Author Topic: War and the history of Wars and how they are started  (Read 1565 times)

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #15 on: June 26, 2007, 08:49:44 AM »
I know this reading thing is hard for you.  But the difference is in the first word after the word Architect.

It doesn't actually denote being an architect, but it clarifies what kind of engineering.  


Just as much if someone were to say to you, I am an engineer, you would probably reply, What kind?
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #16 on: June 26, 2007, 12:13:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Oh like Architects have ANY IDEA as to how buildings stand up, much less fall down.  Have you actually ever talked to an architect?  Very few of them can tell their bellybutton from a hole in the ground.  There are a couple that are very good, but it's difficult to find them.



Anyway, I'm studying architectural engineering.  I'm focusing on Construction Management, but have extensively studied Structural Engineering, architectural design, fire dynamics and fire protection.

Given what happened from the jet's collision blowing off all Fire Proofing, the buildings fell exactly as they should have.


Oh, and John, the Fireproofing WAS applied correctly.  It's just that they never considered that a massive explosion could blow it off the structure.  The fire proofing is no more then flaky foam.  It's purpose is to DELAY the heat transfer from the fire to the metal.  Once the metal gets to 600 degrees Fahrenheit, you are in DEEP ****.  At 600 degrees it has lost 50% of it's structural capacity, taking the load it can hold below the load it was designed for INCLUDING safety factors.


Would you want your family doctor to perform brain surgery on your child?  Architects specialize in the big picture, engineers specialize on specifics.

Architects rely on mechanical engineers, structural engineers, electrical engineers, surveyors, landscape architects and often interior designers to do their specific jobs.  The architect’s job is to design for aesthetic appeal, cost and efficiency.  They spend much of their time coordinating the engineers’ work.  You can’t have a structural member, HVAC and lighting all in one spot.  Architects also follow through the project and make sure that all contractors do their jobs as described in the specs.  Very often the variety of contractors involved take shortcuts that could lead to serious problems or result in lower quality.  Architects do have a broad understanding of many fields; they are the only ones who conceive and see the project in its entirety.  Ultimately, they are responsible that everything is done correctly.  Most college architecture programs focus very little on the effects of fire and fireproofing; this is a major weakness in my opinion.  “Structures I-IV” courses are standard in college architecture programs.  Obviously the course is not as in depth as a structural degree, but it is a fundamental class.  Architects have a pretty good idea why buildings stand up, I do know many.

Unless you want a city to look like an army base, however, you don’t want structural engineers designing your city’s buildings.

Offline Hazzer

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 290
      • Fleetwood town F.C. Cod Army
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #17 on: June 26, 2007, 12:52:36 PM »
Ems Telegram 1870
"I murmured that I had no Shoes,till I met a man that had no Feet."

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #18 on: June 26, 2007, 01:24:24 PM »
Reality can easily be faked........
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #19 on: June 26, 2007, 01:27:28 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by eskimo2
Would you want your family doctor to perform brain surgery on your child?  Architects specialize in the big picture, engineers specialize on specifics.

Architects rely on mechanical engineers, structural engineers, electrical engineers, surveyors, landscape architects and often interior designers to do their specific jobs.  The architect’s job is to design for aesthetic appeal, cost and efficiency.  They spend much of their time coordinating the engineers’ work.  You can’t have a structural member, HVAC and lighting all in one spot.  Architects also follow through the project and make sure that all contractors do their jobs as described in the specs.  Very often the variety of contractors involved take shortcuts that could lead to serious problems or result in lower quality.  Architects do have a broad understanding of many fields; they are the only ones who conceive and see the project in its entirety.  Ultimately, they are responsible that everything is done correctly.  Most college architecture programs focus very little on the effects of fire and fireproofing; this is a major weakness in my opinion.  “Structures I-IV” courses are standard in college architecture programs.  Obviously the course is not as in depth as a structural degree, but it is a fundamental class.  Architects have a pretty good idea why buildings stand up, I do know many.

Unless you want a city to look like an army base, however, you don’t want structural engineers designing your city’s buildings.


Wrong.  The job of the architect is to give the engineers ulcers as they fix all the **** ups.

The Job of the architect is to design the aesthetics.  It is the job of the pre-construction team to do Value Engineering and constructibility reviews.

It is not the architect that leads the MEP coordination, but the Construction Project Managers.

