[002]
Deepbluediver
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
People tend to frown on that whole \
to:
People tend to frown on that whole \\\"human test subject\\\" thing.
There was another comment about Independence day a few spaces down, to which I already replied. Basically, that movie belongs in this group because there probably wasn\\\'t any good reason to use fighter-jets at all, except that it\\\'s cinematic and the director wanted to make \\\"Top Gun with Aliens\\\". Or that the military was thinking \\\"we\\\'ll counter their flying forces with OUR flying forces\\\", which even if it was the best conclusion (it\\\'s not) would be poor justification.
Most importantly, why do they need to test the capabilities of a city-sized ship with figher-planes at all? If you want to attack a city, do you send in the fighters? Or the BOMBERS? Or why do you even need to us planes? Even if the military did not have the un-manned drone capabilities it does today, there are plenty of OTHER medium or long-range options they could have picked: surface-to-air missiles, naval artillery barage, nuclear missiles fired from a silo, etc.
ANY of which might have been more effective/less costly than, or should have been employed in conjunction with, fighter jets.
There was another comment about Independence day a few spaces down, to which I already replied. Basically, that movie belongs in this group because there probably wasn\\\'t any good reason to use fighter-jets at all, except that it\\\'s cinematic and the director wanted to make \\\"Top Gun with Aliens\\\". Or that the military was thinking \\\"we\\\'ll counter their flying forces with OUR flying forces\\\", which even if it was the best conclusion (it\\\'s not) would be poor justification.
Most importantly, why do they need to test the capabilities of a city-sized ship with figher-planes at all? If you want to attack a city, do you send in the fighters? Or the BOMBERS? Or why do you even need to us planes? Even if the military did not have the un-manned drone capabilities it does today, there are plenty of OTHER medium or long-range options they could have picked: surface-to-air missiles, naval artillery barage, nuclear missiles fired from a silo, etc.
ANY of which might have been more effective/less costly than, or should have been employed in conjunction with, fighter jets.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"It is shown in multiple countries across the world, most prominently in the US.\\\"
I\\\'m not even sure how someone would go about measuring which country a multinational show is \\\"most prominent\\\" in, but the first series of \\\'\\\'The Voice UK\\\'\\\', for example, had an average viewership 8.9 mil, which is 36.3% of the audience share. That\\\'s about on a par with \\\'\\\'EastEnders\\\'\\\', so I\\\'m guessing it\\\'s pretty good. (TheBBC website calls it the \\\"[[http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2012/voice-success.html most successful new entertainment series launch on BBC One in over a decade]]\\\".)
I\\\'m not even sure how someone would go about measuring which country a multinational show is \\\"most prominent\\\" in, but the first series of \\\'\\\'The Voice UK\\\'\\\', for example, had an average viewership 8.9 mil, which is 36.3% of the audience share. That\\\'s about on a par with \\\'\\\'EastEnders\\\'\\\', so I\\\'m guessing it\\\'s pretty good. (TheBBC website calls it the \\\"[[http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2012/voice-success.html most successful new entertainment series launch on BBC One in over a decade]]\\\".)
