[Closed] No matter how many times I see a...

It is always one of those

Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth
And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings

Yeap, something like that.

They're just wonderful to see and to hear, imo.

Saw a Spitfire and a Lancaster bomber overhead a couple of weeks ago, real goosebump moment.

Something very stirring about that sight, I'm honestly not that old, but I wonder if the younger generation will have the same feelings.

Indeed, nothing like seeing a machine designed by man to kill and destroy flying by. Really gives me a lump in my throat it does. Makes me hark back to the days when men were men. Kids these days, they'll never know the glory of valiant death, will they? Sometimes feel the same if I see a Cruise missile flying by...the sheer accuracy...you just gotta admire it. 🙂

Ah well Darcy we would all be speaking Kraut if it hadn't been for the Spitfire and the Hurricane and some brave men killing baddies!!

Deadly, you have no soul. 😉

How about a list of countries with corrupt despotic Governments to nuke.I will start with

Myanmar.

Hmmm...

I'm sort of with DD on this one. I've just seen 4 modern jets roar across London. Not exactly sure why, BoB commemoration or something? Can't see why modern jets are appropriate in that context really.

Spitfires though, I can appreciate as they symbolise the bravery of so many people in repelling the Nazi air attack. I don't get all sentimental very them like some on here do, but I can appreciate the sacrifices made by people so that we can live in a free society now.

Whilst I can appreciate the engineering and technology that goes into military hardware, I don't think glorifying it is particularly healthy. It's a weapon, it's not something nice. It's designed and constructed to kill as efficiently as possible. I'm not going to celebrate that. People get all worked up over Vulcan bombers. Sure, it's a beautiful looking plane, but it was developed to deliver proper nasty super-destructive nuclear weapons. I won't cry if they never flew again.

Interestingly, if someone has a fascination with guns, they're seen as a bit of a nut-job. But the same fascination of military aircraft seems acceptable...

I will follow up myanmar with....

The UK..

it never ceases to amaze me how they have so sneakily managed to convince the moronic populace that they are lving in a fair and just democracy.. when in reality the exact opposite is true..

10 out of 10

I wondered how soon the UK would take to get posted!!

Freedom is relative...

proper nasty super-destructive nuclear weapons

Well there is no point having one that doesn't do it properly!!

Ah well Darcy we would all be speaking Kraut

No we wouldn't...but there wouldn't be such a difference between American and UK English 🙂

Deadly, you have no soul.

I couldn't agree more 😀

[img] [/img]

Kids these days, they'll never know the glory of valiant death, will they?

I know you are just doing your usual thing, DD... but come on.

It's not about them being killing machines, it's about the sacrifice. Not sure if collectively we'd have the spine to stand up and be counted in a similar situation nowadays. Much more likely to whinge about the invading forces on a forum.

Modern military machines just give me the willies and make me despair that little has been learned in the intervening years. Now it's the Jews committing war crimes ffs!

Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori:
mors et fugacem persequitur virum
nec parcit inbellis iuventae
poplitibus timidove tergo.

Not sure if collectively we'd have the spine to stand up and be counted in a similar situation nowadays

I'm not so sure... if the invading horde was massing on the shores of France I think people would leap for their pitchforks/kitchen knives/pickaxe handles.. we've all got loved ones that we would unthinkingly unleash our inner hero to protect..

I think the apathy and cynicism is more to do with faraway battles being fought for spurious reasons at the behest of untrustworthy leaders..

This grooves my truffles more. Imposing indeed - UK nuclear deterrent from 50s- 'til introduction of the Polaris submarines - the Avro Vulcan and its 400 kiloton "bucket of sunshine."

[img] [/img]

Does this 'groove your truffle', derek?

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

'Bucket of Sunshine'. Yeah, I'm sure they call it that in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

(If anyone is offended by these images, then I apologise if the reality of war is abhorrent and upsetting. I feel these images are relevant in the context of this discussion, however)

Elf - that isn't a discussion. It is a comment and observation by yourself. AKA an over reaction to my posting a picture of the bomber that prevented, through its deterrent role, the cold war becoming an extremely hot one.

BTW I am particularly impressed by the fire retardant properties demonstrated by that shirt in the last pic.

noteeth - Member

I know you are just doing your usual thing, DD... but come on.

Eh? My "usual" thing? You must be thinking about someone else fella.

BTW I am particularly impressed by the fire retardant properties demonstrated by that shirt in the last pic.

Oh is that meant to be a [i]joke[/i]? I am sorry, I must lack a sense of humour for not finding the horrific suffering of other funny... 🙄

Haha, this has quite amused me to be honest. It's a mountain bike forum, nothing to get your heckles up about...

