|
Nebakenezzer posted:^^ There's some very nice string quartet music with Yo Yo Ma SW8, I love his Silk Road stuff.
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Trent Hone's book on the development of USN tactics has an excellent section on Callaghan's intentions and why he acted the way he did at 1st Guadalcanal: he knew his cruisers were outgunned by Hiei and Kirishima at anything but point-blank range so he was desperately trying to stay unseen as long as possible. Unfortunately his force had no chance to work as a team prior to the battle and his choice of cruising formation was bad and all hell broke loose instead. I'm going to have to pick that up !
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:35
|
|
|
Vaginal Vagrant posted:Wasn't the 1945 war an almost entirely colonial war? I thought American involvement was mostly in support of French colonialism, but then I am but an egg. Its all a bit of a muddle, the French war in Indochina was initially entirely about them retaining control of their former colonies yes. Initially the US was in there with the OSS supporting pretty much every side that was fighting against the Japanese, which notably didnt include the collaborating former French government of the country and did include the Viet Minh, the US didnt seem to know quite what to make of Ho Chi Minh. The US was generally against and pushed against France retaining control of Indochina in general, the US was generally trying to dismantle the empires of Britain and France or certainly wasnt in any mood to really support them at the end of WW2. France tried to bend FDR's ear about this but he wasnt having any of it at the time and neitehr was Truman in the immediate aftermath when the French asked for shipping to take troops there. Their view seemed to be that they wanted to end Colonialism and push Indochina towards national self determination. However from that starting point it got bent fairly quickly when the US realised institutionally that it wasnt going to be friends with the USSR any time soon and the KMT losing in China proper, you had the anti communist panic and the general hardening of US policy. The US largely stays out of it until 1950 when Truman starts funding the war the French are fighting, this takes place in the context of the PRC victory, they then in short order recognise the Viet Minh and start arming them, shortly after France creates the state headed by Bao Dai with his prime minister Diem and legislates to grant Vietnam self determination. When looking at that situation you have the US view which seems to be that the Viet Minh are now being funded and armed by Communist China and probably by the USSR and are pushing for a complete takeover of the country and establishment of it as a communist satelite to which the US view would create a dictatorial state which was implacably opposed to their interest, or you have the other state headed by the former emporer Bao Dai which the US, perhaps naievely, believe they can guide towards democracy, as was stated at the time by the US Government: "The French Foreign Minister and I have just had an exchange of views on the situation in Indochina and are in general agreement both as to the urgency of the situation in that area and as to the necessity for remedial action. We have noted the fact that the problem of meeting the threat to the security of Viet Nam, Cambodia, and Laos which now enjoy independence within the French Union is primarily the responsibility of France and the Governments and peoples of Indochina. The United States recognizes that the solution of the Indochina problem depends both upon the restoration of security and upon the development of genuine nationalism and that United States assistance can and should contribute to these major objectives. The United States Government, convinced that neither national independence nor democratic evolution exist in any area dominated by Soviet imperialism, considers the situation to be such as to warrant its according economic aid and military equipment to the Associated States of Indochina and to France in order to assist them in restoring stability and permitting these states to pursue their peaceful and democratic development. " Its true that we can take a very cynical view of US motives in view of the long and sorry history that people saying that have created, indeed partly in Vietnam, that but i think that the US in 1950 really did believe in that ideal and thought they could bring it about eventually, they wanted to cultivate what they termed Genuine Nationalism, as opposed to the idea of the Viet Minh who they had come to see as essentially Moscows stooges in waiting. So faced with that the US starts funding the French war in late 1950 and never manages to extract itself, partly i think because Korea happens around this time and there is a very real and genuine belief in the domino theory and the idea that the PRC in particular but communists in general were going to try and push the boundaries of countries in their sphere worldwide.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
Squalid posted:In the 1930s military handbooks on interrogation were extremely boring and almost modern in their tone. They like recommend you earn the subjects trust, absolutely no torture, get information. After WWII, the CIA handbooks that are available are just brutal and cruel instructions for terrorizing civilian populations into obedience. Any reason for this change of heart? I know the counter-insurgency poo poo that happened in the Philippines was appalling even to some observers of the day. e: I meant from the turn of the century to 1930 change, not the post war change. Milo and POTUS fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Jan 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:52
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I'm not sure what causes the change
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:54
|
|
|
Cessna, have you read Max Hastings new book on the Vietnam War? If so what are your thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:57
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:So I'm starting the Ken Burns Vietnam thing now. Trent Reznor misses out on being a boomer by a year, so you're ok.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 01:59
|
|
bullshit, isn't it?
