[HN Gopher] An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down mee...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years
       later  (2013)
        
       Author : yutyut
       Score  : 157 points
       Date   : 2021-02-07 18:56 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.rd.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.rd.com)
        
       | MarkusWandel wrote:
       | Worldwide, the sort of divisions where one's own side is all good
       | and the other side is unspeakably evil, are on the upswing again.
       | Having lived through a full cycle of this (old style cold
       | war/thaw/current situation) I try to remind people that we're all
       | humans, and about 99% everywhere have the same instincts to
       | survive and get along. Not everyone listens.
        
         | GiorgioG wrote:
         | > about 99% everywhere have the same instincts to survive and
         | get along
         | 
         | I just finished listening to The Doomsday Machine audiobook
         | (https://www.amazon.com/The-Doomsday-Machine-
         | audiobook/dp/B07...) and it's had a profound effect on how I
         | see our military leadership's nuclear strategy. While the book
         | delves primarily into the 1950s-80s, as far as the author is
         | concerned (he worked as a consultant on nuclear strategy,) the
         | policies have not materially changed since then. Some examples
         | of some things that were eye-opening to me:
         | 
         | - The military deliberately hid their nuclear war strategy from
         | the secretary of defense (and thus the president, etc.) for
         | years.
         | 
         | - US Presidents often invoke the threat of nuclear attack to
         | force nations to bend to its will - to this day, democrats and
         | republicans alike.
         | 
         | - The gov't has done a good job of selling that only the
         | president can order a nuclear strike, but in practice there's a
         | lot more people involved that can launch a nuclear attack
         | without requiring clearance (in years past, this was due to
         | potential communication issues, but even to this day these
         | remain in order to counter potential 'decapitation' attacks.
         | This delegation system means we're one person's mistake (or
         | mental illness) from starting a world-ending cascade of nuclear
         | strikes as other nations respond in kind.
         | 
         | I'm under no delusion that the world can do away with nuclear
         | weapons, but maybe we should stop threatening to use it first
         | like it's no big deal. It seems that our military leadership
         | historically isn't exactly in that 99% group of folks who want
         | to live and get along.
        
           | tharkun__ wrote:
           | We've been very very close (probably more than once).
           | 
           | https://www.vox.com/2018/9/26/17905796/nuclear-
           | war-1983-stan...
           | 
           | In short: Russian early warning system operator sees 5
           | minuteman ICBMs coming towards them. He does not have time to
           | go check with someone. If they are to retaliate, he has to
           | just launch now. No such thing as "waiting for the president
           | to decide to launch". He didn't. Turned out reflections of
           | the sunlight off clouds set off their sensors.
        
       | iaw wrote:
       | This reminds me of the Soviet blockade of West Berlin. Virtually
       | overnight two sides that had been trying to kill each other were
       | working hand in hand to save the Germans living in Berlin.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | hollerith wrote:
         | >Virtually overnight
         | 
         | Except that the blockade began 3 years after hostilities
         | between the US and Germany ended.
        
           | lb1lf wrote:
           | -Considering the scale of the hostilities, I don't think it
           | is much hyperbole to suggest the turn in attitude happened
           | virtually overnight.
           | 
           | I do seem to recall that the Berlin airlift more than any
           | other event was what turned the inhabitants of the western
           | zones around from seeing the Allies as occupants to, well,
           | allies.
        
       | ggerules wrote:
       | Thank you for sharing this amazing story. Now I need to go find
       | this documentary.
        
       | marcodiego wrote:
       | Air forces of the world seem to have their own more strict code
       | of honor, moral or mutual respect. Hermann Goering is known to
       | have enjoyed some hospitality after surrendering[1]. Also Franz
       | Stigler escorted a badly damaged US bomber to safety[2].
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnX5HXbRbcA
       | 
       | [2]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Brown_and_Franz_Stigle...
        
       | effie wrote:
       | It is so weird that men in army are willing to go and kill each
       | other and later behave as friends "because they have a shared
       | experience". Is it a coping mechanism to help oneself'
       | conscience? Or maybe just an example that we really are just
       | machines following the program of the day?
        
