Please gives sources, otherwsie this just seems like a spam answer.

My point is that these are official or semi-official unit names (or plane names) . Therefore, no young men, but mostly senior commanders or even admirals(generals) had to approve this. This leads to serious question about the culture permeating trough USN and Marines.

Source for squadron names originally noted. Source on Jim Flatley comments noted, you could also refer to Steve Ewing's Biography, "Reaper Leader" Books are grand.

Questions of culture? I could say some very unkind things about your 21st century point of view on this, but I shall not. There was no, repeat NO, Satanic conspiracy. And why have you not looked at the USAAF or, indeed the Army has a whole.

@RLeonard I did look at US Army and USAAF, and despite being larger organizations they were much less "satanic" in their naming scheme. They had "Red Devils" and "Sun Devils" but no outright mention of Satan. It is a question of culture, especially among top brass who permitted this. I'm not saying that they were satanist, but again things need to be explained - it certainly was not a coincidence .

Regretfully, none of the original approvers are around. Maybe you should contact the USN and USMC and explain your sensitivity. I'm sure they will be happy to change any name that is offensive . . . maybe they'll even get rid of the "Puking Dogs"

No mention at all of VMF-214? Baaaaaaaa

@rs.29 do you have a source showing that the "top brass"/senior commander approves every plane/squadron/whatever nickname? I'd think they have many other pressing issues than what is appropriate for a nickname.

"Whistling Death" is an awesome nickname. You just didn't want to be in a Flying Coffin (Brewster Buffalo) at the beginning of WWII.

FWIW, I went into some USAAF names in the q's chat. Specifically, until their recent retirement, the AC-130 gunship models were names "Specter" and "Spooky". Not "satanic" per se, but definitely evocative of death.

Jeez, yes, let's get rid of those sheep. . . gives everyone the wrong idea

@rs.29 - And as far as the USAAF is concerned, you obviously didn’t look very hard. Spent about 15 minutes perusing Maurer Maurer's "Combat Squadrons of the Air Force World War II," Office of Air Force History, 1982. Perhaps you should check the insignia/emblems of: 1st Composite Squadron, 1st Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter, 6th Fighter Squadron, 13th Bombardment Squadron, 89th Fighter Squadron, 97th Fighter Squadron, 97th Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron, 431st Fighter Squadron, 433rd Fighter Squadron and 515th Bombardment Squadron. More squadrons than you mentioned in the original post.

@BruceWayne Every listing I found in the first dozen or so said CNO approved insignia - nicknames are not approved but if they are depicted in the insignia then obviously that has to be approved. history.navy.mil/content/dam/nhhc/research/histories/…

@corsiKa thanks! I never knew how far up the sign off went of insignia.

Nobody ever said Ernie King was a nice man.

As a Christian, I'd just be scared of being directly ordered to fly under a name like the 10%. Depending on the situation (some I feel are a lighter shade of grey, while others a darker shade), I'd in at least some cases be religiously forced to consciensiously object until assigned to something different. I still understand though that the original intent - what's going on in other people's minds - would normally just be trying to sound tough or whatever.

@Panzercrisis: You'd have to consciensiously object to the name of something you'd be flying to kill people with? Funny priorities you have there...

@BruceWayne Do you really think you could name a squadron, paint something on aircraft, create insignia and wear it, and expect that your squadron commander and wing commander not know anything about it ?

@RLeonard Neither of these squadrons was named after Satan. They had some skulls and/or devils on insignia, but not the name .

@rs.29 of course they would know about it.I just didn't know how far up any actual approval went. Frankly, those planes are used (generally) to hurt, kill, or otherwise destroy the enemy with fire and brimstone. I wouldn't think the CO's would say "The enemy has been killing our men. Let's go rain fire and brimstone on them, destroy their strongholds, kill ...hey wait, Private, that image on that plane might possibly offend someones. Let's take a day and repaint it, make sure it doesn't offend anyone, and then we'll get back to fighting and killing and spilling blood and guts. "

@DevSolar Murder is unacceptable. Defense is not. Things can get a little iffy in war sometimes, but the US and many other countries started the war under attack, so they were acting in self-defense. (This isn't saying every individual action was justified, but the general idea of getting in the plane was defensive.)

@Panzercrisis Uh boy, now you're walking a fine line... you know that Britain and France declared war on Germany? That the US, as a neutral party, was assisting Britain in its war efforts? Was the war Germany waged against those, then, in defense? Of course not. That's not what I am saying. But you're awfully close to justifying war-related killing in general, and you claim that the names of units and equipment would weigh so heavily on your conscience? I don't think so.

Note that, when you enter the armed forces, you don't get to decide whether the next war you will be fighting will be "just" or "unjust" in your eyes...