Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry they are lost, but the extent and scope of the media coverage on this is ridiculous. These are five rich people who willingly chose to go on a dangerous morbid site seeing exercise. It is getting significant media attention only because it has all the “right” elements to appeal to stupid people who consume news: Titanic, submarine, missing rich people, limited oxygen.

Meanwhile, a migrant boat capsized off Greece last week (possibly caused by the Greek Coast Guard itself) with up to 700 deaths, and there is shockingly little coverage of it, only because it has all the “wrong” elements: poor migrants, rickety boat, official involvement in the disaster.

Ironically, the migrant boat was carrying a lot of poor Pakistanis, and the Titanic sub apparently has two rich Pakistani tourists aboard. So tell me as a society what we care about: money!

This post is really just looking for something to be upset about. Unusual events always get more news coverage than more commonplace ones. In some ways, that's the definition of newsworthy. A boat full of migrants capsizing with hundreds of deaths is tragic, but sadly not that uncommon. Whereas people potentially being crushed to death or suffocating at the site of the Titanic is not exactly standard fare.

So you’re trying to say we’re just like the Romans: mass shooting death is boring and commonplace, but being mauled to death in the Colosseum, now that’s a story!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we wasting our resources on these idiots?

We try to rescue people. Usually because they did something dumb. Because it's the right thing to do.

Nobody tried to rescue those 700 migrants currently sitting on the floor of the Mediterranean Sea. I wonder why.

You are full of it. Do some research before you spout your falsehoods. There is footage from MarineTraffic showing a frenzy of ships come to assist when the ship sank. 500 are missing not 700.

Stop reading cnn or the BBC before continuing with your lies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry they are lost, but the extent and scope of the media coverage on this is ridiculous. These are five rich people who willingly chose to go on a dangerous morbid site seeing exercise. It is getting significant media attention only because it has all the “right” elements to appeal to stupid people who consume news: Titanic, submarine, missing rich people, limited oxygen.

Meanwhile, a migrant boat capsized off Greece last week (possibly caused by the Greek Coast Guard itself) with up to 700 deaths, and there is shockingly little coverage of it, only because it has all the “wrong” elements: poor migrants, rickety boat, official involvement in the disaster.

Ironically, the migrant boat was carrying a lot of poor Pakistanis, and the Titanic sub apparently has two rich Pakistani tourists aboard. So tell me as a society what we care about: money!

This post is really just looking for something to be upset about. Unusual events always get more news coverage than more commonplace ones. In some ways, that's the definition of newsworthy. A boat full of migrants capsizing with hundreds of deaths is tragic, but sadly not that uncommon. Whereas people potentially being crushed to death or suffocating at the site of the Titanic is not exactly standard fare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope they have to pay the cost of the search and rescue/recovery efforts. Utter BS. It’s like the people who set sail for another continent with a week of food and an old boat radio.

+1000

Taxpayers should not have to pay to rescue these fools.

Guys they’re dead, you can’t bill them

Why can’t you bill their estate?

Billing people for SAR makes it less likely that the next person will be willing to call for help when necessary.

Fine with me.

Anonymous wrote:They have about 40 hours of oxygen left

Anonymous wrote:This is really sad. How was the company legally allowed to operate this business, given how dangerous it is and the difficulty in being unable to rescue people if things went wrong?

Anonymous wrote:Do any of you idiots have a link to them dying?

Anonymous wrote:Do any of you idiots have a link to them dying?

Anonymous wrote:Do any of you idiots have a link to them dying?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was reading that they have apparently 96hrs of oxygen supply. If the sub still has oxygen. It can’t return to the surface that sounds like a slow and excruciating death.

I hate to say it, but they’re better off being crushed.

Can you explain why they can't resurface? I don't understand.

It’s more that if they haven’t yet, there is probably catastrophic failure preventing it. David Pogue has been on this vehicle and said it has 7 ways to surface, with or without power. If they haven’t AND aren’t communicating, the craft is likely gone or obliterated.

Is it possible it emerged and they haven't located it yet? (ie its floating somewhere and they are trapped inside). Or would that be easy to spot?

One of the rescue planes is looking at the surface for them. So yes, that is the hope - that they have surfaced and are found there.

It is waaaaay to deep to just "re-emerge" . There is no debris field, there is no floating device. This isn't some buoy that just pops to the surface.

We're talking 13,000+ ft where the water pressure and currents are too intense for even military devices to go.

I don't think people understand how deep this is. Or the intense water pressure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really sad. How was the company legally allowed to operate this business, given how dangerous it is and the difficulty in being unable to rescue people if things went wrong?

People have been sailing, and dying at sea, since prehistory.

Murdering people is a pretty old phenomenon too! Well, technically just killing people for most of that time, I guess. You can't have "murder" without laws and government.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really sad. How was the company legally allowed to operate this business, given how dangerous it is and the difficulty in being unable to rescue people if things went wrong?

People have been sailing, and dying at sea, since prehistory.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really sad. How was the company legally allowed to operate this business, given how dangerous it is and the difficulty in being unable to rescue people if things went wrong?

People have been sailing, and dying at sea, since prehistory.