SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the I-want-to-believe-marsh-gasses-are-out-there dept.
Pentagon Has Finally Declassified Those Grainy UFO Videos From The US Navy:
After years of speculation, defence officials have now declassified and released three grainy videos from the Navy that have been circulating online for a while now, causing all sorts of speculation.
The mysterious footage was captured using infrared cameras in November 2004 and January 2015, and leaked to the public a few years ago.
[...] "DOD is releasing the videos in order to clear up any misconceptions by the public on whether or not the footage that has been circulating was real, or whether or not there is more to the videos," the US Department of Defence said in a statement.
"The aerial phenomena observed in the videos remain characterised as 'unidentified'."
But that characterisation is not for a lack of trying. For five years, from 2008 through 2011, the Pentagon had a top-secret program investigating UFOs and the potential threats they could pose to aircraft and other aerial activities.
See the linked story for the videos.
Also on the Beeb, The Guardian, even The Daily Beast.
Forbes Amidst The Insanity Of 2020, UFO Footage Feels Forgettable
Now that the month is coming to an end, we're due another world-shaking event, and an alien invasion seems to fit the apocalyptic theme.
Thus, the Pentagon officially released three unclassified videos taken by Navy pilots of UFOs. To clarify, nobody is claiming the footage shows alien spacecraft, but merely clarifying that the footage is legitimate and the subject is unknown.
[...] But the strangest thing about the footage, is that in the context of 2020, it almost seems boring. You'd think the Pentagon officially releasing UFO footage would break the internet (all it used to take was a photo of Kim Kardashian's bottom), but nowadays, the internet has become jaded to all but the most Earth-shattering event.
[...] The footage has inspired a few memes here and there, sure, but otherwise, the unidentified flying object hardly seems to have made a dent in pop culture; a collective shrug seems to be the general response. Although, only the most hardcore alien obsessives and Area 51-invaders seem to believe that the footage shows an actual alien spacecraft.
The Pentagon's decision to officially declassify three 'UFO' videos that have been circulating for years has triggered feverish speculation about what the famously secretive department is trying to distract Americans from.
[...] However, not all of the speculation had to do with the type of 'little green men' that might be piloting the objects. Even as hashtags like #aliensarereal and #ufo2020 dominated social media, many commenters were skeptical as to why the Defense Department had selected this particular moment in history to officially 'release' the videos. With the world in the grips of both a pandemic and an unprecedented economic depression – and with anger rising at government responses to both – the timing raised more than a few eyebrows.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 01 2020, @03:38AM (1 child)
The 'announcements' were back in 2015. But I don't think it has anything to do with any administration or another. I think there are two main factors:
1) The military is increasingly seen as little more than a tool for enforcing somewhat arbitrary political motivations. In particular it's just a tool to keep the military industrial complex churning which, in turn, keeps the economy churning. The soldiers that have sacrificed their lives in the Mideast didn't do it to protect the nation, protect freedom, save lives, or anything - not even to kill some 'bad guys.' They did it so we could keep the dying petrodollar alive for a few more decades. There's not even any glory in that. It's just throwing your life away.
2) People have become soft - figuratively and literally. According to Pentagon data 71% [heritage.org] of Americans aged 17-24 are unfit to serve. The majority of the problem there was because of health or fitness problems. On top of that you now have a society where it's increasingly trendy for men to be feminists, 'toxic masculinity' is something taught in schools, and generally being weak, effeminate, and passive is increasingly encouraged.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Friday May 01 2020, @07:08PM
1) I'd be very interested to hear more about how traditional recruitment demographics are wising up to what the upper classes have known for half a century. I think it's more likely those demographics have become cynical about the concept of one America, and are worried about the wrong political party being in charge of their deployment. Which could easily mean that they are more worried about another neoliberal winning the presidency than they are about whatever Trump might do. It's all speculation on my part though.
2) Don't let the name 'toxic masculinity' fool you. It's not a statement that masculinity is always toxic. It's a way of expressing masculinity in ways that, it is argued, are toxic to society, but it's not the only way of expressing it. If our young men have learned to stop suppressing emotion, projecting bravado and invulnerability, and establish hierarchical dominance through any allowable means, that's objectively good for their own mental health. Not to mention the stability of society and the safety of the weak, who are systematically victimized by 'toxic masculinity'. The men who go to war come back with PTSD; they may project strength, but they are still human, and their stoicism prevents them from healing. We do our servicemen a disservice when we tell them that aggression and dominance is the path to glory.
--
There's a solution to both of these problems, though: immigration. Immigrants, especially those from central America that are lining up at our borders, are 1) relatively ignorant of American politics, and 2) come from cultures that still prize 'toxic masculinity'. The easiest way to stock our infantry brigades would be to promise a path to citizenship to all immigrants and their families through military service.
Why we aren't doing this is a function of politics. If it was really a priority, we'd stuff our objections and do it. As it is, the left won't because they are politically opposed to the military industrial complex, and the right won't because they are politically opposed to immigration.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?