         | pluto9 wrote:
         | It's not weird at all. Soldiers on opposite sides have a lot in
         | common, just as you might have a lot in common with someone of
         | your profession from a different country. Their conflict is
         | that of their respective countries, or they may think they're
         | serving a good cause. But in either case, it's not personal.
         | 
         | It's also a mistake to think that every time a soldier shows an
         | ounce of humanity, they're only doing it to "help their
         | conscience". Soldiers are usually not the tortured individuals
         | Hollywood portrays them to be. Why should these two men's
         | consciences bother them? NATO troops thought they were
         | defending the oppressed, and Serbian troops thought they were
         | defending their sovereignty.
        
           | lostlogin wrote:
           | I think you are attributing a lot of what goes on to choice -
           | war has a poor track record in this regard and soldiers are
           | often recruited very young and/or conscripted. Even the US
           | recruits soldiers defined by the Convention on the protection
           | of children (below 18). Schools are used for recruiting in
           | many places.
           | 
           | This aspect of war is really sad - giving kids and young
           | adults guns and sending them off to shoot people is widely
           | glorified. It is estimated that 70% of conflicts involve
           | child soldiers, though any measurement is hard due variable
           | definitions and the difficulty in measuring.
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Rights_of_.
           | ..
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_in_the_military
           | 
           | https://www.savethechildren.org/us/charity-stories/child-
           | sol...
        
             | pluto9 wrote:
             | I'm talking about the men in this article. Both of them
             | were career military officers. It's fair to say that that
             | was their choice.
             | 
             | Certainly there's propaganda that goes into recruiting
             | naive young people in the US, but it's quite a stretch to
             | equate that with child soldiers. I chose to enlist and so
             | did everyone I served with. The vast majority of us do not
             | regret it or feel that we were conned.
        
               | effie wrote:
               | Why did you enlist, at what age? In retrospective, do you
               | think it made you stronger/more mature? Or was it a money
               | thing?
        
             | jki275 wrote:
             | Oh stop the hand wringing.
             | 
             | The US doesn't recruit child soldiers.
             | 
             | The very few who actually sign up when they are 17 are
             | almost all 18 before they go to bootcamp, and of the
             | extremely rare ones who aren't they are 18 before they go
             | to their first command or do anything at all. They are not
             | allowed to deploy outside the US or participate in any
             | hostilities until they are 18.
        
               | effie wrote:
               | 18 year olds men are mentally immature. Not children, but
               | for sure they are teenagers.
        
           | effie wrote:
           | > Why should these two men's consciences bother them?
           | 
           | It would bother me, so I'm projecting.
           | 
           | But good points. I am also more inclined to understand this
           | as a case of people "just working here". Like Germans were.
        
             | pluto9 wrote:
             | There's an element of the "just working here" mentality,
             | but it's more than that. I was in Afghanistan more than a
             | decade ago, and in my mind, we were fighting against the
             | abuses and brutality of the Taliban. The guy shooting at me
             | from a mountainside with a PKM was "one of them", a
             | legitimate bad guy.
             | 
             | In retrospect, I realize that guy was probably much like
             | me. A young guy, full of testosterone and looking for
             | adventure, with notions of being part of something grand
             | and heroic (repelling an invader) and a certain naivete
             | about the larger forces and agendas that were using him.
             | We'd probably get along if we met now.
             | 
             | Awhile back I saw a conversation on Reddit between an
             | American soldier who fought in Ramadi (or maybe Fallujah, I
             | can't remember) and an Iraqi soldier who was there at the
             | same time fighting against the Americans. There was no ill
             | will at all, just storytelling and reminiscing, and talking
             | about the courses of their lives, families, and careers
             | since then. The fact was that these guys had almost
             | everything in common about that time in their lives, and
             | had similar motivations for taking part in it. The only
             | difference was that they happened to be on opposite sides.
        
               | rascul wrote:
               | > Awhile back I saw a conversation on Reddit between an
               | American soldier who fought in Ramadi (or maybe Fallujah,
               | I can't remember) and an Iraqi soldier who was there at
               | the same time fighting against the Americans.
               | 
               | Any chance you might be able to dig up that link? I think
               | it might be interesting to read it.
        
