Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:October:27 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2007/10/27-11/1 [Reference/History/WW2/Japan, Reference/History/WW2/Germany] UID:48460 Activity:very high
10/26   Except for Hiroshima/Nagasaki, is it actually possible to bomb
        people into submission? It seemed to failed with the Londoners,
        Germans, Vietnamese, Afghanistan, etc.
        \_ worked all right with the Germans.  bombing them from the air
           isnt the only thing that let to their defeat but it helped some.
           \_ Most historians don't really agree with you here. Maybe it
              reduced their tank and plane production slightly, which
              helped shorten the war slightly. It did not effect the
              "will to fight."
              \_ I don't understand this new fad of declaring unsavory tactics
                 like torture or civilian bombing 'ineffective.'  Of course
                 they are effective.  Have you read "why the allies won?"
                 There is a whole chapter on bombing.  We don't live in a
                 convenient world where all immoral choices can be rejected
                 on amoral grounds. -- ilyas
                 on amoral grounds.  Are you willing to backup your
                 'most historians' claim or this the old 'argument by
                 non-existence consensus?'  -- ilyas
                 non-existent consensus?'  -- ilyas
                              \- i think declaring "unsavory tactics" off
                                 limits hugely helps the US, because the
                                 US has a massive advantage in any battle
                                 that involves "fighting fair" where they
                                 define fair.
                 \_ I am sad when I agree with ilyas.  I have to agree that
                    making the civilian population sad and feaful that the RAF
                    is going to drop a ton of explosive on their head is going
                    to reduce their 'will to fight' and 'will to build
                    tank' and 'will to put up with Hitler'
                   \_ The civilian population had a will to fight in Feb 1945?
                      How were they supposed to stop it? No, the purpose
                      might be to attempt to shock the leadership. But that
                      relies on there being a rational leadership.
                      \_ In Csarist Russia, the loses on the front led to the
                         government being overthrown. In France, the troops
                         mutinied late in WWI. Nothing like this happened in
                         Germany (or Japan) due to the allied bombing campaigns.
                         German workers continued to work under horrific
                         conditions and followed orders all the way to the
                         surrender. German soldiers fought to the end in Berlin.
                         \_ It is not possible for 'business to remain as usual'
                            when your life is put under daily threat.
                              -- ilyas
                         \_ If the Germans hadn't sent VI LENIN back to Russia,
                            the revolution wouldn't have had legs. Along
                            similar lines, the folks who could have led
                            revolutions in Germany and Japan either failed
                            due to bad timing and lack of assurances or didn't
                            ever have the forces necessary to force the issue,
                   \_ See Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#Effectiveness
                      on wikipedia. It is certainly open for debate, but
                      German production of tanks, plane and guns increased
                      during 1944, the year of the heaviest bombing. It did
                      have a substantial effect on oil production.
                      \_ The question is whether production would have been
                         higher had there been no bombing. -- ilyas
                         \_ No the question is more subtle and harder to
                            answer: could the materiel and manpower deployed
                            to the strategic bombing campaign been more
                            usefully deployed elsewhere? Like for instance
                            tactical bombing and air control, which
                            undoubtedly had a huge effect, or a larger number
                            of tanks, which Britain was woefully short of.
                            \_ The only allied power with good tanks was the
                            \_ I agree that it's not at all clear whether
                               strategic bombing was the best use of resources.
                               However, the part I objected to was the claim
                               that strategic bombing was 'ineffective.'
                                 -- ilyas
                               Incidentally more tank production for non-USSR
                               allied countries would have been a terrible idea
                                -- Britain and US had terrible tanks.  -- ilyas
                               \_ If the allies had taken a course of action
                                  that would have made them win faster but
                                  instead used strategic bombing as a tactic,
                                  which wasted men, materiel and focus, thereby
                                  making the war last longer, then I think this
                                  means that strategic bombing was not only
                                  ineffective, but counterproductive. But I
                                  guess at this point we are quibbling over
                                  definitions. The one thing that strategic
                                  bombing might have accomplished it to force
                                  the Luftwaffte fighter force to sally,
                                  allowing us to shoot them down and gain air
                                  superiority. But there were easier and less
                                  roundabout ways to do this. Do you think that
                                  unarmoured troops in jeeps were more effective
                                  than tankers in Shermans? American tanks
                                  were not as bad as their reputation, they
                                  just weren't as good as the best German tanks.
                                  Very few Tigers and Panthers were ever made.
                                  Off the top of my head, I think we made 10x
                                  Shermans for every Panz-V and Panz-VI, while
                                  losses were something like 2x in tank battles.
