US Air Force removes lessons on black WWII pilots from training

[Darat]

If Harris had won would the movies have been taken down in the first place?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Despite being generally aghast at Trump's flurry of wrecking and petty revenge EO's, I have to admit this particular case smells like malicious compliance to me.

 

[Vixen]

Really? How can you not like a Pastrami Sandwich at Katz's Deli? NY delicatessen food is maybe what I miss most about living in NY.

Oh don't...! Reminds me of when I worked in the City of London; there was a Salt-Beef Sandwich Bar with long queues at lunchtime. Pret à Manger decided to copy it and brought out their own pastrami club with the most delicious mustard-mayo sauce. Mmmm. mmmm.

 

[Ziggurat]

If Harris had won would the movies have been taken down in the first place?

According to the Air Force, they were never actually taken down at all.

 

[Vixen]

Arsonist's accomplist put out fire he helped start.

I like it!

 

[Vixen]

According to the Air Force, they were never actually taken down at all.

I don't think that is true. Why else was there a delay of three hours for the next set of new recruits on Monday, unless it was to put the videos and training stuff about Tuskegee and WASP back, as ordered on Sunday?

 

[Donal]

Do you think that changes anything? No, it doesn't.

Not to an ideologue. You wouldn't let facts and other people's lived experience change your opinion.

More factors being involved doesn't weaken my argument, it weakens the case for DEI, because DEI doesn't consider all those other factors.

Only if you constantly downgrade the role racism and sexism play. Classism is big as well, but that doesn't mean racism and sexism don't play massive roles.

They may play a small role. They don't play a large role. Not today, not in the US.

Yes, they do. Guess what its called when you can off handedly dismiss the role of racism and sexism because it has never affected you.

How do you know? You haven't presented a single study. But if you present a bad study (of which there are many), then yeah, I'll dismiss it.

"bad study" being anything that proves you wrong.

What, "racial discrimination is bad and we shouldn't do it" isn't enough of an objection?

Because you don't do much to support that. I know that conservatism is performative, but you aren't even performing.

No, it wouldn't. Because again, Nigerian Americans.

Yes, you found your model minority. How many Nigerian immigrants are there compared to American born black people? How do those Nigerian immigrants compared to white people of the same wealth and education?

But that's hardly the only evidence. You know what's a FAR better predictor for economic success or failure than race? Whether you come from a single-mother home. That applies to blacks AND whites.

You have that backwards. Seriously, stop learning about the outside world from Ben Shapiro. He's a failed writer paid by billionaires to convince minions that said billionaires have our best interests at heart.

Yes, it does.

You can keep saying your Big Lie. But it won't make it true.

Of course. I'm not surprised that this is actually more important to you than helping lift up the poor.

Lifting the poor does hurt your feelings.

 

[Donal]

That Hegseth immediately rescinded it? He'd only been in office for maybe a day and that was one of his first acts.

Maybe he got drunk and thought the rescind button was his wife when he punched it. Or maybe he is as incompetent now as when he ran that veterans' "charity".

 

[Ziggurat]

"bad study" being anything that proves you wrong.

You haven't presented even a single study at all, good or bad. So why the hell are you appealing to evidence that hasn't been presented?

You have that backwards.

Go on, then. Show me.

Lifting the poor does hurt your feelings.

DEI hasn't lifted the poor.

 

[plague311]

So now your working theory is that both Trump and Hegseth are retarded?

Yes.

 

[Donal]

You haven't presented even a single study at all, good or bad. So why the hell are you appealing to evidence that hasn't been presented?

Because I've done that dance. It doesn't matter. A lot of folks around here have. You want this gone. You need things to go back to some Leave It To Beaver fantasy of the past.

Why?

Go on, then. Show me.

For what? You to ignore it? For you to dismiss it as "woke"? You don't understand how things like poverty are cycles?

DEI hasn't lifted the poor.

No, probably not. It was supposed to enable more equity within corporate America. It wasn't supposed to be a panacea to end poverty, as you seem to think.

But, corporations are part of the problem, which is a discussion you aren't ready for.

 

[Ziggurat]

Because I've done that dance. It doesn't matter. A lot of folks around here have. You want this gone. You need things to go back to some Leave It To Beaver fantasy of the past.

Why?

Why do I want stable two-parent households? Because in general it's better for children. Especially poor children. That's not a fantasy, that's reality. It's a fantasy that single motherhood doesn't cause problems. It's a fantasy that fathers abandoning their children doesn't cause problems.

Why do you deny that?

For what? You to ignore it? For you to dismiss it as "woke"? You don't understand how things like poverty are cycles?

I understand that fully. So is single motherhood. So is fathers abandoning their children. They are indeed self-reinforcing pathologies. The fact that it's a cycle doesn't mean that it's still not a major factor in creating and perpetuating poverty. In fact, these are some of the primary reasons poverty is cyclical.

