Links 10/17/12

Links for you. Science:

Embrace Flexible Work Arrangements
A Grand Experiment to Rein In Climate Change
Statement on the Death of Former Senator Arlen Specter
What are the downsides of winning a Nobel prize?
As Scientists Question New Rat Study, GMO Debate Rages On

Other:

Did Biden drop “flat guarantee” of no cuts to Social Security?
Final Thoughts on the Baker-Rowe-DeLong-Krugman Deficit Debate
The Liberatory Possibilities of Full Employment (so who kidnapped Yglesias and replaced him with a liberal?)
Polarization: ain’t that America?
When We Half Understand Poverty
Poverty isn’t just a game
Civil Servant Shares Nobel Prize in Physics
The REAL Reason America Used Nuclear Weapons Against Japan (It Was Not To End the War Or Save Lives)
Republican Senator, Vietnam Veteran Endorses President Obama
Email-free UNC-CH professor set to prove there are better ways to communicate
The Koch Brothers Read Hayek
Why I Resigned the Paterno Chair
The National Debt and Our Children: How Dumb Does Washington Think We Are?

This entry was posted in Lotsa Links. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Links 10/17/12

  1. Kaleberg says:

    re: The REAL Reason America Used Nuclear Weapons Against Japan (It Was Not To End the War Or Save Lives)”

    Ah yes, more atomic bomb revisionism. There was a lot of rethinking in hindsight, but Germany didn’t surrender until Berlin, and the rest of the nation, was taken by “boots on the ground”. It wasn’t like World War I, where when things turned against the Germans they sent out diplomatic feelers seeking an end to the war. There was no similar reaching out by the Japanese who were drilling their civilian population in defense of the homeland using wooden stakes. A few weeks before the atomic bomb attack, there was a raid on Tokyo that killed twice as many people as the two atomic bombs combined, over 200,000. There were no peace feelers, no signs of diplomacy. You can read the source materials, public and classified, but there was no sign that V-J was going to be any different than V-E, except with higher Allied casualties.

    People can look back afterwards and rationalize. The Japanese were ready to collapse. Maybe true, but after how many more Tokyo like raids would it take before surrender? Where were the back channel diplomatic contacts? It’s not even clear the two atomic bomb attacks would have been sufficient if they hadn’t been part of an American bluff, claiming an unlimited supply of such weapons. In mid-1945, who exactly was willing to bet that the conclusion of the war against Japan was going to be any different than the conclusion of the war against Germany, except with more mountainous terrain, and if the invasion of Okinawa was any indication, higher casualties on both sides.

    Sure, by late 1945 there was plenty of second guessing, but that was well after the fact.

Comments are closed.