Almost forgot.
Our attempts at naval restrictions go back to the late 1800's.
We weren't restricting them at that time (the 1800's) because of the article you linked (1931).
Need to go back further.
- zevo
One Day The Americans Decided To BBQ A City For No Reason
They knew that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked a month before, but they obviously didn't warn anybody and kept the goddamn thing secret.
It was just an excuse to test the H-Bomb, and it's been declassified.
Everybody knows that.
It's the same red flag shit that went on in the Gulf of Tonkin (the infamous Gulf of Tonkin Incident): there was no attack, it was just a pretext to engage in a war with Vietnam for two reasons: drugs and weapons.
Hmpf.
It was just an excuse to test the H-Bomb, and it's been declassified.
Everybody knows that.
It's the same red flag shit that went on in the Gulf of Tonkin (the infamous Gulf of Tonkin Incident): there was no attack, it was just a pretext to engage in a war with Vietnam for two reasons: drugs and weapons.
Hmpf.
we didn't have the bomb when Pearl Harbor went down.the ar wrote:They knew that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked a month before, but they obviously didn't warn anybody and kept the goddamn thing secret.
It was just an excuse to test the H-Bomb, and it's been declassified.
Everybody knows that.
It's the same red flag shit that went on in the Gulf of Tonkin (the infamous Gulf of Tonkin Incident): there was no attack, it was just a pretext to engage in a war with Vietnam for two reasons: drugs and weapons.
Hmpf.
The first bomb was detonated on the morning of 6 August 1945.
Pearl Harbor was December 7, 1941.
omfg some of you guys...
In my life
Why do I smile
At people who I'd much rather kick in the eye?
-Moz
Why do I smile
At people who I'd much rather kick in the eye?
-Moz
I thought he was joking.Tone Deft wrote:we didn't have the bomb when Pearl Harbor went down.the ar wrote:They knew that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked a month before, but they obviously didn't warn anybody and kept the goddamn thing secret.
It was just an excuse to test the H-Bomb, and it's been declassified.
Everybody knows that.
It's the same red flag shit that went on in the Gulf of Tonkin (the infamous Gulf of Tonkin Incident): there was no attack, it was just a pretext to engage in a war with Vietnam for two reasons: drugs and weapons.
Hmpf.
The first bomb was detonated on the morning of 6 August 1945.
Pearl Harbor was December 7, 1941.
omfg some of you guys...
Surely he wasn't serious? Maybe?
- zevo
infinite density, zero volume
inmazevo wrote:Almost forgot.
Our attempts at naval restrictions go back to the late 1800's.
We weren't restricting them at that time (the 1800's) because of the article you linked (1931).
Need to go back further.
- zevo
'Our' as in US or the Island Monkeys? The Island Monkeys signed some sort of treaty with the Japanese in the late 1800s, then continued to fuck with them - while the Japanese were attempting to take over some place or other. meh. I can't remember the details and I'm too lazy at the moment to look it up.
Regardless.
The amount of Revisionist History when it comes to the use of the A-Bomb has reached Epic proportions. Second only to Revisionist History when it comes to anything Russia has done since..since..since..hell, since forever.
...
Ok. I will assume that you are taking the piss and I am being dissed here. But because there is a slight element of doubt in my mind I will attempt to explain the joke, in the context of my story and its association with this thread.aburgener wrote:yeah me either.. hence the confused facelandrvr1 wrote:I don't get it....
While anticipating the commencement of the Dessert Storm operation, (lots of televised lead up) most people were forming opinions about what the US was doing and what should or should not happen. This particular American, decided to offer his opinion to me while carrying out his homeland security duties (I was a captive audience). He decided to use previous historical US involved events as a solution to the pending trouble in Iraq. His solution was, like they did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was to BBQ Baghdad.
This I found to be a commonly expressed opinion with the Americans I bumped into around that time. There was some pride and glory in the historical flexing of that kind of muscle, and, in a joking manner, was offered as the correct thing to do to deal with this american involved middle eastern conflict. We've done it before...let's do it again!
Of course though, it was just a joke.
iMac - 10.10.3 - Live 9 Suite - APC40 - Axiom 61 - TX81z - Firestudio Mobile - Focal Alpha 80's - Godin Session - Home made foot controller
No, by "our" I mean western (and particularly England and the US... and France to a lesser degree). I'll find some links and post them if you want. I did a quick search a few minutes ago and found some articles from 1907.landrvr1 wrote:inmazevo wrote:Almost forgot.
Our attempts at naval restrictions go back to the late 1800's.
We weren't restricting them at that time (the 1800's) because of the article you linked (1931).
Need to go back further.
- zevo
'Our' as in US or the Island Monkeys? The Island Monkeys signed some sort of treaty with the Japanese in the late 1800s, then continued to fuck with them - while the Japanese were attempting to take over some place or other. meh. I can't remember the details and I'm too lazy at the moment to look it up.
Well, my view of the bomb is quite a personal one, as my dad was on the project, and is quite sure that if we hadn't used it, he'd be dead.The amount of Revisionist History when it comes to the use of the A-Bomb has reached Epic proportions. Second only to Revisionist History when it comes to anything Russia has done since..since..since..hell, since forever.
I don't usually go there (and won't now), as I've done it many times before and the fact is that it's such an emotional topic, particularly with people who actually lived through the time, that reaching a consensus is difficult at best.
My view of the bomb is shaped by being a child of the cold war, so my tolerance level of it is very different from his.
