What's your favorite color.

Guys,

––First, let me start out by saying “Unbroken” is NOT a war movie,….at least like you normally think of one.
----It IS a very powerful, inspirational movie that is extremely well done. It also has a enough WW2 action/scenes to be “interesting” to a WW2 buff. The CGI as well as the physical props were well done. I only noticed one inacuracy,…when returning to America at the end of the war there was a transport aircraft that still had the early ww2 red dot in the star and red/white rudder stripes. I guess it might have been possible but I doubt it. Anyway, it was hardly noticable (except to a historian) and didn’t detract from the movie at all. All summed up, a great movie that’s well written, acted, with great cinematography.

----My opinion,…If you want to see a well done INSPIRATIONAL movie set in the WW2 era, this is a GREAT ONE!

Tall Paul

I believe those interested in politics do not read my history posts. (Otherwise how could they negative them?)
Thank you for your compliment, Malachi.
Hope you are enjoying your weekend.

@idk_iam_swiss:

I love kitties!!

Dogs are cool but to me cats rule. I have always had kitties throughout my life so I love kitties as well!!

All the other animals died in hours breathing that air. It caused the lungs to liquefy. Humans lived in homes that had poor insulation and they had to cover up with wet towels and many died. Thats black cloud moved at 60 MPH and just made the day into night. The jackrabbits were able to survive on very dry conditions, while all the natural predators died off, creating a huge population rise. Entire counties were covered in jackrabbits running around. Its on the History Channel and its a must see. I could not believe how bad it was back then.

The locusts arrived because all the animals that ate them also died ( birds etc…) SO it was the same for other bugs like Centipedes and spiders… just showed up 10 fold and stung children and old people to death.

They said it covered the eastern half of USA is 1/4 inch dust, plus the Atlantic on the worst day called “black Sunday”

Of course THIS video is 100% on topic for this forum…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME0U9nY0AH4&feature=related

I think most of the backing came due to two facts:
(1) the USSR needed reforms, that was obvious.
Still, they probably wanted a long term leader that could be influenced => a younger one, after the two short reigns of Andropov and what-was-his-name… Probably, the influentials wanted some change, but surely not that much that it would threaten their power-base, one of the reasons for the coup that failed due to Jelzins help for Gorbachev.
(2) The general secretary and all the other positions he fills made him the most powerful man in the USSR. Probably, whoever put Gorbachev into place, underestimated him. Pretty much the same underestimation that Hitler faced when he was appointed Chancellor, but luckily Gorbachev used that to reform positively, and i consider the new freedom of information, the right to ask wether the party is right and that the crucial reform.

So, I don’t think that there was “real” backing, i believe Gorbachev was kind of a compromise candidate, kind of a makeshift. Of course, once he was into power, you ccouldn’t remove instantly, that would have meant that the party made a mistake (which was not “allowed” before Gorbachev). And he was clever enough to stay into power, and use his popularity at the beginning (which soon, after the economy started to collapse openly, was reduced to more or less nothing) to enforece the reforms.

Well, we can. It’s just that I have an incredible amount of assignments and reports I have to make up on the computer (I’m a terrible speller – so sue me). I haven’t been able to read a lot of TM’s post, so is their anything in particular you would like her to respond to?