No, probably not. It was supposed to enable more equity within corporate America.

And what has that accomplished?

 

[Ziggurat]

Yes.

Good luck with that.

 

[Donal]

Why do I want stable two-parent households?

not the topic. And again, you confuse the cause and effect.

Because in general it's better for children.

If one of the parents is a drunken abuser?

Especially poor children. That's not a fantasy, that's reality. It's a fantasy that single motherhood doesn't cause problems. It's a fantasy that fathers abandoning their children doesn't cause problems.

Psst, poverty causes missing parents.

Why do you deny that?

I deny your seriousness in addressing the issue.

I understand that fully.

So, you intentionally ignore it.

So is single motherhood. So is fathers abandoning their children. They are indeed self-reinforcing pathologies. The fact that it's a cycle doesn't mean that it's still not a major factor in creating and perpetuating poverty. In fact, these are some of the primary reasons poverty is cyclical.

Like racism?

And what has that accomplished?

Made right-wingers cry.

 

[Ziggurat]

not the topic. And again, you confuse the cause and effect.

You keep saying that, but you provide no evidence.

If one of the parents is a drunken abuser?

What part of "in general" did you not understand? I put that in for a reason. And I didn't think I had to say that you shouldn't have kids with a violent partner in the first place, but apparently I do.

Psst, poverty causes missing parents.

Not directly. It's cheaper for a couple to live together and share expenses than to live separately.

I deny your seriousness in addressing the issue.

I deny that you know what the hell you're talking about.
See how effective that argument is?

Like racism?

Racism doesn't cause cyclical poverty in whites, but there are plenty of whites caught in cyclical poverty. What is it that poor whites and poor blacks have in common? It's not skin color.

Made right-wingers cry.

Once again, we see that this, not helping people, is what you actually care about.

 

[Donal]

"Let's talk about a group of black people who served in the military, created their own unit from the ground up, and became one of the most decorated and successful in history, despite massive amount of institutional racism opposing them at every turn."

"NO! THAT'S WOKE!"

 

[Vixen]

You seem to have missed the fact that I said "current-day racism". I put that qualifier in there for a reason, because in the past racism really was a major impediment. I've never denied that. But the impediments that kept the Tuskegee Airmen from joining regular units doesn't exist anymore. The US military desegregated a long, long time ago.

And that desegregation wasn't DEI. Recognizing their accomplishments and the unfairness they faced isn't DEI. And removing them from training videos isn't required by the elimination of DEI. Which is why Hegseth immediately reversed the unwarranted decision to remove that material from training. That initial removal is part of a malicious compliance trend which we will no doubt see more of, which activists are in fact calling for, as an effort to oppose Trump.

That removal is how the bods in the USAF viewed it, given Trump and Hegseth's stated views, with Hegseth's views that women belong under the thumb and slaves should obey their masters (a favourite quote of conservative Christians from the New Testament)..

But your claim:

"But the impediments that kept the Tuskegee Airmen from joining regular units doesn't exist anymore. The US military desegregated a long, long time ago."

.Hence DEI is no longer needed in the armed forces, is flat out wrong. WWII was 80 years ago, and whilst it might seem like a long time ago, many of us still have plenty of living relatives born in the forties and even 30's/20's. Just because segregation is no longer official that doesn't mean there is no work to be done.

When US Airmen came to the UK during WWII they caused a lot of trouble because they demanded that English pubs not serve their Black fellow servicemen because they were so racist (has the US changed?). And do you know whose side the English took? Yes, the English sense of fair play came to the fore and the pub landlords and customers told the US Airmen to piss off and go drink elsewhere but they were NOT going to throw out the coloured servicemen. This gave rise to a lot of brawling and violence on the part of the White Servicemen as they couldn't believe they were the ones being asked to leave.

Are you sure things have changed in one or two generations?

 

[Ziggurat]

.Hence DEI is no longer needed in the armed forces, is flat out wrong. WWII was 80 years ago, and whilst it might seem like a long time ago, many of us still have plenty of living relatives born in the forties and even 30's/20's. Just because segregation is no longer official that doesn't mean there is no work to be done.

You say that as if DEI is the only way to do such work. But there is no reason to think that. Racial discrimination isn't the only remedy to racial discrimination.

Are you sure things have changed in one or two generations?

A generation is 20 to 30 years. It's been three or four generations, not one or two. And yeah, a hell of a lot has changed.

 

[Donal]

Ya, the segregationists got a thesaurus.

 

[Vixen]

You say that as if DEI is the only way to do such work. But there is no reason to think that. Racial discrimination isn't the only remedy to racial discrimination.

A generation is 20 to 30 years. It's been three or four generations, not one or two. And yeah, a hell of a lot has changed.

So are we now onto the logical fallacy of flippancy (aka the non sequitur)? Please expand. What is the other way 'to do such work' and what is the other remedy, which you fail to specify?