• KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    i always find these kind of statements and comics weird, because like.

    If the plane is your own, this would also signal the sound of protection and defense, which is an objectively good thing, if we’re classifying dying due to a plane as a bad thing.

    There are two sides to the coin and i guess this is either shitposting memes, or people never think about the fact that like, you can also just have a military.

    • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 months ago

      Most people don’t like living near even civilian airports. Active duty flights would’ve usually happened nearer to the front, and modern flights often happen from aircraft carriers anyway.

      Much more common for people to hear are shows of force, like the States do for holidays, airshows, and large sports games.

      The comic is making fun of the fact that an airshow idolizes machines of war. Not all airshows focus on military craft, but most of them do, often being held at military airbases.

      As cool as they are, it’s good to remember that those machines are instruments of death, and often used against people of no immediate threat. Regardless of the necessity, I don’t think that’s something to cheer for.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        modern flights often happen from aircraft carriers anyway

        Eh, no?

        Aircraft carriers are ridiculously complicated and expensive, hence even the us only having around a dozen or so? Russia famously has none. Great Brittain has like 2 or so, France like 1?

        Its been a while, I don’t remember the exact numbers, but the number of aircraft carriers in the world would be in the very low dozens because they’re damn near unaffordably expensive.

        The beyond vast majority of modern flights still happen from airports

        • Blackmist@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Also, none have been lost in battle since WW2.

          They’re basically mobile island outposts at this point.

        • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I had meant flights of U.S. planes, but you’re right, they usually use and establish local airfields, and probably only use carriers where that’s too slow or impossible.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        tbf that’s mostly because they’re really fucking loud, all of the time. Military air fields are probably quieter for longer periods of time lol. Although still rather loud im sure.

        Active duty flights would’ve usually happened nearer to the front, and modern flights often happen from aircraft carriers anyway.

        to be clear, this wouldn’t matter, we’re talking about airshows, most people living near the front lines are going to be gone anyway. And even if we were to grant this point, it still wouldn’t diminish my statement. national pride is a weird thing.

        The comic is making fun of the fact that an airshow idolizes machines of war.

        i mean sure, but im pretty sure humanity has always idolized the military and it’s armies, as well as it’s ability to project force. It’s the stable of basically every great empire. Humanity seems to have an inherent connection with the ability of projecting force. It would be evolutionary advantageous, so that’s probably why.

        As cool as they are, it’s good to remember that those machines are instruments of death, and often used against people of no immediate threat. Regardless of the necessity, I don’t think that’s something to cheer for.

        i mean sure, but morbidity is the calling card for a lot of things, the dahmer netflix series for example. Should we be treating that the same? Like to be clear, i don’t disagree, but every time you pick up an angle grinder do you really need to think about how many people have been horrifically inujred by it and pray to the grinder gods for you safety? Or should you just be conscious of how you use the tool, and be careful with it.

        and often used against people of no immediate threat.

        also idk about this statement, maybe for the case of like the russian artillery units for example. I doubt that f-16s have been primarily used on like, someones dog. More than people of actual consequence. It’s also really vaguely defined, which doesn’t help.

        • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          So to be fair, I’ve read the original comic, and it probably was just focusing on the negative aspects of airshows.

          What a lot of people get from this (including me) is the absurdity of military shows. Air shows are less ridiculous because planes are capable of some incredible things, but it’s still unsettling. Like gun shows or parades of duty.

          We have advanced many of our societies to such a point that we might be able to do away with weapon worship entirely, so I think it’s sensible to be uncomfortable with venerating the trappings of dictators and despots.

          I kind of agree that militaries are still necessary, but there’s a big difference between an unfortunate but necessary thing and a celebrated thing.

          The difference between an F-15 and an angle grider is that the F-15 is intended to hurt people. Pulling an angle grinder out of your coat isn’t as intimidating as pulling out a knife, even if the angle grinder could do more damage. Yet both angle grinders and most knives are tools used to create. An F-15 can only destroy. It can’t carry passengers, can’t fight fires, can’t deliver supplies, can’t advance science, at best it can do acrobatics while being incredibly expensive. It’s nothing more than a weapon.

          To be entirely fair, even without military aircraft the U.S. would meddle in international affairs. The air force doesn’t specifically enable these killings or infrastructure damage. It is however a popular and representative method of international war, and I don’t think that’s something to celebrate.

    • BreadOven@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I can’t remember the exact title, but I think it’s by Robert Blake. But the line is something like “a terrorist to me is a freedom fighter to you”.

      Definitely two sides to most things.