Jump to content

capoetc

Members
  • Posts

    210
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by capoetc

  1. For me, S&A is one of Rush's best albums -- I love it.
  2. I didn't see Phil Collins performing from a chair, but I did check it out on YouTube ... the voice is still there. And the fans seemed to love it. It works for Phil Collins, but not for Alex. Which is perfectly ok.
  3. FWIW, this was already linked in the MP 40th thread.
  4. The YYZ Fantoons video which will be included in the Super Deluxe MP 40th set. "No good dope smoking degenerates! I should have known as soon as I saw those kimonos ..." :D
  5. For what its worth, I have the "scaled down" packaging you referenced. The Blurays are the same, and I prefer it because it fits on my shelf with my other concert discs (as opposed to the original book packaging, which needs to be either in its own space or on your book shelf. Something to consider, but I understand wanting the original book it is packaged in.
  6. Well ... I saw the lyric pages available separately on Rush.com earlier today but they are no longer listed other than as part of the Super Deluxe package (or 1 of the 6 lyric sheets randomly inserted in the album version). So that makes my decision easier -- I will just order the 3-CD version from Amazon instead.
  7. I will definitely be buying this. I need to decide between the CD set and the super deluxe ... really, all I want in the super deluxe is the Bluray and the lyric sheets. It is hard to justify paying an extra $250 just to get the Bluray and lyric sheets, though. I am not a record collector, and most of my music these days is via streaming services. I don't own a record player. But ..... it is pretty cool ..... if I don't buy the super deluxe, I will likely buy the lyric sheets separately though.
  8. Not sure how I missed this one -- thanks for posting! (The one on top, not the Geddy Lee Christmas one ...)
  9. capoetc

    Rush and Rand

    Probably unwise for me to poke the outraged bear, but why should someone who says or performs something you do not like "shut the f*ck up"? Is there simply no room in today's society for people with differing viewpoints to simply agree to disagree? Are folks only allowed to produce art that you agree with? What other forms of speech would you be in favor of censoring? I do not agree with all aspects of Ayn Rand's philosophy, but her positions were arrived at through a life of experience. She summed up her philosophy as follows: "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." -- Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged Is there nothing in that statement that you can support? Is the expression of that philosophy something that no one should be allowed to consider and discuss? To be clear, this post is not meant to be an attack of any sort, nor is it a defense of Ayn Rand or her philosophy. My objection is to the suggestion that she, or Eric Clapton, or anyone else for that matter, should not be allowed to express their points of view. The harm is not in the existence of too many points of view, some of which some people find objectionable. The harm is in allowing too few points of view.
  10. Got my Cinema Strangiato tickets for my local theater. :chickendance:
  11. Non-Fan of Primus: "Man, this is weird!" Primus Fan: "Man, this is weird!"
  12. There's a clip of Les Claypool performing 'The Spirit of Radio' as part of RUSH's induction into the 2010 Canadian Songwriters Hall of Fame here. If it can't be viewed by the above link, it's also below. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taS06rvN8gk When Primus embarks on the upcoming RUSH tribute tour, here's a comment posted by someone on Les's 'The Spirit of Radio' clip that puts things into perspective. "Everyone saying this is a bad performance/cover/whatever; I think you're just not accustomed to hearing Les sing in a major key, or...any key, for that matter. Embrace the strangeness." This performance may have been the musical inspiration for the alternative polka band "Rash" ....
  13. Since we already have remastered versions of the studio albums, I would be fine with just releasing any live shows available (over time) with the entire show.
  14. capoetc

