AuthorTopic: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?  (Read 4628 times)

Offline illdill

  • Bussing Staff
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Future Reference Farm
    • View Profile
    • Future Reference Farm
Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« on: November 16, 2013, 09:32:59 AM »
ENERGY PRIMER

>INTRODUCTION

The what is energy, the question is not who, when, where, or why, but how.

This is a quick and dirty primer on our energy situation. It is simplified, but I have tried to cover the most important concepts and explain them and their relationships compared to one another and to society. I believe the energy issue is somewhat complex, but it is THE critical ‘issue’ for our globalized, growth based, consumer society and that will become painfully obvious in short order. We need to have informed awareness about the problem if we expect solutions.

This is not politically suggestive, nor does it propose solutions on how to deal with the energy issue, I leave that up to you. This is strictly observational.


>EROI/EROEI

“It takes money to make money” – Energy Return on Investment / Energy Return on Energy Invested is fairly straightforward. In the first years of commercial oil production, it took one barrel of oil energy equivalent to produce one hundred barrels of CRUDE oil. Now days it is between ten and twenty to one and getting worse. The difference is that EROI focuses on the monetary investment where as EROEI focuses primarily on the actual physical energy required (usually measured in btu’s).

EROI or EROEI, in a sense, represent the profitability of oil extraction, or the economically recoverable amount of oil (or any finite resource) that can be extracted.

>ECONOMICS (Supply & Demand)

“I can’t afford it.”
“Well then I can’t afford to produce it.”

This is the cycle that plays out as the EROI number goes down and the economy struggles to grow with the high costs of energy. As the costs get higher, the oil industry can invest in more production and so ‘excess’ energy is once again delivered to the economy. But soon the abundance drives the price back down and the oil industry can no longer afford to discover and drill for more.

At some point this imbalance could level out, but always with energy availability in over all decline. As the Super Giant fields around the world that still provide the vast majority of the worlds Crude oil continue to decline.

The economy depends on a growing and cheap supply of energy to feed the machines of modern industrial society. The problem is that the supply is getting smaller and less productive.

>ENERGY DENSITY

The different types of fossil energy sources vary, but they can be broken down into Gas and Oil. Each have their own subtypes but are the primary differentiators when it comes to their use in our civilization.

The “Low Hanging Fruit” applies to all energy exploits. People go after the mother load that is easiest to get to. But also there is the issue of Energy Density. As some resources are mined, such as coal, the resource contains less of the material that makes it energy useful, and more of the material that does not. In short, it doesn’t burn as hot.

So as we expand our reach for fossil energy, we are forced to resort to lesser and lesser quality sources of energy that are more and more costlier to extract and refine.

>ENERGY USES

Knowing the different types of oil is a prerequisite to understanding their uses.

Conventional Crude Oil is the black gooey stuff we all think of, but it is ‘fully matured’ and energy dense, where as the ‘Oil’ like substances coming from Fracking are not always fully ‘cured’ and require expensive treatment to make them available as gasoline or other useful oil based byproducts.

The process of Hydraulic Fracturing (I am lumping Tar Sands in with these fuel types even though it is strip mined) (Fracking) produces Gases like Methane and Butane as well as ‘tight oil’ and gas that is trapped in rocks and must be blasted out. There is quite a bit of energy available around the world with this method and resource types. However it still only buys us a few decades, and that is if the economy can continue to adsorb the increasing costs of the energy.

Our primary uses for Crude and some types of the Fracked oil is transportation, as well as other things like plastics and pesticides.

Our primary use for gas (Methane, Propane, Butane, and many others) is in some small and larger vehicles as well as fertilizer, cooking and heating and producing electricity.
It does not contribute to transportation in any significant way and our infrastructure isn’t set up for it.

Though we have a ‘lot’ of natural gas in the US, Natural gas does not have the kind of global market like Crude oil and therefore is primarily subject to local costs. Although there have been talks about building more Natural gas ports. But Natural gas is expensive to transport due to it needing to be very cold and under very high pressure.

We are setup to run on highly energy dense, combustible liquid fuel, or Gasoline.

