Fleet Week: Our Writers Argue For, Against

I've leave the symbolic arguments to others.

WHOOOOOOOSHHHH......woohoo!

Okay, while I agree with some of the "against" opinion, it's written with the panache of a forum troll-comment, so I can't take it seriously at all.

The "for" argument is problematic, though, because it ignores the biggest problem. While I've heard the "safety and convenience" arguments (and the even lamer arguments against it), the problem I hear most about, and feel the strongest about personally, is the distracting distruption caused by the weekday rehearsals.

Yes, we love the military and support the troops, but as the author pointed out, it's a privately funded event. How many other private events would be allowed to pollute the business district of a major financial capital with alarming, ear-splitting roars? If bass booms from a concert at AT&T park rattled the windows of SoMa during the middle of a weekday, you'd have everyone from city officials to street-level wonks rightfully up in arms about disruptive noise-bleed from a "private event."

Alas, it's a great excuse for a work-from-home day.

Cole's article proves why Fleet Week is justified: the let-it-all-hang-out lifestyle we embrace here in the City is a fruit of liberty. Our right to protest in the streets is guaranteed in the Constitution. And once in a while, it wouldn't hurt to take a moment to appreciate the efforts (and talents) of those who guard our liberties and sometimes make the ultimate sacrifice.

Or, you can join the lemmings and be another jaded, cynical San Franciscan who thinks that the country apparently defends itself and the most important thing the military can do is zealously preserve my right to walk in a crosswalk at any time, or get Papusas on demand from El Zocalo.

Plus, my inner five-year-old likes loud things that go fast.

I agree somewhat with Jason on the "problematic" nature of my argument, but I would like to point out that San Francisco permits, once a month, an event that "pollutes the business district": Critical Mass. And while I support the efforts of the bicyclists to raise awareness of their presence, I also think that if we can inconvenience every motor vehicle one day a month, this too can and should be embraced.

Fleet week should be a time of private contemplation of national shame. Yes we have aggressive instincts and a desire to take by force what we cannot have otherwise. This is something we should be discussing with our psychiatrists, not flaunting in public like it was a good thing. If we must have something for the children, how about a kamikaze assault of one Blue Angel into one aircraft carrier? The pilot could bail out at the last second and parachute into a field of poppies.

I like things that go fast.

The Blue Angels are like a rape fantasy. Finding anything at all titillating in the whole thing makes you feel gross and awful but you can't deny there's something there.

I think the safety and noise concerns are trite and unconvincing. My only aversion to Fleet Week is its underlying jingoism. If this was a non-military air show I'd have absolutely no problem with it - in fact I'd love it! As it stands I do enjoy it, but only nervously. It's one thing to maintain and even revere a strong military in a violent world, but it's an entirely different issue when you are flaunting weapons of war for entertainment purposes.

Bottom line: I will be attending, so I suppose that says it all.

I think we should rename it Colonic Irrigation Week. Face it, enemas are old-fashioned. Colonic irrigation is hip and trendy. Also, I don't think that the City and County should be promoting a specific brand of enema.

we'll see if god will even permit this show to happen, as the clouds and fog have returned with a vengeance.

I'm generally pro-Navy and I'm happy that we host Fleet Week, despite the Navy's decisions to close its shipyards and other facilities in the area. I object only to the Blue Angels stunting over land; the safety issue is an important one, or am I the only person who remembers what happened at a little airshow in Ramstein? Yes, the Angels are serious about safety, but all it takes is one slipup and we could have a tragedy that makes that the casualty list from 1988 look like a walk in the park.

Oh don't get me started on Critical Mass. :-)

Though I have enjoyed this show in the past, I have changed my mind on its importance.

It is time for this annual glorification of the military industrial complex to end.

Defending our country is an important goal, but doing that is not the same thing as our current practice of spending billions upon billions of dollars on ever-more-expensive weapon systems.

In fact, one can argue that all this spending is making us less secure, not more.

I get it! These articles were each written by a representative of the extreme opposing viewpoint as preposterous caricatures of their nemesis. How else, for instance, could someone who claims to love this city's irreverence use the Blue Angels as an excuse to make it sound like Rush Limbaugh's lamest stereotype of "a constant freakshow of absurd parades and protests, ad retardum" where "we traipse down Market Street, traffic be damned, on our roller skates with our dicks dangling out of our tutus, celebrating, protesting, cavorting..."? Really? That's what's happening here on the regular? If that were the extent of our city's anti-establishment heft, George W. Bush would've visited by now. Sounds more like a weeklong Mardi Gras than a way to characterize one of the planet's most influential municipalities. In short, your ploy was revealed when you tried to simultaneously validate the argument that the only people who hate the Blue Angels are cross-dressing buffoons and the argument that the city's residents are all just that.

Your counterpart, lampooning the pro-Angels viewpoint, probably offends members of the military, or just people who like airplanes and flying stuff, with his steretypical myopic logic and stilted language. But at least he doesn't offend my hometown.

Anyway, nice try with the little "trading places" conceit. But these both ultimately fail to be funny partly because they're not very true, but mostly because they're such hackneyed, played-out stereotypes. Play it straight next time - there's probably a real argument to be had.