6 ms·

I must say i don't understand why so many people here are so sad that a weapon is destroyed. In my book that's fucking great! I'm even somewhat disgusted. But

by buster 14y ago

I must say i don't understand why so many people here are so sad that a weapon is destroyed. In my book that's fucking great! I'm even somewhat disgusted. But when i read the title i was sad as well... until i came across "The aircraft carrier".

antidoh 14y ago
I agree entirely with the idea of rejoicing at a weapon destroyed. However, something like this represents world history, as well as personal history. Life is more complex and nuanced than "weapons bad," because we live in that world as it is. I served on the Enterprise in the late seventies, and while I can't say I'm sad, I'm definitely experiencing a nostalgic episode. (I never went to sea on the Enterprise, overhaul in the shipyard only, so I can't tell you anything more interesting than how to lay tile on a metal deck or how to use a needle gun to strip paint.)
- buster 14y ago
  That would explain it for you, but i doubt all those commenters are your ex colleagues ;) I'm aware that life is complex. But comments like "hey, let's give it to Israel they can re-arm it and have a nice weapon there" make me sick, sorry.
  - antidoh 14y ago
    You don't have to have been somewhere to have nostalgia for it and its associations. Edit: I agree, better not to give it to anyone.
    - buster 14y ago
      Ah well, they should put it in a museum i guess, not scraping it. edit: Or make a museum out of it, with the size of the ship :P edit2: I see, and according to another link, the ship basically will be destroyed by removing the reactor, so there is no way around it...
Roybatty 14y ago
Or you can look at it as a weapon that protected free people.
- buster 14y ago
  No, weapons kill free people. Please look at how many innocent people die in your so called war for your own freedom. And then look where the Enterprise was deployed. Vietnam.. Iraq... yes.. the ship protected your home from the other side of the planet... how?
  - philwelch 14y ago
    The US carrier fleet ensured that the US and its allies would have total naval and air supremacy throughout the Cold War. This is one of the reasons that various potential enemies never even considered attacking us. A weapon doesn't have to be used in anger in order to protect. It need only be ready.
    - buster 14y ago
      This is already achieved by atomic bombs and the means to get them as far as Moscow or Beijing or wherever your enemy of the month is today. No need for guns, tanks, aircraft carriers and all that other stuff that is used to _actually kill people_. Especially if you are living one your own continent with no enemy around for thousands of miles. If you didn't get it now: The weapons i talk about kill people. Many innocent. The ship we talk about was actually used in multiple wars to kill. I only hear "defend freedom" and "deterrence" but in reality it's neither of them. Only indoctrinated stuff that people have been told all their life and actually believe..
      - philwelch 14y ago
        > Especially if you are living one your own continent with no enemy around for thousands of miles. How would they get here? Oh, right, the ocean. Better control the ocean, then.
lotharbot 14y ago
I grew up in a pacifist family, and still attend a Mennonite church. But I also have what I think is a realistic view of history and geopolitics. I recognize the Enterprise, and more generally the U.S. carrier fleet, played a significant role in the relative peace we've had in the world since WWII. Sure, there have been wars since then. But the total loss of lives, and total destruction from those wars, has been relatively minor in comparison to wars of the past. Nations only go to war, and only continue fighting, as long as they think they can gain from it somehow -- land, resources, safety, ideological spread, whatever. Having a carrier group parked off your coast ready to unleash fury tends to cut into those possible gains, and therefore deters nations from entering into hostilities. The value proposition of "negotiating" becomes higher than that of "fighting" in a lot of marginal cases. Strategic weapons (like carriers and nukes) in essence win wars by causing them not to be fought. From where I stand, that's a win -- not just for "my side", but for humanity as a whole.

by buster 14y ago

antidoh 14y ago

I agree entirely with the idea of rejoicing at a weapon destroyed. However, something like this represents world history, as well as personal history. Life is more complex and nuanced than "weapons bad," because we live in that world as it is. I served on the Enterprise in the late seventies, and while I can't say I'm sad, I'm definitely experiencing a nostalgic episode. (I never went to sea on the Enterprise, overhaul in the shipyard only, so I can't tell you anything more interesting than how to lay tile on a metal deck or how to use a needle gun to strip paint.)

buster 14y ago
That would explain it for you, but i doubt all those commenters are your ex colleagues ;) I'm aware that life is complex. But comments like "hey, let's give it to Israel they can re-arm it and have a nice weapon there" make me sick, sorry.
- antidoh 14y ago
  You don't have to have been somewhere to have nostalgia for it and its associations. Edit: I agree, better not to give it to anyone.
  - buster 14y ago
    Ah well, they should put it in a museum i guess, not scraping it. edit: Or make a museum out of it, with the size of the ship :P edit2: I see, and according to another link, the ship basically will be destroyed by removing the reactor, so there is no way around it...

Roybatty 14y ago

Or you can look at it as a weapon that protected free people.

buster 14y ago
No, weapons kill free people. Please look at how many innocent people die in your so called war for your own freedom. And then look where the Enterprise was deployed. Vietnam.. Iraq... yes.. the ship protected your home from the other side of the planet... how?
- philwelch 14y ago
  The US carrier fleet ensured that the US and its allies would have total naval and air supremacy throughout the Cold War. This is one of the reasons that various potential enemies never even considered attacking us. A weapon doesn't have to be used in anger in order to protect. It need only be ready.
  - buster 14y ago
    This is already achieved by atomic bombs and the means to get them as far as Moscow or Beijing or wherever your enemy of the month is today. No need for guns, tanks, aircraft carriers and all that other stuff that is used to _actually kill people_. Especially if you are living one your own continent with no enemy around for thousands of miles. If you didn't get it now: The weapons i talk about kill people. Many innocent. The ship we talk about was actually used in multiple wars to kill. I only hear "defend freedom" and "deterrence" but in reality it's neither of them. Only indoctrinated stuff that people have been told all their life and actually believe..
    - philwelch 14y ago
      > Especially if you are living one your own continent with no enemy around for thousands of miles. How would they get here? Oh, right, the ocean. Better control the ocean, then.

lotharbot 14y ago

I grew up in a pacifist family, and still attend a Mennonite church. But I also have what I think is a realistic view of history and geopolitics. I recognize the Enterprise, and more generally the U.S. carrier fleet, played a significant role in the relative peace we've had in the world since WWII. Sure, there have been wars since then. But the total loss of lives, and total destruction from those wars, has been relatively minor in comparison to wars of the past. Nations only go to war, and only continue fighting, as long as they think they can gain from it somehow -- land, resources, safety, ideological spread, whatever. Having a carrier group parked off your coast ready to unleash fury tends to cut into those possible gains, and therefore deters nations from entering into hostilities. The value proposition of "negotiating" becomes higher than that of "fighting" in a lot of marginal cases. Strategic weapons (like carriers and nukes) in essence win wars by causing them not to be fought. From where I stand, that's a win -- not just for "my side", but for humanity as a whole.