|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388423 is a reply to message #388227] |
Wed, 06 November 2019 13:43   |
usenet
Messages: 556
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> To understand the war in Vietnam, "Deliver Us from Evil" by Tom Dooley is a good
> place to start.
Dooley was a CIA operative and a propagandist, and that book is full of lies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388428 is a reply to message #388423] |
Wed, 06 November 2019 16:33 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2019-11-06, Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> To understand the war in Vietnam, "Deliver Us from Evil" by Tom Dooley is a good
>> place to start.
>
> Dooley was a CIA operative and a propagandist, and that book is full of lies.
>
>
Cite?
--
Maus@ireland.xxx
Will rant for food.
You are taking the IPCC, right?
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388430 is a reply to message #388362] |
Wed, 06 November 2019 20:11 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 10:09:23 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 03 Nov 2019 01:49:08 -0400, J. Clarke
>>> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 21:32:31 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 3:53:59 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> >> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 13:48:16 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>> You kept your mouth
>>>> >>> shut at all times, never criticizing the government, ever (or
>>>> >>> much else), less the police come for you and you're never seen
>>>> >>> again.
>>>> >
>>>> >> Depends on how you criticized it and who to and whether you were
>>>> >> significant enough for anybody to care. The secret police didn't
>>>> >> really have any incentive to round up every drunk who mouthed off in a
>>>> >> bar.
>>>> >
>>>> >>> Going back a generation, people lived under constant
>>>> >>> terror, even after Stalin's death.
>>>> >
>>>> >> Constant terror of what?
>>>> >
>>>> >>> Kruschev wasn't as bad, but was no saint.
>>>> >
>>>> >> You sound like the "Americanism vs Communism" text for the propaganda
>>>> >> class I was required to sit through in sixth grade.
>>>> >
>>>> > Communism _was_ pretty much as evil as it was painted by American conservatives.
>>>> >
>>>> > That they exploited this as a club against loyal Americans who wanted America to
>>>> > do more for racial equality, to address poverty, and so on... speaks badly of
>>>> > them, but it does not change what Stalin or Khrushchev or Brezhnev or Andropov
>>>> > were.
>>>> >
>>>> > This is the misunderstanding that keeps America divided.
>>>>
>>>> Since you did not take that propaganda course, you have no basis for
>>>> commenting on it. Suffice it to say that much of what they told us
>>>> was evil about Communism also occurred in places like France.
>>>>
>>>> And much of what they told us was evil about Communism is now taking
>>>> place in the United States, mostly at the behest of liberals.
>>>
>>> You misspelled 'GOP nutcases who emulate Nazism'. Liberals have
>>> nothing to do with our current crises.
>>
>> (mostly) it’s not the right who refuse to let people they don’t agree with
>> speak. or attack someone for something they may have done years ago,
>> regardless of what they might be doing now. Even Obama is pushing back
>> against this “wokeness”. Both sides are doing bad stuff, and it’s scary,
>> but it’s pretty much a toss up which side is worse.
>
> Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan are not exactly open minded when it
> comes to any criticism of their man. They have actually
> called for retribution against the whistleblower, in blatant
> violation of the law.
>
> So much for freedom of speech and democracy.
>
>
Unless the Dems go completely off the rails a lot of this nonsense should
be gone after the next election. My home is that enough of the Republican
party can be salvage from the wreckage.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388431 is a reply to message #388371] |
Wed, 06 November 2019 20:11 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 09:29:25 -0700, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 04 Nov 2019 19:31:10 -0500, J. Clarke
>>> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 13:37:28 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 12:03:19 PM UTC-7, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Democracy is a fairly rare and mostly very recent development in history.
>>>> >> Most people have been ruled by some kind of despotism, better or worse. I
>>>> >> don?t think many people really care, as long as they can have a decent life
>>>> >> and be left alone to raise their families.
>>>> >
>>>> > That's true as far as it goes. But it is also misleading.
>>>> >
>>>> > Because letting people lead a decent life, and raise their families, is what
>>>> > democracy is all about. Control over the government means being able to make the
>>>> > government serve your purposes, rather than those of some despot.
>>>> >
>>>> > So it allows the people to keep their taxes lower, or get the government to
>>>> > address crime or other concerns.
>>>> >
>>>> > Democracy as an end in itself might be something too abstract for ordinary
>>>> > people to worry about - but it is also a means to an end. And the ends to which
>>>> > it is a means definitely do matter to ordinary people.
>>>>
>>>> Quadi, go experience a war first hand and then let us know how that's
>>>> better than living under a heavy-handed government.
>>>
>>> Are you saying the Allies shouldn't have invaded Festung Europa and
>>> prevailed against the Axis ?
>>>
>>
>> Its always easy after the fact to say that this or that war should or
>> should not have been fought. It takes a rare individual to say that before
>> the fact, and such people are usually ignored.
>
> Interesting way to avoid the question.
>
I answered it elsewhere - I think Europe would look roughly the same today
in any case.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388432 is a reply to message #388380] |
Wed, 06 November 2019 20:11 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 2:06:17 PM UTC-7, JimP wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 09:29:24 -0700, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>> They tend to leave the average person alone, except for maybe Kin Jong Un.
>>> Someone who doesn’t express any political thoughts can usually just live a
>>> normal life.
>
>> Everything I have read about the Soviet Union and China contradicts
>> your claim.
>
> I wouldn't go as far as that.
>
> But first one may note that "usually" is not the same as always.
>
> When the Soviet Union took over the Baltic countries, it started by killing
> eveyone who had any kind of community leadership position. The idea was to
> forestall, in advance, any possibility of a rebellion organizing.
>
> There is the holodomor in the Ukraine - the artificial famine of the 1930s.
>
> But indeed, most of the time, people who keep their mouths shut except to parrot
> the party line as required can go on with their lives. But their lives will
> still be affected by the fact they're not living in a democracy. Because the
> government runs the economy according to its own priorities, in the Soviet Union
> there were long line-ups for items at the official price - ordinary people often
> had to have dealings on the black market, thus risking arrest.
