O/T - This snapshot was taken...

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I always wondered what the world would have been like if that day never happened, and how history would have been changed. That's an amazing photo.

It is reasonable to consider that small things, including the actions of a single person, can change history in a big way. A terrific fairly new book on this by Jeff Greenfield:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/books/01book.html

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

It is reasonable to consider that small things, including the actions of a single person, can change history in a big way. A terrific fairly new book on this by Jeff Greenfield:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/books/01book.html

Mark, that's interesting - I like the fact that he's addressing more realistic 'what if' scenarios than the following example mentioned in the review:

"What if a group of time-traveling white supremacists from South Africa gave Robert E. Lee’s troops AK-47 assault rifles to help the Confederacy win the Civil War?"

[packs]

Very sad day. Loosely related, has anyone else been watching the Vietnam in HD series on the History channel? The average WWII vet saw 10 days of combat during his tour. The average Vietnam Vet saw 240 days of action. Have to wonder if they would have seen any had Kennedy not been killed.

[David Atkatz]

Those numbers are very, very misleading. Days of combat have been averaged over all serving. But in WWII, there were huge numbers of support personnel, who saw no combat. Those who did see combat, though, for the most part, were involved for a long time. Unless, of course, they were killed. Consider the thousands of USAAF flight crew, who were killed after a few missions, or the Marines who were killed storming beaches in the Pacific in their first day or two, thus bringing down the average.

In Vietnam, you were in for a thirteen month tour, after which you came home. In WWII, you were in for the duration; until you were either killed, or the war ended.