    August 6, 1945

    At the time, the options were as follows: 1. Give up, sue for peace, and allow a militaristic Japan to build up its military again and menace its neighbors while jeopardizing US interests in the Pacific. 2. Invade Japan, thereby extending the war an indeterminate amount of time. Keep in mind that the Japanese withheld a number of assets from being used in the Okinawa campaign -- Okinawa was considered important, but not vital, and the Japanese had a LOT of assets ready to defend the home islands to the death. 3. Detonate our only two atomic weapons offshore someplace to demonstrate how bad they are. If the Japanese are not sufficiently convinced, it will be another year or so before another weapon can be ready so .... back to option 1 or option 2. 4. Drop the nuclear weapons strategic targets that just might convince the Japanese leadership to surrender without having to invade. I'm running out of options now. How many Japanese military and civilian deaths and American deaths are you willing to sacrifice to avoid the number who were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? It is really easy to sit in the cheap seats and throw stones at President Truman (who did not even know the Manhattan Project existed until after President Roosevelt died). Try really hard to put yourself in his place. His country is exhausted from four long years of war. Many soldiers who fought through Europe, from the Normandy invasion all the way to Berlin (in some cases, they were involved in North Africa and Italy as well), and their units would now be involved in the second wave of the invasion of Japan. I once spoke with a guy whose Dad fought in the Pacific. He was preparing to participate in the invasion of Japan when the war ended because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ... instead, he came home to his family. This gentlemen said that, whenever someone tried to tell him that the US should not have dropped atomic weapons on Japan, he would point his finger in their chest and say, "F**k you! Your Dad was not the one who would have died invading Japan ..." Just imagine the anger and outrage if Truman had decided NOT to drop the bomb, and then the war ended a year or more later .... and it then became known that we had a weapon that could have possibly ended the war without an invasion. That alone is not reason enough to make the decision, but as a leader it must give you pause .... your first and foremost task as President is to protect the American people. Oh, well .... those who think we could have just been nice to the Japanese and they would have seen the error of their ways will never be convinced. The best I can hope for is that those who think the decision was flawed will at least consider the decision within the context of its time, and remember that a lot of people exist today in the USA because their Dad's were not killed invading Japan. And ... a lot of people exist in Japan today because their mothers and fathers were not killed in the invasion of Japan. The nightmare scenario would have been if Hiroshima and Nagasaki (and the empty threat of the same thing happening to every major Japanese city) had not worked and we STILL had to invade Japan. That was the calculated risk ... fortunately, the risk paid off.
  15. capoetc

    August 6, 1945

    I have visited both. I'm a retired US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel (now a pilot for a major airline), so my service afforded me the opportunity to spend a decent amount of time in Japan. I visited Hiroshima first, and I was a bit reticent because I was concerned how I might be viewed by the people who live there. Based upon my haircut and dress, there was no way to hide the fact that I was an American, and likely a service member. I never even detected a sideways glance from people there. And it was a very moving experience -- it would be wise for all policy makers to visit at least once to inform any decisions they might have to make in the future. 1945 was a very different time. There was a 0.0% chance that Japan would respond against the US with nuclear weapons ... no one else had them. So the decision was: Is it worth taking the lives of a large number of civilians, not unlike the fire bombing campaign in Tokyo, to enhance the possibility that Japan might surrender and avoid another 1 - 1 1/2 years or more of fighting, resulting almost certainly in far more death and destruction? Let he or she who has been in a similar position [to make a decision where, no matter what you decide, hundreds of thousands of people will die] cast the first stone. The Japanese were planning to fight to the very end, all the while thinking if they could just inflict enough punishment on the US we might sue for peace. Finally, it is also useful to consider this: More often than not in the field of international geopolitics (and war is nothing more than politics by other means), the decisions at hand are not "right or wrong". The decisions presented are often, "Bad, worse, or catastrophic" ... choose wisely. Right - I’m not surprised nobody gave you a second look when you were at the Hiroshima Peace Museum. By chance, did you get any opportunity to speak with anyone who lived through either of the bombs? Or even just any civilian who lived in Japan during WW2? Those are some gut wrenching experiences if you did get the chance. It’s been good for me to have been been fortunate enough to hear my mom and grandfather’s WW2 experiences in the Philippines, Japanese civilians speaking of theirs here, and plenty of Americans (civilian and military) relaying their experiences too. These personal stories can’t help but influence my thoughts on the war and the choices made by leaders. I totally agree with your last paragraph - every decision is going to be a bad one due to the nature of war. But I just can’t help to think that there must have been another (less horrendous) decision to make other than the ones that actually were made on those two August dates. Well, we could have just sued for peace. What do you think the odds are that a "victorious" Japan that still retains firepower would quit menacing its neighbors? Sometimes the "do nothing" option is the most expensive one of all. And, on the issue of talking with survivors -- yes, I have spoken to several. Have you ever spoken to Pearl Harbor survivors? The ones who were at peace on the morning of Dec 7, 1941, up until the Japanese sneak attack that killed literally thousands of Americans? I have spoken to them too. And the end result of WWII, as terrible as it was, left Japan as a world economic powerhouse (thanks to the American decision to help our defeated enemies rather than punishing them further as ALL previous victors have done throughout history) and no threat whatsoever to their neighbors.
  16. capoetc

