Debate Now Final Countdown (the movie) and the Ultimate Question

[Foxfyre]

RULES FOR THIS DISCUSSION DEBATE:

This has nothing to do with current politics so leave current politics out of it please. No Trump/Biden/Obama or another current political figure bashing, no mention of what modern day Republicans or Democrats would do. Let's focus on ourselves and what we would do given the authority in the situation.

The 1980 movie "Final Countdown" is probably closer to sci-fi genre than anything else but it didn't feel like sci-fi.

The basic premise is that a 1980 aircraft carrier on routine maneuvers gets caught in a weird storm that is actually a time warp and they find themselves moved 40 years back in time to December 6, 1941.

Once they figure out what happened, and knowing the history, they sent out a plane to determine if the Japanese fleet was out there. And when they determined that it was, they had their own debate aboard ship. What to do?

1. They were sworn to defend the United State of America, and a 1980 Aircraft carrier had enough fire power on that one ship to take out the entire Japanese fleet. That would have prevented the USA from getting into WWII and saved hundreds of thousands of American lives.

BUT history always includes many unexpected consequences.

2. It also likely meant that the U.S. never would have gotten into WWII or would have waited too long. Hitler, Mussolini and Hirohito would likely have prevailed and how many nations would have fallen under their power? Almost certainly they would not have been brought to unconditional surrender and would not be the peaceful democratic nations they are now.

Knowing the history, if you were the captain of the U.S.S. Nimitz and could have taken out the Japanese fleet and prevented the attack on Pearl Harbor, would you have given the order to do that?

The poll allows you to change your vote:

 

[eagle1462010]

It would change the course of history. In the new future we might not have even existed.

Had Japans Navy been obliterated that day we may not have entered the War in Europe.

Sooo. Star Trek strategy of dont change history.

 

[MisterBeale]

Almost certainly they would not have been brought to unconditional surrender and would not be the peaceful democratic nations they are now.

No proof of that.

Francisco Franco - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Spanish transition to democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Augusto Pinochet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Chilean transition to democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Dr.Destructo]

I would have given the order, but I would have also done my best to hide the ship from their radars and airplanes. And with that being a faster ship than what they had back then, they could get out of the area and "hid" somewhere South of the equator in "no mans land".

The "effects" of time travel are as varied and fictional as time travel itself. There is NO PROOF of time travel, much less any proof it would change the future.

 

[Foxfyre]

No proof of that.

Francisco Franco - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Spanish transition to democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Augusto Pinochet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Chilean transition to democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

For sure nobody can say what might have happened in that next 40 years without Pearl Harbor. But given the history of say Russia who remained a totalitarian regime for that next forty years and remains one now, we can assume other dictatorships would more likely than not have held onto their power if they could.

But yes, they could have voluntarily given it up too.

So given the situation at the time and knowing the history since, how do you vote?

 

[Foxfyre]

I would have given the order, but I would have also done my best to hide the ship from their radars and airplanes. And with that being a faster ship than what they had back then, they could get out of the area and "hid" somewhere South of the equator in "no mans land".

The "effects" of time travel are as varied and fictional as time travel itself. There is NO PROOF of time travel, much less any proof it would change the future.

The debate though is not whether time travel exists. In the plot of "Final Countdown' it existed so we go with that.

Why hide the ship though? The Nimitz transferred to 1940 had the fire power to take out the entire Japanese fleet long before it ever got to the Nimitz. The Japanese in Japan might wonder why their ships never returned but they would never know why they didn't.

It all would have been done and over with and nobody other than the crew of the Nimitz would ever need to know it ever happened.

So I'm curious. Why would you have given the order?

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

It was a movie. And not a very good one at that. It was a ham handed attempt in the heady and patriotic soaked start of the Reagan era to prognosticate about what would happen had the US been aware of and was able to stop the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Remember, we were approaching the 40th anniversary of the attack and the 20th anniversary of the Arizona Memorial being built. Then, it tried to introduce the philosophical debate of interfering with the timeline and changing history and what happens when you meddle it. A movie of "what ifs". All wrapped in patriotism and bravado...and then James Farentino shows up years later....sure...I'll suspend absolute fucking disbelief.

If you look at some of the threads on this board about the revisionist history of knowing about the attack...it's similar.

But..on the plus side, I did like the carrier thrown back in time was the USS Nimitz and Kirk Douglas always kicks ass.

 

[Foxfyre]

It would change the course of history. In the new future we might not have even existed.

Had Japans Navy been obliterated that day we may not have entered the War in Europe.

Sooo. Star Trek strategy of dont change history.

