|
Are there any good sources about the U.S. involvement in Siberia during World War I?
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
ThisIsJohnWayne posted:This really stuck. Does anyone here know more? The world at that time, and the soviet union at that time... we all know how bad it got. There were a number of women involved in the American program, from the women doing trajectory calculations for Mercury that gave us Hidden Figures (a movie I have not seen), Margaret Hamilton who recently got a lot of social media attention for her role in writing guidance software for Apollo (the stories on social media oversell it, but she was a senior engineer right in the thick of things), to the women who hand-stitched the various space suits. The latter two both feature pretty highly in their respective episodes of Moon Machines, an excellent series that happens to be uploaded in its entirety on YouTube. I know much less about the Soviet program if only because it was so much more secretive, very little has been written about it in English even today. The most famous thing of course was the flight of the first woman in space, one Valentina Tereshkova, though the women's program was a separate thing entirely designed for propaganda purposes. If the Soviets had had a black pilot, I'm confident they would have flown them ASAP.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 05:16
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Pike&Shot keeps referring to pike-armed units as 'keils' but I haven't heard that term before, where does it come from?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 05:40
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:There were a number of women involved in the American program, from the women doing trajectory calculations for Mercury that gave us Hidden Figures (a movie I have not seen), Margaret Hamilton who recently got a lot of social media attention for her role in writing guidance software for Apollo (the stories on social media oversell it, but she was a senior engineer right in the thick of things), to the women who hand-stitched the various space suits. The latter two both feature pretty highly in their respective episodes of Moon Machines, an excellent series that happens to be uploaded in its entirety on YouTube. Forget the space suits, women literally wove the guidance computer together:  Core rope memory being woven at Raytheon by expert seamstresses for apollo
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 05:46
|
|
|
Computer science wasn't a male-dominated field until around the 80s. One explanation is that when personal computers were proliferating society they were only being marketed towards boys rather than girls, so that when the kids grew up to enroll in college, girls would be lacking key experience that the boys had. NPR did a piece on it.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 06:45
|
|
|
Well guys I was going through a Hunnicutt book on the Bradley and other US vehicles and found peak 1950s Lets mount a nuclear recoilless rifle on an open topped artillery tractor! What could go wrong?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 09:26
|
|
|
I think I have found something that is weirder than Girls and Panzer   http://vonkickass.deviantart.com/art/95-S-58-61-Musti-324387592 http://panzerschreckleopard.deviantart.com/art/Lesbian-Tanks-574257814
Nenonen fucked around with this message at 10:07 on May 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 10:01
|
|
|
Please don't share the next thing you find that's weirder
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 10:22
|
|
|
spectralent posted:There's a bunch of "Don't knows" here, but, for this one, imagine that gif of bender going "Oh wait, you're serious, let me laugh even harder". North Korea is incredibly rare earth rich and very little of that stuff is being extracted by the current regime. There's a flood of investment waiting to happen. On the other hand, Seoul probably gets flattened by sheer weight of conventional artillery fire so everyone loses and has to rebuild.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 11:03
|
|
|
"Rare earth" isn't actually that rare. What is rare is a relatively lax environmental regime that makes digging up this stuff sufficiently profitable.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 11:11
|
|
|