               | pluto9 wrote:
               | Unfortunately I can't find it now. I was looking for it
               | earlier because I wanted to reread it myself. Wish I'd
               | bookmarked it at the time. Sorry about that.
        
           | s5300 wrote:
           | >>Soldiers are usually not the tortured individuals Hollywood
           | portrays them to be.
           | 
           | I don't know nor care of Hollywood portrayals, but you should
           | consider looking at some suicide statistics and then
           | apologizing.
        
             | pluto9 wrote:
             | Sure, let me just call up all my buddies from my old
             | platoon and apologize to them because some internet know-
             | it-all said I should feel sorry for them. They're all doing
             | great, so they'll laugh at me, but that's probably just an
             | act. Thanks for enlightening me to their true plight.
             | 
             | Have you looked at the actual numbers? I said _usually_.
             | The veteran suicide rate is roughly double that of
             | civilians [1]. Obviously that 's a problem, but it's still
             | a very small minority. Veterans are not dropping like
             | flies.
             | 
             | [1] https://backhome.news21.com/article/suicide/
        
         | mhh__ wrote:
         | Modern warfare is increasingly buttons rather than bullets, so
         | the psychology is different to (say) meeting the man who
         | bayonetted you after the end of the great war.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | creato wrote:
           | There are similar and even more extreme examples from when
           | war was definitely not "buttons":
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_truce
           | 
           | I think the sibling comment to yours is a better explanation.
        
         | hellotomyrars wrote:
         | They had the same experience. They didn't choose to fight each
         | other as a matter of specificity, they chose to serve their
         | country.
         | 
         | Soldiers are effectively tools of a nation and most of them
         | understand that. They were both doing their jobs and why should
         | they take it personally? They both came out the other side and
         | if their roles had been reversed they would have done the same
         | thing.
        
           | effie wrote:
           | Yeah I get that point of view, "I'm here just following
           | orders, no hard feelings". And that is part of what is weird
           | to me in these stories from wars, that people are so
           | malleable and empty and later talk big about respecting the
           | other side. Well respect them and don't bomb/shoot missiles
           | at them then. Also, the article sounds very artistic and
           | fake, I'm not totally buying it.
        
             | kipchak wrote:
             | Without getting into the politics of it, the purpose of the
             | air strikes according to NATO to "to halt and reverse the
             | humanitarian catastrophe that was then unfolding."[1] -
             | specifically a "ethnic cleansing campaign"[2]. I think it's
             | possible the pilot or others to feel they're there for
             | reasonable reasons, even if they don't hold any particular
             | ill will towards the guy on the other side.
             | 
             | [1]https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_48818.htm
             | 
             | [2]https://www.nato.int/kosovo/history.htm
        
               | effie wrote:
               | > I think it's possible the pilot or others to feel
               | they're there for reasonable reasons, even if they don't
               | hold any particular ill will towards the guy on the other
               | side.
               | 
               | I agree, it is possible that the man in the article
               | thought that. But I think it more probable that once you
               | choose to work for military as a profession, you are
               | either very misinformed or do not really care about the
               | actual purpose of the bombing.
        
             | cassepipe wrote:
             | Can't agree more. "Just doing my job" is a pretty shallow
             | justification for killing another person on vague grounds
             | of "defend my country". Even more so when flying an
             | airplane and just dropping bombs all over the fucking
             | place.
        
               | effie wrote:
               | Glad I'm not alone here. I can respect people in 2nd WW
               | thinking "I believe they are evil and must be stopped and
               | I will do anything to help that goal". I can't respect
               | "I'm just working here".
        
         | arminiusreturns wrote:
         | Anecdotal, but I've witnessed this effect in more than just
         | military men, but rather in males in general. I know lots of
         | guys who tell a story that contains something like; "we got
         | into a fight, but later we became friends"... I'm both, and
         | have done the same. Perhaps there is some more fundamental male
         | psychology at play here?
        