As for revisionist history. That's a tricky one as well.
I think there's definitely a such thing as revisionist history for specific reasons, not necessarily connected to finding out the truth (and in some cases for quite opposite reasons than finding out the truth). I have little tolerance for that sort of thing.
Of course, there's a very real problem with (particularly) recent history. Many parts of recent history are shown through the lense of the rhetoric of the time. In those cases, the only way you actually get at the truth is to periodically revisit the data. In some cases, things are declasified... in other cases, new technology brings to light new facts that change the view of the story.
Does it mean that history is being re-written in this case? Of course.
Do you get to the truth in this case? You get closer to it.
In some cases, it's difficult to tell the difference between revisionist history and history that was just corrected.
As a concrete example, I'll go back to my Custer example.
The accounts of what happened there were given almost entirely from the perspective of the era. Congressional meetings took place, complete with testimony from the other military leaders in Custer's group.
That history has now been re-examined in various ways, one of which is archeological digs in the area, and the "story" isn't matching the testimony.
Doesn't mean they lied. Memory doesn't work like that.
But it doesn't match, so history in this case needs rewritten to include the data.
Take care,
- zevo
PS - As a quick note:
- Japan agression against China isn't cut and dry either. China attempted to invade Japan on two verifiable occasions. And, in fact, the use of the word "kamikaze" by their military stems from these very events.
Again, doesn't make Japan's action right (and certainly not the war crimes, obviously)... just some other facts to consider when viewing the activities of the past.
infinite density, zero volume
gjm wrote:Ok. I will assume that you are taking the piss and I am being dissed here. But because there is a slight element of doubt in my mind I will attempt to explain the joke, in the context of my story and its association with this thread.aburgener wrote:yeah me either.. hence the confused facelandrvr1 wrote:I don't get it....
While anticipating the commencement of the Dessert Storm operation, (lots of televised lead up) most people were forming opinions about what the US was doing and what should or should not happen. This particular American, decided to offer his opinion to me while carrying out his homeland security duties (I was a captive audience). He decided to use previous historical US involved events as a solution to the pending trouble in Iraq. His solution was, like they did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was to BBQ Baghdad.
This I found to be a commonly expressed opinion with the Americans I bumped into around that time. There was some pride and glory in the historical flexing of that kind of muscle, and, in a joking manner, was offered as the correct thing to do to deal with this american involved middle eastern conflict. We've done it before...let's do it again!
Of course though, it was just a joke.
Ahh. It's the 'yet' part of the guy's punchline that just didn't make any sense. If he would have said 'nothing' - well, there you go. lol.
...
so, shouldn't it be... "what do hiroshima, nagasaki and baghdad have in common?"gjm wrote:Ok. I will assume that you are taking the piss and I am being dissed here. But because there is a slight element of doubt in my mind I will attempt to explain the joke, in the context of my story and its association with this thread.aburgener wrote:yeah me either.. hence the confused facelandrvr1 wrote:I don't get it....
While anticipating the commencement of the Dessert Storm operation, (lots of televised lead up) most people were forming opinions about what the US was doing and what should or should not happen. This particular American, decided to offer his opinion to me while carrying out his homeland security duties (I was a captive audience). He decided to use previous historical US involved events as a solution to the pending trouble in Iraq. His solution was, like they did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was to BBQ Baghdad.
This I found to be a commonly expressed opinion with the Americans I bumped into around that time. There was some pride and glory in the historical flexing of that kind of muscle, and, in a joking manner, was offered as the correct thing to do to deal with this american involved middle eastern conflict. We've done it before...let's do it again!
Of course though, it was just a joke.
nothing, yet.
that would make sense.
otherwise, fail.
p.s. i get what you're trying to say... i just think you might have fucked it up
Last edited by aburgener on Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
inmazevo wrote:
As for revisionist history. That's a tricky one as well.
I think there's definitely a such thing as revisionist history for specific reasons, not necessarily connected to finding out the truth (and in some cases for quite opposite reasons than finding out the truth). I have little tolerance for that sort of thing.
A very concise and well worded reply.
The kind of Revisionist History that I'm referring to is those individuals *cough*b0unce*cough* that want to repaint the use of the Atomic Bomb on Japan into something that merely serves their own, current anti-US position - and that really has no basis in reality.
...
aburgener wrote:so, shouldn't it be... "what do hiroshima, nagasaki and baghdad have in common?"
nothing, yet.
that would make sense.
otherwise, fail.
p.s. i get what you're trying to say... i just think you might have fucked it up
Yeah, your right. Long time ago. That was it though. Serves me right for trying to punch with the heavy weights Massive fail on the interweb by gjm Hahahahaha. I hope someone got some laughs out of me Dooooh!!
Reminds me of an old TV program where someone started telling a joke and the object was to interrupt and finish it off.
iMac - 10.10.3 - Live 9 Suite - APC40 - Axiom 61 - TX81z - Firestudio Mobile - Focal Alpha 80's - Godin Session - Home made foot controller
Syd Barrett once got the members of Pink Floyd in a room to practice a new song he was working on called "got it yet?"Reminds me of an old TV program where someone started telling a joke and the object was to interrupt and finish it off.
He'd play it through, and then stop, and ask "got it yet?"
They'd say no, so he did it again, but completely differently...
This went on until everybody but Roger and Syd left the room.
Apparently, only Roger and Syd "got it."
- zevo
infinite density, zero volume
-
adventurepants_
- Posts: 1773
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 3:05 am