Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

archive.today

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 204 posts

Re: Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

#41

Post by sillysaurus3 »

shabda wrote: post #37
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, the purpose of the bomb was to save many thousands more lives than it ended. An invasion of Japan would've cost an enormous number of lives. It would've also had a catastrophic effect on the civilian population, because they were being told that the American troops were there to enslave them. It has even been said that the propaganda being told to the Japanese civilians included the idea that the troops wou…

While there are many people who subscribe to your view, there are an equal number who believe that Japan would have surrendered within months/weeks with no ground invasion. The allies had complete air and naval superiority and Russia had joined the the Japanese war theatre. If you have read the ethics of atomic bombings in any detail you are already aware of the details, so I would refrain from linking to wikipedia.…

I'm not aware of the ethical details, so feel free to correct me. It's my understanding that invasion was imminent at the time of the bombings, so America's choice was either to send bombs or soldiers. If that was truly their choice, it seems hard to argue that the bomb was the less ethical.

It's fine to say that Japan would have surrendered without invasion, but such a strong assertion needs to be backed by equally strong evidence.

EDIT: An excerpt from your link:

This conclusion assumed conventional fire bombing would have continued, with ever-increasing numbers of B-29s, and a greater level of destruction to Japan's cities and population.

It seems hard to argue that literally firebombing an entire civilization into stoneage living conditions was more ethical than forcing a quick political decision to surrender and stop the madness. Can you imagine trying to live without basic necessities? Even if nobody was dropping bombs on you directly, you, your family, and everyone around you would be the definition of misery for the duration of the firebombing. The firebombing didn't simply destroy military targets. It also decimated infrastructure that we take for granted, such as the ability to deliver drinkable water, or to seek medical treatment at hospitals. How many were to die a miserable death due to the firebombing before Hiroshima and Nagasaki could objectively be called the more ethical decision?

Also, the above analysis assumes both sides had perfect information. But information during wartime is asymmetric. It's entirely possible that America had no knowledge of the Japanese political framework at the time the decision to drop the bombs was made. If the Japanese were broadcasting their intention to surrender before the bombs were dropped, that would be different, but it doesn't seem like that was the case.

Would you mind helping me understand why firebombing was more ethical than the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Re: Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

#42

Post by scrollaway »

kyberias wrote: post #38
scrollaway wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It helps to understand how it actually works. The s in its does not point towards possession, it is simply part of the word "its". My, His, Hers, Ours, Yours, Theirs, Its. Not Me's, He's, She's, Us's, Your's, Their's, It's. English is an easy language. Most languages use a lot more words than all that to convey all that. English speakers don't have to deal with the singular second person, with a separate objective no…

I think this doesn't help. What is relevant is that there are two forms: it's and its. Its easy to mix them by non-natives like myself. No-one ever writes She's or Us's, but "It's" is valid as is its. It's easy to deduce that one should not write us's but it's not that easy with it. :)

"It's" is a contraction of "it is", it doesn't exist in and of itself. Maybe that helps more?

Re: Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

#44

Post by zura »

ryandvm wrote: post #14
vixin wrote: post #9

Implosion Sphere for Fat Man nearly assembled and about to be placed inside it's casing. "Its casing". Why do people have such a problem with it's and its?

Because English is like Javascript - it's weird and is riddled with vestigial design errors, but since it's everywhere, we're all forced to use it.

Egzactli.

Re: Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

#45

Post by thefreeman »

dirktheman wrote: post #31

It always amazes me how seemingly careless they were with these nuclear devices back then. To know that such a devestating bomb was handled by a sultry, shirtless youngster, in a shed on a small island in the Pacific... It reminds me of the Slotin Incident ( http://www.damninteresting.com/bitten-by-the-nuclear-dragon/ ) where dr. Louis Slotin accidently slipped the screwdriver he used to separate two plutonium/uraniu…

That is amazing.

I have had a lot of oh shit moments in my days, but none gets close to dropping the plutonium onto the uranium and nearly detonating a nuclear payload.

Re: Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

#46

Post by sophacles »

scrollaway wrote: post #26
sophacles wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's backwards of how apostrophes normally work. In all other cases, it is the right place to use an apostrophe: * ...about to be placed in Fat Man's casing. * ...about to be placed in the bomb's casing * ... about to be placed in its casing. One of those is not like the others.

It helps to understand how it actually works. The s in its does not point towards possession, it is simply part of the word "its". My, His, Hers, Ours, Yours, Theirs, Its. Not Me's, He's, She's, Us's, Your's, Their's, It's. English is an easy language. Most languages use a lot more words than all that to convey all that. English speakers don't have to deal with the singular second person, with a separate objective no…

The brain is an incredible pattern recognition machine.

The regular form of possessive is 's. That is, when it's right to add an s to a noun indicate possession we add an apostrophe. This is more regular than a lot of english rules. So now there are pronouns. They are a bit weird, carrying some strange stuff from germanic languages about changing the word based on the case (sometimes). For the most part, it's pretty straightforward still.