|
Milo and POTUS posted:Any reason for this change of heart? I know the counter-insurgency poo poo that happened in the Philippines was appalling even to some observers of the day. I'm not sure but my guess is simply experience. By 1935 when the manual was published the US military had become much more experienced in the process of occupation. They had had to fight several insurgencies, the one in Haiti being especially bloody, and the small scale of US occupation forces meant they were extremely reliant on locals people and infrastructure to support their mission. The occupations were often politically unpopular, but the United States tended to bribe and cajole grudging acquiescence from much of the governing apparatus and leaders of the local state. Maintaining that support probably required care and finesse. Not that these recommendations were always followed mind you. Especially in Haiti, supervision of low level forces tended to be minimal. You can read the Small Wars Manual yourself if you're interested, its easily available online https://www.marines.mil/Portals/59/Publications/FMFRP%2012-15%20%20Small%20Wars%20Manual.pdf By the time a CIA manual was accidentally released in 1963 the emphasis has changed a bit. . . 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I'm not sure but my guess is simply experience. By 1935 when the manual was published the US military had become much more experienced in the process of occupation. They had had to fight several insurgencies, the one in Haiti being especially bloody, and the small scale of US occupation forces meant they were extremely reliant on locals people and infrastructure to support their mission. The occupations were often politically unpopular, but the United States tended to bribe and cajole grudging acquiescence from much of the governing apparatus and leaders of the local state. Maintaining that support probably required care and finesse. What's KUBARK, precious?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:What's KUBARK, precious? The CIA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Army_and_CIA_interrogation_manuals#CIA_manuals
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:33
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:They're terrified about having "lost China," which many Americans--especially Protestant missionaries--had seen as naturally "theirs" since the late 19th c yeah its obviously related to the desire to check the Soviet Union and communism. After WWII though the conduct of the interventions and the scale of operations radically changes though in all respects. I think it in part just reflects the massive increase in capabilities of the US for covert operations, there was no CIA in 1935 after all. But compare the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'etat to the Nicaragua intervention in 1909. The scale of operations and scope of objectives is completely different. I think the leaders who executed the Guatemalan coup took the lessons of WWII, that you needed to go all out, anything to win. It was total war as practiced in peacetime. It was also completely unnecessary and resulted in a military dictatorship and a decades long civil war that the US would still find itself entangled with in the 1980s, supporting a junta as its soldiers perpetrated a genocide. The mindset at the time that produced these interventions had extremely twisted priorities that produced a lot of bad policy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:44
|
|
|
Squalid posted:yeah its obviously related to the desire to check the Soviet Union and communism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:49
|
|
|
ulmont posted:The CIA. Also that manual has an extensive section on the use of hypnosis in interrogation with a bunch of references to freud, which I guess would have seemed extremely trendy and hip at the time it was published.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:49
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Also that manual has an extensive section on the use of hypnosis in interrogation with a bunch of references to freud, which I guess would have seemed extremely trendy and hip at the time it was published.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:59
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:They're terrified about having "lost China," which many Americans--especially Protestant missionaries--had seen as naturally "theirs" since the late 19th c Still upset that the Jesuits couldn't get the job done, eh?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 02:59
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:it's specifically china though. nobody saw it coming and we're talking multi-generational families of Protestant missionaries who move to the US (back to?) and freak the hell out. this also begins a hysterical search for blame--a purge of gay/queer diplomats, for instance. And since "Democrats lost China" this becomes something JFK has to guard against while looking out for attacks from his right, which makes him more committed to Vietnam than he might otherwise have been
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:01
|
|
|
dublish posted:Still upset that the Jesuits couldn't get the job done, eh? FMguru posted:"Who lost China?" led directly to the rise of McCarthy and that whole shitshow. One of the reasons Johnson stuck it out in Vietnam despite knowing it was an unwinnable quagmire was that he really didn't want to trigger another round of McCarthyism (which he thought would roll back all his domestic work on civil rights and the Great Society).