                                  \_ I bet most German tank losses were due to
                                     aircraft (allies had exceptional planes,
                                     and lots of them).  Shermans couldn't kill
                                     Panthers/Tigers.  Shells would bounce off,
                                     you see. -- ilyas
                                     aircraft (the allies had lots of planes,
                                     and they were excellent).  Shermans
                                     couldn't kill Tigers/Panthers.  Shells
                                     would bounce off, you see.  A better way
                                     for the allies to spend resources on tanks
                                     would be to copy Russian tanks.  Germans
                                     did!  -- ilyas
                 \_ tank:
                                     \_ It depends on which Sherman and from
                                        which angle. The US tanks got
                                        slaughtered early on, because they were
                                        told they could stand toe to toe with
                                        the Panthers, which they could not.
                                        We learned to attack in swarms and take
                                        some losses in order to get a side or
                                        rear shot. Also, we got uparmored pretty
                                        quickly with some better guns and AP
                                        rounds (HEAT, I think) that gave us
                                        a fighting chance. I wonder what
                                        percentage of tanks kills were from the
                                        air? Quite a few, no dobut. Even more
                                        important was the fact that the Panzers
                                        were always short of ammo and fuel, due
                                        to supply line inderdiction.
        \_ Works for the type of people who are very submissive (e.g. those
           who are willing to do silly things like suicide for their
           Emperor, perform Bukake, and draw porn manga). The British,
           Germans, Vietnamese and Afghans on the other hand are in
           general very proud of themselves and/or are very defiant
           thus they'd never surrender.
           \_ E_TOOSHORT
           \_ yes because Japan is not proud of itself.  Just ask anyone
              in East Asia.
        \_ We bombed the greater Tokyo area too.
           \_ We firebombed 67 cities in Japan:
              See also McNamara in Fog of War. It's arguable that Nagasaki
              and Hiroshima were more for demonstrating US possession of
              atomic bombs to the Soviets. -!pp
              \_ McNamura?  BTW this name sounds almost Japanese.
        \_ Nuke and Pave!
        \_ We bombed the Serbs, and they gave up their campaign of genocide
           in Kosovo.
           \_ So that Albanians could continue their campaign of genocide in
              \_ *shrug* op asked for examples of bombing ppl into submission.
                 Mission Accomplished.
        \_ Libya. Kadaffi.
           \_ ...what did we convince Colonel K to do via bombing?
        \_ Arguably the Japanese are better off for having submitted.  The
           destruction of their country stopped, they didn't have a violent
           continuing occupation which threw their country back into a
           dark age, etc.
           \_ In addition their submission allowed them to concentrate their
              resources on the development of kick ass products like Wii,
              Prius, and Bukake/Urabon/Hentai
        \_ Ask the residents of Dresden.
           \_ We'll need to live in mobile floating fortresses for all
              to live in to deal with extreme weather and flooding due
              to global warming.  We'll also need to cut about 1/2 the
              surplus population due to reduced fishery output and
              farm production.
              \_ Are you volunteering to be excess population?
           \_ I guess dead is a form of submission, but it didn't really
              slow down the Germans much, if any at all.
              \_ dont give motd armchair historian any ideas.  Islam
                 means 'submission to god'
              \_ They stopped producing weapons in Dresden.
                 \_ Dresden did not have any munitions factories.
                       \_ Did you even read this? It says that there were
                          no munition factories in Dresden. I guess there were
                          a couple of glass factories.
              \_ Because it wasn't militarily relevant. But the Germans were
                 already slowed down. Dresden was February 1945. VE day is
                 May 8. "Bomb people into submission"... the people can't
                 submit even if they want to. The military forces have to
                 \_ hindsight is laser like in its precision.  we probably
                    thought some industrial capacity in Dresden helped Germany
                    with their war effort.  without Dresden you woulndt
                    get great american literature like Cat's Cradle
        \_ we bombed the americans and now they are cowardly talking of retreat
           from Iraq.  -AQ
           \_ "Somalia" is the word you're looking for.
              \_ somalia wasn't a bombing so much as shooting a few soldiers.
                 Westerners have no stomach for war. It shall be their undoing!
                 \_ same basic concept, no?   kill a few folks so the rest stop
           \_ lets not forget Lebanon.
              \_ Too bad Bush doesn't have the sense of Reagan.
                 \_ Because that worked out really well in Lebanon and had the
                    effect of discouraging our enemies around the world while
                    strengthening our allies' spines.  Or not.  Don't they
                    teach history anymore?
                    \_ Of possible interest: Richard Marcinko reported in
                       Rogue Warrior that he suggested instituting a radio
                       pulse on the frequency the suicide bombers liked to use
                       to blow up their bombers prematurely, but this was
                       rejected as being likely to result in civilian
                    \_ Ah yes, it is much better for America to waste $2T
                       and get beaten anyway, like Our Heroic Leader Bush
                       has done. Too bad they don't teach Conservatives
                       the principle of limited government anymore.
