everyone on the clinton team (see "Loosing Bin Ladin") and then alianted everyone on Bush's team (who were too focused on keeping another mid level manager from going amuck ala Ollie North). Then he said two seperate things to the 9/11 committee that just happened to change when he cachinged on his book.
It's too bad really. Imagine all of the things that Clarke could have stopped if he realized that he actually had to work with other people.
And did a quick application with Ruby on Rails already. If you are confortable with Perl, you may find this easier to deal with then Python and it's love of whitespace. The object model is much more developed then either python or perl, but it still retains much of the flexability of the other two systems.
.NET. Since the core technology behind RoR is open classes, and the ability to add accessors and functionality on the fly, the other languages just don't cut it.
Ruby has already inspired a few efforts to duplicate the technology in Java and in
The usual warnings apply. Implicit code is easier 90% of the time, but that other 10% is painful to debug. With large projects you can prototype fast, but maintaining may be much more difficult.
By the way, this is a real and actual example. Turns out the sat phone Osama carried around broadcasted a locator when it was powered up. One way or another (the leading canidates are the Washington Post, a Senator and police chief in Pakistan) it got leaked that we were tracking him via the phone.
You know, how about instead of trying to score cheap political points (you are in a country that is giving over 1.2 billon? Because between private and governemtn money from the US, there will be around 700 million going in the next 2 months to asia) you instead focus on how we can help people over there? I have friends there and I find your comments disgusting in the extreme.
Civics lession 101: We live in a contitutional democracy in which people vote. more people voted for Bush in more states representing more of the population of the united states so that george bush did win a 3% margin over his opponent.
The American people just got Bush elected. Not some group that you want to make a boogyman.
Oh, and outside of your fantasy world, we don't have an attitude towards Americans, we have an attitude towards assholes bullies, and religious maniacs. Trouble is, Bush is both. Fortunally, and unlike you, we don't make stupid generalization
Umm...
ROFL
Let's flip that on it's head.
How about for once we expect Europeans to actually try and understand Americans?
For example, How many Europeans understand that Kyoto was dead in the water two years before Bush came to office when it was rejected 99-0 by the senate?
How many Europeans understand that it is illegal for any United States president to give any judicial power outside of the United States authority over the Supreme Court of the United States?
How many Europeans understand just how heavily we subsidize not only them, but the middle east, and the third world?
How about the fact that Americans spend more time watching news then any other major country? We have more college graduates (not per capita mind you) then any other nation, and we pull more hours a week then any other nation?
How many Europeans would ever push for a immegration system that is as liberal as the United States?