Brian Klaas

Yeah. I mean, the people in Kokura didn't know that they were the target until it was declassified. I believe it was like two decades later. So, of course, you know, all of a sudden they declassify this thing. And all of a sudden the residents of Kokura have been told you very narrowly escaped being Nagasaki. I mean, just an incredible, incredible facet of history.

Yeah, of course. I mean, war is one that's obvious because you can imagine so easily how if the victor had changed or if the destruction had been different, that the consequences would be enormous. I mean, one of the arguments that I'm making is that, you know, these things have really long tails. And one of the aspects that I think is really difficult for us to grapple with

Yeah, of course. I mean, war is one that's obvious because you can imagine so easily how if the victor had changed or if the destruction had been different, that the consequences would be enormous. I mean, one of the arguments that I'm making is that, you know, these things have really long tails. And one of the aspects that I think is really difficult for us to grapple with

Yeah, of course. I mean, war is one that's obvious because you can imagine so easily how if the victor had changed or if the destruction had been different, that the consequences would be enormous. I mean, one of the arguments that I'm making is that, you know, these things have really long tails. And one of the aspects that I think is really difficult for us to grapple with

When you think about history is whenever I point these aspects out, you know, these tiny details of the cigar or the vacation that Stimson took, the people who push back against me will say, well, yeah, but like the U.S., the Union would have won the Civil War anyway because it had structural advantages or the U.S. would have won against Japan because they would have dropped the bomb elsewhere.

When you think about history is whenever I point these aspects out, you know, these tiny details of the cigar or the vacation that Stimson took, the people who push back against me will say, well, yeah, but like the U.S., the Union would have won the Civil War anyway because it had structural advantages or the U.S. would have won against Japan because they would have dropped the bomb elsewhere.

When you think about history is whenever I point these aspects out, you know, these tiny details of the cigar or the vacation that Stimson took, the people who push back against me will say, well, yeah, but like the U.S., the Union would have won the Civil War anyway because it had structural advantages or the U.S. would have won against Japan because they would have dropped the bomb elsewhere.

And of course, you know, that's probably true. There's some aspects of this that are probably true. But the point that I make is the way you lose conflicts, the way that history unfolds is not just a series of discrete events, right? It's not like the war is now over and now we enter a new chapter of history.

And of course, you know, that's probably true. There's some aspects of this that are probably true. But the point that I make is the way you lose conflicts, the way that history unfolds is not just a series of discrete events, right? It's not like the war is now over and now we enter a new chapter of history.

And of course, you know, that's probably true. There's some aspects of this that are probably true. But the point that I make is the way you lose conflicts, the way that history unfolds is not just a series of discrete events, right? It's not like the war is now over and now we enter a new chapter of history.

The way the war ends affects the way the next war begins or it affects the way the economy recovers, right? If Kyoto is not part of Japan's economy, Japan in the 20th century maybe has a different history. Right. And so the argument that I'm making is that the wars are the most obvious, but everything matters. Right. That these little details are always reshaping history.

The way the war ends affects the way the next war begins or it affects the way the economy recovers, right? If Kyoto is not part of Japan's economy, Japan in the 20th century maybe has a different history. Right. And so the argument that I'm making is that the wars are the most obvious, but everything matters. Right. That these little details are always reshaping history.

The way the war ends affects the way the next war begins or it affects the way the economy recovers, right? If Kyoto is not part of Japan's economy, Japan in the 20th century maybe has a different history. Right. And so the argument that I'm making is that the wars are the most obvious, but everything matters. Right. That these little details are always reshaping history.

And it's just these little glimpses we get when we can actually make the counterfactual make sense. That is why I use warfare very often in illustrating the points. Right.

And it's just these little glimpses we get when we can actually make the counterfactual make sense. That is why I use warfare very often in illustrating the points. Right.

And it's just these little glimpses we get when we can actually make the counterfactual make sense. That is why I use warfare very often in illustrating the points. Right.

I think it's the opposite, unfortunately. And I think it's the opposite for two reasons. I really worry about this. This is where I go into the social science hat a little bit. But the two reasons I think this has gone the wrong way. First is because we have so many data tools at our disposal. that an AI is going to amplify this, that people begin to believe the data can predict the future.

I think it's the opposite, unfortunately. And I think it's the opposite for two reasons. I really worry about this. This is where I go into the social science hat a little bit. But the two reasons I think this has gone the wrong way. First is because we have so many data tools at our disposal. that an AI is going to amplify this, that people begin to believe the data can predict the future.

I think it's the opposite, unfortunately. And I think it's the opposite for two reasons. I really worry about this. This is where I go into the social science hat a little bit. But the two reasons I think this has gone the wrong way. First is because we have so many data tools at our disposal. that an AI is going to amplify this, that people begin to believe the data can predict the future.

And we can't. We just simply can't because you can't model every possible contingency of history. I mean, you would never put in your model the vacation histories of US government officials or the cigar locations of various armies and so on. So as a result of that, I think there's a false hubris that we have when we look at the world.