English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

After nearly a century people still make a fuss over this sunk ship "Titanic". Even one proposing to "save" it from rust! [Not easy when the damn ship is 12 thousands feet underwater] And we make all kinds of ridiculous melodaramatic movies of this damn ship. So the captain was travelling fast? So it hit some dumb iceberg? So it sunk? And most passengers died. There has been worse shipwrecks than this dumb boat. What do you think?

2007-07-04 03:05:03 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities History

11 answers

Maybe it's more to the fact that when they built it they said it was un-sinkable but yes there has been more worse disasters than that look at the Poseidon and what that did to Kurt Russell

2007-07-04 03:15:54 · answer #1 · answered by Equal Animal 5 · 2 0

Back when the Titanic was built and sunk the world was a different place. Airports were only a dream. People who wanted to cross the oceans had to do it by ship. Companies prided themselves on building larger and more luxurious liners for people to travel on. During that time there was no law that a ship have enough life rafts for all passengers (a major reason why so many died). The ship was also considered to be the crowning achievement of years of passenger shipbuilding and design, and it failed. It was a combination of many things that made this event so tragic. One must also remember that the early 1900s was a time where people believed science could overcome anything.

2007-07-04 05:23:57 · answer #2 · answered by rz1971 6 · 1 0

It was a Big Event where 1523 People Perished. It is important to Save it because it is now Considered a Grave site.
Excerpt From Link 1:
These final guidelines have been developed for future research on, exploration of, and if appropriate, salvage of RMS Titanic. As directed by the RMS Titanic Maritime Memorial Act of 1986 (Act), the guidelines were developed in consultation with the United Kingdom, France, Canada and others. The broad and diverse public interest in RMS Titanic was also considered in developing the guidelines. While the guidelines set forth a preferred policy of institute preservation of RMS Titanic, they also set forth the parameters for the research, recovery and conservation of RMS Titanic artifacts for the benefit of the public.*
Also Titanic is 12,460 feet under water.
I agree the Movie was Melodramatic But It was Meant to Show how the Event Affected People on Board and How it Affected the Survivors. It did have Flaws in it Some facts where exaggerated. But that was for people to realize the seriousness of the wreck.
Yes the caption was traveling to fast "Full Speed" or 25 miles per hour when it hit the Iceburg.

It was a big deal for the people who survived and a big deal for the families of the people who parished on the ship.

2007-07-04 06:33:44 · answer #3 · answered by ♥skiperdee1979♥ 5 · 0 0

I think it is because it was supposed to be a revolutionary ship. People were excited about it, and it was supposedly the unsinkable ship. After it sank and tragically so many people died, it naturally became legend, and legends die hard.

Plus, has we've seen with movies like "Titanic" it is easy romanticize what happened to that ship and its passengers. People just eat that sort of stuff up!

It's part of history, and that means it will never go away. So instead of just looking at it as a dumb boat that hit a dumb ice berg that killed many people, just view it as a part of history. You might even want to read up on the ship, it's passengers, and other issues surrounding it. I did. There are some pretty interesting stories associated with it.

2007-07-04 03:12:51 · answer #4 · answered by T the D 5 · 0 0

The Obama administration isn't flippant regarding our national security. What WWIII? The Republicans are the ones with no regard for our national security: Bush did nothing when warned of 9/11; outted a covert CIA operative, with expertise on WMDs; outted an Al Qeada operative who had flipped and was going to spy for us; refused to have flamable and toxic materials on trains rerouted away from terror targets -- to name just a few things. If you were capable of reading, you'd have seen this: The head of the agency responsible for the country's nuclear weapons says a list of nuclear sites accidentally made public does not include classified information about weapons-related facilities. Or this: the posting included no information that compromised national security. Also, you don't know whether the person responsible was also employed by the Bush administration. Probably most people in the printing office have been there longer than a few months. But you wing-nuts just don't care about TRUTH at all.

2016-05-17 23:47:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well is was a major disaster of a ship that was deemed "unsinkable" and due to negligence of not enough lifeboats thousands of people died a horrible and unnecessary death.

2007-07-04 03:18:37 · answer #6 · answered by Horns up bitches! 2 · 0 0

It was the largest luxury passenger vessel out for its maiden voyage. It was also called "un sinkable."

Tragic Irony.

2007-07-04 03:15:18 · answer #7 · answered by Robsthings 5 · 1 0

people are fasinated with those events in history that are unfinished.titanic,marylin monroe,kennedy. all unfinished business so to speak. the fact that titanic was on it's maiden voyage keeps it in the news.

2007-07-04 03:12:52 · answer #8 · answered by racer 51 7 · 0 0

I think we need to keep the grave of the ship alone so the dead can rest in peace.

2007-07-04 03:09:48 · answer #9 · answered by redunicorn 7 · 2 0

What do I think?... I think you are an idiot who doesn't have any respect for yourself or the dead or you wouldn't ask such an inane and disrespectful question.

2007-07-04 03:14:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

fedest.com, questions and answers