ADVERTISEMENT

This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...

Listened to a podcast the other day. Japan was quite aways along on atomic bomb in World War II. Maybe even detonated a weapon in a test environment.

the facility was located in Korea, which is why Russia was eager to get involved in war in pacific. Russia seized the facility and luted all the information, it’s how North Korea got a head start on nuclear program.

Robert Wilcox is the books author. Pretty interesting.

Reports of a Japanese weapon test​

On October 2, 1946 the Atlanta Constitution published a story by reporter David Snell,[21] who had been an investigator with the 24th Criminal Investigation Detachment in Korea after the war, which alleged that the Japanese had successfully tested a nuclear weapon near Hungnam (Konan) before the town was captured by the Soviets. He said that he had received his information at Seoul in September 1945 from a Japanese officer to whom he gave the pseudonym of Captain Wakabayashi, who had been in charge of counter-intelligence at Hungnam.[22][23][24] SCAP officials, who were responsible for strict censorship of all information about Japan's wartime interest in nuclear physics,[25] were dismissive of Snell's report.

Under the 1947-48 investigation, comments were sought from Japanese scientists who would or should have known about such a project. Further doubt is cast on Snell's story by the lack of evidence of large numbers of Japanese scientists leaving Japan for Korea and never returning.[23] Snell's statements were repeated by Robert K. Wilcox in his 1985 book Japan's Secret War: Japan's Race Against Time to Build Its Own Atomic Bomb. The book also included what Wilcox stated was new evidence from intelligence material which indicated the Japanese might have had an atomic program at Hungnam.[26] These specific reports were dismissed in a review of the book by Department of Energy employee Roger M. Anders which was published in the journal Military Affairs,[27] an article written by two historians of science in the journal Isis[28] and another article in the journal Intelligence and National Security.[29]

In 1946 talking about his wartime efforts Arakatsu said he was making "tremendous strides" towards making an atomic bomb and that the Soviet Union probably already had one.[30]
 
I’ve been to numerous antique aircraft shows/fly-ins with aircraft demonstrations. Never been to, or heard of, an antique helicopter show/fly-in.
giphy.gif
 
In short, the stakes are enormous, and with them the dangers. And yet there is good news in the remarkable solidarity and decisiveness of the liberal democracies, in Europe and outside it. The roles of Australia and Japan in responding to the Russian invasion are no less significant than those of Britain or France. In that respect, Ukraine 2022 is not Czechoslovakia 1938, not only because it is fighting ferociously but because the democracies are with it in material as well as moral ways. It differs, too, in that this time the aggressor is not Europe’s most advanced economy but one of its least; its military is not the fearsomely effective Wehrmacht but a badly led, semi-competent, if well-armed, horde better suited for and inclined to the massacre of civilians than a fight against its peers. Russia’s failure to command the air, its stalled armored columns, the smoking ruins of its tanks and armored personnel carriers all testify to the Russian army’s weakness. So too does the continuation in office of the long-serving chief of general staff and defense minister who planned and led this operation, a debacle in the face of every advantage of positioning, timing, and material superiority.



Maybe but he did base it on interviews with some people that allegedly worked there and some declassified documents.
Sorry for the blunt response-it caught me off guard.
 
And I agreed with that point.



For the US the losses are really concentrated in the last 20.
Did you know we'd lost hundreds of helicopters in warzones the last two decades?
I didn't realize it until I came across a page detailing every single loss and cause. I was actually taken aback, because they way they're almost never reported makes the losses sort of invisible.
If you'd asked me a month ago to bet whether or not we had lost 300+ helicopters in warzones since 2000 I would have lost the bet.


You can't quote anything I've said that could be mistaken for 'rootin for Putin'.
It has simply never happened.

I reject elective war as an instrument of policy.
Whether it is Russia doing it, or Saudi Arabia.
What about you?

except for the tweet you sharedthat literally said #istandforrussia and had Putin approved Russian propaganda as the subject of the tweet.
 
Last edited:
Because of how it they have performed and poor conditions of equipment being displayed in this war. They have been taking the money for war and spending it on yachts and mistresses. I don't believe a thing they say about hypersonic missiles and improved delivery systems now any more than I do they are in Ukraine to de nazi the government. They are full of shit on everything so doubtful that type of major money was ever spent.
My question was rhetorical, but re-reading it I see why you would think I was actually asking a question. Anyway, I suspect you are right about their missiles. Neither one of us has Top-Secret clearence though (or at least I'm guessing you don't), so there likely is a lot more information on it. I suspect our intelligence agencies are well aware of their capabilities though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 86Hawkeye
except for the tweet you sharedthat literally said #istandforrussia and had Putin approved Russian propaganda as the subject of the tweet.
Same reply as last time.
Lets see if you duck the questions again:


Did you pay any attention to what the German politician said?
I don’t care a whit about a hashtag. Never paid attention to it.
Is this one of those things where if you forward a piece information some people assume that can only mean 100% alignment with the information in question?

For example, if your college professor explains the rationale Hitler laid out, and then followed, in his path to war, is your assumption the person relaying this information to you not only endorses Hitler’s reasons, but probably flies the swastika at home?

Are you that simple?
 
helicopters are inherently dangerous because they operate against physics to obtain lift and stability. Needs main rotor for lift (vs. gravity) and tail rotor for anti-torque (Newton's Third Law). When something breaks it all goes bad in a hurry. Planes work with physics, Bernoulli's principle....at least that is what a helicopter pilot told me before i was getting into one.
Plus helicopters operate much closer to enemy contact than planes do. They get attacked far more often. I'm betting that most (all?) of the helicopters shot down were Blackhawks or huey's. Many of them probably weren't even carrying weapons beyond the ones the soldiers were carrying.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT