Comments Posted By Bill Arnold
Displaying 31 To 40 Of 118 Comments
REMEMBERING THE BOMB, FORGETTING WHY
There is now ample evidence that Japan was developing nuclear weapons and they were extremely close to success.
What is your source on this? Is there anything more than the 1946 Snell story described in this WIKIpedia article and links?
The 1946 Snell story is weird, because the history and documentation also indicate an underfunded Japanese research program mostly going down dead-end research paths.
Perhaps it was an attempt to manufacture a justification for the U.S. use of the bomb, and other mundane theories also come to mind, e.g. a Japanese "curveball".Right, Bill. According to Richard Rhodes Pulitzer winning book "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" which was exhaustively researched, the Japanese were where we were in 1940 with atomic research. They had no large scale projects to enrich uranium to bomb grade levels indeed they had no plans for such enrichment facilities. To say the Japanese were "close" to getting the bomb is absurd.
ed.
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 15.08.2008 @ 13:15
From 60+ years later, it's hard for me to see the night firebombing raids of Europe (starting with London) and Japan, and the daytime surprise attack on Hiroshima and subsequent single-plane attack on Nagasaki, as anything but war crimes. Though Geneva Four ("Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War") wasn't until 1949, Hague IV 1907 arguably applied.
I understand that the nighttime raids in Europe were initially primarily due to extremely inaccurate nighttime navigation methods, with errors literally measured in miles. The Allied anti-city raids were justified by arguing that they diverted German effort from the front lines to the defense of cities. But later on, they were wholesale attacks on urban civilian populations. We had the bombers, and the bombs, and in Japan at least, complete air superiority - the cities were essentially undefended, and their entire populations couldn't just disperse to the countryside for the duration of the war.
Historical arguments that these attacks were justifiable in some ghastly utilitarian sense may be technically correct but are a little unsettling.
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 13.08.2008 @ 22:13
ANTHRAX SUICIDE CASE RAISES TROUBLING QUESTIONS
One of the plausible theories at the time (and still plausible IMO) was that the perp(s) was a government lab worker so concerned that insufficient attention was being paid to the threat of bio-terrorism that they were willing to kill a few people to make the case.
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 1.08.2008 @ 16:51
It's a perversely utilitarian sort of argument, a sort of personal version of false flag operations real and unrealized and rumored, like "Operation Northwoods" against Cuba (unrealized), Gulf of Tonkin (real?), Hersh's reported recent discussions in the office of the VP about anti-Iran false-flag ops (probably real), and a host of conspiracy theories.
McCAIN CAMPAIGN STILL FOUNDERING
Then why all the competent people say otherwise? I.e. it will be about a decade before drilling will have any effect, and even then it will lower the prices for about 0.5%? Is it because they are in fact incompetent shills??
Perhaps the argument involves oil futures, which can extend to the time when drilling might actually have begin (with grossly optimistic estimates) to an impact. Also, keeping oil in the ground rather than pumping it is, or can be considered, a form of speculation.
The real issue though is demand, especially from India and China. We (the U.S.) can't control the demand growth.
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 31.07.2008 @ 18:39
Consider the other “celeb,” Paris Hilton. She is famous for being famous with absolutely no accomplishments to her name, except possibly continuing to be a “celeb.”
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 31.07.2008 @ 18:34
She's otherwise known as the single best argument against the repeal of the estate tax.
Also, the Hilton family is strongly Republican and is reportedly unhappy with this ad.
This was a very confused ad, from the campaign of a man who wears $520 dollar loafers. (Nordstrom's price, I checked)
HONESTLY, IS JOHN ARAVOSIS A PIECE OF EXCREMENT OR WHAT?
Typical leftwingnut trick throw out numerous random accusations, none of which have any basis in reality, and keep the opposition busy refuting those so no meaningful discussion of policy ever needs to take place.
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 1.07.2008 @ 15:04
I've read plenty of sentences very similar to this, except with "left" replaced with "right".
We can blame the Clintons. If Bill Clinton hadn't been elected, the rightwingnuts wouldn't have been forced to spend the 1990's concocting stories like Hillary ordering the killing of Vincent Foster to cover up a lesbian affair with Markie Post. (Did I get that one right? Not particular familiar with the rightwingnut anti-Clinton canon.)
John at least actually earned his medals which we know Clark and Kerry didnt.
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 30.06.2008 @ 18:19
Out of curiosity, do you have a link that calls into suspicion Clark's purple heart and silver star?
FISA CLOTURE PASSES: WORLD ENDING, SAY NETROOTS
Where were they when FDR was rounding up Japanese Americans
Perhaps they were not serving in Congress yet?My takes on this whole sorry FISA update debate are:
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 26.06.2008 @ 12:50
(A) We need to develop a privacy culture and privacy legislation in this country, or by exponential technological curve default, it will slide into a ubiquitous surveillance society/state. If we collectively decide we want to trade all of our privacy for something else (e.g. security, very precise targeting of marketing, etc), fine, but let's not slide into it over the next 25 years as the technology makes it more and more possible and inexpensive.
(B) The retroactive immunity for telecoms looks and smells like ("has the appearance of") a GWBush administration wrongdoing protection act. Supporters of immunity can dress it up all they want as e.g. preventing activists from forcing discovery/testimony that exposes details of secret methods and programs, but it still has the appearance of protecting the administration from prosecution and/or embarrassment. I'd bet at 80 percent odds that the GWBush administration ordered (or otherwise made to happen) some minor (at least) improper and possibly illegal surveillance of political opponents, but there is no point betting now.
TALES OF HORROR FROM THE HEARTLAND
In case it wasn't your intent, that might be interpreted as a parody of the idea of coded "dog whistle" postings. :-)
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 23.06.2008 @ 18:18
Red-wing Blackbirds will harass anything that approaches their nest. I haven't seen any exceptions, though one guesses that they might avoid harassing birds of prey that can eat them, e.g. large falcons or accipiters.
The validity of the message is not negated by his motives, but don’t be so naive as to believe this is not a calculated political speech.
Comment Posted By Bill Arnold On 16.06.2008 @ 16:50
Everything the 2 major candidates will do for the remainder of the run-up to the election will be interpreted in the political context, and the candidates know it. BObama has been married to one woman (his first and only wife) for 18 years. That, and their children, gets anyone family-values credits IMO. Why would one presume that it was insincere and political, rather than sincere and political?