    August 6, 1945

    I have visited both. I'm a retired US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel (now a pilot for a major airline), so my service afforded me the opportunity to spend a decent amount of time in Japan. I visited Hiroshima first, and I was a bit reticent because I was concerned how I might be viewed by the people who live there. Based upon my haircut and dress, there was no way to hide the fact that I was an American, and likely a service member. I never even detected a sideways glance from people there. And it was a very moving experience -- it would be wise for all policy makers to visit at least once to inform any decisions they might have to make in the future. 1945 was a very different time. There was a 0.0% chance that Japan would respond against the US with nuclear weapons ... no one else had them. So the decision was: Is it worth taking the lives of a large number of civilians, not unlike the fire bombing campaign in Tokyo, to enhance the possibility that Japan might surrender and avoid another 1 - 1 1/2 years or more of fighting, resulting almost certainly in far more death and destruction? Let he or she who has been in a similar position [to make a decision where, no matter what you decide, hundreds of thousands of people will die] cast the first stone. The Japanese were planning to fight to the very end, all the while thinking if they could just inflict enough punishment on the US we might sue for peace. Finally, it is also useful to consider this: More often than not in the field of international geopolitics (and war is nothing more than politics by other means), the decisions at hand are not "right or wrong". The decisions presented are often, "Bad, worse, or catastrophic" ... choose wisely.
  17. capoetc