It is not the architect that is responsible, but the Professional Engineers.  Past the design phase, it is the Construction Managers who are responsible for everything being built right.


Architects are just barely worth the air they breathe.  Barely.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #20 on: June 26, 2007, 01:38:40 PM »
Only in AH BBS can you start a thread on history of wars and end up bashing architects. :rolleyes:

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #21 on: June 26, 2007, 01:51:47 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Only in AH BBS can you start a thread on history of wars and end up bashing architects. :rolleyes:


It's always cool to bash architects.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #22 on: June 26, 2007, 02:03:06 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lasersailor184
It's always cool to bash architects.
Somewhere, there is an architect saying "the idiot engineers didn't build it the way I designed it!" ;)

Offline Airscrew

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4808
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #23 on: June 26, 2007, 02:07:42 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Only in AH BBS can you start a thread on history of wars and end up bashing architects. :rolleyes:

read these and it may help explain it...





Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #24 on: June 26, 2007, 05:23:12 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Wrong.  The job of the architect is to give the engineers ulcers as they fix all the **** ups.

The Job of the architect is to design the aesthetics.  It is the job of the pre-construction team to do Value Engineering and constructibility reviews.

It is not the architect that leads the MEP coordination, but the Construction Project Managers.

It is not the architect that is responsible, but the Professional Engineers.  Past the design phase, it is the Construction Managers who are responsible for everything being built right.


Architects are just barely worth the air they breathe.  Barely.


My wife has degrees in architecture and interior design from Kent State University.  She worked for a small firm in Colorado for seven years.  People/businesses hire architects to design buildings, hire all of the various engineers, put the project up for bid with various construction companies, choose one, and follow the project through completion.  I don’t know what they have taught you in school, but this is how it is done in the real world.  I’ve seen it again and again.  The architect is the only one on the project from conception to completion.  If anyone screws up the architect can be sued.  They can sue the engineers/construction companies in turn, but they are ultimately responsible.

storch

  • Guest
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #25 on: June 26, 2007, 05:26:53 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by eskimo2
My wife has degrees in architecture and interior design from Kent State University.  She worked for a small firm in Colorado for seven years.  People/businesses hire architects to design buildings, hire all of the various engineers, put the project up for bid with various construction companies, choose one, and follow the project through completion.  I don’t know what they have taught you in school, but this is how it is done in the real world.  I’ve seen it again and again.  The architect is the only one on the project from conception to completion.  If anyone screws up the architect can be sued.  They can sue the engineers/construction companies in turn, but they are ultimately responsible.
yup.

Offline Citabria

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #26 on: June 26, 2007, 05:47:32 PM »
doing more reading I found the lavon affair..

The Lavon Affair refers to the scandal over a failed Israeli covert operation in Egypt known as Operation Susannah, in which Egyptian, American and British-owned targets in Egypt were bombed in the summer of 1954. It became known as the Lavon Affair after the Israeli defense minister Pinhas Lavon, who was forced to resign because of the incident, or cryptically as The Unfortunate Affair (Hebrew: òñ÷ äáéù Esek HaBish).

Operation Susannah
In the early 1950s the United States began pressuring the British to withdraw from the Suez Canal[citation needed], and thereby abandon two operative treaties, the Convention of Constantinople and the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of 1936 that made the canal a neutral zone under British control. Israel was strongly opposed to the British withdrawal, as it feared that it would remove a moderating effect on Nasser's military ambitions, especially toward Israel, but diplomatic methods failed to sway the British. In the summer of 1954 Colonel Binyamin Gibli, the chief of Israel's military intelligence, Aman, initiated Operation Suzannah in order to reverse that decision. The goal of the Operation was to carry out bombings and other acts of sabotage in Egypt with the aim of creating an atmosphere in which the British and American opponents of British withdrawal from Egypt would be able to gain the upper hand and block the withdrawal.[1]

The top-secret cell, Unit 131, which was to carry out the operation, had existed since 1948 and under Aman since 1950. At the time of Operation Susannah, Unit 131 was the subject of a bitter dispute between Aman and Mossad over who should control it.

Unit 131 operatives had been recruited several years before, when the Israeli intelligence officer Avram Dar arrived in Cairo undercover as a British citizen of Gibraltar called John Darling. He had recruited several Egyptian Jews who had previously been active in illegal emigration activities and trained them for covert operations.