This is also a method of control. The government sets up situations where
petty crimes like black-marketeering are common, and then if they need to
they can threaten you with arrest.
>
> This shouldn't be surprising, after all, in democracies, politics is often about
> competition between regions for government spending, or conflicts between jobs
> and the environment.
>
> John Savard
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388433 is a reply to message #388384] |
Wed, 06 November 2019 20:11 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:17:49 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 5:36:11 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 13:45:52 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 11:10:11 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> > On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 07:09:38 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On Friday, November 1, 2019 at 8:53:07 PM UTC-6, Anne & Lynn Wheeler quoted, in part:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> The Geneva Agreement of 1954, ending the first
>>>> >>> Vietnamese war, established a temporary frontier between the North and
>>>> >>> the South, and two temporary governments on either side of the line,
>>>> >>> pending elections scheduled for 1956. 14 When the South Vietnamese
>>>> >>> government refused to permit these elections, it clearly lost whatever
>>>> >>> legitimacy was conferred by the agreements.
>>>> >>> pg98/loc2373-75: The Saigon regime was so much an American creature that
>>>> >>> the U.S. governments claim to be committed to it and obligated to
>>>> >>> ensure its survival is hard to understand. It is as if our right hand
>>>> >>> were committed to our left. There is no independent moral or political
>>>> >>> agent on the other side of the bond and hence no genuine bond at all.
>>>> >>> pg99/loc2383-85: It would be better to say that the U.S. was literally
>>>> >>> propping up a governmentand shortly a series of governmentswithout a
>>>> >>> local political base, while the North Vietnamese were assisting an
>>>> >>> insurgent movement with deep roots in the countryside.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Just because something gets printed in a book doesn't mean it's true.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Or, in this case, just because it is factually true to some extent doesn't mean
>>>> >> it's not horribly misleading.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The United Statew was fighting against Communism in Vietnam, and Communism was a
>>>> >> horrible evil, whether under Stalin in Russia, under Mao in China, or under Ho
>>>> >> Chi Minh in Vietnam.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Only when one gets this most basic fact right can one then proceed to a fuller
>>>> >> but still correct analysis which includes the many regrettable faults of the
>>>> >> U.S. war effort in Vietnam.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > People who lived under Communism seem to have a different view from
>>>> > yours. Could have been better they'll admit but "horrible evil"
>>>> > justifying large numbers of deaths in war, not so much.
>>>>
>>>> Most people from the former Soviet Union who came the U.S.
>>>> have nothing good to say about it. They are very glad to
>>>> be out of there. Conditions were horrible.
>>>
>>> "Horrible" -- is that their word or yours?
>>>
>>>> > Vietnam was an effort to keep control of a colony. If it hadn't been
>>>> > a French colony the US would likely have never gotten involved.
>>>>
>>>> The French were defeated. While the US got involved in a minor
>>>> way, it took a while for the US to send large numbers of
>>>> troops over.
>>>
>>> The French made it a US problem.
>>>
>>>> It wasn't about a colony.
>>>
>>> It was about maintaining the government that the French wanted and not
>>> the government that the Vietnamese wanted.
>>
>> Once the French lost and pulled out, they no longer cared.
>>
>>
>>> If the Communists had not had popular support they could not have
>>> succeeded.
>>
>> The communists had 'support' solely due to the point of a gun.
>
> And yet the Americans had more and bigger guns and didn't get that
> support.
>>
>
Bigger, but not more. The VC was into every village and province down to
the lowest level. The Americans would pop in and leave, but Charlie stayed
there.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388436 is a reply to message #388433] |
Wed, 06 November 2019 21:12 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 18:11:55 -0700, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:17:49 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 5:36:11 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 13:45:52 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 11:10:11 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> >> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 07:09:38 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On Friday, November 1, 2019 at 8:53:07 PM UTC-6, Anne & Lynn Wheeler quoted, in part:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> The Geneva Agreement of 1954, ending the first
>>>> >>>> Vietnamese war, established a temporary frontier between the North and
>>>> >>>> the South, and two temporary governments on either side of the line,
>>>> >>>> pending elections scheduled for 1956. 14 When the South Vietnamese
>>>> >>>> government refused to permit these elections, it clearly lost whatever
>>>> >>>> legitimacy was conferred by the agreements.
>>>> >>>> pg98/loc2373-75: The Saigon regime was so much an American creature that
>>>> >>>> the U.S. government?s claim to be committed to it and obligated to
>>>> >>>> ensure its survival is hard to understand. It is as if our right hand
>>>> >>>> were committed to our left. There is no independent moral or political
>>>> >>>> agent on the other side of the bond and hence no genuine bond at all.
>>>> >>>> pg99/loc2383-85: It would be better to say that the U.S. was literally
>>>> >>>> propping up a government?and shortly a series of governments?without a
>>>> >>>> local political base, while the North Vietnamese were assisting an
>>>> >>>> insurgent movement with deep roots in the countryside.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Just because something gets printed in a book doesn't mean it's true.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Or, in this case, just because it is factually true to some extent doesn't mean
>>>> >>> it's not horribly misleading.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> The United Statew was fighting against Communism in Vietnam, and Communism was a
>>>> >>> horrible evil, whether under Stalin in Russia, under Mao in China, or under Ho
>>>> >>> Chi Minh in Vietnam.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Only when one gets this most basic fact right can one then proceed to a fuller
>>>> >>> but still correct analysis which includes the many regrettable faults of the
>>>> >>> U.S. war effort in Vietnam.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >> People who lived under Communism seem to have a different view from
>>>> >> yours. Could have been better they'll admit but "horrible evil"
>>>> >> justifying large numbers of deaths in war, not so much.
>>>> >
>>>> > Most people from the former Soviet Union who came the U.S.
>>>> > have nothing good to say about it. They are very glad to
>>>> > be out of there. Conditions were horrible.
>>>>
>>>> "Horrible" -- is that their word or yours?