    August 6, 1945

    You folks who think the decision to drop atomic weapons on Japan was "terrorism" and not a legitimate use of force really need to consider the context. Before I continue, it is useful to remember two things when considering historical events (not just this one): (1) Personalities matter. If you want to understand the decision making, you must understand the personalities of the leaders involved. (2) People do the things they do and make the decisions that they make for what, to them, are good reasons at that time. ======================================================================================================== The casualties from invading Japan would have been far greater than those that occurred with the dropping of the atomic weapons (civilians and combatants both). We are talking millions of casualties. In a conventional invasion, the Japanese would almost certainly have fought to the death ... to the very last man, woman, or child. To those who say, "We should have just dropped the bomb on a tactical target so they could see how awful it is, and they would have conceded." Wrong. And the problem is ... we only had two! We didn't have an unlimited supply of enriched uranium lying around -- and the Japanese had an opportunity to surrender after "Little Boy", the first nuclear weapon, was dropped on Aug 6, 1945. How long would it take for them to see how awful an atomic bomb detonated offshore is and surrender? They had 3 days before Fat Man (the second atomic bomb) was dropped on Nagasaki. They weren't even convinced after an entire city was literally flattened! By dropping a second weapon on Nagasaki, we were able to create the impression that we had an unlimited supply of nukes -- THAT is why the Japanese surrendered. The Planned Invasion: The first invasion would be called Operation Olympic, commencing Nov 1st, 1945. Fourteen divisions (each around 15,000 men) of army and marine combat troops would conduct an amphibious assault (following an unprecedented naval and aerial bombardment) on the southern-most Japanese home island of Kyushu. Operation Olympic was expected to take four months to subdue Kyushu, leading to the invasion of Honshu and the Tokyo Plain in Operation Coronet commencing March 1, 1946. Operation Coronet would include at least 22 divisions. With the exception of part of the British Pacific Fleet, both operations would be American-only operations and would include more than 40% of the troops still in uniform in 1945. Expected Casualties: Casualties were expected to be very, very high. General Charles Willoughby, who was General Douglas MacArthur's intel chief, expected American casualties alone to be well over 1 million men by the fall of 1946 (Willoughby's own staff believed one million was a conservative estimate). Estimated Japanese deaths -- military and civilian -- would have been far higher. Had the invasion come about, the Japanese civilian population, inflamed by a national slogan - "One Hundred Million Will Die for the Emperor and Nation" - were prepared to fight to the death. Twenty Eight Million Japanese had become a part of the National Volunteer Combat Force. They were armed with ancient rifles, lunge mines, satchel charges, Molotov cocktails and one-shot black powder mortars. Others were armed with swords, long bows, axes and bamboo spears. The civilian units were to be used in nighttime attacks, hit and run maneuvers, delaying actions and massive suicide charges at the weaker American positions. Timeline May 25, 1945: The Joint Chiefs of Staff issued orders to General MacArthur (overall commander), Admiral Nimitz (naval commander), and General Arnold (airpower commander) to prepare for the invasion of Kyushu, commencing after typhoon season in November. July 24, 1945: President Truman approved the plans for the invasion. July 26, 1945: The United Nations issued the Potsdam Proclamation, which called upon Japan to surrender unconditionally or face total destruction. July 29, 1945: the Japanese governmental news agency broadcast to the world that Japan would ignore the proclamation and would refuse to surrender. During this sane period it was learned -- via monitoring Japanese radio broadcasts -- that Japan had closed all schools and mobilized its schoolchildren, was arming its civilian population and was fortifying caves and building underground defenses. August 6, 1945: The atomic bomb, nicknamed "Little Boy", was dropped by the B-29 Enola Gay on Hiroshima. August 8, 1945: The Soviet Union declares war on Japan and invades Manchuria. August 9, 1945: The atomic bomb "Fat Man" was dropped by the B-29 Bockscar on Nagasaki. August 14, 1945: Japan surrenders unconditionally, thus ending World War II. As a side note, I once had a long conversation with an Army vet from World War II. He was in the 25th Infantry Division, and he had been in combat in the Pacific since January 1943. On August 14th, 1945, he and some of his buddies were on liberty at a USO show -- the Andrews Sisters were performing, and then someone came out on stage and handed a note to one of the sisters. She stopped the song and said into the microphone that she had an announcement to make: "The Japanese have surrendered, and World War II is over." He said that the party that erupted was unlike any you can imagine: These men were enjoying their last day of liberty before returning to their unit for the beginning of preparations for what they were sure would be the invasion of the Japanese home islands -- and they knew many of them would be dead soon. It was as though they were all on death row, and the Governor had just called to commute their sentence. I second the recommendations for Countdown 1945 -- it contains new scholarship, and goes in depth into the decision-making involved in dropping the bomb. Highly recommended.
  18. I got mine, and I agree. Well worth the cost. Very informative. I just received my book today. I flipped through it but have not taken the time to read yet. The book is well made ... I am glad I bought it (along with the 1980’s version of the bobble heads, I couldn’t resist! I already had the original bobble heads).
  19. Nothing is being released to theaters at the moment -- perhaps this will be a year off for Cinema Strangiato and it will return next August ...
  20. I have created an Exit ... Stage Left playlist on Spotify (I only used official versions, not bootlegs). Here is the list along with the source of each song on the list (the ones in bold type are from the Exit ... Stage Left recording): ========================================================================= 2112 “Overture” and “The Temples Of Syrinx” [used version from Different Stages] Freewill Limelight [used version from Different Stages] Cygnus-X1: Book II: Hemispheres “Prelude” [available from the R40 tour recording, but I chose to not include that here and replace the "Armageddon" part in the setlist below with the abbreviated Hemispheres from the new Permanent Waves 40th anniversary live version since I could not find "Armageddon" alone to include below] Beneath, Between, & Behind (abridged) Subdivisions (prerelease version) [used version from A Show of Hands] The Camera Eye [used version from Time Machine tour] YYZ (with drum solo) Broon's Bane The Trees Xanadu The Spirit Of Radio Red Barchetta Closer To The Heart Tom Sawyer Vital Signs [used Rush in Rio version] Working Man (with reggae intro) [used Rush in Rio version] Cygnus-X1: Book II: Hemispheres “Armageddon” [used abbreviated version from PeW 40th anniversary] By-Tor And The Snow Dog [used abbreviated version from PeW 40th anniversary] In The End [used version from ATWAS] In The Mood [used version from AFTK 40th anniversary] 2112 “Grand Finale” [used version on Different Stages] Encore: La Villa Strangiato (with electric guitar intro) ======================================================================== I tried to use recordings from as close to 1980 as possible. If anyone has recommendations to improve the sources of individual songs from the setlist (ie, a "better version" than the one I used), please let me know. I really, really hope that the full Exit ... Stage Left show is available so there can be a full 40th anniversary show release! Not holding my breath though.
  21. Ordered the ARF40 ... it's for a good cause, so why not? :)
  22. I should probably know this, but ... where does one get the remaining tracks to cobble together a PeW Tour Setlist (along with the live tracks on the new set)?
×
×
  • Create New...