Aman decided to activate the network in the spring of 1954. On July 2, a post office in Alexandria was firebombed, and on July 14, the U.S. Information Agency libraries in Alexandria and Cairo, and a British-owned theater were bombed. The homemade bombs, consisting of bags containing acid placed over nitroglycerine, were inserted into books, and placed on the shelves of the libraries just before closing time. Several hours later, as the acid ate through the bags, the bombs would explode. They did little damage to the targets and caused no injuries or deaths.

Before the group began Israeli agent Avraham Seidenberg (Avri Elad ) was sent to oversee the operations. Seidenberg assumed the identity of Paul Frank, a former SS officer with Nazi underground connections. Avraham Seidenberg allegedly informed the Egyptians resulting in the Egyptian Intelligence Service following a suspect to his target, the Rio Theatre, where a fire engine was standing by. Egyptian authorities prematurely arrested this suspect, Philip Natanson, when his bomb accidentally ignited prematurely in his pocket. Having searched his apartment, they found incriminating evidence and names of accomplices to the operation. Several suspects were arrested, including Egyptian Jews and undercover Israelis.

Colonel Dar and Seidenberg had managed to escape. One suspect was tortured to death in prison and Hungarian born Israeli Max Bennett committed suicide. The trial began on December 11 and lasted until January 27, 1955; two of the accused (Moshe Marzouk and Shmuel Azar) were condemned to execution by hanging and two acquitted with the rest receiving lengthy prison terms. The trial was widely criticized as a show trial, and there were credible allegations that evidence had been extracted by torture. [1]

Two of the imprisoned operatives, Meir Meyuhas and Meir Za'afran, were released in 1962, after having served seven year jail sentences. The rest were eventually freed in February 1968, in a secret addendum to a prisoner of war exchange.

Soon after the affair, Mossad chief Isser Harel expressed suspicion to Aman concerning the integrity of Avraham Seidenberg. Despite his concerns, Aman continued using Seidenberg for intelligence operations until 1956, when he was caught trying to sell Israeli documents to the Egyptians. Seidenberg was tried and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. In 1980, Harel publicly revealed evidence that Seidenberg had been turned by the Egyptians even before Operation Suzannah. If true, this would imply that Egyptian Intelligence was aware of the operation from the beginning.


[edit] Political aftermath
In meetings with prime minister Moshe Sharett, secretary of defense Pinhas Lavon denied any knowledge of the operation. When intelligence chief Gibli contradicted Lavon, Sharrett commissioned a board of inquiry consisting of Israeli Supreme Court Justice Isaac Olshan and the first chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, Yaakov Dori that was unable to find conclusive evidence that Lavon had authorized the operation. Lavon tried to fix the blame on Shimon Peres, who was the secretary general of the defense ministry, and Gibli for insubordination and criminal negligence. Sharett resolved the dilemma by siding with Peres, who along with Moshe Dayan testified against Lavon, after which Lavon resigned. Former prime minister David Ben-Gurion succeeded Lavon as minister of defense.

In April of 1960, a review of minutes from the inquiry found inconsistencies and possibly a fraudulent document in Gibli's original testimony that seemed to support Lavon's account of events. During this time, it also came to light that Seidenberg (the Israeli agent running Operation Suzannah in Egypt), had committed perjury during the original inquiry. Seidenberg was also suspected of betraying the group to Egyptian authorities; though the charges were never proven, he was eventually sentenced to a jail term of 10 years. Ben-Gurion scheduled closed hearings with a new board of inquiry chaired by Chaim Cohen, a supreme court justice.

This inquiry found that the perjury indeed had been committed, and that Lavon had not authorized the operation. Sharett and Levi Eshkol tried to issue a statement that would placate both Lavon and those who had opposed him. Ben-Gurion refused to accept the compromise and viewed it as a divisive play within the Mapai party. After another investigative committee sided with the Cohen inquiry, Ben-Gurion resigned from his post as defense minister. This led to the expulsion of Lavon from the Histadrut labor union and an early call for new elections which changed the political structure in Israel.

It should be noted that the specifics of Operation Susannah were not public at the time of the political upheaval.


