I’ve always thought it was a horrific decision, but not at all because of the immediate effects or massive death and destruction they caused in Japan….they fucked around and found out and deserved everything they got (and I was unaware the Russian Manchurian offensive timing, but it’s even more reason to not drop a second bomb or even a first if we knew it was coming).

I think it was horrific because we had no idea what the long term effects of even minimal fallout might be, and in fall/winter the jet stream runs from Japan directly to the highly populated West coast (which we knew well thanks to balloon bombs), so some portion of the fallout was guaranteed to fall on millions of US citizens. We lucked out that it wasn’t deadly a year later, and didn’t cause horrible birth defects with near zero exposure…we had no concrete idea at the time though just guesses, and still don’t have a clear idea of how much it contributed to higher cancer rates in the US.

Keep in mind, we had no idea what discussions the Japanese were having amongst themselves , so no idea how effective our bombs nor the Manchurian offensive were at persuading them to surrender. Hindsight is 2020, but at the time we were flying blind.

The uncertain risk there of possibly killing millions of ourselves or gimping or sterilizing or even Cronenberging entire future generations for the comparatively minimal convenience of not using conventional bombs, to me, is no where near worth it. There were just too many unanswered questions about too many factors. I’m sure the soldiers fighting at the time would feel differently.

*promote the history lesson, learned some new stuff!

I don't know what point you're trying to make. Nothing I said was incorrect. For a gun to fire simunition, it has to have special modifications. Whether the modifications are easy or hard had nothing to do with the point I made, which is that a gun modified to fire simunition can't fire regular ammunition. So if they were using simunition, there is no chance of one of them grabbing the wrong "clip" and accidentally killing someone.

A 40mm LTL round sounds about like a pistol being fired. Here is a video I found doing a quick search.

If you watch the video again, between 23 and 24 seconds you can see a green powder cloud, which looks exactly like this 40mm marking powder grenade, which according to the manufacturer, has an effective range of 5 to 120 feet.

It also has a warning: "This product can expose you to chemicals including Lead Salts and Hexavalent Chromium, which are known to the State of California to cause cancer, and Lead Salts, which are known to the State of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm."

Organo -mercury compounds are extremely dangerous even at quite low levels because they do bio-accumulate in the natural environment. Read up on Minamata Disease - caused by industrial disposal of organo-mercury compounds into surface waters that ended up in Minamata Bay in Japan. The mercury bioaccumulated into the fish and shellfish - not only neurological effects but also severe birth defects for the population that consumed the fish.

While I love it when developers have the courage and funding to do something bold and different artistically, I imagine I wouldn't feel better after playing that.

I get the appeal of more typical horror; being afraid is thrilling and can feel liberating when you know you're actually safe. But the feeling I get from this is not that it's scary but more along the lines of "wow, look at those suffering freaks suffer with no end in sight". It's like spending a few hours looking at the most disturbing pictures of birth defects and leprosy you can find, without the possible benefit of empathizing with a real experience that other people could have.

I'm not trying to denigrate people who like it, I'm just baffled. Can anyone explain the appeal to me?

Folks on the street haven't been all too friendly towards the Greeks for some years now, and the exhaustion caused by this mess only added to an attitude of "just get it over with" over the last year or so.

For nearly three years, I have tried to provide counter-arguments whenever someone went off on a tirade against the Greeks (and others) during a conversation with me, or generally around me. You can't really try to explain the birth defects of the Eurozone in 20 seconds or less, but just having some raw data ready at hand (pensions, wages, state of the healthcare system, etc) was usually enough to get people thinking.

But today was different. Today was ugly. Three times I was involved in an ad-hoc discussion about Greece and three times people couldn't care less about the facts at hand. It always boiled down to "we've paid enough, they need to piss off". Period. End of story. People turned sour, big time. All this time, I had never been yelled at, or laughed at, not even once. Until today.

Worst of all, a friend of mine with family back in Greece stopped arguing altogether. What's the point, she said...