>ALTERNATIVES

Alternative energies such as wind and solar have the potential to provide energy for a few decades longer, but only in limited areas, and subject to sunlight and wind variations. We would have had to divert all of our efforts for building our infrastructure around that type of energy decades ago.

It is highly unlikely we will reach that level of renewable capability before the costs of energy make it impossible. Developing these technologies requires that the fossil fuel dependent backbone of the global economy continue to be greased with cheap, abundant energy.

>CLIMATE CHANGE

Climate Change forces us to look at the humanity side of the coin. And it doesn’t tell a pretty story. The climate changes naturally, the Sun has warm and ‘cool’ phases, we can see it in the data. But the data also tells another story. A story of rapid acceleration of many recent data points that do not occur in the available historical data, ever.

Humans are certainly impacting the climate, but whether or not we are causing the damage, Climate Change is still a game changing issue, not merely for our convenience, but for the survival of almost every multi-cellular life form on this planet (which includes humans).

The newer methods of extraction and fossil sources not only prove more expensive and of less quality, but they contribute more of the chemicals that scientists tell us are the main culprits of our environmental and climate impact.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2013, 09:17:17 PM by illdill »
It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society. - jiddu krishnamurti

Offline Petty Tyrant

  • Cannot be Saved
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 4573
    • View Profile
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2013, 01:01:24 PM »
Illdill
Dont be put off by King, he is probably just a paid govt infiltrator to try and allay any concern about climate and energy issues. he claims to be a scientific expert yet never produces any evidence of that. Notice he can not give any reasons why he disagrees with your reasoning.

When asked why he visits he says he was a doomer from decades ago, yet if you look at his avatar picture it is an asteroid hitting earth. He tries to suggest with that and often with his posts that energy or economic collapse concerns are akin to worry about the sun running out of gas or an asteroid.

If the maxim to look at what someone does rather than what they say has any value apply it. King claims to be a petrol engineer and is always saying peak oilers know nothing, yet drives an electric car and rides a bicycle or 50cc scooter.

Regulars here are all aclimatised to him, but I thought you should be orientated.
ELEVATE YOUR GAME

Offline g

  • Golden Oxen
  • Contrarian
  • Master Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 12280
    • View Profile
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2013, 01:56:52 PM »
Illdill
Dont be put off by King, he is probably just a paid govt infiltrator to try and allay any concern about climate and energy issues. he claims to be a scientific expert yet never produces any evidence of that. Notice he can not give any reasons why he disagrees with your reasoning.

When asked why he visits he says he was a doomer from decades ago, yet if you look at his avatar picture it is an asteroid hitting earth. He tries to suggest with that and often with his posts that energy or economic collapse concerns are akin to worry about the sun running out of gas or an asteroid.

If the maxim to look at what someone does rather than what they say has any value apply it. King claims to be a petrol engineer and is always saying peak oilers know nothing, yet drives an electric car and rides a bicycle or 50cc scooter.

Regulars here are all aclimatised to him, but I thought you should be orientated.

I am not being sarcastic or trying to instigate an argument or just being contrary.

It is my opinion that MKing makes some valid points and is a contributor to our forum who does not deserve such constant condemnation for his views. His attitude and demeanor could well be the result of the way he is treated. He has also tried to get personal, revealed a lot of his personal past, and tried to become one of us.

May I make a simple request that we stop gang banging him for a week or two and see what happens?? Just my two centavos.

nobody

  • Guest
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2013, 02:36:03 PM »
Ox  "May I make a simple request that we stop gang banging him for a week or two and see what happens?? Just my two centavos."


No.

Offline JoeP

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 2148
    • View Profile
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2013, 03:57:05 PM »

If the maxim to look at what someone does rather than what they say has any value apply it. King claims to be a petrol engineer and is always saying peak oilers know nothing, yet drives an electric car and rides a bicycle or 50cc scooter.


It's just a part of MKing's Modus operandi.  Looks like you already figured this out.   
just my straight shooting honest opinion

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 19357
    • View Profile
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2013, 04:06:36 PM »
ENERGY PRIMER
>INTRODUCTION

The what is energy, the question is not who, when, where, or why, but how.

