Letter: Arguments being made against jets hold no water

Editor,

All these anti-Growler/OLF letters are interesting for the lack of facts and heavy duty innuendo and blame. This week, we’re treated to the “not here first” argument. Someone weeks ago mentioned the Salish Sea and the whales and fish that were here long before Naval Air Station Whidbey Island. True, but that logic which leads the author to somehow use it as a reason to get rid of the base and OLF Coupeville means that people need to leave Whidbey, too, as the whales and birds and fish were here long before mankind. So, let’s start packing up, huh?

The argument is simple. OLF started using jets for flight landing practices between the years 1965-67. If you moved here after 1967, moved into a house under the noise print of OLF, then you were not here before the Navy. You voluntarily put yourself under that noise. And in the mid 60s, they were flying A3Ds. really loud aircraft.

As for recent ‘facts’:

• Nope, the Growler is not the loudest plane in history and no it wasn’t designed to be loud.

• Nope, not just rookies fly at OLF, but all boat bound/tactical air crews do. Experienced and inexperienced. It’s for safety learning how to fly aboard the boat. It’s 100 percent required, and often, by all aircrews.

• Nope, the aircrews do not purposely make noise, or fly unsafely, or heinously fly over houses, playgrounds and schools. Stop making stuff up, please.

• Nope, the “other side of the mountains” or “just go to JBLM” are not options at all. Zero chance, zero value in any such idea. It’s NIMBY, pure and simple.

If some folks were here before the OLF got jets, then I’m sorry for that change for you, but civilization sometimes brings changes. People used to buy cheap hunting cabins on Mercer Island in the past; no more. Folks had to move in order to build Interstate 5. Bill Boeing built wood furniture. Change.

For those who moved in after 1967, you made a choice to live with the noise, so live with it. Why do you think the price of those homes were so reasonable, anyway?

By the way, no one defends a vicious attack dog and that analogy is ridiculous. Nope, the Navy is not destroying citizens and shame on those who make it so personal against the Navy or supporters of the Navy hyperbolic fake news is what that kind of invective is.

Granted, the noise is very, very loud at OLF and at the NAS. No argument.

Jim Innes

Oak Harbor

More in Letters to the Editor

Letter: Navy failing to follow through with promises

Editor, Quite a few years ago, during the Environmental Impact Statement 106… Continue reading

Letter: NAS Whidbey has led the way in cleaning up contaminants

Editor, The Jan. 7 letter to the editor of the Whidbey News-Times,… Continue reading

Letter: Donation of feminine products helping women

Editor, In the 10 short months since “I Support The Girls-Whidbey Island”… Continue reading

Letter: ‘Deranged screed’ wrong, Americans are suffering

Editor, You recently published a deranged screed from a local Trumpster. He… Continue reading

Letter: Congress must act to prevent war

Editor, The United States and Iran are poised at the edge of… Continue reading

Letter: We need a centrist candidate

Editor, I’d like to float the idea of purposefully voting for a… Continue reading

Letter: Members of Congress must abide by oath to uphold law

Editor, I was mystified by Timothy Hazelo’s letter to the editor in… Continue reading

Letter: Navy should clean up its mess for the next generation

Editor, There has been a lot of news about the PFAS in… Continue reading

Letter: Influence of the NRA is dominating U.S. politics

Editor, I begin this response by asserting that I agree with most… Continue reading

Letter: So many suffer from Trump Derangment Syndrome

Editor, The “pro-impeachment rally draws crowds,” piece in the Dec. 21 Whidbey… Continue reading

Letter: Article falls short of representing hospital

The Whidbey News-Times article of Dec. 17, titled “Hospital ponders adding new… Continue reading

Letter: More than ever, climate change facts important

Editor, In response to my letter to the editor Wednesday, Nov. 6,… Continue reading