If you believe DNA was the result of intelligent design, then the creator did an absolute shit job of it: there's so many ways that things can and do go wrong at the genetic level -- cancer, birth defects, aging, death -- that you would have to conclude the creator has a special love for causing suffering based on his bad designs; the creator is a rampant sadist.

Your second question is silly: how would you know if you were living in a universe where bananas are grapes and grapes are monkeys? But I understand what you're trying to get at and the answer is that the universe I live in has no empirical evidence for a creator and a very workable theory for how life came about and evolved over time.

So here's a question for you: if there is a creator, why is he so incredibly bad at it (99.9% of all species that ever lived are now extinct) and why does he like beetles so much (there's a staggering number of beetle species)?

>> ^bareboards2:

The very first minute of this report says these planes have never been used in combat.
Why we are risking the lives of these pilots for a training plane? It is seriously nuts.
I think of it as penis waggling. Boys and their toys. Even the pilots said they were happy to fly again at first.
Who in the Pentagon is so invested in keeping these in the air and why? It isn't rational.


Dunno about penis waggling, politicians of all genders are generally of the mindset if we paid for something we should use it no matter how wasteful/dangerous/stupid it is.

That's why so many projects end up going over budgets and never working, because they are too "invested" either corruptly or politically to say enough is enough.

They need a bunch of kids getting cancer or born with birth defects (BP oil spill and all those non-harmful chemicals they dumped in the water *wink wink nudge nudge*), or a school being demolished by a plane falling out of the sky to give them the proof they need to not look like they screwed up in the first place and instead look like they gave it a chance but obviously the people advising them are fools...never the politician or people in charge.....never.

We're talking about the same people who generally promote family values and hetero relationships while they are heading to the restroom for a little rough and tumble with a random dude they just met or whatever other devious example you want to use. Bunch of corrupt mfers basically, who give no shits about you until it makes them look bad when they don't.

Aye I agree that not hurting people is a worthy cause, but if you follow that line of thinking, once again you will find inconsistency. For example, if he truly doesn't want to hurt people, why did he try to have the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 repealed - twice.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:h.r.2310:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d094:h.r.13264:

Wouldn't having less safety at work result in more harm to workers, and even deaths?

How about his stance on the environment, would a degraded, polluted environment lead to harm? Quite possibly, and he's sponsored more than a half dozen bills to try to get rid of, or limit legislation protecting it, including a bill to repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:h.r.7079:

There are plenty of studies that demonstrate a scientifically significant correlation between pesticide exposure and cancers, birth defects and spontaneous abortions. Look up carbaryl, atrazine and benomyl-carbendazim to name a few, if he truly wanted to avoid doing harm, shouldn't he focus on legislation that tightens up the use of toxic chemicals in the food chain so that the seasonal and migrant workers (especially) might have improved health outcomes?

What about his handling of the Florida oil spill, the ecosystem there got devastated and there will be ongoing health consequences for not just the locals. His reaction was that there should be less oversight by the Government and instead there should be promises by the corporations to make good any damages with the populations they affect. That's not just an example of how his principles could harm people but it's an example of libertarianism gone crazy. His sponsorship of the H.R.2415 and H.R.4004 bills back this up, both of them incentivize off-shore drilling.
http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-06-16/ron-paul-defends-obama-on-bp-oil-spill-and-himself-on-owning-gold/

He takes the stance that he 'doesn't want to hurt people because he's then able to get a lot of anti-abortion supporters to vote for him, or in other words, he's doing a good job of being a politician. In addition, he's deciding what is right and what is wrong for the people that have other opinions and may wish to express those opinions in the form of exercising the right to make an informed decision about their future family - I don't call that libertarianism.

You are truly a moron. I've tried not to say so, but you are. Your conspiracy theory videos and this retarded attack on immunisation just prove it.

Widespread vaccination has the potential to reduce cervical cancer deaths around the world by as much as two-thirds, if all women were to take the vaccine and if protection turns out to be long-term. In addition, the vaccines can reduce the need for medical care, biopsies, and invasive procedures associated with the follow-up from abnormal Pap tests, thus helping to reduce health care costs and anxieties related to abnormal Pap tests and follow-up procedures.
—American National Cancer Institute, [22]
(source)

If you're all fine with NOT trying to prevent two thirds of cervical cancer deaths based on a misguided fear of immunisations, then have at it sir, and then don't bitch when any woman you knows dies of it.

