There is no recognisable implicacation in Shot One's statement; the statement is as clear as a bell
I fail to see how ShotOne's statement that calls for "rage" and "disbelief" and that accused the pilots of "messing about" had no "recognisable implicacation". And that when he accused the entire pilot community of "a long list of minor infringements, short-cuts and "tolerations" which had obviously gone on for some time prior" also had no recognizable implications? The implications to my American ears are "clear as a bell".
As for "not trying to make an issue out of nothing" calling for "rage" and "disbelief" is not "nothing". Neither is accusing the whole pilot community of "a long list of minor infringements, short-cuts and "tolerations" which had obviously gone on for some time prior". To me, ShotOne's post was disrespectful of an aircrew who died in the performance of their duty while serving their nation in a combat zone and deserved outrage rather than the mild rebuke I provided. Indeed, to me it was exactly the kind of outrageous disrespect that thankfully was cut off in the A400M crash thread. Why some folks tolerate that kind of disrespect for a helo crew in a combat zone totally escapes me.