Now we get to the word its. Yeah, it's a pronoun, but it follows the possessive pattern of adding an s. So 'it' follows the pronoun pattern of changing the word, but it also phonetically follows the regular noun pattern of adding an s.

In this one special case, there are two patterns being followed at the same time. Except not really, because unlike all the other cases where the s is appended for possession, we don't mark it different.

This is of course because there is a form of the phonetic 'its', which is spelled "it's" . This word is very similar to its, but it really is a contraction (a special word that actually means two words, but we're lazy and drop some of letters from the second word) in this case, "it's" is ("it's"'s :) ) short for it is. That phrase of course is not about possession, but it does describe a quality possessed by the thing referred to by "it".

Of course on top of all this, we have yet another use in english for the 's construct. It is related to the "it's", because it not only denotes possession, but also denotes a contraction with is, or with has (which itself is a completely different rant - have and is are arbitrarily used in all sorts of languages) like described above for it's , but more generally.

That means the the sentence:

Bob's going to Bob's house.

Is a correct way of using the 's in two different meanings...

Bob is going to the house Bob owns.

Yet, if was talking about a robot...

Robot is going home. Its house has its charger and it's going to plug in.

So yeah, English is super duper easy! I mean, how hard is it for our pattern matching machines to not realize that contracting with is means 's, that possession which is phonetically an s sound is spelled 's, and pronouns use different words for different cases, these are all pretty regular occurrances, EXCEPT when talking about spelling the pronoun its, which despite its appearance and phonetics of being a pronoun that follows noun rules, is actually a separate word arbitrarily. I mean, who would ever get confused by the 's pattern not applying in this one case? It's a special case of a special case and should be extremely obvious.

Amiright?

Re: Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

#47

Post by kordless »

shabda wrote: post #37
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, the purpose of the bomb was to save many thousands more lives than it ended. An invasion of Japan would've cost an enormous number of lives. It would've also had a catastrophic effect on the civilian population, because they were being told that the American troops were there to enslave them. It has even been said that the propaganda being told to the Japanese civilians included the idea that the troops wou…

While there are many people who subscribe to your view, there are an equal number who believe that Japan would have surrendered within months/weeks with no ground invasion. The allies had complete air and naval superiority and Russia had joined the the Japanese war theatre. If you have read the ethics of atomic bombings in any detail you are already aware of the details, so I would refrain from linking to wikipedia.…

I believe the parent was relating what was believed at the time, not what is common knowledge today. I'm not sure he's pushing his views on anyone, but more relating what the view at the time was. Careful of cognitive dissonance here - what once once was isn't necessarily what is today.

Re: Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

#48

Post by dirktheman »

thefreeman wrote: post #45
dirktheman wrote: post #31

It always amazes me how seemingly careless they were with these nuclear devices back then. To know that such a devestating bomb was handled by a sultry, shirtless youngster, in a shed on a small island in the Pacific... It reminds me of the Slotin Incident ( http://www.damninteresting.com/bitten-by-the-nuclear-dragon/ ) where dr. Louis Slotin accidently slipped the screwdriver he used to separate two plutonium/uraniu…

That is amazing . I have had a lot of oh shit moments in my days, but none gets close to dropping the plutonium onto the uranium and nearly detonating a nuclear payload.

Or accidently dropping a tungsten carbide brick on the plutonium bomb core, for that matter...(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_K._Daghlian,_Jr.) That picture fascinates me. It's like a deadly game of Jenga.

Re: Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

#49

Post by Moru »

ryandvm wrote: post #14
vixin wrote: post #9

Implosion Sphere for Fat Man nearly assembled and about to be placed inside it's casing. "Its casing". Why do people have such a problem with it's and its?

Because English is like Javascript - it's weird and is riddled with vestigial design errors, but since it's everywhere, we're all forced to use it.

I think people coming from other languages have another view of English. As a "swede" I find it surprisingly logical and easy to learn. I bet someone from Finland would agree :-)

Re: Declassified photos from Tinian Island as the B-29 “Enola Gay” was being loaded

#50

Post by jnsaff2 »

dirktheman wrote: post #31

It always amazes me how seemingly careless they were with these nuclear devices back then. To know that such a devestating bomb was handled by a sultry, shirtless youngster, in a shed on a small island in the Pacific... It reminds me of the Slotin Incident ( http://www.damninteresting.com/bitten-by-the-nuclear-dragon/ ) where dr. Louis Slotin accidently slipped the screwdriver he used to separate two plutonium/uraniu…

You should read Command and Control which is about the history of nuclear accidents and management in the US. Carelessness didn't go away for a long time, especially in the upper management.

Very well written and interesting book.

http://www.amazon.com/Command-Control-Eric-Schlosser-ebook/d...

Post reply on HN