[edit] Legacy
While Israeli concerns about Nasser's military ambitions turned out to have some merit, Operation Suzannah and the Lavon Affair turned out to be disastrous for Israel in several ways:

The Egyptian government used the trial as a pretext for a series of efforts to punish Egyptian Jews culminating in 1958 when, following the Suez Crisis, 25,000 Jews were expelled by Egypt and at least 1,000 ended up in prisons and detention camps.
Israel lost significant standing and credibility in its relations with the United Kingdom and the United States that would take years to repair.
The tactics of the operation led to deep-seated suspicion of Israeli intelligence methods, such as agent provocateurs and false flag operations.
The political aftermath caused considerable political turmoil in Israel that affected the influence of its government.
In March 2005, Israel publicly honored the surviving operatives, and President Moshe Katsav presented each with a certificate of appreciation for their efforts on behalf of the state, ending decades of official denial by Israel.[2]


[edit] See also
History of Israel (under "Lavon affair")
Moshe Marzouk

[edit] Notes
^ According to historian Shabtai Teveth, who wrote one of the more detailed accounts, the assignment was "To undermine Western confidence in the existing [Egyptian] regime by generating public insecurity and actions to bring about arrests, demonstrations, and acts of revenge, while totally concealing the Israeli factor. The team was accordingly urged to avoid detection, so that suspicion would fall on the Muslim Brotherhood, the Communists, 'unspecified malcontents' or 'local nationalists'." (Ben-Gurion's Spy, Columbia University Press, 1996, p. 81)
^ "Israel Honors Egyptian Spies 50 Years After Fiasco", Reuters, March 30, 2005.
Fester was my in game name until September 2013

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #27 on: June 26, 2007, 06:31:01 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by eskimo2
My wife has degrees in architecture and interior design from Kent State University.  She worked for a small firm in Colorado for seven years.  People/businesses hire architects to design buildings, hire all of the various engineers, put the project up for bid with various construction companies, choose one, and follow the project through completion.  I don’t know what they have taught you in school, but this is how it is done in the real world.  I’ve seen it again and again.  The architect is the only one on the project from conception to completion.  If anyone screws up the architect can be sued.  They can sue the engineers/construction companies in turn, but they are ultimately responsible.


Well, your wife has been pulling your chain.  All design firms indemnify themselves from all claims in the basic general purpose contract.  Meaning, the architects and engineers aren't responsible for what happens.  Guess who is ultimately responsible.  That would be the Construction Management firm.  Even if they didn't design a single square foot of the project, they are responsible for it.

There are many forms of project delivery.  There's only one form in which just the architect is there from start to finish, and this is losing it's popularity compared to all the rest.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

storch

  • Guest
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #28 on: June 26, 2007, 07:11:13 PM »
laser, is there ever anything you are correctly informed on?

Offline eskimo2

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7207
      • hallbuzz.com
War and the history of Wars and how they are started
« Reply #29 on: June 26, 2007, 07:22:50 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Well, your wife has been pulling your chain.  All design firms indemnify themselves from all claims in the basic general purpose contract.  Meaning, the architects and engineers aren't responsible for what happens.  Guess who is ultimately responsible.  That would be the Construction Management firm.  Even if they didn't design a single square foot of the project, they are responsible for it.

There are many forms of project delivery.  There's only one form in which just the architect is there from start to finish, and this is losing it's popularity compared to all the rest.


My wife pulling my chain?  I guess she, her bosses, co-workers, work associates and college friends must have all been pulling a fast one on me.  I’d have trouble recalling all the architects and draftsmen I know and have spoken with about various aspects of the job.  One thing I can tell you is that with any field of college study the real world turns out much different than you think once you are employed.  

Anyone involved in a project is responsible for his or her work and can be sued.  The architect is always involved if something goes wrong, however.  They regularly make site visits to ensure that the correct materials are being used and procedures are being followed.  It seemed that every project someone’s doing something wrong and the architect is the one who tells them to do it again/right.  Sure, contractors use sub contractors and check their work also, etc.  

The larger and more unique a project, the more likely an architect is directly involved.  Cookie cutter neighborhoods often go up without architects, but not skyscrapers or big buildings.  My wife did a lot of LDS churches.  They have three designs, small, medium and large.  Drop any blind Mormon off at any LDS church anywhere and they could find their way around just like it was their home stake (provided the same size).  The LDS church hires architects to see the project through even though the building plan is essentially done (except for the site plan).  Why do they bother to go through an architecture firm?
« Last Edit: June 26, 2007, 07:25:40 PM by eskimo2 »