>>>>
>>>> >> Vietnam was an effort to keep control of a colony. If it hadn't been
>>>> >> a French colony the US would likely have never gotten involved.
>>>> >
>>>> > The French were defeated. While the US got involved in a minor
>>>> > way, it took a while for the US to send large numbers of
>>>> > troops over.
>>>>
>>>> The French made it a US problem.
>>>>
>>>> > It wasn't about a colony.
>>>>
>>>> It was about maintaining the government that the French wanted and not
>>>> the government that the Vietnamese wanted.
>>>
>>> Once the French lost and pulled out, they no longer cared.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If the Communists had not had popular support they could not have
>>>> succeeded.
>>>
>>> The communists had 'support' solely due to the point of a gun.
>>
>> And yet the Americans had more and bigger guns and didn't get that
>> support.
>>>
>>
>
> Bigger, but not more. The VC was into every village and province down to
> the lowest level. The Americans would pop in and leave, but Charlie stayed
> there.
And how did Charlie manage that without popular support?
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388437 is a reply to message #388428] |
Wed, 06 November 2019 21:17 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 2:33:34 PM UTC-7, ma...@mail.com wrote:
> On 2019-11-06, Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>> To understand the war in Vietnam, "Deliver Us from Evil" by Tom Dooley is a good
>>> place to start.
>> Dooley was a CIA operative and a propagandist, and that book is full of lies.
> Cite?
The Wikipedia article about him seems to agree... and I also found an article in
the Los Angeles Times. Apparently he was blackmailed because of being a
homosexual.
This is distressing to learn.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388448 is a reply to message #388430] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 09:00 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 10:09:23 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 03 Nov 2019 01:49:08 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 21:32:31 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
>>>> > <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 3:53:59 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> >>> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 13:48:16 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>>> You kept your mouth shut at all times, never criticizing the
>>>> >>>> government, ever (or much else), less the police come for you
>>>> >>>> and you're never seen again.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Depends on how you criticized it and who to and whether you were
>>>> >>> significant enough for anybody to care. The secret police
>>>> >>> didn't really have any incentive to round up every drunk who
>>>> >>> mouthed off in a bar.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>>> Going back a generation, people lived under constant terror,
>>>> >>>> even after Stalin's death.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Constant terror of what?
>>>> >>
>>>> >>>> Kruschev wasn't as bad, but was no saint.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> You sound like the "Americanism vs Communism" text for the
>>>> >>> propaganda class I was required to sit through in sixth grade.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Communism _was_ pretty much as evil as it was painted by American
>>>> >> conservatives.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> That they exploited this as a club against loyal Americans who
>>>> >> wanted America to do more for racial equality, to address
>>>> >> poverty, and so on... speaks badly of them, but it does not
>>>> >> change what Stalin or Khrushchev or Brezhnev or Andropov were.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> This is the misunderstanding that keeps America divided.
>>>> >
>>>> > Since you did not take that propaganda course, you have no basis
>>>> > for commenting on it. Suffice it to say that much of what they
>>>> > told us was evil about Communism also occurred in places like
>>>> > France.
>>>> >
>>>> > And much of what they told us was evil about Communism is now
>>>> > taking place in the United States, mostly at the behest of
>>>> > liberals.
>>>>
>>>> You misspelled 'GOP nutcases who emulate Nazism'. Liberals have
>>>> nothing to do with our current crises.
>>>
>>> (mostly) it’s not the right who refuse to let people they don’t
>>> agree with speak. or attack someone for something they may have done
>>> years ago, regardless of what they might be doing now. Even Obama is
>>> pushing back against this “wokeness”. Both sides are doing bad
>>> stuff, and it’s scary, but it’s pretty much a toss up which side is
>>> worse.
>>
>> Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan are not exactly open minded when it comes
>> to any criticism of their man. They have actually called for
>> retribution against the whistleblower, in blatant violation of the
>> law.
>>
>> So much for freedom of speech and democracy.
>
> Unless the Dems go completely off the rails a lot of this nonsense
> should be gone after the next election. My home is that enough of the
> Republican party can be salvage from the wreckage.
I've heard more than one pundit predict the demise of the Republican
party. My town has been solid Republican as long as I've been here. In
the last few elections that's changed.
If you look at the personality profile of a liberal vs. conservative,
you'll find conservatives value loyalty more than a liberal. Most
people look on loyalty as a positive trait. Me too, but if a friend
does something wrong, right or wrong takes precedence.
I thought the Republicans would turn on Trump long before this. I'm
still waiting.
You're right about the Dems going off the rails. They really need to
stick with moderates. It's clear the country is just about evenly
divided.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388453 is a reply to message #388320] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 13:46 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 7:31:11 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
> Quadi, go experience a war first hand and then let us know how that's
> better than living under a heavy-handed government.
thankfully I've never had to experience a war. but I know
lots of people who've had to experience a heavy handed
govt and they might differ with your perspective.
in ww ii, people in countries liberated from the axis
powers certainly were most grateful and quite willing
to accept sacrifices. they have told me so.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388454 is a reply to message #388304] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 13:50 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 10:49:15 AM UTC-5, JimP wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 07:09:58 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
> wrote:
>> On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 5:23:15 AM UTC-7, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> The logical error in your post is the assumption that people want the
>>> US to "free" them no matter how many people die in the process.
>>
>> No, because I'm not making that error. The Americans don't care too much how many
>> Russians die in the process of keeping Stalin out, and much the same applies to
>> Thais and Vietnamese.
>
> I doubt every American approved of any of that. Same for other people
> living elsewhere.
>
> If someone only knows the form of government they live under, they
> can't make a choice. My high school history teacher had us read Mein
> Kampf, the Communist Manifesto, and the US Constitution and Bill of
> Rights. I seem to remember we read some part of the Federalist papers
> to, but I'm not sure. I noticed rather quickly the Kampf and Manifesto
> were idiocy and rather loony in places.
>
> But many nations simply don't allow opposing views of government to be
> read, viewed, etc. by their people. So they can't make choices.
