:rolleyes: You want to pretend political correctness in that era, go ahead. Of course it made it easier. Read Studs Terkel or any number of American author on the how the war in the Pacific (or Vietnam or Korea) had a qualitative difference to those fought against European nations.

It’s not political correctness – it’s called you don’t like being asked to show any facts to back up your charges. Try using factual references to argue the issue at hand – namely America would use atomic weapons more freely against an Asian nation then any others of non-Asian background. You can weasel around the issue and deflect all you want but when you make a wide sweeping racist comment like this – your going to be called on it to defend it intelligently .

I never said that the US had some form of official racial policy like Jim Crow or Apartheid during the Cold War towards China. I said the attitude of 1950s America where Jim Crow was a perfectly legal platform made it an easy to nuke a non-white threat like China.

What does the African American experience have to do with your assertion that the command and control structure of the US Government is racist? You may want to wrap yourself in the flag of past racial horrors as some form of a defence, but the fact remains that you have no evidence to back up your loony assertions of a racial bias when it comes to nuclear war.

The only emotional person here is you.

(Laughing)

You’re the one calling another poster in this forum “racist” just because he pointed out the prevailing attitude of the times.

It appears you don’t get it. We are discussing *your* charge that America could care less about killing millions of people because they are non-white. I asked you to prove this to be true. It appears that you can’t with your comments below.

There isn’t even any way to seriously argue about the attitude then.

Well there you go Sherlock! At what point will you understand that when you make a gross generalisation about an identifiable group without any basis in fact that you have done a disservice to this group?

There were actual laws in the US that declared one race was inferior to the other and needed to be separated.

Why are you dodging the issue? Japan STILL has racial issues on how it deals with people born in Japan who are of non-Japanese background. This is as relevant to the disscussion at hand as Jim Crow is.

So there is no arguement about the racial attitude during that period.

What, because you say so? You can make all the childish assertions all you want – but the fact remains you have a closed mind on this topic – facts or no facts.

You’ve not shown any links, any statements that prove any ill will towards Asians where by it would be, *easier* for the US Governement to use atomic bombs on these peoples.

Your immensely stupid idea that American society might be racist but not its military and political power structure is some politically correct bull manure.

I never asserted that American society was inherently racist – I was paraphrasing you! Keep track of your own arguments will you. (Laughing)
I don’t believe even in the 50’s, (if I follow your twisted logic) that the American public would support wiping out millions of people because of some idea that Asians lives are worth less then others.

The military in the US (as in almost every nation) is generally more conservative than society as a whole.

So if I understand your argument here; your saying that people of a political right wing slant are more disposed to racial bias then center or left wing groups? There you go again with more grossly warped logic.

A harebrained idea in the tactical use of nuclear weapons? Who said anything about “tactical” use of nuclear weapons. You’re trying bs your way through this by making up things I’ve said.

Well what other use is there other then to create genocide?

You’re first instinct is to call someone a racist which the PC way of stopping all discussion.

You made an inherently racist comment that American society in the 50’s would breed military leaders that would nuke Asians “easier” then others. I said prove it. You don’t seem to be able to.

That was exactly my opinion and of many other about the train of thought of men in power back then.

And this “opinion” of yours is unsupported by any facts.

Why the hell do you think there was a need for the civil rights movement in the US?

Should we throw in the civil war, Tiananmen Square, Rwanda, the Great Patriotic war etc. Is there a kitchen sink we can throw in here too?

You’re trying to convince me that the US military was less conservative than American society as a whole?

I’m not trying to convince you of anything – I’m trying to get you to show anyone around here any links to papers, reports, statements, documents and such that support your extremely ill advised statements that the American government would find radiating people of Asian background “easier” then other groups. Go ahead and enlighten us. Please.

As for the type of thinking back then. It was in the same era as the Holocaust.

WHAT??? Ok, explain this statement? J H C!

It absolutely made it easier for China, an abysmally poor nation compared to the US and who didn’t even have nuclear weapons, to be repeatedly threatened with nukes by American leaders.

And I suppose poor old dear China was innocent of any of it’s own bully tactics at the time? You make China seem, well, so Swiss like. LOL!

So yes, I do believe that American leaders find it easier to nuke Chinese than people from Europe.

So based on any evidence to prove your argument to the contrary, one can only come to the conclusion that you have a deep seated bias that cannot be rationally explained.

Never heard of him but from what I’ve seen, there is a group that considers anyone who believes Chinese people are human is a China aopologist.

Boy your on a roll here aren’t you? Going for the Gold Medal in chip on your shoulders I see. (smirk)

The only one who made sweeping generalizations is you.

Pot – meet Kettle.

I said there is no official policy of racial hatred like the Nazi in the US government back in the 1950s.

What? This explanation should be good! So there WAS an *unofficial* nazi like policy? Who was in charge of this?

But I do say that the prevailing attitude of the time was to treat no-whites as something less than human.