It's a mountain bike forum, nothing to get your heckles up about...

awwww... how cute.. you're new here aren't you..?

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Well, reasonably new. I just love the way a post about loving the sight of a Spitfire descends into pictures of people dying due to nuclear attacks. You couldn't make it up. Except someone just did. 😆

I just love the way a post about loving the sight of a Spitfire descends into pictures of people dying due to nuclear attacks.

Attention seekers with nothing better to do usually.

Look - here's one now

|
|
|
\ /
\ /
V

Well, reasonably new. I just love the way a post about loving the sight of a Spitfire descends into pictures of people dying due to nuclear attacks. You couldn't make it up. Except someone just did.

I think the point DD was trying to make originally, was to do with the glorification of weapons of destruction, by people who haven't a clue what war is actually about, and who will chose to ignore the reality whenever it's presented to them. A bit like children playing with guns/toy warplanes.

'Yeah aren't warplanes great?'

[url= http://www.google.co.uk/images?um=1&hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en&biw=877&bih=774&tbs=isch%3A1&sa=1&q=victims+of+atomic+bomb&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= ]They do things like this.[/url] (Warning: Very shocking and disturbing images. Don't click if you don't want to see images of horrific injuries and mutilation)

'Oh no you're so mean don't do that'.

Attention seekers with nothing better to do usually.

Or, people who really don't think the glorification of war is something we should accept so lightly.

Good Lord, some people can't even handle their views being questioned; God knows how they'd handle war. 🙄

Haha, this just gets better. 😆

Are you Chris Morris in disguise?

Oh, and BTW; the pics of victims of atomic bomb strikes were in response to someone getting all doe-eyed over a Vulcan bomber, nowt to do with Spitfires. But hey, feel free to take things completely out of context if you think it helps your argument.

Are you Chris Morris in disguise?

Why, are you Alan Partridge? 😉

Loving the irony of someone using the anonymity of the Tags to accuse me of being a coward, btw... 😆

Fred, you said it best when you said this:

Spitfires though, I can appreciate as they symbolise the bravery of so many people in repelling the Nazi air attack.

I got narked at DD's comment because, as you say, something (designed to kill) can indeed symbolise extraordinary acts of bravery, by a generation who saw more of death than most on this forum will ever know. Many of whom didn't come back.

By virtue of my location, I've had the privilege of helping to look after a fair number of mechanics and factory types who worked on Spitfires (and the rest). And whilst most felt some kind of affection for the machines, I never heard any of them [i]glorify[/i] what it meant to fight the Luftwaffe. Most seemed haunted by the horror of it - ground crew waiting for planes that never returned.

No need to bring cruise missiles into it - although there certainly won't be much left to remember after the apocalypse. 😕

I watched a fantastic programme last night called 'spitfire girls'. They were glamourous women of the 1940's who delivered all sorts of aircraft from old bi-planes to the up to the moment large bombers during the war.

Out of every 10 pilots there was one fatality amongst these air transport auxillary girls.

The bombers do it for me. So slow, must have been sitting ducks.

Regardless of their original purpose it's difficult to deny that they are awesome to see in the flesh so to speak. The Vulcan and Spitfire are iconic images and the noise they create is a thing of wonder. I saw the Tornado at the Southport airshow last year and it was an amazing experience.

Sometimes people think to deeply and jump out of their boxes too quickly. War is a terrible thing, I haven't read anything above that disputes that.

Some folk need to lay off the caffeine.

was to do with the glorification of weapons of destruction, by people who haven't a clue what war is actually about,

IMO it's nothing to do with that.

If you're one of those people that appreciates mechanical objects for what they are, and the certain 'something' (I call it character or soul) that they possess, then a Spitfire is well up there with THE very best vehicles ever construced by mankind. You either understand that or you don't.

My list would be something like

Ducati 916 & Desmosedici RR
E type Jaguar
Concorde
Spitfire
Air cooled VWs
Lamborghini Countach
Alfa Romeo SZ
Lancia Delta Integrale
Aston Martin DB5 (?? the Bond one)
Vincent Black Shadow

And a few others.
Stuff that stops me in my tracks, makes me do a double take or sends a shiver down my spine. And there's very little to beat the lazy burble of a Merlin V12. 😀

It's not an argument Elfin. You my friend are taking things out of context.

Someone puts a picture of an Avro Vulcan up - you put pictures of nuclear bomb victims up. The Vulcan never attacked anyone using nuclear weapons. You are taking things out of context. War is bad, we know this. Why do you need to bring a mountain bike forum down with your higher than mighty opinions?