       | shoo wrote:
       | Interesting to rewind to before the engagement & think about the
       | odds of them both ending up alive years later: there was a chance
       | that Zoltan would be killed by taking a risky third look with the
       | radar from a fixed position. There was a fair chance that both
       | missiles hit Zelko's plane, a chance that any single missile hit
       | would be enough to kill him or render him unable to eject, and a
       | fair chance of him dying anyway even if he did manage to eject.
       | Also a chance that both missiles missed and there would be
       | nothing to write about.
        
       | pastrami_panda wrote:
       | For those curious (the article doesn't address it) it was the
       | bomb hatch that momentarily gave away the planes position.
       | 
       | I'm curious as to how such a huge oversight in the design of the
       | craft made it to production, since it's widely known that 90
       | degree angles is a surefire way to get instantly detected on
       | radar.
        
         | toephu2 wrote:
         | > I'm curious as to how such a huge oversight in the design of
         | the craft made it to production
         | 
         | Do you work in military aircraft production? (just curious of
         | your background)
        
           | pastrami_panda wrote:
           | Sorry I realize I came off very rude, it was not my
           | intention. When I learned about this hatch and saw the
           | pictures I was just so surprised since it _seems_ the design
           | could be improved to reduce the radar signature significantly
           | by using the standard practices they use for the rest of the
           | craft. Just curious if this was an oversight or what the
           | motivations behind the design were.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | How else do you release bombs? I believe that even modern
         | stealth aircraft are more vulnerable when releasing missiles or
         | bombs.
         | 
         | The thing is if the aircraft gets to the point of releasing
         | bombs or missiles it has pretty much done its job. You won't
         | get that far without being stealthy.
        
           | KMag wrote:
           | The GP is suggesting the doors should have had zig-zag edges.
           | 
           | However, from what I've read, it sounds like radar reflectons
           | from the doors themselves are dwarfed by radar signals
           | bouncing off the upper bulkhead of the bomb bay. If they made
           | the side bulkheads of the bomb bay at 90 degrees to the upper
           | bulkhead, then an incoming radio wave bouncing off both the
           | upper and side bulkheads will leave anti-parallel to its
           | incoming direction... right back at the sending radar. (This
           | geometric identity is used on the laser reflectors left on
           | the moon. They send the laser right back at the sender
           | without having to track the Earth.)
           | 
           | Though, maybe the reporting I've read is just imprecise, and
           | maybe the doors do have a larger radar cross-section than the
           | bomb bays themselves.
        
             | jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
             | The GP is asserting, without any evidence at all, that the
             | designers simply did not think about the radar return from
             | the bomb bay opening. That's a rather absurd position to
             | take, vs the more banal explanation that engineering always
             | involves tradeoffs.
        
           | pastrami_panda wrote:
           | From the top of my head using a hatch that folds up into an
           | empty space _seems_ like could reduce the radar signature
           | significantly. I guess better yet a sliding door if avoiding
           | empty space is paramount. I 'm no expert but it just seems
           | odd to expose several right angles when it seems it could be
           | easily avoided?
        
           | spockz wrote:
           | The doors could recess and roll away? I'm not an aeronautical
           | engineer so no idea what that would do with the radar profile
           | nor the flight characteristics of the plane.
        
           | lostdog wrote:
           | The bombs could be ejected at high speed along with the outer
           | hatch door, kind of like a magazine, and then a secondary
           | inner hatch closes to cover the hole.
           | 
           | ...but I'm also not an aircraft designer.
        
           | zerkten wrote:
           | You can only reduce the window that the aircraft is
           | vulnerable, or deploy some kind of countermeasure to provide
           | additional cover.
           | 
           | Only in the worst kind of situation is it acceptable to lose
           | an aircraft like this, especially when you have control of
           | the airspace. In most cases, stealth aircraft should be
           | detected so late that you can't mount an initial defense, or
           | an effective counter attack while the aircraft is returning
           | to base.
        
         | jki275 wrote:
         | That's not an oversight. Stealth is a continuum, not a binary
         | thing.
        