And you experienced this personally at the time did you? You do realise that there are many people here from this era that may find your attitude repulsive? Many here are veterans who fought against such ignorance.

Read about the US wars in the Pacific, Korea and SE Asia, kid.

Your arrogance is astounding and your general outlook on life seems to be based on your own personal issues instead of any reality that historians recognise as fact based. Kid??? LOL

In fact, pick up John W. Dower’s War Without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War.

This pathetic and obvious apologia for a Japanese elite that started the war in the first place would of course find great value among people who stereotype that America in general, was a racist society. I suggest you go for balance in your reading and look through Richard Frank’s excellent book – Guadalcanal.

The US had already nuked an Asian nation. Nuking a non-white nation like China (and Russia too since in the 1950s, Americans like Germans considered Russians somewhat Asian and less than full European) was considered pretty acceptable in 1950s America.

Racism is alive and well I see. The fact that an Asian country started the war in the Pacific must be lost on you. The fact that this Asian country in question was working on the *bomb* as a first strike device I guess is a moot point with you? Everyone was working on the bomb during WW2 – the Americans just happened to have the biggest budget and help from several other countries to get there first. For your information, Japan’s leaders at the time believed that races such as whites were mongrels and would have used every means to end the war in their favour – including use of atomic options if available to them.

All wars are fought on the basis of strategic interests if you want a simple non-complex explanation. I always find it interesting that some people bring the issue of race into the discussion of nuclear conflicts without any factual basis to support their hypnosis. Its very easy to sit back and simplify everything down to White versus Asian and then slide out from that slippery slope and state that it was, “considered pretty acceptable in 1950s America.”

It sounds as if this statement is based on YOUR perceptions of America during the 50’s instead of the numerous academic research papers and books written on the subject of the decision to bomb Japan and the post war nuclear cold war period.

You bring race into this argument without any facts. You remind me of people who make hiring judgements based on peoples last names without even meeting them..

So what the hell are Boeing going to do with 2xA340-500, 10xA340-300 and 8xA330-300?

Send them to international lease finance? I’m sure someone will find a use for them. 🙂 The 767’s are being traded for the 787’s and the 777’s in model 8 and 9 form are replacing the A330’s and 340’s.

I think Air Canada just made a deal for regional jets for Jazz as well – EB’s I think – 100 pax size.

I assume that the engine deal is for GE’s – but you never know if they could go Trent 1000 if the price was really right. I haven’t seen any engine deal signed yet. Air Canada does a big business in servicing other airlines maintenance needs both airframe and engines so you would have to figure that if they have gone Boeing this time, that they have done a deal on parts and service work in the contract.

I thought the Pilots had rejected all that and so no new Boeing aircraft for the meantime – the fleet will remain as it is. See Boeing press release:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/news/ews/2005/050618g.html

June 8, 2004???!!!

Old news! As everyone expected – the deal with Boeing was always still on. The federal labour arbitrator made his ruling and it was binding on Air Canada and the union. As soon as that ruling took place – the talks with Boeing went ahead as if they never left off. From what was last reported, Boeing have allowed them to mix and match their fleet needs by dumping the 737 next gen and adding more 787’s. In fact if Air Canada takes up all it’s options they will be buying 60 787’s! The 2 777F’s in addtion to the other 777 orders were also a surprise as well – as before the labour issues, the freighters were not even mentioned in the first round of talks.

April 2005
http://www.airfax.com/airfax/releases/showrelease.asp?id=1362

Nov 2005
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/news/2005/q4/nr_051109g.html

Now… (With more upgrades to the aircraft)
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060208/sfw088.html?.v=45

Many people say good old Robert really used the union to drive an even better deal from Boeing then he had before. It was always interesting to see that the contract with Boeing was on condition that the union agree to lower wages or working condition changes. One could say he played each other off against each other and Airbus against Boeing. With this 6 Billion+ order, Air Canada has certainly been able to use volume discounts to drive a lower unit price. It now appears that they may keep the mid range Airbus aircraft for domestic routes instead of trading them in as per the earlier deal.

the photos in this thread are a testament to a/c’s durabiltity and strength in a crisis. so although in this picture it didn’t ‘fly him home’ after hitting a pylon (?) this pilot walked away with his life!!!! 😮

Does anyone know where this photo was taken? It looks like it was at a car racing track – you can see the triple armco he just hit and the edge of the track in the lower frame. It also has Musco lighting towers which suggests an oval track in the US?? Anyone?

Okay, I’ve looked at this thread five times. Where were you ? Ace aeroplanes by the way.

blue “ficko” robin.

This is where he was. http://www.nasm.si.edu/

To be more precise: http://www.nasm.si.edu/museum/udvarhazy/

You have camera movement which is different then slow shutter speed – but can be a result of slow shutter speed. You get the same effect if you use digital or film camera. Your (the camera) moving faster then your subject matter is moving.

With the crash of AF358 here in Toronto, I’ve been amazed to see how many people are from the area. It would be good to be in touch perhaps???

Personally, I live right in Toronto.

407/401 area here