Someone likes to see a Spitfire fly. That is all.

Amen to that.

If you're one of those people that appreciates mechanical objects for what they are, and the certain 'something' (I call it character or soul) that they possess, then a Spitfire is well up there with THE very best vehicles ever constructed by mankind. You either understand that or you don't.

I am, and I do. I find both the Spitfire and the Vulcan to be wonderful examples of aeronautical engineering and design. But I also see things within the context of their purpose. In the case of the Spitfire, I think it is deservedly a symbol of the struggle and sacrifice made against tyranny and evil. When I see one, I give thought to those who flew in them and other warplanes, who all did their bit to help defend their nation. I have nothing but admiration and utmost respect for those that fought, and helped the war effort in whatever capacity.

With the Vulcan, however, I see it differently; it isn't a symbol of hope and bravery, like the Spitfire. Regardless of it's undoubted pedigree, it is little more than a symbol of Mankind's inability to resolve it's own conflicts. And when someone makes a glib comment like "400 kiloton "bucket of sunshine."", then I find that incredibly insulting and disrespectful to all those who suffer from the ravages of war.

It's a pity Mankind can't focus efforts in more benevolent ways.

With the Vulcan, however, I see it differently; it isn't a symbol of hope and bravery, like the Spitfire. Regardless of it's undoubted pedigree, it is little more than a symbol of Mankind's inability to resolve it's own conflicts. And when someone makes a glib comment like "400 kiloton "bucket of sunshine."", then I find that incredibly insulting and disrespectful to all those who suffer from the ravages of war.

It's a pity Mankind can't focus efforts in more benevolent ways.

You know, I think you might be right. Point well made.

It's not an argument Elfin. You my friend are taking things out of context.

Someone puts a picture of an Avro Vulcan up - you put pictures of nuclear bomb victims up. The Vulcan never attacked anyone using nuclear weapons. You are taking things out of context. War is bad, we know this. Why do you need to bring a mountain bike forum down with your higher than mighty opinions?

Someone likes to see a Spitfire fly. That is all.

I don't think I'm taking things 'out of context' at all. Derek Starship's comments were, in my opinion, insulting and disrespectful to the victims of such 'buckets of sunshine'. I think sentiments like his are sickening, quite frankly. It was he that chose to glorify the Vulcan as a weapon of war, not me. I chose to take a broader view of such things, that's all. Yes, it's an incredible 'plane, but let's not forget it's [i]purpose[/i]. To separate or disassociate the thing from it's purpose is to ignore the reality of Mankind's Inhumanity.

As for the accusation of bringing down a mountain biking forum' with my 'high and mighty opinions'; Am I not entitled to voice my opinions? I've at least attempted to explain them, and stand by them 100%. If this sits uneasy with some, then maybe my point of war being something that should not be glorified has been understood.

Anyway enough already. I'm sure Deadlydarcy will be along presently to explain his own views.

Look, someone said they like seeing a Spitfire when it goes past.

Why does it have to turn into a soapbox of right and wrong? You state the obvious that most of us know. Why not go on a political forum to air your view?

Person likes Spitfire.

Nuclear bombs bad. Nothing to do with person liking seeing a plane fly past.

Anyway enough already. I'm sure Deadlydarcy will be along presently to explain his own views.

Eh? Somebody call?

Now, I love a bit of engineering as much as the next guy. And undoubtedly, a Spitfire's a grand looking thing indeed. However, for me, any machine of war will always be tainted with the purpose for which it was designed. To kill. To maim. To rain destruction on it's victims. If you can ignore this, then fair dues, go ahead and ignore it and glibly comment on how a plane will deliver a 40 kiloton bucket of sunshine on its victims. Don't you think that the bucket of sunshine will be arriving back at your door by return post anyway?

Mankind has designed beautiful machines and engineering. Personally, I prefer it when he designs things to bring people together - to cross borders. To shorten the distance between us. Which is why, for example, (even though I don't treat its passing as some kind of bereavement) I can appreciate Concorde. I'm not going to attribute anything as imaginative as "soul" to some nuts and bolts and moulded aluminium and plastic though. A drawing of a sun coming up over a rickety house on a hill drawn by a three year old's got more soul than a machine.

Man is capable of seemingly impossible achievements when he talks and communicates with his fellow man. But when he stops talking and picks up a gun or a plane or a missile or a tank to do his talking for him, he has failed. No matter how "beautifully" he has done it.

Why not go on a political forum to air your view?

That's the beauty of STW Glitter - you just never know which way the discussion's going to go. And another thing, you get to be controversial every so often. Like, I dunno, you tell me...some people even take the name of a convicted paedophile and complete arsewipe of a human being and turn it the other way round...edgy ****ers that they are. They probably think that's funny. I reckon any day now, someone might just try it.

