Looks like the video was probably produced and definitely promoted by The Clarion Project

They spread the load out more evenly and provide friction in a larger area than just the bolt / screw. They can also provide expansion to prevent the eventual loosening due to movement (lock washers).

The alternative, as far as I am familiar with the counterargument to this viewpoint, would have been to loosen the requirement of "unconditional surrender" of Japan, and possibly to demonstrate the bomb by dropping it on an unpopulated area. Inviting Japanese scientists to a staging ground for a controlled demonstration was also on the books.

Now, assuming the US top brass were convinced Japan was not going to surrender, the argument presented here is quite valid. Bombing a live target certainly had the most shock value, and the bombs were likely in quite limited supply. (I confess, I don't know how many there were at the time.) A continued conventional war would have been horrendous.

But... Were the Japanese really unwilling to surrender, and if so, why? According to what I've read... Well, let me just quote the story, I've seen this in a number of texts:

"At the conclusion of the conference, Roosevelt and Churchill held a press conference. Roosevelt said that he and Churchill…

…were determined to accept nothing less than the unconditional surrender of Germany, Japan, and Italy…

Churchill said later that he was surprised by this statement. Churchill adds that he was told by Harry Hopkins that the President said to him:

…then suddenly the Press Conference was on, and Winston and I had had no time to prepare for it; and the thought popped into my mind that they had called Grant “Old Unconditional Surrender,” and the next thing I knew I had said it."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2012/04/jonathan-goodwin/roosevelt-demands-unconditionalsurrender/

It was Jonathan Glover who I first read giving this account of events, but I don't remember what his source was. The argument he and others make, though, is that the Japanese did signal their willingness to surrender, but were not willing to do so unconditionally. This is because they feared the emperor might have been deposed and put to trial, which was simply unthinkable to them. If this is true, then dropping the bombs may have been unnecessary and even before the bombs, the war effort in the Pacific could have been ended through diplomatic means.

All this does leave one with some disconcerting questions. Would Allied leaders really have refused to reconsider their demands of Japan simply due to prestige and the need to show resolve? Was there no diplomatic backchannel? Certainly the fog of war must have played a part in the decisions made. I haven't been able to find a source beyond hearsay for what, exactly, the Japanese diplomatic position on surrender was. Considering this debate still goes on, no such source is likely to surface.

What stands out here, to me, as the saddest thing is: it seems countless lives were lost for lack of solid information and communication between enemies. Had Japan and the Allies been able to negotiate further, had the allies dared show their nuclear hand, had they made it possible for the emperor (while not a nice guy by any means) to be protected, how many lives could have been saved? Unfortunately, no-one has the benefit of hindsight when it's most needed.

I can't help but think of the Cuban missile crisis - what would have happened, had a similar failure to communicate occurred at that time? It was very close...

The only way that video would have been better is if they had loosened the root system enough were it fell back on their own house.

Wow, you guys are the biggest bunch of Jaded Folks!

I'm on the internet all the time, and being here makes you a cynic, trust me, I know. But listen to yourselves once and a while. Here are some cute little quotes about love, from kids. Loosen up.

Who cares if this list has made the rounds at some point or another. It's like "Kids say the darnedest things." The kids may have been coaxed a bit but the sentiments are sincere.

Does it make us feel more intelligent to criticize, break down and look for every fault in every post? I file this one under trite, but it's fun, and I don't think it merits the assault that has been lavished upon it..

Take life a little less seriously and lighten up a bit...
Your stress levels may thank you for it.

Leaving a tie tied to loosen it, but then re-wear it tightens the knot. It stretches the fabric shrinks the knot size. It is not a very classy move. Buy a clip-on if you do not want to show some culture or pride. Also, you shouldn't wash or dry clean a tie. Ties are a one hit wonder.

I bartend. I have to display an illusion of a lie, but carry class during my steps of work.

Do it right or leave it at home.

Great, now I just need an excuse to tie it in front of somebody to impress them.