         | redis_mlc wrote:
         | From what I've read, the US got complacent and flew the same
         | air routes at the same time daily, and in this case the pilot
         | did a climb. The Serb battery commander studied the above and
         | just waited until the right moment.
        
         | pdoege wrote:
         | It was less about technical factors relating to stealth than
         | human factors.
         | 
         | The USAF reused the route packages and the shooters knew the
         | approximate location and timing of the flight. A Serbian asset
         | tipped off the shooters that the normal SEAD assets would not
         | be present. Without SEAD the shooters were able to keep
         | transmitting long enough to see the plane. There were 3 F-117
         | in the flight, only one had its doors open long enough for the
         | shooters to acquire.
         | 
         | Different routes, randomized timing, SEAD presence, better
         | stealth hygiene and it would have been just another night.
         | 
         | The Serbian commander comes across as skilled, creative, and
         | diligent. The USAF comes across as lazy and sloppy that night.
        
       | codeproject wrote:
       | A wonderful story indeed, heart warming with a sense of humor.
       | War is really stupid. But there is still an unsolved mystery
       | here, How did the radar pick up the signals? Didn't the pilot
       | turn off all the radios?
        
         | girvo wrote:
         | I believe the bomb door gave him away
         | 
         | https://theaviationgeekclub.com/an-in-depth-analysis-of-how-...
        
       | DoctorNick wrote:
       | "lmao you got wrekt, nerd"
        
       | nimbius wrote:
       | This wasnt very surprising when it happened as historically The
       | united states is its own worst enemy when it comes to military
       | counterintelligence assessments. Id surmise no general wants to
       | openly admit to the enemies asymmetric advantage.
       | 
       | Francis Gary Powers was no doubt stunned to find his U2 spyplane
       | tumbling from the skies in 1960 thanks to what I can only imagine
       | is inherent bias in the war room against the enemy. Its also
       | worth noting the Tupolev TU95 bear left Washington scratching its
       | heads for nearly a decade, furiously revising the numbers for
       | speed and range.
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20081211055010/http://www.aviati...
       | 
       | in 2006 china managed to tail a US aircraft carrier and emerge in
       | torpedo range with a Song 039 type submarine, a generation behind
       | the US, which was previously thought incapable of such an
       | operation. https://thediplomat.com/2015/11/closest-encounter-
       | since-2006...
       | 
       | Those unfamiliar with history text might also recall the day when
       | Iran not only detected but casually landed a sophisticated US
       | military drone at one of its airbases.
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incid...
        
         | rjsw wrote:
         | > in 2006 china managed to tail a US aircraft carrier and
         | emerge in torpedo range with a Song 039 type submarine, a
         | generation behind the US, which was previously thought
         | incapable of such an operation.
         | 
         | The alternative version of that story is that the Carrier Group
         | commander was quietly commended for not giving away how far out
         | they detected the submarine.
        
         | jariel wrote:
         | "stunned to find his U2 spyplane tumbling from the skies in
         | 1960 thanks to what I can only imagine is inherent bias in the
         | war room against the enemy"
         | 
         | The U2 has been flying for literally decades, even to this day,
         | relatively unencumbered. The performance ratio is way in the
         | favour of 'confident war room'.
         | 
         | Also - it's hard to say anything about submarines, they're so
         | clouded in secrecy, I think the truth tends not to come out
         | until a couple of decades after the fact.
        
           | jki275 wrote:
           | It certainly hasn't been flying over the Soviet Union.
           | 
           | It became obsolete in 1960. That doesn't mean it was no
           | longer useful anywhere.
        
         | JoeyBananas wrote:
         | What exactly does this incident have to do with
         | counterintelligence? I think you are using that word
         | incorrectly. I also don't understand what those linked
         | incidents have in common. Sure, the US military isn't
         | invulnerable and there is always risk associated with combat.
        
           | ip26 wrote:
           | I think they are saying the US systematically underestimates
           | the enemy's capability so it probably wasn't actually that
           | surprising an F117 was downed.
        