There's a well known study on possible effects of a NK artillery strike against Seoul. http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/mind-the-gap-between-rhetoric-and-reality/ Main points from that article - Three Primary Factors Range – Only about 1/3 of Seoul is presently in range from artillery along a DMZ trace. The northern reaches of Seoul within artillery range have much lower population densities than Seoul proper; Numbers – Even though KPA has a tremendous number of artillery pieces, only a certain number are emplaced to range Seoul. KPA can’t emplace every weapon near Seoul or the rest of North Korea’s expansive border would be unguarded and even more vulnerable. Moreover, an artillery tube immediately reveals its location as soon as it fires. Therefore only about two-thirds of artillery will open fire at a time. The rest are trying to remain hidden; Protection – Artillery shelters for twenty million people exist in the greater Seoul metropolitan area. After the initial surprise has worn off, there simply won’t be large numbers of exposed people. Even during the initial attack the vast majority of people will either be at work, at home, or in transit. Few people will be standing in the middle of an open field with no protection whatsoever available anywhere nearby. Three Secondary Factors Dud rate – the only numbers available—to the DPRK as well as the rest of the world—indicate a dud rate of twenty-five percent. It’s like immediately taking every fourth artillery tube away. Counter-battery fires – shortly after the KPA artillery begins firing, and the political decision has been made, South Korean artillery, Air Forces, and others will begin destroying artillery at a historical rate of 1% per hour. South Korea has had approximately 50 years to figure out where North Korean artillery tubes are emplaced using every sense available to man and machine. Logistics – in order to move south from the DMZ trace and place the rest of Seoul at risk, KPA must expose approximately 2,500 thin-skinned vehicles each day along three well-defined transportation corridors. Otherwise, KPA grinds to an almost immediate halt without a way to transport fuel, ammunition and spare parts needed to continue moving south. Alternatively, KPA can scavenge from ROK fuel stores and depots if they have not been previously destroyed. About ability to protect heavy artillery from counter battery fire: "There are several HARTs near the area. Because of the KOKSANs size, there are relatively few HARTs able to handle the gun. Here is a representative sample of the kinds of places from which and to which the guns can move. HARTs can only be situated in certain areas to be effective. Generally they must provide protection, be oriented in the right direction, allow clearance for the artillery to come into and out of the location, cannot exceed certain gradient of slopes and other requirements. If the slope is too steep, the gun will not be able to depress or raise in order to fire at certain ranges. Also if the slope is too steep there is the very real possibility of sliding off the platform as anyone who has experienced a Korean winter knows. However, Korea has been blessed with numerous locations which meet all the criteria. The 240 MRL needs a certain blast radius cleared behind it or can kill the operators and anyone else who happens to be in the way. The 240 is likely going to have to come out of the HARTs in order to fire, unlike other systems which can fire from an almost completely protected area with only the tube sticking out. The total exposure time for a 240 MRL is around 15 minutes from exiting the HART, stabilizing the platform, erecting the launcher, raising the pads, retracting the launcher, moving and reloading." And estimated casualties - "~29,661 Civilian; likely~790 Foreign nationals~605 Chinese" for a surprise attack against population centres.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 11:19
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:North Korea is incredibly rare earth rich and very little of that stuff is being extracted by the current regime. There's a flood of investment waiting to happen. NK is history's greatest humanitarian crisis waiting to happen. Tackling that would probably bankrupt SK and, considering the US is still trying to fix afghan and Iraq, it isn't a smart move for them either.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 11:21
|
|
|
Hasn't the rare earth market crashed anyway since there was a supply shortage a few years ago, and so a whole bunch of manufacturers moved to alternatives that turned out to be better?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 11:23
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:On the other hand, Seoul probably gets flattened by sheer weight of conventional artillery fire so everyone loses and has to rebuild. This idea has been debunked many times now. Seoul covers a large area and Nork guns can't be lined up right on the edge of DMZ, as long range guns and long range ammunition is just a fraction of the arsenal and Southern counterbattery efforts and USAF will be concentrating on them they just can't do much damage to the city apart from the northernmost parts and even then not for long enough to flatten it. Take a look at Syria, cities take a long time to pulverize by shelling. Life would be disrupted by evacuations but not for long.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 11:25
|
|
|
30,000 civilian casualties is still a lot. Also it seems like a lot of this is reliant on 2011 estimates of the range of NK artillery, and (relatively) small increases in range would expose a lot more of the densely populated parts of Seoul to fire.