Many dictatorships took power by force. Agents shut down
opposition news media, block opposition candidates and
use other violence. So, even if they manage to "win"
an election, it clearly wasn't a fair one.
Regardless of their propaganda, the Bolsheviks and Maoists
used brutal force to take over and then maintain power.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388456 is a reply to message #388322] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 13:59 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 9:32:12 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
> mcnamara was lemay's staff planning fire bombing cities in ww2, left fom
> the auto industry and came back as secdef for vietnam ... where laos
> become the most bombed country in the world
bombing wasn't as effective as the air corps claimed.
the enemy still managed to maintain productive capacity
and it took ground troops to finally end the war.
undoubtedly it helped but not as much as claimed.
killing civilians does not win a war.
Vietnam wasn't an industrialized country, so bombing
them was even less effective. unfortunately, they
couldn't bomb the real source of munitions, the
ussr.
us prosecution of the war was terrible. sad, because
there were officers in the military who knew what to do
for that environment, even trained units accordingly,
but not deployed.
all those failed initiatives of pacification and other
crap were just idiotic shots in the dark.
I've heard lots of people curse out McNamara. now I know why.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388457 is a reply to message #388336] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 14:04 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 8:37:07 AM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
> I'm an American and I care.
Good.
> I may be wrong, but I think many of us care.
These days i'm not so sure. voter turnout is still
terrible despite in most places it's very easy to vote.
people aren't informed and they don't want to be.
these days it seems only political extremists are involved,
and that's not good.
In Tuesday's elections, a lot of extremists of both ends
got elected in my area.
> As a society, I think we need to throw nationalism in the ditch.
> It's fine to want the best for yourself, your family, your town, your
> state, your country, but also consider the good of humanity.
Absolutely, positively! WW I was fueled by nationalism.
Nationalism accomplishes nothing and creates wars and ugly
messes.
The nationalism engendered by the present White House has
hurt our economy and hurt our people. it has done no good.
sadly, nationalism is growing overseas with equally dire results.
I guess the lessons of WW I have been forgotten.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388458 is a reply to message #388346] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 14:06 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 11:29:22 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>> The US has a foreign policy?
>
> Not any more. Trump has a foreign policy.
We need to ask why the Russians were dancing in the streets
when Trump was elected.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388459 is a reply to message #388345] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 14:08 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 11:29:22 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
> People who get their political news from Facebook probably don’t rank too
> highly on the intelligence scale.
I know someone like that and your characterization is correct.
Amazingly, she voted for the exact opposite of what she thought
she was getting, and that was detrimental to her personal interests.
Sadly, it seems that an awful lot of people now get their news solely
from online sources. This person won't pick up a newspaper or
watch the evening news. She stays clued to her smartphone.
I don't think that's good.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388460 is a reply to message #388384] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 14:14 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 6:13:51 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
>> The communists had 'support' solely due to the point of a gun.
>
> And yet the Americans had more and bigger guns and didn't get that
> support.
the americans may have had massive firepower in Vietnam, but they
used it very poorly.
LBJ was as bad as trump. really. he kept his complaints quiet
(no Twitter), but he was a tyrant. he tired to go after the tv
networks to control coverage. he blatantly lied to the
American people about Vietnam.
His "Great Society" was a trainwreck as well and did a lot
of damage.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388461 is a reply to message #388388] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 14:16 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 6:24:27 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:32:17 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, November 3, 2019 at 2:55:51 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> So how many people do you know, personally, who lived under Communism?
>>
>> Lots, of all ages.
>>
>> Leaving a communist country meant a great personal sacrifice,
>> even risk. People who applied for an exit visa could and were
>> branded as traitors and jailed. So, the people who left really
>> were motivated, just as the Vietnamese 'boat people' were really
>> motivated and the Cuban boat lift were really motivated.
>>
>> That tells you something right there.
>>
>> Indeed, after WW II, refugees from lands now under communist
>> control did not want to go back, but Stalin demanded their
>> return.
>
> So you know people who were sufficiently opposed to Communism to want
> to leave on political grounds.
Didn't say that.
> How many people do you know who grew up under Communism and just plain
> did not give a crap about politics?
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388462 is a reply to message #388390] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 14:17 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 6:31:15 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:27:34 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, November 3, 2019 at 1:49:09 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>
>>> And much of what they told us was evil about Communism is now taking
>>> place in the United States, mostly at the behest of liberals.
>>
>> We have hard core conservative Republicans now waging a war
>> against anyone who dares to criticize their president.
>
> Trump sucks!!!!!
>
> There, I critcized the President. I guess that now the secret police
> are supposed to knock on my door.
Go say it where people can actually hear you and look at
the consequences. Won't be pretty.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388463 is a reply to message #388391] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 14:19 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 6:35:28 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:20:33 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 5:53:59 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 13:48:16 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 11:15:39 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> > On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 07:02:58 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > >On Friday, November 1, 2019 at 5:23:46 PM UTC-6, Walter Bushell wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> It was a war of national liberation and we were on the wrong side.
>>>> > >> There was no North or South Vietnam only Vietnam.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >1) The United States was on the _right_ side.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >Ho Chi Minh may have started out leading a war of national liberation against an
>>>> > >oppressive French colonial regime.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >But to *do* that, he got support from Stalin and Mao, with the result that he
>>>> > >replaced one oppression with a *worse* one.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >The United States fought on behalf of a Vietnamese regime that was closer to a
>>>> > >democracy. The Pentagon Papers noted how they made it less democratic to have a
>>>> > >better partner in the war, but even so, the result was still far better than the
>>>> > >horrible brutal Communist tyranny of the North.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >To understand the war in Vietnam, "Deliver Us from Evil" by Tom Dooley is a good
>>>> > >place to start.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >2) There was a part of Vietnam that Ho Chi Minh controlled, and a part that he
>>>> > >didn't.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >That North and South Vietnam weren't historic nations is true, not just
>>>> > >semantics. But it is irrelevant. The United States was defending people who were
>>>> > >(somewhat, imperfectly) free from a regime that wanted to make them unfree.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >The historical roots of the political entity in which they lived are irrelevant
>>>> > >to the legitimacy of that activity.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >Korea is one historic nation. Does that mean that the people of South Korea
>>>> > >*ought* to be living under the nightmarish regime of Kim Jong Un?