Go and look up what immunisation has done for the world, go on...

Children DIED because of the hysteria created around the MMR vaccine by the slime ball Andrew Wakefield. Children who would NOT have died did so because idiots like you made parents incorrectly fear a vaccine, so their children were not immunised, infection rates sky-rocketed, and children DIED.

I mock the fucking shit out of you because you are wrong, and your decisions put the lives of other people at risk too, not just your own. There's no two ways about it, vaccinations are a HUGE benefit to society, a HUGE life saver, a HUGE preventer of pain and suffering.

Do you use homoeopathic remedies to ward off evil do you?


>> ^marbles:

>> ^spoco2:
>> ^marinara:
mercury causes mental retardation, vaccines contain mercury, therefore vaccines=retardation.

A 6-ounce can of tuna fish contains an average of 17 micrograms of mercury, vaccines that contain mercury contain roughly 25 micrograms.
You think you're going to become mentally retarded by eating two cans of tuna?
No?
Then what you're saying is retarded.
That sort of knee-jerk, mindless shit is what causes people to stop getting their kids immunised and starts getting kids killed.

There's a big difference between ingesting mercury and injecting it straight into the vein.
Do junkies eat heroin? Why the fuck do you think they go to the trouble of injecting smack, why don't they just eat it?
Hardly any mercury is absorbed through ingesting, like around .01%. So that would be 1/1000 of 17 micrograms actually absorbed or .0017 micrograms / 6oz can of tuna.
And what do we actually know about mercury? Well, we know it's HIGHLY toxic. Let's go to the wikipedia page for Mercury poisoning:
Mercury is such a highly reactive toxic agent that it is difficult to identify its specific mechanism of damage, and much remains unknown about the mechanism. It damages the central nervous system, endocrine system, kidneys, and other organs, and adversely affects the mouth, gums, and teeth. Exposure over long periods of time or heavy exposure to mercury vapor can result in brain damage and ultimately death. Mercury and its compounds are particularly toxic to fetuses and infants. Women who have been exposed to mercury in pregnancy have sometimes given birth to children with serious birth defects (see Minamata disease).
Mercury exposure in young children can have severe neurological consequences, preventing nerve sheaths from forming properly. Mercury inhibits the formation of myelin.
/source

And since we're at it, let's have a peak at Thiomersal's wikipedia page:
Thiomersal is very toxic by inhalation, ingestion, and in contact with skin, with a danger of cumulative effects. ...
Few studies of the toxicity of thiomersal in humans have been performed. Cases have been reported of severe poisoning by accidental exposure or attempted suicide, with some fatalities. Animal experiments suggest that thiomersal rapidly dissociates to release ethylmercury after injection; that the disposition patterns of mercury are similar to those after exposure to equivalent doses of ethylmercury chloride; and that the central nervous system and the kidneys are targets, with lack of motor coordination being a common sign. Similar signs and symptoms have been observed in accidental human poisonings. The mechanisms of toxic action are unknown.
/source
But you can keep talking out of your ass like you actually have a fucking clue. And keep shooting up your children with neurotoxins too, while mocking those that oppose forced inoculations.
BTW statist idiot, the video is referring to the HPV vaccine. Why do fucking 10 year olds need to be vaccinated for STDs?

>> ^spoco2:

>> ^marinara:
mercury causes mental retardation, vaccines contain mercury, therefore vaccines=retardation.

A 6-ounce can of tuna fish contains an average of 17 micrograms of mercury, vaccines that contain mercury contain roughly 25 micrograms.
You think you're going to become mentally retarded by eating two cans of tuna?
No?
Then what you're saying is retarded.
That sort of knee-jerk, mindless shit is what causes people to stop getting their kids immunised and starts getting kids killed.