This is a quick and dirty primer on our energy situation. It is simplified, but I have tried to cover the most important concepts and explain them and their relationships compared to one another and to society. I believe the energy issue is somewhat complex, but it is THE critical ‘issue’ for our globalized, growth based, consumer society and that will become painfully obvious in short order. We need to have informed awareness about the problem if we expect solutions.

This is not politically suggestive, nor does it propose solutions on how to deal with the energy issue, I leave that up to you. This is strictly observational.


>EROI/EROEI

“It takes money to make money” – Energy Return on Investment / Energy Return on Energy Invested is fairly straightforward. In the first years of commercial oil production, it took one barrel of oil energy equivalent to produce one hundred barrels of CRUDE oil. Now days it is between ten and twenty to one and getting worse. The difference is that EROI focuses on the monetary investment where as EROEI focuses primarily on the actual physical energy required (usually measured in btu’s).

EROI or EROEI, in a sense, represent the profitability of oil extraction, or the economically recoverable amount of oil (or any finite resource) that can be extracted.

>ECONOMICS (Supply & Demand)

“I can’t afford it.”
“Well then I can’t afford to produce it.”

This is the cycle that plays out as the EROI number goes down and the economy struggles to grow with the high costs of energy. As the costs get higher, the oil industry can invest in more production and so ‘excess’ energy is once again delivered to the economy. But soon the abundance drives the price back down and the oil industry can no longer afford to discover and drill for more.

At some point this imbalance could level out, but always with energy availability in over all decline. As the Super Giant fields around the world that still provide the vast majority of the worlds Crude oil continue to decline.

The economy depends on a growing and cheap supply of energy to feed the machines of modern industrial society. The problem is that the supply is getting smaller and less productive.

>ENERGY DENSITY

The different types of fossil energy sources vary, but they can be broken down into Gas and Oil. Each have their own subtypes but are the primary differentiators when it comes to their use in our civilization.

The “Low Hanging Fruit” applies to all energy exploits. People go after the mother load that is easiest to get to. But also there is the issue of Energy Density. As some resources are mined, such as coal, the resource contains less of the material that makes it energy useful, and more of the material that does not. In short, it doesn’t burn as hot.

So as we expand our reach for fossil energy, we are forced to resort to lesser and lesser quality sources of energy that are more and more costlier to extract and refine.

>ENERGY USES

Knowing the different types of oil is a prerequisite to understanding their uses.

Conventional Crude Oil is the black gooey stuff we all think of, but it is ‘fully matured’ and energy dense, where as the ‘Oil’ like substances coming from Fracking are not always fully ‘cured’ and require expensive treatment to make them available as gasoline or other useful oil based byproducts.

The process of Hydraulic Fracturing (I am lumping Tar Sands in with these fuel types even though it is strip mined) (Fracking) produces Gases like Methane and Butane as well as ‘tight oil’ and gas that is trapped in rocks and must be blasted out. There is quite a bit of energy available around the world with this method and resource types. However it still only buys us a few decades, and that is if the economy can continue to adsorb the increasing costs of the energy.

Our primary uses for Crude and some types of the Fracked oil is transportation, as well as other things like plastics and pesticides.

Our primary use for gas (Methane, Propane, Butane, and many others) is in some small and larger vehicles as well as fertilizer, cooking and heating and producing electricity.
It does not contribute to transportation in any significant way and our infrastructure isn’t set up for it.

Though we have a ‘lot’ of natural gas in the US, Natural gas does not have the kind of global market like Crude oil and therefore is primarily subject to local costs. Although there have been talks about building more Natural gas ports. But Natural gas is expensive to transport due to it needing to be very cold and under very high pressure.

We are setup to run on highly energy dense, combustible liquid fuel, or Gasoline.

>ALTERNATIVES

Alternative energies such as wind and solar have the potential to provide energy for a few decades longer, but only in limited areas, and subject to sunlight and wind variations. We would have had to divert all of our efforts for building our infrastructure around that type of energy decades ago.

It is highly unlikely we will reach that level of renewable capability before the costs of energy make it impossible. Developing these technologies requires that the fossil fuel dependent backbone of the global economy continue to be greased with cheap, abundant energy.