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:02
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Also that manual has an extensive section on the use of hypnosis in interrogation with a bunch of references to freud, which I guess would have seemed extremely trendy and hip at the time it was published. "Hip young CIA agent with liberal arts degree incorporates Jung dissertation into torture manual"
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:04
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:if you think that's trendy and hip you need to go down the dolphins in the 70s rabbit hole oh yeah this poo poo is totally in the same vein. It's all bizarre pseudoscience  It also extensively discusses the efficacy of secretly drugging interrogation subjects and the general use of narcotics. There's are reason that dolphin lsd sex experiment was funded by the military. This was the try anything once era of military and covert strategy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:08
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:mad, MAD about jesuits online Remember that this was pre Southern Strategy, they had a whole lot of pretty right wing and very hawkish Dems their majorities depended on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:Remember that this was pre Southern Strategy, they had a whole lot of pretty right wing and very hawkish Dems their majorities depended on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:11
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:instead of two big parties you could make the case we functionally had four small ones Even more than that. Ethnic blue collars were still a big big thing, they were Northern/North-Eastern but had little in common with the liberalism we generally ascribe to Northern Democrats (versus the Southern ones). E: although they were generally very left on economic (and more particularly labor) issues.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:13
|
|
|
There's another CIA paper where they talk about actual results of hypnosis, using their secreataries, in many cases, as test subjects
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:16
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:There's another CIA paper where they talk about actual results of hypnosis, using their secreataries, in many cases, as test subjects you better believe these people fell in love with dolphins
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:20
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:Even more than that. Ethnic blue collars were still a big big thing, they were Northern/North-Eastern but had little in common with the liberalism we generally ascribe to Northern Democrats (versus the Southern ones). ok so: liberal dems ethic white people (these people vote dem now but will all get VErY mad about bussing and abortion and vote for reagan in 20 years) southern dems (nixon bait) liberal republicans the mccarthy/nixon people who will eventually unite with movement conservatives: anticommunism and big spiritual journeys the last gasp of the Taft conservatives anyone else? HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Jan 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:23
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:you better believe these people fell in love with dolphins https://mobile.twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/1079863420458074112
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 03:46
|
|
|
That man is on enough cocaine to make a whale see Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
Don Gato posted:enough cocaine to make a whale see Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 04:09
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF9rKO_HFSY
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 04:15
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:hasn't he done enough to them Everybody says "Save the whales", but then you have one little revival meeting and they kick you out of Seaworld.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 04:17
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Trent Hone's book on the development of USN tactics Is that _Learning War_?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:07
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Cessna, have you read Max Hastings new book on the Vietnam War? If so what are your thoughts? I have a copy, but haven't read it yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:13
|
|
|
there are Greenland sharks alive today who would have been able to look up--if sharks look up--and see Gustav Adolph's ships far above them, making their way to Stralsund.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:20
|
|
|
Don't they tend to go blind from parasites
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:21
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:Don't they tend to go blind from parasites
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:23
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:there are Greenland sharks alive today who would have been able to look up--if sharks look up--and see Gustav Adolph's ships far above them, making their way to Stralsund. Seems unlikely, given they don't live in the Baltic Sea...
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:23
|
|
|
sullat posted:Seems unlikely, given they don't live in the Baltic Sea... well i'm just loving up all over the place tonight
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:26
|
|
|
Zorak of Michigan posted:Is that _Learning War_? That be the one, yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:39
|
|
|
Cessna posted:I have a copy, but haven't read it yet. I listened to the audiobook about 2 months back or so. It's pretty good. Max Hastings wears his politics on his sleeves, he really thinks North Vietnam, and communism in general was pretty poo poo, and he is clear about his belief that VIetnam would be better off if the North hadn't won and the South had survived. Then again he does not believe that the US lost the war because it "held back" or anything like that, and he's pretty vocal in his crticism of the failures of both the US politicla and military authorities, especially in their priorities and conduct of the war and their relations with the the Saigon regime (which he also does not regard highly, he believes that one of the primary reasons the North won was because they managed to never appear to be a puppet regime but appeared genuinely independent and Vietnamese, which gave them alot of legitimacy that the South never really managed to get). The best things about it is that he presents alot of different accounts and perspectives on the war, alot of them Vietnamese (both North and South) maybe even most, which he believes to be the most important.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 10:20 |
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:you better believe these people fell in love with dolphins It was such a dumb idea and the guy who came up with it was insane, but imagine if it worked? If they actually managed to get dolphins to talk? I don't particularly know what they'd do with that, but it'd sure be something. Of course, it ended up with dolphins tripping on acid committing suicide and a weird story about handjobs. Not a fruitful study. Better than the experiments in resisting being tortured into false confessions that somehow circled around into some scumbuckets introducing "enhanced interrogation" to America's list of sins.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2019 05:51
|
|
