What did he use against the Kurds and Iranians, harsh language? He did have them at one time, and, if he did destroy them, he didn't bother to have the destruction witnessed by the inspectors. Kind of stupid for him to do that, since then he was forced to try to prove a negative.
There's a book called "Downfall" you might want to read.
The Japanese were killing about 100,000 Chinese a month in 1945. Almost all civilian. Shaving three months off the war more than makes up for the deaths caused by the nukes.
In the US invasion of Okinawa, more Navy sailors died from kamikaze attacks than Army and Marine troops died taking the islands. The military thought the Japanese would have about 1500 kamikazes defending the home islands. They about wet their pants after the surrender when they found 6000 kamikaze planes.
If the war had continued, the Japanese people would have endured a winter with no fuel, no transport, and no food. Millions would have starved or died from exposure and sickness.
And, of course, even if the US had never had the Manhattan Project, Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have been burned to the ground by B-29 bombers anyway, just like every other city in Japan. They probably had to keep threatening Curtis LeMay with immediate court martial to keep him from burning those cities to the ground as it was.
Sure, the Japanese were trying to surrender. Just not unconditionally. The military leaders wanted to stay in power and get the chance to rearm. Imagine those psychopaths running Japan in the '50s. In a world with nukes.
Let's do a little thought experiment. The USSR declared war on Japan about a week before the surrender; in that week they took half of Korea. If the war had gone on for just another week or two, Kim Il Jung II would rule all of Korea, not just half of it. And it's very possible that the Japanese military would have submitted to Soviet occupation to preclude an American invasion, as long as those in power kept most of their power. The officers in power were (quite rightly) scared to death of American occupation.
Also, Japanese culture made it impossible for them to surrender to American military superiority. But they could justify to themselves having to surrender to American scientific superiority. Even so, Japanese military officers tried to kidnap the Emporer to prevent him from surrendering.
And if we had the bomb, and didn't use it, Truman would have been carried off by a mob and hung from the nearest lamppost. Also, just how effective do you think the concept of nuclear deterrence would work if we didn't use nukes to end a war we didn't start?
Yep, by far the game that has most affected me. Dreams, insomnia, etc. And it was the first with mulitplayer. After playing against my friend on the modem, I couldn't even think about sleeping for three or four hours.
Was living in an apartment at the time; went with a friend to a lawn and garden store. Saw a wall full of chainsaws for sale, and had a nearly overwhelming compulsion to buy the biggest one there. I *knew* having a chainsaw around would make me safe.
Money had *something* to do with it? How come the sanctions are still in place? Could it be that the French, Germans, and Russians are *still* profiting off of oil-for-food? Hey, their profits are up because they don't have to give Saddam kickbacks anymore. And there's the billions of oil-for-food money collecting interest in French banks that they'll have to give back to Iraq if the sanctions are lifted.
Without a government that (hopefully) protects those rights, you can have whatever rights you want. Unfortunately, anyone bigger and meaner than you has the right to take your rights away from you.
I for one am not counting on God to protect my God-given rights.
The "punishment" for Germany isn't leaving them open to attack from the Swiss. It's the US not spending tens of billions of tax dollars every year in their country anymore. But you knew that.
Personally, I think they should bring all the troops in Europe back to the US.
Actually, a lot of the forces in Saudi will come back to the US. After all, the only reason they were there in the first place was because of Saddam Hussein. And the military command and the main airbases for the Middle East are now in Qatar; they won't be in Iraq.
The CIA isn't governing Iraq, the military is. The military has a much better record of "nation building" than the CIA or State Dept.
It's likely that the Iraqi constitution will give them the ability to amend the constitution or call a constitutional convention to re-write it. Just like the American constitution (and, I suspect, the Japanese and German constitutions).
FYI, I live in Texas, and the main reason that capital punishment is so prevalent here is that it is impossible for a jury to send someone to jail for life. There is always the possibility of them getting out on parole.
So if a jury wants to make sure that someone never walks the streets again, the only way they can do it is to give them the death penalty.
They're trying to change the laws to allow life without parole, if they get that done the number of people on death row will go down. By attrition:(
New religion? What, we're forcibly converting Muslims? Don't you watch the news? The Shiite *majority* of Iraq just had a pilgrimage they haven't been able to make since Saddam took power.