>CLIMATE CHANGE

Climate Change forces us to look at the humanity side of the coin. And it doesn’t tell a pretty story. The climate changes naturally, the Sun has warm and ‘cool’ phases, we can see it in the data. But the data also tells another story. A story of rapid acceleration of many recent data points that do not occur in the available historical data, ever.

Humans are certainly impacting the climate, but whether or not we are causing the damage, Climate Change is still a game changing issue, not merely for our convenience, but for the survival of almost every multi-cellular life form on this planet (which includes humans).

The newer methods of extraction and fossil sources not only prove more expensive and of less quality, bet they contribute more of the chemicals that scientists tell us are the main culprits of our environmental and climate impact.

I generally agree with your analysis. No big issues to debate here, as far as I'm concerned. The main unknown is exactly WHEN the chickens will come home to roost, not if. They'll probably still be drilling wells with borrowed money as we take our last gasp of fetid, polluted air, though.
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline Petty Tyrant

  • Cannot be Saved
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 4573
    • View Profile
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2013, 04:43:12 PM »
Ox  "May I make a simple request that we stop gang banging him for a week or two and see what happens?? Just my two centavos."


No.

GO,
I wanted to take a break from posting, being over depressing-doomed out and just read for a couple days and then be able to show something positive after that. However I had to say something here and now because I did not want illdill discouraged. King used innuendo and oblique attack without any substance to it to give the feedback illdill requested, similar to your own occasional use of snide sarcasm. Not criticising you for that, its your way and thats ok. We often call on king to explain himself and back up what hes saying. You may be one day called upon to spit it out and spell it out.

Nobody,
Such a lovely fine day isnt it? How are you today, fine?  fine then. Yippety doo da yippety yay my o my what a wonderful day, Lets turn on Today for our advertainment with Matt Lowrie, Savannah Guthrie, Natalie Morales, and David Gregory. Beautiful people beautiful everything. White noise to whitewash everything, get great ratings and dont frighten anyone away with discussion of doom.

ELEVATE YOUR GAME

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18498
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2013, 05:36:25 PM »
If the maxim to look at what someone does rather than what they say has any value apply it. King claims to be a petrol engineer and is always saying peak oilers know nothing, yet drives an electric car and rides a bicycle or 50cc scooter.

Guilty as charged. As least someone is now showing that they actually READ some of the stuff I have been happy to volunteer.

Oh, its gets read. And then refuted, as is often necessary whenever you open your piehole.
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief. Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it."

Offline Surly1

  • Administrator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18498
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2013, 05:56:12 PM »
Illdill
Dont be put off by King, he is probably just a paid govt infiltrator to try and allay any concern about climate and energy issues. he claims to be a scientific expert yet never produces any evidence of that. Notice he can not give any reasons why he disagrees with your reasoning.

When asked why he visits he says he was a doomer from decades ago, yet if you look at his avatar picture it is an asteroid hitting earth. He tries to suggest with that and often with his posts that energy or economic collapse concerns are akin to worry about the sun running out of gas or an asteroid.

If the maxim to look at what someone does rather than what they say has any value apply it. King claims to be a petrol engineer and is always saying peak oilers know nothing, yet drives an electric car and rides a bicycle or 50cc scooter.

Regulars here are all aclimatised to him, but I thought you should be orientated.

I am not being sarcastic or trying to instigate an argument or just being contrary.

It is my opinion that MKing makes some valid points and is a contributor to our forum who does not deserve such constant condemnation for his views. His attitude and demeanor could well be the result of the way he is treated. He has also tried to get personal, revealed a lot of his personal past, and tried to become one of us.

May I make a simple request that we stop gang banging him for a week or two and see what happens?? Just my two centavos.

GO, I respect your opinion but disagree with your assessment.

Certainly you cannot forget some of the past debates about Hiroshima, his comments in re Occupy, Assange, et al, the incessant assertion of half truths, the snide tone and condescension.  You seem to respect Ashvin for his continued proselytizing and apologetics; at least tolerate one who will defend his own beliefs with a similar enthusiasm and energy against those who would serve the extractive status quo.