>>>> > >
>>>> > >China is one historic nation. Does that mean Xi Jinping should extend his rule
>>>> > >to include Taiwan?
>>>> > >
>>>> > >Either of those two cases would be a horrible disaster for the people who today
>>>> > >live in freedom; the same is true of what happened in Vietnam.
>>>> >
>>>> > Tell me something, Quadi. How many people do you, personally, know
>>>> > who have lived under Communism?
>>>> >
>>>> > My former boss grew up in Poland, so did two of my co-workers. Our
>>>> > configuration management person is Russian. Our lead actuary is
>>>> > Chinese. I don't mean "Polish-American" or "Russian-American" or
>>>> > "Chinese-American", I mean people who grew up in Communist Poland, the
>>>> > Soviet Union, and mainland China.
>>>> >
>>>> > They all like the pay and the selection of goods in the US, but none
>>>> > of them say that somebody should have gone to war to "free" them, and
>>>> > in terms of everyday interference in their lives, the US is worse than
>>>> > any of the Communist countries.
>>>>
>>>> OMG, all of the immigrants I know from former Communist countries
>>>> say the atmosphere was horribly repressive.
>>>
>>> Perhaps they were the kind of people to whom blathering about ideology
>>> was the most important thing in the world.
>>>
>>>> You kept your mouth
>>>> shut at all times, never criticizing the government, ever (or
>>>> much else), less the police come for you and you're never seen
>>>> again.
>>>
>>> Depends on how you criticized it and who to and whether you were
>>> significant enough for anybody to care. The secret police didn't
>>> really have any incentive to round up every drunk who mouthed off in a
>>> bar.
>>
>> Actually they did.
>
> What was the incentive?
>
>>>> Going back a generation, people lived under constant
>>>> terror, even after Stalin's death.
>>>
>>> Constant terror of what?
>>
>> Being arrested, deported to Siberia or shot.
>
> So someone minding his own business, with an ugly wife and an ugly
> daughter and no money and no interest in politics lived in terror of
> being arrested, deported, or shot? Why would they arrest, deport, or
> shoot him?
Stalin set quotas. He deliberately created an atmosphere
of terror. Victims were basically selected at random.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388466 is a reply to message #388425] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 14:28 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Wed, 06 Nov 2019 18:43:29 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 17:35:21 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> Because they didn't stoop to things like cutting off the fingers of little
>> children.
>
> One of the many lies in the Dooley book.
Both sides murdered unarmed people in the villages and kept body parts
as souvenirs. One of my high school classmates told me about it. He
was there, 4 tours.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388468 is a reply to message #388448] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 14:38 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 9:00:45 AM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 10:09:23 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > On Sun, 03 Nov 2019 01:49:08 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>> > <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 21:32:31 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
>>>> >> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 3:53:59 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> >>>> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 13:48:16 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>>> You kept your mouth shut at all times, never criticizing the
>>>> >>>>> government, ever (or much else), less the police come for you
>>>> >>>>> and you're never seen again.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> Depends on how you criticized it and who to and whether you were
>>>> >>>> significant enough for anybody to care. The secret police
>>>> >>>> didn't really have any incentive to round up every drunk who
>>>> >>>> mouthed off in a bar.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>>> Going back a generation, people lived under constant terror,
>>>> >>>>> even after Stalin's death.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> Constant terror of what?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>>> Kruschev wasn't as bad, but was no saint.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> You sound like the "Americanism vs Communism" text for the
>>>> >>>> propaganda class I was required to sit through in sixth grade.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Communism _was_ pretty much as evil as it was painted by American
>>>> >>> conservatives.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> That they exploited this as a club against loyal Americans who
>>>> >>> wanted America to do more for racial equality, to address
>>>> >>> poverty, and so on... speaks badly of them, but it does not
>>>> >>> change what Stalin or Khrushchev or Brezhnev or Andropov were.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> This is the misunderstanding that keeps America divided.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Since you did not take that propaganda course, you have no basis
>>>> >> for commenting on it. Suffice it to say that much of what they
>>>> >> told us was evil about Communism also occurred in places like
>>>> >> France.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> And much of what they told us was evil about Communism is now
>>>> >> taking place in the United States, mostly at the behest of
>>>> >> liberals.
>>>> >
>>>> > You misspelled 'GOP nutcases who emulate Nazism'. Liberals have
>>>> > nothing to do with our current crises.
>>>>
>>>> (mostly) it’s not the right who refuse to let people they don’t
>>>> agree with speak. or attack someone for something they may have done
>>>> years ago, regardless of what they might be doing now. Even Obama is
>>>> pushing back against this “wokeness”. Both sides are doing bad
>>>> stuff, and it’s scary, but it’s pretty much a toss up which side is
>>>> worse.
>>>
>>> Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan are not exactly open minded when it comes
>>> to any criticism of their man. They have actually called for
>>> retribution against the whistleblower, in blatant violation of the
>>> law.
>>>
>>> So much for freedom of speech and democracy.
>>
>> Unless the Dems go completely off the rails a lot of this nonsense
>> should be gone after the next election. My home is that enough of the
>> Republican party can be salvage from the wreckage.
> I've heard more than one pundit predict the demise of the Republican
> party. My town has been solid Republican as long as I've been here. In
> the last few elections that's changed.
Republicans aren't going anywhere. They probably will take
a big hit in 2020, if events repeat the Watergate experience.
(too soon to tell, but recall Nixon won in a landslide in 1972).
> If you look at the personality profile of a liberal vs. conservative,
> you'll find conservatives value loyalty more than a liberal. Most
> people look on loyalty as a positive trait. Me too, but if a friend
> does something wrong, right or wrong takes precedence.
They say "Republicans fall in line, Democrats fall in love".
> I thought the Republicans would turn on Trump long before this. I'm
> still waiting.
It blows my mind that Republicans tolerated repeated vicious
attacks on Sen. McCain, a war hero and respected statesman,
more recently on Mitt Romney. I couldn't believe the venom
Fox News spewed against him. I don't get why this is tolerated.
It is not good for the country.
> You're right about the Dems going off the rails. They really need to
> stick with moderates. It's clear the country is just about evenly
> divided.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388471 is a reply to message #388468] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 15:23 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:38:24 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 9:00:45 AM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>>> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>> On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 10:09:23 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>> > JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> On Sun, 03 Nov 2019 01:49:08 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>> >> <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 21:32:31 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
>>>> >>> <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> On Saturday, November 2, 2019 at 3:53:59 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> >>>>> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 13:48:16 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>>> You kept your mouth shut at all times, never criticizing the
>>>> >>>>>> government, ever (or much else), less the police come for you
>>>> >>>>>> and you're never seen again.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> Depends on how you criticized it and who to and whether you were
>>>> >>>>> significant enough for anybody to care. The secret police
>>>> >>>>> didn't really have any incentive to round up every drunk who
>>>> >>>>> mouthed off in a bar.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Going back a generation, people lived under constant terror,
>>>> >>>>>> even after Stalin's death.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> Constant terror of what?
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Kruschev wasn't as bad, but was no saint.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> You sound like the "Americanism vs Communism" text for the
>>>> >>>>> propaganda class I was required to sit through in sixth grade.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Communism _was_ pretty much as evil as it was painted by American
>>>> >>>> conservatives.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> That they exploited this as a club against loyal Americans who
>>>> >>>> wanted America to do more for racial equality, to address
>>>> >>>> poverty, and so on... speaks badly of them, but it does not
>>>> >>>> change what Stalin or Khrushchev or Brezhnev or Andropov were.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> This is the misunderstanding that keeps America divided.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Since you did not take that propaganda course, you have no basis
>>>> >>> for commenting on it. Suffice it to say that much of what they
>>>> >>> told us was evil about Communism also occurred in places like
>>>> >>> France.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> And much of what they told us was evil about Communism is now
>>>> >>> taking place in the United States, mostly at the behest of
>>>> >>> liberals.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> You misspelled 'GOP nutcases who emulate Nazism'. Liberals have
>>>> >> nothing to do with our current crises.
>>>> >
>>>> > (mostly) its not the right who refuse to let people they dont
>>>> > agree with speak. or attack someone for something they may have done
>>>> > years ago, regardless of what they might be doing now. Even Obama is
>>>> > pushing back against this wokeness. Both sides are doing bad
>>>> > stuff, and its scary, but its pretty much a toss up which side is
>>>> > worse.
>>>>
>>>> Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan are not exactly open minded when it comes
>>>> to any criticism of their man. They have actually called for
>>>> retribution against the whistleblower, in blatant violation of the
>>>> law.
>>>>
>>>> So much for freedom of speech and democracy.
>>>
>>> Unless the Dems go completely off the rails a lot of this nonsense
>>> should be gone after the next election. My home is that enough of the
>>> Republican party can be salvage from the wreckage.
>
>
>
>> I've heard more than one pundit predict the demise of the Republican
>> party. My town has been solid Republican as long as I've been here. In
>> the last few elections that's changed.
>
> Republicans aren't going anywhere. They probably will take
> a big hit in 2020, if events repeat the Watergate experience.
> (too soon to tell, but recall Nixon won in a landslide in 1972).
>
>
>
>> If you look at the personality profile of a liberal vs. conservative,
>> you'll find conservatives value loyalty more than a liberal. Most
>> people look on loyalty as a positive trait. Me too, but if a friend
>> does something wrong, right or wrong takes precedence.
>
> They say "Republicans fall in line, Democrats fall in love".
>
>
>
>> I thought the Republicans would turn on Trump long before this. I'm
>> still waiting.
>
> It blows my mind that Republicans tolerated repeated vicious
> attacks on Sen. McCain, a war hero and respected statesman,
> more recently on Mitt Romney. I couldn't believe the venom
> Fox News spewed against him. I don't get why this is tolerated.
>
> It is not good for the country.
Definately not good for anything. Makes me wonder what kind of dirt a
certain twit has on them. Its certainly abnormal behavior.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388472 is a reply to message #386363] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 15:36 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Kerr-Mudd,John
On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 17:21:25 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2019-11-07, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> You're right about the Dems going off the rails. They really need to
>> stick with moderates.
>
> What's amusing about this is that by European standards, the Democrats
> *are* moderates. American politics is so much further to the right that
> they only look like loons inside America.
Eh? Rightwing Democrats look to me like loons (from the outside).
I'm coding an 8086 hexdump program. If anyone cares.
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388473 is a reply to message #388457] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 15:38 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Kerr-Mudd,John
On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 19:04:34 GMT, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 8:37:07 AM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>> I'm an American and I care.
>
> Good.
>
>
>> I may be wrong, but I think many of us care.
>
> These days i'm not so sure. voter turnout is still
> terrible despite in most places it's very easy to vote.
>
> people aren't informed and they don't want to be.
>
> these days it seems only political extremists are involved,
> and that's not good.
>
> In Tuesday's elections, a lot of extremists of both ends
> got elected in my area.
>
>
>> As a society, I think we need to throw nationalism in the ditch.
>> It's fine to want the best for yourself, your family, your town, your
>> state, your country, but also consider the good of humanity.
>
> Absolutely, positively! WW I was fueled by nationalism.
> Nationalism accomplishes nothing and creates wars and ugly
> messes.
>
> The nationalism engendered by the present White House has
> hurt our economy and hurt our people. it has done no good.
> sadly, nationalism is growing overseas with equally dire results.
> I guess the lessons of WW I have been forgotten.
