European military and Popular Mechanics

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax:


Dr. Strangelove did not support the doomsday device, but just the opposite,
the pre-emptive strike, as Von Neumann did.

As far as I know, Dr. Kahn did not speak with a strong foreign accent, nor
was forced to a weelchair by bone cancer. Von Neuman certainly did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Strangelove

The character is an amalgamation of RAND Corporation strategist Herman
Kahn, mathematician and Manhattan Project principal John von Neumann,
German rocket scientist Wernher von Braun and Edward Teller, the "father
of the hydrogen bomb."

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Ah,another "moral equivalence" proponent.

Had the Nazis won we would no doubt be celebrating their final
elimination of the greatest threat to all mankind - the Jews. Seen
universally as a good and necessary thing by those who wrote the history
books. No doubt it that universe anyone proposing "moral equivalence"
would also be sneered at, or worse.

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Strangelove

WOW! What a reliable and authoritative source! ;-)

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax:


WOW! What a reliable and authoritative source! ;-)

Then follow up the citation.

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax:

Then follow up the citation.

Unfortunately I'm still too pretentious to take in every circumstance
WikiLOLpedia as a source more reliable than logic.

 

[Les Cargill]

They? Whose fault was it that Germany invaded Poland? That Japan
murdered multitudes in China and Korea and attacked multiple peaceful
Pacific islands?

Moral relativism sucks, because it can be used to justify almost any
horror.

John

One way to look at it is that it really started with Bismarck's use
of the Franco-Prussian War to unify Germany. The French were assigned
reparations and were eager to get out from under them by war
with Germany in WWI. Then WWI ended badly ( one theory is that
Kaiser Wilhelm gave up when mutinies happened in the German Navy,
but there's a book titled "1918" that supposedly shoots this down ).

WWI wasn't conclusive, and Pershing even predicted when it would
start. The lack of conclusivity led to Konspiracy
Theories in Germany in the '20s, leading to WWII.

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

Les Cargill:

One way to look at it is that it really started with Bismarck's use
of the Franco-Prussian War to unify Germany. The French were assigned
reparations

To be precise, the French, as usual, lost a war they started and managed to
sit at the post-war negotiations table on the winners' side.

and were eager to get out from under them by war
with Germany in WWI. Then WWI ended badly ( one theory is that
Kaiser Wilhelm gave up when mutinies happened in the German Navy,
but there's a book titled "1918" that supposedly shoots this down ).

Yeah, Spanish influenza, that killed almos a fourth of the population, had
nothing to deal with it.

WWI wasn't conclusive, and Pershing even predicted when it would
start.

Evidently he knew french egos.

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

[email protected]:

Industrial development was concentrated on
war, resulting in the perfection of bronze weaponry technology..."

And not only weaponry, I suppose. War is not as bad as it looks.

Not that it doesn't look horrible.

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

Michael A. Terrell:

So you prefer a six pack and a dartboard?

By all means.

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

John Larkin:

Under those conditions, it's still not nice.

But much better than the converse.

 

[Les Cargill]

It's not nice to kill people.

John

That's for sure.

 

[Les Cargill]

Les Cargill:


To be precise, the French, as usual, lost a war they started and managed to
sit at the post-war negotiations table on the winners' side.

With Bismarck on the scene, it's kinda hard to say the French
really started it. Bismarck is quoted as saying one of
his own books: "I knew that a Franco-Prussian War must take place
before a united Germany was formed."

Yeah, Spanish influenza, that killed almos a fourth of the population, had
nothing to deal with it.

That too. But the effective loss of the Navy didn't help; the Germans
were not exactly defeated conclusively...

 

[Martin Brown]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax:


Dr. Strangelove did not support the doomsday device, but just the opposite,
the pre-emptive strike, as Von Neumann did.

As far as I know, Dr. Kahn did not speak with a strong foreign accent, nor
was forced to a weelchair by bone cancer. Von Neuman certainly did.

I think you are right. Dr Kahn did help Kubrick with some of the ideas
and contributed the idea of a Doomsday Machine. However, his intention
appeared to be to make the point that a massive retaliatory nuclear
strike was not such a smart idea. You can't get any more massive than
killing all life on the Earth - he was making a point in game theory.

A book about him is on Google Books but with some of the interesting
bits for resolving this conundrum missing. p41 does however say that as
a result of his book "On Thermonuclear War" and the ideas that Kubrick
picked up on he was popularly known as "The Real Dr Strangelove". Anyone
have a paper copy and care to precis what it says?

The start of chapter "The Real Dr Strangelove" p61-63 are missing.

I was very surprised to read that he was pulled off nuclear projects for
being suspected Kommunist more than once in the Cold War paranoia.

Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

Martin Brown:

I was very surprised to read that he was pulled off nuclear projects for
being suspected Kommunist more than once in the Cold War paranoia.

Gosh!

Thanks for the infos I cut.

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

Phil Hobbs:

Somebody's confusing the Spanish flu (1917-19, ~1% of the population)

What? 1% in the US, maybe. Certainly not in Europe.

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax:


Unfortunately I'm still too pretentious to take in every circumstance
WikiLOLpedia as a source more reliable than logic.

http://news.cnet.com/Study-Wikipedia-as-accurate-as-Britannica/2100-1038_3-5997332.html

"Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as
Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world
around us, according to a study published this week in the journal Nature."

Huh - "Nature"! LOL eh?

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

You wouldn't say that on a battlefield, when they are shooting at
you.

Most soldiers do say that.
Or at least believe it to the extent that most conscripts will not
actually, deliberately, shoot the enemy. Professional soldiers are
somewhat different, but if you really want people who will kill without
hesitation then you go to special forces.

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax:

http://news.cnet.com/Study-Wikipedia-as-accurate-as-Britannica/2100-1038_3-5997332.html

"Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as
Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world
around us, according to a study published this week in the journal Nature."

Huh - "Nature"! LOL eh?

If you refer to exclusively scientific topics, that holds true.

But when it comes to any politically-sensitive issue (such as History,
global warming, "renewable" energies and the like) my LOL holds truer.

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax:


If you refer to exclusively scientific topics, that holds true.

But when it comes to any politically-sensitive issue (such as History,
global warming, "renewable" energies and the like) my LOL holds truer.

Well, I doubt that there's much of an editing war over Kubrick's movies.

 

[F. Bertolazzi]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax:

Well, I doubt that there's much of an editing war over Kubrick's movies.

True, lack of interest is the other source of errors, since a sloppy
comment (that affirms what the same Wikipedia, in the page dedicated to
Herman Kahn reports as "reportedly") may go unnoticed.