             | tharkun__ wrote:
             | If the US military and government are anything like
             | American companies, then they're good at marketing. Wait, I
             | think with the military it's called propaganda.
             | 
             | I also grew up thinking a Stealth Fighter could never be
             | shot down. It's invisible. No way.
        
       | x32n23nr wrote:
       | Another famous example of how in the darkest hours there's
       | longing for peace and friendship is the Christmas Truce during
       | the first world war [1].
       | 
       | British soldiers heard German troops in the trenches singing
       | carols and patriotic songs. They started shouting messages to
       | each other. The next day, soldiers from both sides met, exchanged
       | gifts, took photographs and played football.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_truce
        
         | oconnor663 wrote:
         | The article also reminded me of a story from the aftermath of
         | the My Lai massacre:
         | 
         | > In 1998, Thompson and Colburn returned to the village of Son
         | My, where they met some of the people they saved during the
         | killings, including Thi Nhung and Pham Thi Nhanh, two women who
         | had been part of the group about to be killed by Brooks's 2nd
         | Platoon. Thompson said to the survivors, "I just wish our crew
         | that day could have helped more people than we did." He
         | reported that one of the women they had helped out came up to
         | him and asked, "Why didn't the people who committed these acts
         | come back with you?" He said that he was "just devastated" but
         | that she finished her sentence: "So we could forgive them."
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Thompson_Jr.
        
         | u678u wrote:
         | And the next day started shooting at each other again. Humans
         | are truly weird.
        
           | 7952 wrote:
           | Unofficial live and let live systems carried on...
           | 
           | https://www.ias.edu/ideas/2014/chiu-war
           | 
           | Unwillingness to die is _really_ common in war
        
       | neogodless wrote:
       | I didn't see it covered in this article and the documentary is
       | unavailable through normal streaming at this time. (Anyone in the
       | U.S. find otherwise?)
       | 
       | But what I was hoping to find out was _how_ the identifies of
       | each party was discovered, presumably by the documentary maker?
        
       | welder wrote:
       | > one woman said to me, "When you were shot down, I celebrated. I
       | cheered with my friends. But we were upset that you were not
       | killed. We thought you deserved to die." You can imagine the hush
       | in the audience. And then she said, "But now that we have gotten
       | to know you, I'm so glad that you are here." I was weeping.
       | 
       | > There's so much misunderstanding in the world resulting in
       | unnecessary sorrow. Having the Danis--a positive, joyful family--
       | in my life has altered my perspective. It may sound trite, but if
       | only there were a way for all the religious, cultural, and ethnic
       | groups of the world to meet and get to know one another in a
       | meaningful way--the way Zoltan and I have--how could we ever go
       | to war again?
        
       | nexthash wrote:
       | Here's the documentary film that was created about this
       | encounter:
       | 
       | https://optimisticfilm.com/videos/docs/the-second-meeting/
        
       | shimonabi wrote:
       | The joke at that time was Serbs saying: "Sorry, we didn't know it
       | was invisible."
        
       | aerosmile wrote:
       | There is so much gold in here. The human race would do well to
       | explore how it's possible to turn hatred into love. It clearly
       | happened here, and I've witnessed it on a smaller scale as a 16
       | year old in Vienna. As an immigrant, it was easy to find yourself
       | in the wrong place at a wrong time. That finally happened one
       | night, and the only thing that saved me was seeing a sign on one
       | of the guys' jackets that belonged to a soccer club where I
       | played in a young division (these guys were lifelong supporters,
       | so my small achievement was enough to view me in a completely
       | different light).
       | 
       | Deeply embedded in our evolutionary story is the urge to protect
       | people you have something in common with (and I suppose this
       | works the other way around as well). How easy would it be to hack
       | this trait and increase the chances of world peace by consciously
       | exploiting it on a global scale? Think of it as next-gen UN, but
       | instead of focusing on top-down conflict resolution, we would
       | work from the bottom up and search for things we're passionate
       | about and can connect with people from across the world to
       | collaborate on. Rule #1: teams should not be divided on a country
       | by country basis.
        