>
I heard it was all caused by sunspots (or lack of, I forget which).
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388475 is a reply to message #388456] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 16:13 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 9:32:12 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>
>> mcnamara was lemay's staff planning fire bombing cities in ww2, left fom
>> the auto industry and came back as secdef for vietnam ... where laos
>> become the most bombed country in the world
>
> bombing wasn't as effective as the air corps claimed.
> the enemy still managed to maintain productive capacity
> and it took ground troops to finally end the war.
> undoubtedly it helped but not as much as claimed.
I’m currently reading a book about the final weeks of WW II. The
firebombing of Japanese cities was effective because the Japanese had
dispersed their manufacturing around the cities into the civilian areas.
The firebombing, while unfortunately killing lots of civilians, was
effective in shutting down the manufacturing.
>
> killing civilians does not win a war.
>
> Vietnam wasn't an industrialized country, so bombing
> them was even less effective. unfortunately, they
> couldn't bomb the real source of munitions, the
> ussr.
We could have bombed the transportation facilities, which would have made
sense.
>
> us prosecution of the war was terrible. sad, because
> there were officers in the military who knew what to do
> for that environment, even trained units accordingly,
> but not deployed.
>
> all those failed initiatives of pacification and other
> crap were just idiotic shots in the dark.
>
> I've heard lots of people curse out McNamara. now I know why.
>
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388478 is a reply to message #388475] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 17:13 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> We could have bombed the transportation facilities, which would have
> made sense.
which was a lot of the indiscriminate bombing in Laos (ho chi minh
trail). "Kill Chain: The Rise of the High-Tech Assassins"
https://www.amazon.com/Kill-Chain-Rise-High-Tech-Assassins-e book/dp/B00MSZ5BBI/
pg31/loc556-60: Task Force Alpha was finally switched off on December
31, 1972. Out in the jungle, the last sensors went on faithfully
broadcasting sounds, movements, and smells that no one would hear, until
their batteries ran down. Once the last raid on Laos had flown home—an
average of one planeload of bombs had landed on that country every eight
minutes, twenty-four hours a day, for nine years—the surviving So Tri
emerged from the hidden dugouts where they had waited out the cataclysm
and returned to rebuild their ruined villages amid the countless
craters. They did not teach their children about the war.
Also bombing continues to kill and maim people ... lots of B52 bombs
didn't explode (immediately) "American Reckoning: The Vietnam War and
Our National Identity"
https://www.amazon.com/American-Reckoning-Vietnam-National-I dentity-ebook/dp/B00LFZ87LS/
loc2719-21: A single B-52, loaded with cluster bombs, could cover a
square mile with 7.5 million steel pellets firing out in every
direction. Bomblets that failed to explode on contact could explode
years and even decades later when inadvertently dislodged by farmers or
picked up by children.
a little computer drift, IBM in vietnam ... posted to Collins radio
thread
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2019e.html#77
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388480 is a reply to message #388458] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 17:36 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:06:01 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 11:29:22 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>>> The US has a foreign policy?
>>
>> Not any more. Trump has a foreign policy.
>
> We need to ask why the Russians were dancing in the streets
> when Trump was elected.
The thing is the next President is going to have a different foreign
policy that may bear no resemblance to the current one.
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388481 is a reply to message #388475] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 17:38 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 14:13:10 -0700, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 9:32:12 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>>
>>> mcnamara was lemay's staff planning fire bombing cities in ww2, left fom
>>> the auto industry and came back as secdef for vietnam ... where laos
>>> become the most bombed country in the world
>>
>> bombing wasn't as effective as the air corps claimed.
>> the enemy still managed to maintain productive capacity
>> and it took ground troops to finally end the war.
>> undoubtedly it helped but not as much as claimed.
>
> Im currently reading a book about the final weeks of WW II. The
> firebombing of Japanese cities was effective because the Japanese had
> dispersed their manufacturing around the cities into the civilian areas.
> The firebombing, while unfortunately killing lots of civilians, was
> effective in shutting down the manufacturing.
>
>>
>> killing civilians does not win a war.
>>
>> Vietnam wasn't an industrialized country, so bombing
>> them was even less effective. unfortunately, they
>> couldn't bomb the real source of munitions, the
>> ussr.
>
> We could have bombed the transportation facilities, which would have made
> sense.
Uh, the "transportation facilities" were a horde of VC with bicycles.
Note that they did not ride the bicycles, they loaded them with stuff
and then used them as pushcarts.
>
>>
>> us prosecution of the war was terrible. sad, because
>> there were officers in the military who knew what to do
>> for that environment, even trained units accordingly,
>> but not deployed.
>>
>> all those failed initiatives of pacification and other
>> crap were just idiotic shots in the dark.
>>
>> I've heard lots of people curse out McNamara. now I know why.
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388482 is a reply to message #388462] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 17:42 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:17:16 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 6:31:15 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:27:34 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, November 3, 2019 at 1:49:09 AM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> And much of what they told us was evil about Communism is now taking
>>>> place in the United States, mostly at the behest of liberals.
>>>
>>> We have hard core conservative Republicans now waging a war
>>> against anyone who dares to criticize their president.
>>
>> Trump sucks!!!!!
>>
>> There, I critcized the President. I guess that now the secret police
>> are supposed to knock on my door.
>
> Go say it where people can actually hear you and look at
> the consequences. Won't be pretty.
If you think that this is a private conversation, you have a big fat
surprise coming.
This is USENET which is visible to, well, just about anybody.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388491 is a reply to message #388468] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 19:35 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2019-11-07, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 9:00:45 AM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>> I thought the Republicans would turn on Trump long before this. I'm
>> still waiting.
>
> It blows my mind that Republicans tolerated repeated vicious
> attacks on Sen. McCain, a war hero and respected statesman,
> more recently on Mitt Romney. I couldn't believe the venom
> Fox News spewed against him. I don't get why this is tolerated.
Maybe they finally figured out that Obamacare was patterned after
Romneycare.
> It is not good for the country.