However, for me, any machine of war will always be tainted with the purpose for which it was designed. To kill. To maim. To rain destruction on it's victims. If you can ignore this, then fair dues

I can. I don't think the Vulcan is all that, either.

Just looks like a flying bit of plywood to me. A Lancaster is far nicer plane to look at, but neither is a patch on a Spit.

But if we're thinking about the war machine angle too, that makes the Spitfire even better, IMO, as per Elfin's comments above.

I sometimes wish someone would nuke this forum and all on it, including myself. The world would be a much better place, no one could argue with that.

Why not go on a political forum to air your view?

Like you say, you've not been here long, have you? 😉

I think DD has summed things up more beautifully than I could have managed.

But let's not forget; the Spitfire was a thing born of War. As is the Vulcan, the AK47, the Atomic Bomb. All fantastic feats of design, engineering and science.

Someone likes to see a Spitfire fly.

I do. Because they serve as a reminder of why we should always fight against that which seeks to destroy us, or take away our liberty.

Have a look at Redthunder's thread. That's not glorification, that's about admiration for The Few.

P.S. That is my birth name.

It’s not the sight. It’s the sound of the Merlin engine, one of the most distinctive and emotive sounds in the world.

but let's not forget it's purpose.

Which was to bomb the basxxrds before they got us what's the problem? or would you rather become crispy duck first?

or would you rather become crispy duck first?

I'd rather nobody had fought about things in the first place.

Spitfire is quite pretty for a prop plane but Concorde makes it and almost everything else look like a crap kids drawing.

<pedant>

the Spitfire was not a thing born of war, it was born of the [i]threat[/i] of impending war. It first flew in 1936, 3 years before Hitler's troops invaded Poland, 2 years before they "annexed" Austria, Czechoslovakia & the Rhineland.

If it had been born out of the actuality of war, it would have probably been 2 years too late to do any good. The Hurricane on its own, while it accounted for the majority of shot-down German aircraft, might not have been enough to prevent the Luftwaffe gaining the air superiority needed for Operation Sealion to go ahead.

</pedant>

Merlin engine + Spitfire = WIN End of thread 😉

Personally, I prefer it when he designs things to bring people together - to cross borders

I can see beauty in most living things...even ton. From the pigeon to the falcon. I can appreciate why beautiful machines stir the soul of some, but machines don't really do it for me. A beautiful bridge gets near sometimes. But machines just don't go deep enough.

even ton

Steady. 😯

No need to go that far...

Flippin' 'eck.

The "bucket of sunshine" quote is from a book I am currently reading. Vulcan 607. What happened in Japan on the 6th and 9th of August 1945 was abhorrent. War IS abhorrent.

But I do believe the Vulcan that Elfinsafety seems to vilify potentially saved him and us from not being here.

The Vulcan - and the rest of the V-Force were amazing feats of aviation engineering and the pilots and supporting crew were amazing people.

C'est tout.

The "bucket of sunshine" quote is from a book I am currently reading.

In which case I partially apologise. But I hope that you can consider my views on this. Your comment did seem quite glib and insensitive. I hope you can appreciate this. And your comment abut the 'fameproof shirt' wasn't appropriate either, imo.

But I do believe the Vulcan that Elfinsafety seems to vilify potentially saved him and us from not being here.

I do hope your going to produce some evidence to support this claim.

😯

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were terrible events, but nowhere near as unpleasant as what the Japanese unleashed on mainland China.

It saved the lives of tens of thousands Allied troops who did not die as a result of having to invade Japan. That makes it worthwhile. It probably also saved 100s of thousands of Japanese lives as well. Unpleasant but true.

[i]I do hope your going to produce some evidence to support this claim.[/i]

we're all still here, aren't we? Would we have been if Britain had not had an independent nuclear deterrent? That's another issue. Part of the "beauty" of the V-bomber force is that simply by being there, there was never any need to use them in anger

The whole theory of Mutually Assured Destruction seems to have worked, so far at least.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were terrible events, but nowhere near as unpleasant as what the Japanese unleashed on mainland China.

They were every bit as 'unpleasant', just on a much smaller scale, ultimately.

It saved the lives of tens of thousands Allied troops who did not die as a result of having to invade Japan. That makes it worthwhile. It probably also saved 100s of thousands of Japanese lives as well. Unpleasant but true.

Popular US propagada designed to make us feel better about the fact that the USA unleashed two nuclear weapons on hundreds of thousands of innocent people. The Japanese weren't far off surrender at that point anyway. Dropping the Bomb was about displaying US military might, and establishing the USA as a global superpower.