Fangz fucked around with this message at 11:40 on May 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 11:33
|
|
|
Fangz posted:30,000 civilian casualties is still a lot. Consider that Seoul metropolitan area has a population of 26 million people. While it is lots, overall it doesn't mean a full apocalypse to the city.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 12:30
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Consider that Seoul metropolitan area has a population of 26 million people. While it is lots, overall it doesn't mean a full apocalypse to the city. It's ten simultaneous 9/11 attacks.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 12:40
|
|
|
ThisIsJohnWayne posted:This really stuck. Does anyone here know more? The world at that time, and the soviet union at that time... we all know how bad it got. Why do you think the Soviet Union was more sexist than anywhere else in the 50s and 60s?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 12:45
|
|
|
Fangz posted:It's ten simultaneous 9/11 attacks. It'd also be a total war with a neighbour ROK has been in conflict with since 1950. You should rather compare to WW2 campaigns. In the correct context it's predicted light losses overall. Tragic, but still a mere footnote.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 12:52
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:It'd also be a total war with a neighbour ROK has been in conflict with since 1950. You should rather compare to WW2 campaigns. In the correct context it's predicted light losses overall. Tragic, but still a mere footnote. I think the context of attacks on first world civilians under the view of the 24/7 news media is far more relevant than WWII. No one uses the large population of New York to show 9/11 to be a 'footnote'.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 13:02
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:If this is the wrong thread, please direct me to the correct one! Chertok's four-part memoir Rockets and People was translated into English and published as an ebook by NASA: https://www.nasa.gov/connect/ebooks/rockets_people_vol1_detail.html I don't think you'd find anything better or more comprehensive.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 13:05
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I think the context of attacks on first world civilians under the view of the 24/7 news media is far more relevant than WWII. No one uses the large population of New York to show 9/11 to be a 'footnote'. people cared about 9/11 because the victims were americans
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 13:27
|
|
|
So I've recently been through The Jungle is Neutral, Tresspassers on the Roof of the World, Foreign Devils on the Silk Road and The Great Game. I really enjoyed the exploration/historical perspective of these books (I like Peter Hopkirk I hope he is well regarded here) and am looking to continue with some books similar to these. Africa is not of much interest to me but I would consider it.... Any more good books on the Great Game, or I'd do something on the discovery, exploration and exploitation of British India which I'm sure is well documented, maybe something on more Asian territories? https://www.amazon.com/Foreign-Devils-Silk-Peter-Hopkirk/dp/0719564484 https://www.amazon.com/Trespassers-Roof-World-Exploration-Kodansha/dp/1568360509 There was an interesting chapter in Trespassers when they discovered Everest about some of the first attempts to scale it, I'm minorly interested in this if anyone has a recommendations about the early expeditions
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
I quite enjoyed Shooting Leave by John Ure, but it is more about the men of the British and Russian Empires doing their exploration/scouting/hunting/trying not to die around the North West Frontier. It does cover parts of Asia minor as well!
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:In the event of war between the US, South Korea and North Korea, what would be the opening moves? Would the THAAD and other anti-ballistic defense systems be adequate in preventing cities like Seoul and Tokyo from becoming irradiated craters? Is the South Korean military superior to the norths'? How many US troops would be required to repel and invade the north? What would an insurgency look like? Would those loyal to the regime (of which I presume the majority of the population) resort to worldwide acts of terror? Would Trump be willing to nuke Pyongyang and other military facilities, or use conventional bombing instead? I'll answer these in line. - In the event of war between the US, South Korea and North Korea, what would be the opening moves? There are three primary Peninsula scenarios: 1) The DPRK does something awful (eg, launches a missile at somebody) that requires US and allies to invade and depose the Kim government. 2) Someone (probably POTUS) decides to pursue regime change without DPRK having done something awful, and 3) DPRK invades the south. 1 and 2 are a whole lot more plausible than 3; you can probably extrapolate what will happen in each scenario though. I'm not going to even try to speculate onto troop movements and whatnot; if you have more discrete questions though I'm happy to answer them. -Would the THAAD and other anti-ballistic defense systems be adequate in preventing cities like Seoul and Tokyo from becoming irradiated craters? Couple of things: first, the THAAD deployment, while high profile, is very small in the grand scheme of missile defense in ROK (case in point: there are well under 100 THAAD interceptors in total available to the peninsula). Patriot still has the vast majority of the missile defense mission there. Second, there is no indication that DPRK has managed to weaponize any nuclear device, especially meeting the shall we say rather extreme demands of ballistic missile deployment. So, the real fight of interest is not a potential nuclear