He DID give LD some solid advice when LD was asking for career direction input; I'll give you that. But even Satan can quote scripture to suit his own purposes. The fact that he has given up a few shreds of detail about an Appalachian childhood entitles him to no greater consideration than the fact that Chris Christie had the sense to accept federal aid from Obama when half his state had blown into the Atlantic makes Christie a moderate.

Your mileage may vary.
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief. Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it."

Offline illdill

  • Bussing Staff
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Future Reference Farm
    • View Profile
    • Future Reference Farm
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2013, 09:06:53 PM »
Any ONE of the topics mentioned deserves far more than what is provided. And certainly "dumbed down" is never an excuse for a bad explanation, and net energy isn't just a bad explanation but a full bore face palm all by itself in terms of usefulness in understanding the modern predicament.

Of course the topics all deserve way more information and explanation. The point was to condense it so that it would be palatable to a typical, brain dead politician.

Please elaborate on where the explanation has gone 'bad'.

Net energy (or EROEI) is a key factor in the viability of fossil fuel extraction (In a 'free market' paradigm). Please let me know how and why you think it not to be useful.

Full bore face palm? Why are you here?

Thanks, I welcome all criticism.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2013, 10:00:39 PM by illdill »
It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society. - jiddu krishnamurti

Offline g

  • Golden Oxen
  • Contrarian
  • Master Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 12280
    • View Profile
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2013, 09:12:05 PM »
Quote
GO, I respect your opinion but disagree with your assessment.

Thanks Surly, it goes with saying that I also am an admirer of your work.

Forgetting for a moment, whether we agree with certain opinions of MKing, my argument is that he has opinions and presents them. He has a right to do so in my opinion. That is why we are here.

My experience with the gent has been different than yours, I have had arguments with him about Nicole Foss and her ideas. He treated me in an acceptable manner and came back with some revelations I had not thought of, in short he taught me something.

His ideas on the bombing in Japan, an issue I am familiar with, are held by a great many people; whether they are right or wrong is another matter, and up to each forum member to decide on or comment on for himself.

My personal view on the matter, a very common one, is that President Truman should have demonstrated the bombs power to them first, and said this is what you get dropped on your head in a week if you don't surrender. MKing's point that the military is designed to seek and destroy the enemy not deal in politics or threats or conjecture was a valid one, even though both you and I think the way the bombing was carried out was a grave error. President Truman's statement that he would have done the same thing all over again if he thought it would save just one American life was a view shared by millions of Americans, especially those who had sons, relatives, family members engaged in the war. Again, it is a valid point of view.

My latest defense of MKing was in regards to Uncle Bob calling him a paid shill for the FF crowd.

My understanding is the only poster here whose work he admires and has not admonished is Agelbert. I can't think of anyone alive on the planet earth that is more opposed to Fossil Fuels than our Agelbert.

He also claims he rides a bicycle, and cautions us to stop burning the poison and do likewise, not because of our incorrect view on oil, but because it is bad for us. Hardly the stuff trolls are noted for.

I also view his opening up to us about his rise from poverty, his abusive drunken father, differently than you. That type of personal glimpse in the past of someone always appeared to me to be a reaching out, a cry for understanding, "See this is what I am and where I come from, this is why I am the way I am, understand me and stop hating me. We all view people differently. RE and Karpatok as well as Lucid and Peter were very revealing and expressive of their past. It gave me a much better understanding of them, a kinship with them, and a good feeling that they were truly involved in our community.

The matter of Mking wishing to remain anonymous is perfectly valid and one that I concur with myself. It has no need of any defense in my view. If you don't believe his credentials then don't, call him a BS artist, it is your privilege.

As far as your comment about me seeming to respect Ashvin and his postings; I plead guilty as charged. Ashvin is a person whom I admire greatly, his scholarship, ideas on right and wrong, concern with salvation, message of hope, he is a treasured Diner resource. That kid is no doubt a genius in my view and is destined for great fame. We are most fortunate to have him.






Offline illdill

  • Bussing Staff
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Future Reference Farm
    • View Profile
    • Future Reference Farm
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #11 on: November 16, 2013, 09:16:23 PM »
I generally agree with your analysis. No big issues to debate here, as far as I'm concerned. The main unknown is exactly WHEN the chickens will come home to roost, not if. They'll probably still be drilling wells with borrowed money as we take our last gasp of fetid, polluted air, though.