As for Vulcan; it was pretty much redundant as soon as it saw service, and ended up in a lesser role. Because ICBMs made it pretty useless really.

Anyways up, I've said me bit, so I'm done.

I've not read all this thread ...... has anyone mentioned the Junkers Stukas ?

I reckon they were well ace, especially with their wailing sirens.

Don't you start Ernie. Try to contribute in a positive, constructive manner. Don't come one here trying to cause fights like you normally do.

The Japanese weren't far off surrender at that point anyway.

The Japanese were nowhere near surrender. Try reading Nemesis by Max Hastings. Although pushed back to the Japanese homeland the Japanese were not seriously considering surrender so an invasion was imminent which, going by the invasion of Okinawa, would have cost more lives than the nuclear strikes. It may not suit your pacifist/anti-American leanings Elfin but history is not on your side on this one.

so an invasion was imminent

In case you haven't noticed, Japan is an island. Which can easily be surrounded. And cut off from any supply lines. Their military force was pretty much spent. Meaning it would've caved in eventually, probably with far less loss of life.

It may not suit your warmongering pro-American leanings, but geography isn't on your side in this one. 😀

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki ]

Among those who opposed the bombings were, among others, also military and political US-leaders like general Dwight Eisenhower, admiral William D. Leahy, (Chief of Staff to Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman), Herbert Hoover (US-president 1929–1933), and general Douglas MacArthur.[112] They argue that it was simply an extension of the already fierce conventional bombing campaign[113] and this together with the sea blockade and the collapse of Germany (with its implications regarding redeployment) would also have led to a Japanese surrender, therefore, the atomic bombings were militarily unnecessary,[12] inherently immoral, an experiment on human beings, a demonstration of power to the rest of the world, especially the Soviet Union, setting a terrible example and harming the reputation of the United States in the rest of the world, describing the outcome of such a bombing would have been sufficient to end the war, it was a war crime, or a form of state terrorism.[114]
J. Samuel Walker, chief historian of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, summarized: "The consensus among scholars is that the bomb was not needed to avoid an invasion of Japan and to end the war within a relatively short time. It is clear that alternatives to the bomb existed and that Truman and his advisers knew it." [115]

Don't come one here trying to cause fights.......

WTF ? 😕

I happen to think that Stukas were well cool......what's wrong with that ? Is it because they were Luftwaffe planes ?

What are you, a racist ?

No you're a racist.

Well obviously you are with your petty "it has to be a British plane" attitude.

You lot must be amazing riders, the fervour and passion you are devoting to this thread is incredible and seeing as its on an mtb forum I am assuming that you do extend these kind of energies to actually riding bikes and not just having ridiculous arguments with people you probably dont even know about events which none of you will ever influence. You do ride bikes don't you?

I love Spitfires they are ace, but only with super tacky high rollers.

Blockade - what, like the one the Germans tried on the British Isles?

Blimey Elfin, where were you when the Allies needed you?

I suppose the thousands of Allied PoWs in Japan would have survived this blockade too?

Bollocks to Japan. I'm happy that several members of my family were able to come back in one piece because the Japanese surrendered when they did.

Sometimes feel the same if I see a Cruise missile flying by...the sheer accuracy...you just gotta admire it.

Actually yes, they're amazing things. Love the engineering in them.

Don't you start Ernie. Try to contribute in a positive, constructive manner. Don't come one here trying to cause fights like you normally do.

Ah, Mr Pot, we've been expecting you, meet Mr Kettle

Marzocchi 888's are nice.

*Better not say I like Bombers......*

War = bad, warplanes = good - simple equations. Vulcans were produced just up the road and I used to love seeing them flying over when I was growing up. I also remember the space shuttle piggybacking on top of a commercial airliner flying over school, anyone remember that? Now that was cool!

Yeah, if you were the type of human whose "soul" is "stirred" by machines, I guess the space shuttle could be considered cool. Your simple equations are bollocks though. How did you derive them?

derived by not over-analyzing like most people on here seem to? War = bad. pretty self explanatory that one. i'm sure most war could've been avoided if people were more tolerant of each other.

Warplanes are just planes = drop the 'war' bit and it's just an amazing feat of engineering. even if war had never existed i'd imagine we'd still have planes like that in some form or another, it's human nature to build things that go like stink (not having missiles attached of course)

my soul does get stirred by machinery, same way i love classic cars, fast cars, motorbikes, megamachines on the discovery channel, tinkering with stuff in the garage to see why it's the way it is....but what do i know, i'm just a simpleton 😉