I've always kinda wanted to rock the granny knot just to give the impression of a guy that really gives zero fucks...but unfortunately I do actually give fucks about whether or not people think I can tie it properly, and I fear these doubts already betray the lack of confidence that would be required to carry it. I figure you'd have to go with the tradtional getup to begin with and then transition to the granny knot later, but yah, I think its going to remain one of those fantasies of rebellion.

Oh, and the problem with not untying it is that it sort of has an expiry date. Every cycle of loosen and tighten it gets always seems to lose some of its plump until it may as well be a granny knot. I figure you're good for 3 uses, maybe 4 if you're really careful before you're going have to cook up a new fresh one.

Not to say that Walmart treats its employees well, but you people are missing something here.
First why should Wal-Mart do anything beyond what is required by law? Minimum wage is minimum wage. The government set that rate and Walmart pays its employees over that wage. They do not have to give insurance to their associates, yet they do. Most states are "At Will" states which means you can be fired for any reason aside from sex, age or race. If you don't like what Walmart offers then there is a McDonald's on almost every corner. Or even a Starbucks.
As for manufacturing, while Walmart is BRUTAL on it's vendors, they also have one of the strictest social compliance programs in the world. They've also instituted a packaging reduction program that looks to reduce packaging waste and increase the amount of recycled material used.
It is not totally the fault of Walmart that everything is made China. They buy from Vendors, vendors moved manufacturing to China in order to be competitive. Everything could have stayed in the USA but with the increasing wages and government policies US manufacturers could not compete(At the same time restrictions on imports from Asia were loosened) Now if you wanted to make a plastic piece in the USA it would cost 4-6 times more than in China, generally speaking. Recently I have found some US manufacturers that can injection mold components at a reasonable cost, but due to the havoc wreaked by everything moving to China I lack the infrastructure to be able to do things like Paint Decoration (Again something so strictly regulated that it would be near impossible to do in the US).
As we continue to see the USD falter against the RMB and as the price of oil continues to increase we may reach a point of balance where manufacturing in the US could come back, but it would most likely be automated and would not result in near the number of jobs it had in the past. Of course at the same time, due to those same changes in Oil prices and the USD against the RMB we'll be seeing some pretty big price increases on product. Hang on to your pocket books everybody it's gonna be a rough ride.
On another note Sam Walton was a total skin flint, but he did it across the board. The guy didn't even get heat in his office until he was near death. Only then it was done because the engineer put it in with out him knowing. They feared him catching a pneumonia. He complained when he found out. No one could drive fancy cars, because if Sam saw them he'd figure he was paying them too much. After he died all kinds of sports cars popped up in the Walmart parking lot.

Comedy does seem to help loosen people up and remove inhibitions.

>> ^lucky760:

Iframe support is only available on select hosts (those for which it has been implemented). It's possible we'll loosen up iframe embeds in v5, which is still under heavy development.


Cool!

Iframe support is only available on select hosts (those for which it has been implemented). It's possible we'll loosen up iframe embeds in v5, which is still under heavy development.

I love seeing anchors loosening up and having a laugh, after all the straight-facing they have to go through.

*happy *sexuality

>> ^ReverendTed:

Thus far we've really been framing abortion as being about "unready" parents, probably because the discussion started on the "mother can choose to have sex" angle.
You've got to wonder how confused this issue would get if we could detect genetically if a fetus might be homosexual. Would Christians loosen their intolerance for abortion if it meant not having a "gay baby"? (Even if it would fly in the face of their belief that homosexuality is a choice.) Would pro-choicer's take a second look at the availability of abortion? Would it still be "one of those terrible things that happens in a free society"?

To an extent, this already happens, and it's awful. In this case, it's exacerbated by government policy.

Deep down, (despite all evidence to the contrary) I guess I'd like to believe that people inherently want to behave in a moral fashion. I would hope that choosing to have an abortion is a hard decision reached after a lot of soul searching, but I cannot say that a third party should sit in judgement of that womans decision.

If there circumstances (economic, political, social) that in some way encourage abortion, we should look at changing those.

Safe, legal and rare.