exchange, but rather defending the most important strategic assets in the south (things like Osan AB for example) from enormous numbers of ancient liquid fueled ballistic missiles. It'll basically come down to "how many Patriots we got", which is really not all that many. DPRK dumping SCUDs onto populated areas would make people mad but the damage would be fairly limited (just ask the 8th Air Force how hard it is to destroy cities with high explosive) and would have little effect on the actual fighting of the war. - Is the South Korean military superior to the norths'? Yes, conclusively. The ROK military is generally speaking a very capable, well equipped, and robust thing, plus it has a whole lot of big brothers standing right behind it. The threat of invasion (read: scenario #3) has virtually dissolved over the last couple decades: the DPRK is no longer capable of sustaining operations more than a few miles from their border and China is clearly totally uninterested in anything the DPRK does so long as their business interests aren't affected. - How many US troops would be required to repel and invade the north? This are two very, very different requirements. Excluding the missile defense aspect, the ROK is perfectly capable of defending itself from the DPRK without any help from outsiders. The Kim government's primary military objective today, however, is defending the regime from invasion, and they've invested an awful lot of effort in developing a force to do exactly this. Any sort of invasion of the DPRK would be a very difficult task and would take an awful lot of dudes and an awful lot of everything else. As for the "Seoul would be a smoking crater because of DPRK artillery" thing that you see loving EVERYWHERE, that's idiotic and completely unrealistic and it appears a good post above discussed it in detail so read that.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
Can anyone help out the president here?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
I wish zombie Andrew Jackson would get a big stick and correct his history personally if you know what I mean.
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:20
|
|
|
My guess is that he's referring to the Nullification crisis, but he's too retarded to articulate his thoughts properly.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
zoux posted:Can anyone help out the president here? Lol yeah why did they start shelling fort sumter?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
I have the strong suspicion that Trump thinks Andrew Jackson and "Stonewall" Jackson were the same person.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
Yeah that's the thing about big wars, you never see people asking why they happened
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:26
|
|
Ainsley McTree posted:Yeah that's the thing about big wars, you never see people asking why they happened We need some sort of educational movement dedicated to this. What should we call it?
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
Hundreds of men walking toward their death across a field in Gettysburg all the while thinking "lol why the hell are we even here lmao".
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:31
|
|
zoux posted:Hundreds of men walking toward their death across a field in Gettysburg all the while thinking "lol why the hell are we even here lmao". Free shoes.
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
*while being stabbed with a bayonet* um excuse me wtf
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
Stop shooting me and I just like wearing red coats what the fu
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 15:35
|
|
|
I wonder if the civil war wouldn't have happened if the rebels didn't secede and start shelling fort sumter 🤔
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
For people who have somehow mercifully avoided learning about the state of American politics, the president has a couple phrases that he uses habitually. When he says some variation of "nobody is talking about this" or "people don't ask the question" or "nobody knew that this was so complicated", he means that he personally was ignorant of something and he wants to normalize that. When the president says "a lot of people are saying" something or "many people believe" he means that he believes that thing and wants represent that belief as normal and widely held. Further to this specific point about Andrew Jackson, there is as yet no convincing evidence that the president has ever read an entire book in his life. His knowledge of history and current affairs comes from television or, at best, skimming articles in newspapers and magazines. He probably saw someone compare him to Andrew Jackson on television, and pieced some other details together, perhaps from conversations with aides. Like maybe he asked Sebastian Gorka to tell him about Jackson. His previous encounter with Civil War history came when he tried to pretend he knew about Frederick Douglass and spoke of him as if he were still alive.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I wonder if the civil war wouldn't have happened if the rebels didn't secede and start shelling fort sumter 🤔 hosed up if true
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 13:35 |
|
|
Schenck v. U.S. posted:For people who have somehow mercifully avoided learning about the state of American politics, the president has a couple phrases that he uses habitually. When he says some variation of "nobody is talking about this" or "people don't ask the question" or "nobody knew that this was so complicated", he means that he personally was ignorant of something and he wants to normalize that. When the president says "a lot of people are saying" something or "many people believe" he means that he believes that thing and wants represent that belief as normal and widely held. I enjoyed this post a lot
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2017 16:46
|
|