        \_ I don't understand why anyone listens or respects Bush in any
           way.  he's poured a couple of trillion down a fucking rathole.
           He should be Shunned in DC.  Entire blocks of people too disgusted
           to look at his face.
           \- in an odd coincidence:
2007/10/27-29 [Transportation/Car/RoadHogs, Transportation/Car/Hybrid] UID:48461 Activity:low
10/26   Looks like the suburvan lifestyle is about get a lot more expensive:
        "Such pricing strategies could make a car five times more expensive
         to operate, Heminger said."
        \_ Well what do ya expect from a jew controlled liberal outlet.
           As for "... a new poll shows that many Bay Area residents are
           ready to take those steps [to live in smaller houses, higher
           gas taxes/tolls]." Sorry buba, but the general rule of thumb
           is that the more people save in N Cal, the more people will
           waste in S Cal. In another word, for every unit of Prius driven
           in N Cal, there will be a near linearly proportional number of
           Hummers that'll be driven in S Cal.
        \_ I don't know about road tolls, but higher gas taxes is good because
           it directly correlates to the amount of CO2 a car produces.  I live
           in Fremont.
           in Fremont and work in San Mateo.
2007/10/27-11/1 [Industry/Jobs, Industry/Startup] UID:48462 Activity:nil
10/27   Anyone have experience with phone 66 Punch block wiring?  I have a
        small office I need to fix some phone jacks on--and I have no idea how
        the rows of pins are connected electrically, or how to safely branch a
        single line from the phone company into multiple jacks in the office.
        \_ Cabling by David Barnett ; David Groth ; Jim McBee
2007/10/27-11/1 [Science/GlobalWarming, Computer/SW/Editors/Vi] UID:48463 Activity:nil
10/27   Unlimited competition for expanding markets would lead to a
        global confict.
        \_ I CAN HAS SENTENCE?
        \_ trust the invisible hand
           \_ You are not the original invisible hand!
                --#1 original invisible hand
        \_ PLAGIARISM!!! Karl Marx and John A. Hobson need to be quoted
           (wrt to WW1, WW2, etc)
           \- and VI LENIN. just our of curiosity, where did you come across
           \- and VI LENIN. just out of curiosity, where did you come across
              JA HOBSON?
2007/10/27-11/1 [Reference/History/WW2/Japan, Reference/History/WW2] UID:48464 Activity:nil
10/27   Why are there so many WW2 games? 1/2 of the first person shooter
        games are based in/around WW2 theatres. What happened to WW1?
        Why are there no trench war, gas mask, chem gas games
        \_ There are a few realistic WW1 Dreamcast games for the Japanese
           market that involve driving your tank somewhere for hours
           and hours staring at a tiny box on the screen representing your
           limited view of the outside world if you're a tanker...
           then suddenly you die and you have no idea what
           hit you, the end.  hours of enjoyment
        \_ Because getting killed from dysentery or other diseases, rat bites,
           shell shock, and getting mowed down by emplaced machine gun nests
           as you run across a large, open, muddy field in yet another
           pointless charge, your corpse left hanging in barbed wire as you
           bleed out just doesn't sound all that much fun to most people.
           WW1 was way up there on stupidly fought wars.  Go read up on the
           French officer's revolt and how that ended.
           \_ Yeah, and besides that the war was mostly pointless. Compared
              with WW2, WW1 had no real cause or glory to it at all. The
              propaganda was lame and the USA was a minor player overall.
              WW2 and the 50's were the golden age of the USA.
        \_ At a guess, because the "really cool" weapons start surfacing in
           WW2. Let's see: automatic weapons vs. mustard gas, which is sexier?
           \_ Nukes are either boring game enders or so unimpressive in most
              games you're better off not bothering.  Mustard gas could have
              some cool in-game effects.  Decreased LOS, slower movement,
              semi-random movement, damage over time, wind can cause it to
              drift to other places including back over your own lines (which
              really happened in WWI), gravity causing the gas to flow down
              slopes, etc.  Nukes?  BOOM!  Stuff is dead.  Whatever.  Zzzzz,
              \_ "Atomic" != "Automatic"
                 \_ Oops.  Back to Reading 1A for me.  Anyway, I'd still
                    prefer mustard gas over playing rat-tat-tat.wav.
        \_ I really miss the old PC game "Total Annihilation".  Is Supreme
           Commander any good?
           \_ I didn't really like it that much.  SC is TA-like, but not TA.
              The game is all about building out the tech 4 super units as
              fast as possible then stomping the enemy base with them before
              they do the same to you.  The tech 1 and most tech 2 units are
              unworthy of production.  They get swept aside in combat.  The
              tech 3 are ok.  You'll probably want a bunch to help your tech 4
              fight off their tech 4, otherwise they're mostly useless too.
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:October:27 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>