And as far as giving them "civilization", don't worry, if the Iraqis miss Saddam they can always elect a homicidal psychopath to lead them in a few years.
And the left, the Arabs, and the Europeans have been complaining about the sanctions for the last decade, because of all the Iraqi children starving to death. They *wanted* the sanctions lifted so the resources could be exploited. Exploiting the natural resources will help the children. Think of the children!
Yeah, now that we've exploited the natural resources of Japan and Germany, we need to go to Iraq. Whether or not you agree with Wolfowitz's ideas about the Middle East, you should be able to figure out that it concerns national security, not corporate profits.
Maybe you need to read somthing like "King Leopold's Ghost" to see what real colonialism is like.
Where have the protesters been for the last six or seven years, when European corporate greed was propping up Saddam's dictatorship? A lot more people died under Saddam then than died in the entire war.
And as others have mentioned, the museum was still in a part of the city controlled by the regime when it was looted. It would require a military advance at a time when it wasn't known if it would involve a lot of street fighting and a lot of casualties.
Whereas the Oil Ministry had the records of who owed what to Iraq, to the tune of billions of dollars, money that will go a long way towards helping the Iraqi people. The records also include, almost certainly, records of food-for-oil kickbacks from France, Germany, and Russia. I'm sure the Europeans would rather that building burn to the ground.
What exactly is keeping the nutjob from bringing in a gun from outside? And if he does, how *comfortable* would you feel knowing that your sane coworker, the one with the carry permit that knows how to handle a pistol, has to leave his gun in the trunk of his car every day?
The whole idea behind concealed carry permits is that criminals don't know if a nearby civilian can pop a cap in his ass. But, hey, now they can go to your workplace and wreak havoc secure in the knowledge that nothing will happen until the cops show up.
By not allowing workers/customers with carry permits to bring their guns onto the premises, you could open yourself to liabilty if some nutjob goes postal and later the lawyers argue that an armed employee/customer could have prevented a death or injury,
Um, it *is* widely known (but, evidently not *that* widely known) that there's a direct corellation between unemployment rates and crime rates. He's not trying to justify it, he's merely stating a known fact.
Even better, just use liquid water, and raise it to a temperature where it vaporizes and expands. It would be much more efficient, and the technology for transporting and storing liquid water is much better understood.
High water vapor levels -> more clouds -> higher albedo -> more reflected sunlight -> lower temperatures -> more rain -> lower water vapor levels. There's a feedback loop.
The feedback loop for CO2 involves freshly exposed rock becoming carbonate and getting transported to the ocean by the process of erosion, where it eventually gets subducted into the mantle. Higher levels of CO2 (theoretically) increase weather activity and the rate of erosion. This takes place over geological time, however.
I agree with all your points, but I have to give you some crap:)
"Pink Floyd: The Wall" isn't a concert video, it's a regular movie that had theatrical release.
If you like Pink Floyd, you need the Roger Waters "In The Flesh" DVD. You can get it for $13 online. The CD version is $23 at Amazon, $31 for SACD, but I'm sure it's cheaper somewhere online.
Many concert CDs are 2 CD sets, too, which would explain why they're priced higher.
WTF? The only "explosives" involved is the rocket fuel to de-orbit the probe. Kinetic energy is what causes the probe to penetrate. Jeez, I didn't even read the friggin article and I know that.
Bunker busters use kinetic energy to get way down in the ground. Then they blow up. They omit the blowing up part from these probes, because that would be bad for the sensors.
Slashdot Mirror
The US hasn't considered using nukes for anti-missile defense for about, oh, 40 years.
Hmm, let's see:
Use two nukes, no American deaths, 300,000 innocents die.
Don't use two nukes, 100,000+ American deaths, well over a million innocents die.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki would be burnt to the ground in either case.
50 million people died in WWII, and about 40 millioln of them were civilians, the vast majority of those were killed by people other than Americans.
What did he use against the Kurds and Iranians, harsh language? He did have them at one time, and, if he did destroy them, he didn't bother to have the destruction witnessed by the inspectors. Kind of stupid for him to do that, since then he was forced to try to prove a negative.