Actually two of the characters debated whether it was possible to change history. (There were a number of twists and concepts in that movie that really made you think and could actually squirrel your mind. I don't want to get into all of them as it could spoil it for those now interested in seeing that movie if they haven't seen it.)

But yes trying to change one aspect of history could have so many ramifications for other aspects of history that it is mind boggling to think about.

I checked the "I don't know' box on the poll but may change that after I think about this some more and see how other's think if anybody is of a mind to wade in on this.

 

[Foxfyre]

It was a movie. And not a very good one at that. It was a ham handed attempt in the heady and patriotic soaked start of the Reagan era to prognosticate about what would happen had the US been aware of and was able to stop the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Remember, we were approaching the 40th anniversary of the attack and the 20th anniversary of the Arizona Memorial being built. Then, it tried to introduce the philosophical debate of interfering with the timeline and changing history and what happens when you meddle it. A movie of "what ifs". All wrapped in patriotism and bravado...and then James Farentino shows up years later....sure...I'll suspend absolute fucking disbelief.

If you look at some of the threads on this board about the revisionist history of knowing about the attack...it's similar.

But..on the plus side, I did like the carrier thrown back in time was the USS Nimitz and Kirk Douglas always kicks ass.

It would have been a better movie with some better and more thoughtful editing but it certainly wasn't terrible as it was. (It was made in the last year of the Carter Administration and I doubt Reagan was given a single thought in its making.)

I thought the concept was fascinating though in the dilemma of ingrained sense of duty against the uncharted reality they faced. So how would you vote?

 

[WorldWatcher]

I would have given the order, but I would have also done my best to hide the ship from their radars and airplanes. And with that being a faster ship than what they had back then, they could get out of the area and "hid" somewhere South of the equator in "no mans land".

The "effects" of time travel are as varied and fictional as time travel itself. There is NO PROOF of time travel, much less any proof it would change the future.

The Japanese Fleet didn't have RADAR.

WW

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

It would have been a better movie with some better and more thoughtful editing but it certainly wasn't terrible as it was. (It was made in the last year of the Carter Administration and I doubt Reagan was given a single thought in its making.)

I thought the concept was fascinating though in the dilemma of ingrained sense of duty against the uncharted reality they faced. So how would you vote?

It was terrible.
For the wormhole sound effects, the movie reused the effects I heard in "Star Trek The Motion Picture" almost a year earlier.

And I'm not sure what movie you were looking at but it was made at the beginning of Reagan mania. By the fall of 1979 (when the movie was filmed), Reagan's name was all over the place. If I'm not mistaken, it was released in the summer of 1980..and Reagan..was everywhere. But you are correct in the sense that people were done with Carter. They just wanted something to hold on to...and this patriotic drivel filled the bill.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I voted to not intervene due to the paradox do so would have created.

I think it's human nature for us to think that our acts would produce a better outcome, but the possibility always exists that it could make for a worse outcome.

Final Countdown has been one of my favorite movies. Here's another of my favorites:

Millennium (1989)

Millennium (1989)

www.imdb.com

 

[WorldWatcher]

Just remember.

Captain Yellend ordered his Cruiser/Destroyer escort back to Pearl as the fist votex appeared. The Nimitz was on her own. There was no mention (IIRC) about the anti-sub, sub that normally accompanies. Since it was going out for "Exercises", she probably wasn't carrying a full combat load of stores.

Now don't get me wrong, a US Carrier by it self as some pretty impressive air defense capabilities - but they mostly rely on the escorts for long range detection and engagement of air and sub sea threats. The Nimitz air defense would mostly have come from airborne Hawkeye detection and F-14 CAP for engagement.

Then there is the techology aspect. Having been in the Navy for 20 years and been aircrew on the Hawkeye (Airborne Early Warning and Air Control), keeping the aircraft in flight ready condition was a constant process of maintenance. That means spare parts (some in stock, but finite), some supplied via UNREPS, and some supplied via COD (Carrier Onboard Delivery) aircraft flying in parts from shore. The Nimitz would have had only what was onboard.

The more you fly the aircraft the more they break, the more you leave them sitting without flying the more they break. In other words aircraft and ships systems will degrade over time to the point where you are canabilizing one aircraft/system to keep others flying/working.

The tecnology of the 1980's didn't exist in the 1940's, so over time (depending on operations) the value of the Nimitz would deteriorate as it was unable to provide that big "bunch" that it could on first arrival. Not only would aircraft and ships systems degrade for lack of parts, modern missile systems would be expended with no replacements as industry at the time would be unable to replace them.

And it would have been a prime BFT (Big Freak'n Target) for Japanese subs and any replacement escorts would have been 1940's versions without advance ASW (Anti Submarine Warfare) suits on moder escorts.