         | cheschire wrote:
         | I don't believe war requires hatred, no more than sport. Some
         | people wind up in war through machinations that have nothing to
         | do with even the acknowledgment of the enemy's existence.
         | 
         | Go here, wait there, if your life is in danger, return the
         | danger back at them.
        
           | aerosmile wrote:
           | As someone who witnessed war preparations in two very
           | different countries and with more than a decade in between, I
           | can tell you what they had in common: people at the top had
           | to convince the majority of the population that the war was
           | necessary. In each case, the arguments were sloppy and could
           | have been pushed back on. I would argue that giving people
           | more data points would increase the decisioning threshold for
           | such actions.
        
             | 7952 wrote:
             | A few lies and myths can snowball into a narrative that
             | makes war logical and even noble. Conspiracy theories turn
             | every data point into something that confirms the myth.
             | People really believe that they are in the right. And the
             | most appalling acts can seem logically consistent.
        
             | lostlogin wrote:
             | Having ones fighting forces being primarily composed of
             | young people is helpful in this regard. Not only are they
             | usually physically fit, they haven't had a ton of life
             | experience and are more likely to do what they are told
             | without question. The point isn't for them to think, they
             | don't need more data, they need to do what they are told.
        
             | frereubu wrote:
             | Stefan Zweig's book The World of Yesterday is very good on
             | this as regards WWI from the point of view of Austria-
             | Hungary.
             | 
             | Your comment also reminds me of a phrase from one of the
             | last surviving British soliders from WWI, Harry Patch: "If
             | two Governments can't agree give them a rifle each and let
             | them fight it out. Don't lose 20,000 men. It isn't worth
             | it."
        
           | sneak wrote:
           | I think the world would be better off if people simply
           | refused the initial "Go here" order from someone who cares
           | nothing for their own life, or the lives of those "there".
           | 
           | War cannot be waged without soldiers, and no one is born a
           | soldier.
           | 
           | This requires the cultural de-glorification of soldering-as-
           | profession. Millions of tax dollars are spent on advertising
           | to ensuring it remains, and many companies are complicit in
           | furthering it (priority boarding, discounts, et c). I shop
           | elsewhere whenever possible.
        
             | AnimalMuppet wrote:
             | First, good commanding officers _do_ care for the lives of
             | their soldiers.
             | 
             | Second, those who don't have soldiers can still die by
             | someone else's soldiers.
        
         | acct776 wrote:
         | > how it's possible to turn hatred into love.
         | 
         | Remove yourself from the influence of the military-industrial-
         | Congressional complex.
        
         | jki275 wrote:
         | War is almost never about hate or love.
         | 
         | War is a tool of diplomacy.
         | 
         | Both of these men were simply professionals doing their jobs.
         | The one attacking, the one defending. It's unlikely they ever
         | hated each other or even really thought a great deal beyond how
         | to accomplish their respective missions at the time.
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | > War is a tool of diplomacy.
           | 
           | More often than not war is a means of pursuing business
           | interests.
        
             | jki275 wrote:
             | Certainly not in this case.
        
         | tobmlt wrote:
         | I think we'd have this already/automatically as our
         | interconnectivity has grown.
         | 
         | It's media and government propaganda stoking fear of the other
         | for their gain which actively thwarts it. -- up to the point
         | which it can live organically once again in the greater
         | populace.
         | 
         | But that's just like, my opinion, man.
        
         | TimTheTinker wrote:
         | > Rule #1: teams should not be divided on a country by country
         | basis.
         | 
         | I don't think I agree. It's great for individuals and countries
         | to be friendly, but I see two problems with a one-world-
         | government system:
         | 
         | 1. It concentrates an extreme quantity of power in the hands of
         | a few people. Power has a potential of corrupting those who
         | hold it, and I believe that potential increases on an
         | exponential (or at least an algebraic) scale, not a linear
         | scale.
         | 
         | 2. If an evil personage gains power (think 20th century
         | dictators), a single world country would suffer significantly.
         | But having countries separated provides a limit and a check on
         | the potential fallout of that dictator's actions.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | jacquesm wrote:
       | You'll never hear a story like this about a drone pilot.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-02-07 23:00 UTC)