There's a book called "Downfall" you might want to read.
The Japanese were killing about 100,000 Chinese a month in 1945. Almost all civilian. Shaving three months off the war more than makes up for the deaths caused by the nukes.
In the US invasion of Okinawa, more Navy sailors died from kamikaze attacks than Army and Marine troops died taking the islands. The military thought the Japanese would have about 1500 kamikazes defending the home islands. They about wet their pants after the surrender when they found 6000 kamikaze planes.
If the war had continued, the Japanese people would have endured a winter with no fuel, no transport, and no food. Millions would have starved or died from exposure and sickness.
And, of course, even if the US had never had the Manhattan Project, Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have been burned to the ground by B-29 bombers anyway, just like every other city in Japan. They probably had to keep threatening Curtis LeMay with immediate court martial to keep him from burning those cities to the ground as it was.
Sure, the Japanese were trying to surrender. Just not unconditionally. The military leaders wanted to stay in power and get the chance to rearm. Imagine those psychopaths running Japan in the '50s. In a world with nukes.
Let's do a little thought experiment. The USSR declared war on Japan about a week before the surrender; in that week they took half of Korea. If the war had gone on for just another week or two, Kim Il Jung II would rule all of Korea, not just half of it. And it's very possible that the Japanese military would have submitted to Soviet occupation to preclude an American invasion, as long as those in power kept most of their power. The officers in power were (quite rightly) scared to death of American occupation.
Also, Japanese culture made it impossible for them to surrender to American military superiority. But they could justify to themselves having to surrender to American scientific superiority. Even so, Japanese military officers tried to kidnap the Emporer to prevent him from surrendering.
And if we had the bomb, and didn't use it, Truman would have been carried off by a mob and hung from the nearest lamppost. Also, just how effective do you think the concept of nuclear deterrence would work if we didn't use nukes to end a war we didn't start?
Yep, by far the game that has most affected me. Dreams, insomnia, etc. And it was the first with mulitplayer. After playing against my friend on the modem, I couldn't even think about sleeping for three or four hours.
Was living in an apartment at the time; went with a friend to a lawn and garden store. Saw a wall full of chainsaws for sale, and had a nearly overwhelming compulsion to buy the biggest one there. I *knew* having a chainsaw around would make me safe.
I remember seeing plenty of CDs in 1986 or so for ten bucks. Not used, either. Stuff like Pink Floyd's "Animals".
You may want to read about the atmospheric probe part of the Galileo mission to Jupiter. You'd be surprised at what they can design things to handle :)
Saddam was your friend?
Money had *something* to do with it? How come the sanctions are still in place? Could it be that the French, Germans, and Russians are *still* profiting off of oil-for-food? Hey, their profits are up because they don't have to give Saddam kickbacks anymore. And there's the billions of oil-for-food money collecting interest in French banks that they'll have to give back to Iraq if the sanctions are lifted.
Without a government that (hopefully) protects those rights, you can have whatever rights you want. Unfortunately, anyone bigger and meaner than you has the right to take your rights away from you.
I for one am not counting on God to protect my God-given rights.
The "punishment" for Germany isn't leaving them open to attack from the Swiss. It's the US not spending tens of billions of tax dollars every year in their country anymore. But you knew that.
Personally, I think they should bring all the troops in Europe back to the US.
Actually, a lot of the forces in Saudi will come back to the US. After all, the only reason they were there in the first place was because of Saddam Hussein. And the military command and the main airbases for the Middle East are now in Qatar; they won't be in Iraq.
The CIA isn't governing Iraq, the military is. The military has a much better record of "nation building" than the CIA or State Dept.
It's likely that the Iraqi constitution will give them the ability to amend the constitution or call a constitutional convention to re-write it. Just like the American constitution (and, I suspect, the Japanese and German constitutions).
If the Europeans are copacetic with Iraq flouting international law, and even conspire with them to profit from it, why should they complain?
I didn't see Western Europe go to war against the USSR because they "absorbed" eastern Europe. Or against China when they "absorbed" Tibet.
So, Saddam was a neo-conservative?