WW

 

[task0778]

If I were the captain of the Nimitz, I would have attacked the lead Japanese aircraft carrier and damaged it enough to prevent them from attacking Pearl Harbor. I think the Japanese would believe that least the element of surprise is gone and they would have turned around and gone home. I would then sail for Pearl Harbor and apprise them of the Japanese intentions, not knowing if the Nimitz would ever return to it's own time. Whatever happens next is not their prerogative to determine.

Who is to say what the ramifications would be if the Nimitz prevents the attack on Pearl Harbor? History would have been changed for sure; my dad served in WWII, he joined the Navy in 1943 when he was old enough to get in but maybe World War II would have happened anyway and I might not be here today. LOL, yeah I know, no big loss.

The appearance of a supership like the Nimitz could alter the balance of power enough to where the Axis powers stopped their aggression. After becoming aware of the Japanese intentions, the US Gov't would probably have beefed up their forces in the Philippines and elsewhere in the Pacific. So might the Brits and the Australians, among others. One might think the Japanese would conclude that a war with America wasn't really in their best interest and the Pacific War might never have happened. Maybe Hiroshima and Nagasaki would never have happened. Not fighting in the Pacific means America could focus solely on Europe. Hitler and Mussolini may have decided to quit while they were ahead and the war in that theater may never have escalated. But those 2 men possibly would have remained in power and who knows how that would have changed everything. Or maybe everything would have gone to shit anyway.

 

[Foxfyre]

The Japanese Fleet didn't have RADAR.

WW

Actually they did. Not on all their ships but as I recall maybe 20 of them? The scout plane from the Nimitz was undetected however so the radar probably wasn't all that good if that scene was realistic and I honestly have no way of knowing whether it was or wasn't. But for sure their Zero prop planes were no match for our F-14s and the Nimitz had excellent radar capabilities so they could have taken out any Japanese scout plane that ran across them.

The Japanese however were mostly concerned about being seen by coincidental shipping as radio capabilities could have blown their cover for secrecy. So in the movie the Japanese scout planes sunk a private yacht that happened to be in their path. And intended to sink anything else that was unfortunate enough to know the Japanese were there.

But they didn't know the Nimitz was out there from another period in time and we would have had no trouble at all sinking every ship in that attack force. Nobody on our side other than personnel on the Nimitz. would ever have to know it was ever there. Nobody on their side would ever know what happened to it.

 

[Foxfyre]

It was terrible.
For the wormhole sound effects, the movie reused the effects I heard in "Star Trek The Motion Picture" almost a year earlier.

And I'm not sure what movie you were looking at but it was made at the beginning of Reagan mania. By the fall of 1979 (when the movie was filmed), Reagan's name was all over the place. If I'm not mistaken, it was released in the summer of 1980..and Reagan..was everywhere. But you are correct in the sense that people were done with Carter. They just wanted something to hold on to...and this patriotic drivel filled the bill.

I don't want this to become a modern day political thread please. How will you or would you vote in the poll and why?

 

[Dr.Destructo]

The debate though is not whether time travel exists. In the plot of "Final Countdown' it existed so we go with that.

Why hide the ship though? The Nimitz transferred to 1940 had the fire power to take out the entire Japanese fleet long before it ever got to the Nimitz. The Japanese in Japan might wonder why their ships never returned but they would never know why they didn't.

It all would have been done and over with and nobody other than the crew of the Nimitz would ever need to know it ever happened.

So I'm curious. Why would you have given the order?

To stop another war.
And I'd hide the ship out of range, because I wouldn't want any government knowing there was a technologically advanced ship around. That would cause a war in itself.

I'd also send word to the US government that Japan has plans for attacking, so they could build up the fleet around Hawaii.

Keeping the ship out of sight and radar means that no government would know there was a technologically advanced ship available. Which would just cause a different war.

 

[Dr.Destructo]

The Japanese Fleet didn't have RADAR.

WW

What ever they had. Keeping out of the line of sight in any form........

 

[Foxfyre]

To stop another war.
And I'd hide the ship out of range, because I wouldn't want any government knowing there was a technologically advanced ship around. That would cause a war in itself.

I'd also send word to the US government that Japan has plans for attacking, so they could build up the fleet around Hawaii.

Keeping the ship out of sight and radar means that no government would know there was a technologically advanced ship available. Which would just cause a different war.

Interesting. But sooner or later the Nimitz would have to be resupplied. And they knew where all the mistakes would be made for the next 40 years. Wouldn't they want to be able to educate the U.S. government and military on that?

(That is one of the arguments from the movie by a character who wanted to destroy the Japanese fleet.)

 

[BackAgain]

But this is akin to the question of going back to kill baby Hitler.

And what about Obama and Trump? What would they do?

Also, paradoxes.