Thanks for the reply. I added the statement at the beginning to express the idea that we can cast blame, make predictions, etc. but when it comes down to it, the real question is how. How will we overcome this reality of declining resources. Although I fail to provide any ideas or purpose as to keep it politically or ideologically sterile.

Of course for many of us, 'how' is no longer an option and 'when' IS the primary question. But when introducing people to the issue, it is not advisable to start form the most hopeless albeit accurate (in my mind there is no solution that will keep us going as we are currently) position. At least that is my experience.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2013, 09:30:23 PM by illdill »
It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society. - jiddu krishnamurti

Offline jdwheeler42

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3337
    • View Profile
    • Going Upslope
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #12 on: November 16, 2013, 09:55:06 PM »
My personal view on the matter, a very common one, is that President Truman should have demonstrated the bombs power to them first, and said this is what you get dropped on your head in a week if you don't surrender. MKing's point that the military is designed to seek and destroy the enemy not deal in politics or threats or conjecture was a valid one, even though both you and I think the way the bombing was carried out was a grave error. President Truman's statement that he would have done the same thing all over again if he thought it would save just one American life was a view shared by millions of Americans, especially those who had sons, relatives, family members engaged in the war. Again, it is a valid point of view.
I found that debate useful myself.  While I don't agree with President Truman, I had thought the bombing was justified in that in the calculus of war, it actually resulted in fewer innocent Japanese lives being lost than if the war had continued on for several more years on the Japanese islands.  The discussion here convinced me otherwise.
Making pigs fly is easy... that is, of course, after you have built the catapult....

Offline g

  • Golden Oxen
  • Contrarian
  • Master Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 12280
    • View Profile
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2013, 10:13:32 PM »
My personal view on the matter, a very common one, is that President Truman should have demonstrated the bombs power to them first, and said this is what you get dropped on your head in a week if you don't surrender. MKing's point that the military is designed to seek and destroy the enemy not deal in politics or threats or conjecture was a valid one, even though both you and I think the way the bombing was carried out was a grave error. President Truman's statement that he would have done the same thing all over again if he thought it would save just one American life was a view shared by millions of Americans, especially those who had sons, relatives, family members engaged in the war. Again, it is a valid point of view.
I found that debate useful myself.  While I don't agree with President Truman, I had thought the bombing was justified in that in the calculus of war, it actually resulted in fewer innocent Japanese lives being lost than if the war had continued on for several more years on the Japanese islands.  The discussion here convinced me otherwise.

Hi JD, Yes it is a very complicated issue, more so than it seems at first glance. I had a Jesuit priest history teacher that was very disturbed by it. It was one of the most horrible things that could have been done by a humane nation and could never be forgiven in his view. It remained my view as well for decades, but like with most things you learn there is a lot more to some ideas than you have at first viewing. It is a very confusing world, at least for me.

Offline illdill

  • Bussing Staff
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Future Reference Farm
    • View Profile
    • Future Reference Farm
Re: Is This Dumbed Down and Innocent Enough for an Editorial?
« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2013, 10:19:13 PM »
I am not well read on the bombing of Japan but from what I have read, I am lead to understand that the war was mostly over. There was no need to drop the bombs. It was primarily a defensive gesture to other nations not to F with the US, as well as a chance for us to test it out in a live scenario.

Also I have heard that the US had foreknowledge of the attack on pearl harbor and allowed it to happen to justify using the bomb, but again, whether that is just propaganda or based in reality, I cannot say.

I have also read about how as a means of helping Japan rebuild, we allowed them an advantage in automobile and other technology manufacture over our own companies which is why their cars last much longer.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2013, 10:29:58 PM by illdill »
It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society. - jiddu krishnamurti

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
1143 Views
Last post March 03, 2016, 05:03:11 PM
by MKing
0 Replies
399 Views
Last post October 31, 2016, 05:20:08 PM
by Eddie
6 Replies
80 Views
Last post June 11, 2020, 09:21:45 PM
by Eddie