Agreed. Forget Muslims, it's Republicans who have been radicalized.
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ "Alexa, define 'bugging'."
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388492 is a reply to message #388473] |
Thu, 07 November 2019 19:35 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2019-11-07, Kerr-Mudd,John <notsaying@invalid.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 19:04:34 GMT, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> The nationalism engendered by the present White House has
>> hurt our economy and hurt our people. it has done no good.
>> sadly, nationalism is growing overseas with equally dire results.
>> I guess the lessons of WW I have been forgotten.
>>
> I heard it was all caused by sunspots (or lack of, I forget which).
Let's see... the sunspot cycle is 11 years long, so it'll take 5 1/2
years to go from a peak to a trough (or vice versa). We're 3 years
into Trump's term, so it'll be another 2 1/2 years for a complete
reversal of the sunspot cycle. That puts us past the next election.
Damn...
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ "Alexa, define 'bugging'."
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388498 is a reply to message #386363] |
Fri, 08 November 2019 06:16 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Kerr-Mudd,John
On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 21:58:01 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
wrote:
> On 2019-11-07, Kerr-Mudd,John <notsaying@invalid.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 17:21:25 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2019-11-07, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> You're right about the Dems going off the rails. They really need
>>>> to stick with moderates.
>>>
>>> What's amusing about this is that by European standards, the
>>> Democrats *are* moderates. American politics is so much further to
>>> the right that they only look like loons inside America.
>>
>> Eh? Rightwing Democrats look to me like loons (from the outside).
>
> Oh, all American politics looks like lunacy. And the Brits are
> following down the same path. :o(
>
>>
>> I'm coding an 8086 hexdump program. If anyone cares.
>
> You poor soul.
>
>
Hey, everyone's got to have a hobby!;
Actually the reverse; it's hex2bin currently 60 bytes.
ffi watch alt.lang.asm; I'll post it there when I'm happy with it.
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388499 is a reply to message #388478] |
Fri, 08 November 2019 06:51 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2019-11-07, Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> We could have bombed the transportation facilities, which would have
>> made sense.
>
> which was a lot of the indiscriminate bombing in Laos (ho chi minh
> trail). "Kill Chain: The Rise of the High-Tech Assassins"
> https://www.amazon.com/Kill-Chain-Rise-High-Tech-Assassins-e book/dp/B00MSZ5BBI/
> pg31/loc556-60: Task Force Alpha was finally switched off on December
> 31, 1972. Out in the jungle, the last sensors went on faithfully
> broadcasting sounds, movements, and smells that no one would hear, until
> their batteries ran down. Once the last raid on Laos had flown home—an
> average of one planeload of bombs had landed on that country every eight
> minutes, twenty-four hours a day, for nine years—the surviving So Tri
> emerged from the hidden dugouts where they had waited out the cataclysm
> and returned to rebuild their ruined villages amid the countless
> craters. They did not teach their children about the war.
>
> Also bombing continues to kill and maim people ... lots of B52 bombs
> didn't explode (immediately) "American Reckoning: The Vietnam War and
> Our National Identity"
> https://www.amazon.com/American-Reckoning-Vietnam-National-I dentity-ebook/dp/B00LFZ87LS/
> loc2719-21: A single B-52, loaded with cluster bombs, could cover a
> square mile with 7.5 million steel pellets firing out in every
> direction. Bomblets that failed to explode on contact could explode
> years and even decades later when inadvertently dislodged by farmers or
> picked up by children.
>
> a little computer drift, IBM in vietnam ... posted to Collins radio
> thread
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2019e.html#77
>
--
Maus@ireland.xxx
Will rant for food.
You are taking the IPCC, right?
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388500 is a reply to message #388481] |
Fri, 08 November 2019 08:10 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 14:13:10 -0700, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, November 4, 2019 at 9:32:12 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>>>
>>>> mcnamara was lemay's staff planning fire bombing cities in ww2, left fom
>>>> the auto industry and came back as secdef for vietnam ... where laos
>>>> become the most bombed country in the world
>>>
>>> bombing wasn't as effective as the air corps claimed.
>>> the enemy still managed to maintain productive capacity
>>> and it took ground troops to finally end the war.
>>> undoubtedly it helped but not as much as claimed.
>>
>> Im currently reading a book about the final weeks of WW II. The
>> firebombing of Japanese cities was effective because the Japanese had
>> dispersed their manufacturing around the cities into the civilian areas.
>> The firebombing, while unfortunately killing lots of civilians, was
>> effective in shutting down the manufacturing.
>>
>>>
>>> killing civilians does not win a war.
>>>
>>> Vietnam wasn't an industrialized country, so bombing
>>> them was even less effective. unfortunately, they
>>> couldn't bomb the real source of munitions, the
>>> ussr.
>>
>> We could have bombed the transportation facilities, which would have made
>> sense.
>
> Uh, the "transportation facilities" were a horde of VC with bicycles.
> Note that they did not ride the bicycles, they loaded them with stuff
> and then used them as pushcarts.
From North to South Vietnam, yes, but if the Russians were supplying
weapons they fame in by train or ship. That would seem to be the chokepoint
- bomb a few railroad bridges/tunnels or mine the port facilities. Let’s
see them try to bring the stuff in by bicycle from Moscow.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388506 is a reply to message #386363] |
Fri, 08 November 2019 13:57 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Friday, November 8, 2019 at 11:17:54 AM UTC-7, Dave Garland wrote:
> Except, of course, for the ones who were dead.
World War II was, of course, an extreme case.
One of the few times when the cake wasn't a lie.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT, "new" Heinlein book [message #388507 is a reply to message #386363] |
Fri, 08 November 2019 14:04 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Kerr-Mudd,John
On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 17:51:35 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2019-11-08, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 20:36:23 -0000 (UTC), Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm coding an 8086 hexdump program. If anyone cares.
>>
>> Never really understood the segment thing. I preferred M68K assembly.
>
> +1
>
>
64k is enough for hobbyists.
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
