Too bad they were beaten, shot and hanged for it, and we have the world we have now...
In other words, the bottom line is no excuse for anything. Not even in business. A creepy bastard is a creepy bastard, even if it's for profit.
You only care about body count, or spectacular victories ("let's put the fear of God to them"), when you don't know what you're imposing if anything, or to whom you're imposing it on. Then body count becomes the only measure of prgress that you can use. It's like your fighting a war either because you can, or because you don't know what else to do...
Besides, what made Red Army relatively easy picking for the Wehrmacht in 1941-42 was the very fact that it won it's two previous engagements (Khalkyn-Gol and Winter war), the first one spectacularly, which pretty much prevented any constructive critique or learning from mistakes and casualties.
Wasting 30 seconds searching would have given you http://simplex.giss.nasa.gov/s..., or http://www.cesm.ucar.edu/model... or http://www.mi.uni-hamburg.de/S...
Funny thing, the code, the data, the explanations, everything has been avalable for years, and yet so many of the public believe they're not. I wonder why that is?
It's like there was this massive political campaign against science. Of which you just became part of. Congratulations!
Overnight, we'd have a stable, healthy, growing economy.
Really, every European Intelligence Agency should be purged from persons who advocate international cooperation. And purged such a way that several genrations of intelligence people will think twice about "exchanging information".
Of course, what remains of international terrorism will have (again) grrreat time operating globally, but trust is something we can not afford anymore.
For most purposes touchscreen is an inferior input device compared to almost anything. It's like using your computer only with several mice and claiming it's great experience... now, making it the only input device, one hardly can call that an advancement.
Invalidating shoddy research would be a bonus.
Nuclear is in no way or form zero emission power source.
Other problem with nuclear is the enourmous power generating capacity of a reactor: it requires equally enormous backup for the inevidable times the reactor is offline! And since reactors are slow to come online, that backup needs to be something else, like natural gas. Or wind. Or solar.
Think about that, too.
Second, the French have a much greater faith in their scientists and engineers than we do here in the United States. The French scientists and engineers in turn work hard to earn and sustain that trust by doing good work. I cannot recall there ever being a serious nuclear accident in France for example. Finally, it seems that the French legal system doesn't allow for NIMBYs to get in the way of projects that are deemed to be in the national interest whereas anyone with money for the filing fees can cause no end of legal trouble here in the United States.
After the oil crisis French goverment went for the nuclear solution without any democratic or parliamentary process whatsoever. Which soon resulted in violent demonstrations etc. The energy production in France is complety controlled (owned and subsidized) by government.
Currently nuclear seem to thrive only in countries where tax payers pay the bill and have no say in the matter...