FYI, I live in Texas, and the main reason that capital punishment is so prevalent here is that it is impossible for a jury to send someone to jail for life. There is always the possibility of them getting out on parole.
:(
So if a jury wants to make sure that someone never walks the streets again, the only way they can do it is to give them the death penalty.
They're trying to change the laws to allow life without parole, if they get that done the number of people on death row will go down. By attrition
New religion? What, we're forcibly converting Muslims? Don't you watch the news? The Shiite *majority* of Iraq just had a pilgrimage they haven't been able to make since Saddam took power.
And as far as giving them "civilization", don't worry, if the Iraqis miss Saddam they can always elect a homicidal psychopath to lead them in a few years.
And the left, the Arabs, and the Europeans have been complaining about the sanctions for the last decade, because of all the Iraqi children starving to death. They *wanted* the sanctions lifted so the resources could be exploited. Exploiting the natural resources will help the children. Think of the children!
Yeah, now that we've exploited the natural resources of Japan and Germany, we need to go to Iraq. Whether or not you agree with Wolfowitz's ideas about the Middle East, you should be able to figure out that it concerns national security, not corporate profits.
Maybe you need to read somthing like "King Leopold's Ghost" to see what real colonialism is like.
Where have the protesters been for the last six or seven years, when European corporate greed was propping up Saddam's dictatorship? A lot more people died under Saddam then than died in the entire war.
And as others have mentioned, the museum was still in a part of the city controlled by the regime when it was looted. It would require a military advance at a time when it wasn't known if it would involve a lot of street fighting and a lot of casualties.
Whereas the Oil Ministry had the records of who owed what to Iraq, to the tune of billions of dollars, money that will go a long way towards helping the Iraqi people. The records also include, almost certainly, records of food-for-oil kickbacks from France, Germany, and Russia. I'm sure the Europeans would rather that building burn to the ground.
And how about the aqueduct? And the roads. Of course, the roads, that goes without saying.
What exactly is keeping the nutjob from bringing in a gun from outside? And if he does, how *comfortable* would you feel knowing that your sane coworker, the one with the carry permit that knows how to handle a pistol, has to leave his gun in the trunk of his car every day?
The whole idea behind concealed carry permits is that criminals don't know if a nearby civilian can pop a cap in his ass. But, hey, now they can go to your workplace and wreak havoc secure in the knowledge that nothing will happen until the cops show up.
By not allowing workers/customers with carry permits to bring their guns onto the premises, you could open yourself to liabilty if some nutjob goes postal and later the lawyers argue that an armed employee/customer could have prevented a death or injury,
Um, it *is* widely known (but, evidently not *that* widely known) that there's a direct corellation between unemployment rates and crime rates. He's not trying to justify it, he's merely stating a known fact.
Even better, just use liquid water, and raise it to a temperature where it vaporizes and expands. It would be much more efficient, and the technology for transporting and storing liquid water is much better understood.
High water vapor levels -> more clouds -> higher albedo -> more reflected sunlight -> lower temperatures -> more rain -> lower water vapor levels. There's a feedback loop.
The feedback loop for CO2 involves freshly exposed rock becoming carbonate and getting transported to the ocean by the process of erosion, where it eventually gets subducted into the mantle. Higher levels of CO2 (theoretically) increase weather activity and the rate of erosion. This takes place over geological time, however.
I agree with all your points, but I have to give you some crap :)
"Pink Floyd: The Wall" isn't a concert video, it's a regular movie that had theatrical release.
If you like Pink Floyd, you need the Roger Waters "In The Flesh" DVD. You can get it for $13 online. The CD version is $23 at Amazon, $31 for SACD, but I'm sure it's cheaper somewhere online.
Many concert CDs are 2 CD sets, too, which would explain why they're priced higher.
WTF? The only "explosives" involved is the rocket fuel to de-orbit the probe. Kinetic energy is what causes the probe to penetrate. Jeez, I didn't even read the friggin article and I know that.
Bunker busters use kinetic energy to get way down in the ground. Then they blow up. They omit the blowing up part from these probes, because that would be bad for the sensors.
And as long as you don't have your datacenter in Florida :)