I sill believe though that if America looked strong then Pearl wouldn't have been attacked.
No. Pearl Harbor was attacked because America looked strong. If America had looked weak, Japan would have ignored us and conquered China and the western Pacific anyway.
But we looked like we could and would stop them from doing so. So Japan acted to take us out long enough to conquer the Dutch East Indies, Indochina, etc.
Admiral Yamamoto's famous quote, "I fear we have woken a seeping giant". Quite an afterthought
His forethought was (approximately) "I will run amok for six months to a year. After that..."
Interestingly, the Battle of Midway came just six months after Pearl Harbor.
In a related thought, Heinz Guderian wrote a book on tank warfare in the early '30s. His book included a listing of the various nations' automobile engine production, as a fraction of the total world output. Guderian considered that to be a major indicator of a nation's ability to prosecute modern (read: mechanized) warfare. He thought that Germany could be a Player, because their engine production was comparable to the UK, France, and the Soviet Union (~4% each). Interestingly, in his table, the USA was listed at 80%.
I used to use this. Then one day I decided to register myself as "oooooooo". With similarly useful other information. DOn't remember why. Anyway, the NYT registry came back and told me that "oooooooo" was already in use, and suggested I use "oooooooo2". I did, and have been happily reading their articles since then, content in the knowledge that their datbase has one more useless record...
The mere fact that the government knew that voters had this power of veto at their disposal would, I suggest, cause them to be a little more circumspect when trying to mess with people's rights or pass legislation that isn't necessarily going to reflect the wishes of the majority.
Or possibly force them to be a little bit more clever about concealing the intent of "legislation that isn't necessarily going to reflect the wishes of the majority".
In most cases, unmanned exploration is cheaper, safer, and the better research tool.
On the other hand, perhaps human missions in space are considered to serve purposes other than research. After all, a whole planet (I know. The moon isn't really a planet) has to have some use...
Y'know what amuses and disturbs me to no end? Politicians will go out and spit on the Constitution with no shame, as long as it pleases their corporate masters.
However, if you suggest reforming the campaign finance system, they'll all unite to rail against this "Unamerican suppression of 1st Amendment rights".
Keep in mind that the only people who will be allowed to mention a politician within 60 days of an election (after the next election, of course) will be those self-same "corporate masters". And the politicians themselves.
Certainly YOU won't be allowed to say anything in public opposing the reelection of any of these congress-entities, without violating the "campaign finance reform" law. After all, YOU are a "special interest"...
Slashdot Mirror
The external threat is a crucial ingredient, but so is internal decadence and decay.
And so was a major plague in the Empire.
I sill believe though that if America looked strong then Pearl wouldn't have been attacked.
No. Pearl Harbor was attacked because America looked strong. If America had looked weak, Japan would have ignored us and conquered China and the western Pacific anyway. But we looked like we could and would stop them from doing so. So Japan acted to take us out long enough to conquer the Dutch East Indies, Indochina, etc.
Admiral Yamamoto's famous quote, "I fear we have woken a seeping giant". Quite an afterthought
His forethought was (approximately) "I will run amok for six months to a year. After that..." Interestingly, the Battle of Midway came just six months after Pearl Harbor.
In a related thought, Heinz Guderian wrote a book on tank warfare in the early '30s. His book included a listing of the various nations' automobile engine production, as a fraction of the total world output. Guderian considered that to be a major indicator of a nation's ability to prosecute modern (read: mechanized) warfare. He thought that Germany could be a Player, because their engine production was comparable to the UK, France, and the Soviet Union (~4% each). Interestingly, in his table, the USA was listed at 80%.
I used to use this. Then one day I decided to register myself as "oooooooo". With similarly useful other information. DOn't remember why. Anyway, the NYT registry came back and told me that "oooooooo" was already in use, and suggested I use "oooooooo2". I did, and have been happily reading their articles since then, content in the knowledge that their datbase has one more useless record...
The mere fact that the government knew that voters had this power of veto at their disposal would, I suggest, cause them to be a little more circumspect when trying to mess with people's rights or pass legislation that isn't necessarily going to reflect the wishes of the majority.
Or possibly force them to be a little bit more clever about concealing the intent of "legislation that isn't necessarily going to reflect the wishes of the majority".
The right to bear arms relates to a well ordered state militia.
Well, no. "Rights" belong to individuals. "Powers" belong to governments. So a "right to bear arms" cannot reside in the state governments.
On the other hand, perhaps human missions in space are considered to serve purposes other than research. After all, a whole planet (I know. The moon isn't really a planet) has to have some use...
Keep in mind that the only people who will be allowed to mention a politician within 60 days of an election (after the next election, of course) will be those self-same "corporate masters". And the politicians themselves.
Certainly YOU won't be allowed to say anything in public opposing the reelection of any of these congress-entities, without violating the "campaign finance reform" law. After all, YOU are a "special interest"...
Of course, the cleaning lady might see it. But that's not a problem, because cleaning ladies are always reliable natives of the country. Right?