• SailorFuzz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 days ago

    eyyy there goes $140 million dollars just so the chuds could take their chud-to-be tax burden kids to gawk at the military propaganda while saying “whooooa look at da airpwane”

      • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 days ago

        there are plenty of things which are fun to watch which didn’t involve spending billions of tax dollars on killing machines

      • kahjtheundedicated@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 days ago

        …which aren’t (usually) paid for with taxpayer dollars

        But I’m guessing doing air shows counts towards training hours, so they’re going to be flying those planes regardless. Still feels like a massive waste when two of them crash and burn in a show though

      • saltesc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 days ago

        That’s definitely not true. Maybe it is in the US, but seeing machines go fast or tackle complex challenges isn’t a gender-specific thing. For example, 42% of Formula 1 fans are female. Plenty of women spectating and competing at drag strips, land speed, rally, etc.

        The old conservative culture of assuming things of people or pigeonholing them based on gender—like, “attract and fascinate mostly men”—is not as relevant as it used to be back in the old days, nor should it be preserved.

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      22 days ago

      I hate this take. Air shows are awesome, they fascinate children and adults alike. Seeing these machines first hand is inspiring…

      There’s little enough in this world that I would describe as “inspiring”, so I’ll take what I can get.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 days ago

        I’m divided on airshows. I get that the spectacle is impressive. They’re also literal monuments to war that are burning an excessive amount of fuel to operate.

        I get that you probably don’t have multiple military aircraft flying overhead every day. I chose to live in San Diego without knowing that was gonna be my version of the train that I had to learn to ignore. So that probably colors my thinking, as well as being a Navy Vet.

        Personally I’d prefer more museums so they can be shown off without burning more fuel than is needed.

        • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          22 days ago

          Seing one operating in person and seing one on display are two very different things.

          But military airshows are not just for ordinary people to be amazed. It’s an opportunity for the manufacturer to market their airplanes.

          And while it does burn a lot of fuel. It’s nothing compared to all the private jets flying around the world.

          I’m pretty sure Taylor Swifts jet burns more fuel in a year than all airshows combined.

          • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            22 days ago

            It’s an opportunity for the manufacturer to market their airplanes

            Ohhhh, they’re good because they’re promotion for the military-industrial complex, of course…

  • eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 days ago

    Kinetic!

    Insufficiently lethal to please Khal Hegseth though.

    A USAF air show without at least six deaths is considered a dull affair…