There's a big difference between ingesting mercury and injecting it straight into the vein.

Do junkies eat heroin? Why the fuck do you think they go to the trouble of injecting smack, why don't they just eat it?
Hardly any mercury is absorbed through ingesting, like around .01%. So that would be 1/1000 of 17 micrograms actually absorbed or .0017 micrograms / 6oz can of tuna.

And what do we actually know about mercury? Well, we know it's HIGHLY toxic. Let's go to the wikipedia page for Mercury poisoning:

Mercury is such a highly reactive toxic agent that it is difficult to identify its specific mechanism of damage, and much remains unknown about the mechanism. It damages the central nervous system, endocrine system, kidneys, and other organs, and adversely affects the mouth, gums, and teeth. Exposure over long periods of time or heavy exposure to mercury vapor can result in brain damage and ultimately death. Mercury and its compounds are particularly toxic to fetuses and infants. Women who have been exposed to mercury in pregnancy have sometimes given birth to children with serious birth defects (see Minamata disease).

Mercury exposure in young children can have severe neurological consequences, preventing nerve sheaths from forming properly. Mercury inhibits the formation of myelin.
/source


And since we're at it, let's have a peak at Thiomersal's wikipedia page:

Thiomersal is very toxic by inhalation, ingestion, and in contact with skin, with a danger of cumulative effects. ...

Few studies of the toxicity of thiomersal in humans have been performed. Cases have been reported of severe poisoning by accidental exposure or attempted suicide, with some fatalities. Animal experiments suggest that thiomersal rapidly dissociates to release ethylmercury after injection; that the disposition patterns of mercury are similar to those after exposure to equivalent doses of ethylmercury chloride; and that the central nervous system and the kidneys are targets, with lack of motor coordination being a common sign. Similar signs and symptoms have been observed in accidental human poisonings. The mechanisms of toxic action are unknown.
/source

But you can keep talking out of your ass like you actually have a fucking clue. And keep shooting up your children with neurotoxins too, while mocking those that oppose forced inoculations.

BTW statist idiot, the video is referring to the HPV vaccine. Why do fucking 10 year olds need to be vaccinated for STDs?

>> ^grinter:

iRenew may also cause birth defects, anemia, and stroke.


http://p1.portal2sounds.com/96

iRenew may also cause birth defects, anemia, and stroke.

Depends on what you mean by solved. If you mean what it actually means, which is dealt with, then the result of any conflict must be said to be solved...as it has an end result not based on inaction. Now, as the the question of solved well, I didn't offer an opinion on that...though my general position on violence should be self evident; a reality that I hate, but is ever present and effective.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Was the objective of Vietnam and Korea to stop Communism? If so, then the success rate is 50%.


Actually the War in Vietnam was pretty much a complete success. The idea was to make sure that Communism didn't spread...it was to show that if you consider this way of life we will visit the terrors of the earth upon you. After the Tet Offensive the business community decided that this wasn't profitable anymore and turned against the war. Many pundits wrote that the US should just claim victory since we did achieve our main objectives. So yes...2-4 million Vietnamese dead (we don't count our victims hence the 2 million discrepancy) and effects from Chemical warfare that are still being felt today through thousands of birth defects. Yeah it's not taught in schools and it's not generally accepted but we did actually win in Vietnam...but I would point out how could any human being say that it solved anything?

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

Was the objective of Vietnam and Korea to stop Communism? If so, then the success rate is 50%.



Actually the War in Vietnam was pretty much a complete success. The idea was to make sure that Communism didn't spread...it was to show that if you consider this way of life we will visit the terrors of the earth upon you. After the Tet Offensive the business community decided that this wasn't profitable anymore and turned against the war. Many pundits wrote that the US should just claim victory since we did achieve our main objectives. So yes...2-4 million Vietnamese dead (we don't count our victims hence the 2 million discrepancy) and effects from Chemical warfare that are still being felt today through thousands of birth defects. Yeah it's not taught in schools and it's not generally accepted but we did actually win in Vietnam...but I would point out how could any human being say that it solved anything?