Eliminatus said:aggielostinETX said:
So it seems the former military guys here all agree that we should not have shoot it down prior to this. Why did we even let it get here?
This seems like a massive **** up by our military to allow it to even get over our air space. Explain that.
That's what I mean by carrying the water. Y'all seem to be defending, poor performance and bad decisions.
Pretty sure most military guys here were saying shoot it down in Montana at the extreme latest. Including myself. This was such a failure of our government that I am still trying to process it.
And it wasn't our military. Our civilian leaders pick the targets and when to shoot. Military just pulls the trigger. Been this way for generations.
HTH clear some things up for you.
Chinese Spy Balloon
97,237 Views |
1075 Replies |
Last: 3 mo ago by lb3
.Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:
So it seems the former military guys here all agree that we should not have shoot it down prior to this. Why did we even let it get here?
This seems like a massive **** up by our military to allow it to even get over our air space. Explain that.
That's what I mean by carrying the water. Y'all seem to be defending, poor performance and bad decisions.
They shot it down so it would fall in water off the East coast near Norfolk where a bunch of Navy water recovery assets are. Yes, they clearly decided to wait to do that. And anybody opining they definitely made a mistake okay you slept in a Holiday Inn Express last night and know for sure that was the wrong approach. Everybody has a right to their opinion.
Do you not think that letting it get over US soil was a mistake?
I'm not former. I'm current.aggielostinETX said:
So it seems the former military guys here all agree that we should not have shoot it down prior to this. Why did we even let it get here?
This seems like a massive **** up by our military to allow it to even get over our air space. Explain that.
That's what I mean by carrying the water. Y'all seem to be defending, poor performance and bad decisions.
For reasons that go beyond your comprehension of national defense. There are experts conducting surviellnce in china, the Pacific Ocean and at home. This goes way beyond "see bad balloon, shoot bad balloon". With some of the most sophisticated intelligence gathering platforms in the world, both on ground and space, we deemed it to be a threat not worth shooting down over American soil.
Think strategic level impacts and influence and not tactical capabilities.
Okay, Maverick.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
You have no idea how few people live in the areas it's flown over do you? But that doesn't stop you from gracing us with your nonsense.
redcrayon said:Believe it or not, the military doesn't want to kill civilians.Stringfellow Hawke said:redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Since when does the govt care about its people?
Some of you need to take a step back.
But we can leave a border open, endangering lives of ranchers and the destruction of their property? What a ridiculous take. This thing was over miles and miles of open space, it wasn't like they were downing a space station.
This is exactly what a government intent on allowing our enemy to cruise over sensitive sites , collecting data and sending it back.
🚨BREAKING: Chinese Spy Balloon Shot Down Over South Carolina- Chad Caton Caught It Live
— Red Voice Media (@redvoicenews) February 4, 2023
"Hey China, kiss my a**... Holy sh*t, that just happened" - @ImFiredUp2 pic.twitter.com/CdXOGqji3K
Funniest take/video I've seen.
redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
"Freedom is never more than one election away from extinction"
Fight! Fight! Fight!
Fight! Fight! Fight!
MarathonAg12 said:I'm not former. I'm current.aggielostinETX said:
So it seems the former military guys here all agree that we should not have shoot it down prior to this. Why did we even let it get here?
This seems like a massive **** up by our military to allow it to even get over our air space. Explain that.
That's what I mean by carrying the water. Y'all seem to be defending, poor performance and bad decisions.
For reasons that go beyond your comprehension of national defense. There are experts conducting surviellnce in china, the Pacific Ocean and at home. This goes way beyond "see bad balloon, shoot bad balloon". With some of the most sophisticated intelligence gathering platforms in the world, both on ground and space, we deemed it to be a threat not worth shooting down over American soil.
Think strategic level impacts and influence and not tactical capabilities.
OK smart guy. That's OK. But why not shoot it down over Alaska? Ain't nobody ****ing out there.
A Trump Top Security advisor is aware that our #1 global rival is operating an unauthorized spy aircraft in US airspace and the president doesn't know about it? Even if he didn't, the admission that a top security official knew and screwed up by not raising the issue makes this fact….redcrayon said:So not facts?mike0305 said:
Bloomberg article:
Ballons
Relevant passage, not sure how Trump national security officials who weren't aware could know if Trump was briefed on it:
One top national security official from the administration of former President Donald Trump said none of the Chinese spy balloons were near sensitive sites or had payloads as large as this one appears to carry. Other senior Trump national security officials said they were not personally aware of intelligence on any Chinese surveillance balloons over the United States during Trump's four years in office and do not believe Trump was made aware.
I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
aggielostinETX said:.Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:
So it seems the former military guys here all agree that we should not have shoot it down prior to this. Why did we even let it get here?
This seems like a massive **** up by our military to allow it to even get over our air space. Explain that.
That's what I mean by carrying the water. Y'all seem to be defending, poor performance and bad decisions.
They shot it down so it would fall in water off the East coast near Norfolk where a bunch of Navy water recovery assets are. Yes, they clearly decided to wait to do that. And anybody opining they definitely made a mistake okay you slept in a Holiday Inn Express last night and know for sure that was the wrong approach. Everybody has a right to their opinion.
Do you not think that letting it get over US soil was a mistake?
Has anybody been hurt yet by this? Apparently no, and they shot it down in a way and over water near Norfolk naval base making it as easy as possible to recover it.
So folks against what they did, can you 100% say with factual evidence that approach was wrong?
Montana averages 7 people per square mile. It wouldn't have been too hard to take it down there with very little risk to U.S. citizens.redcrayon said:I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
redcrayon said:I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
Hey man, I'm a big supporter of the military. But the recent history has not left a great taste in a lot of peoples mouths.
TexAgs has the highest number of balloon shooter downer experts in the world and that is a GD fact! Don't question us!!!
Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:.Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:
So it seems the former military guys here all agree that we should not have shoot it down prior to this. Why did we even let it get here?
This seems like a massive **** up by our military to allow it to even get over our air space. Explain that.
That's what I mean by carrying the water. Y'all seem to be defending, poor performance and bad decisions.
They shot it down so it would fall in water off the East coast near Norfolk where a bunch of Navy water recovery assets are. Yes, they clearly decided to wait to do that. And anybody opining they definitely made a mistake okay you slept in a Holiday Inn Express last night and know for sure that was the wrong approach. Everybody has a right to their opinion.
Do you not think that letting it get over US soil was a mistake?
Has anybody been hurt yet by this? Apparently no, and they shot it down in a way and over water near Norfolk naval base making it as easy as possible to recover it.
So folks against what they did, can you 100% say with factual evidence that approach was wrong?
Can you say with 100% accuracy that it was correct? What Intel was gathered as a traversed over Alaska and then over the rest of the country. What are they gonna use that intel for? Any ideas?
Today, the U.S. sent a powerful message to the world: If a hostile nation invades our airspace with spy equipment, we'll let it loiter around our strategic military sites for days before we take it out.
— Election Wizard 🇺🇸 (@ElectionWiz) February 4, 2023
I bet Putin is quaking in his boots.
I'm female.aggielostinETX said:redcrayon said:I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
Hey man, I'm a big supporter of the military. But the recent history has not left a great taste in a lot of peoples mouths.
I get it but there are still loyal, very smart people in the Pentagon. But they have civilian leadership. That's just the facts. Even if they advised shooting it down over the Aleutian Islands, they can't just do that unilaterally. Read Eliminatus' post.
Just the optics of strength or weakness alone probably make shooting it down before it crossed the continental US the correct move, no matter how harmless its payload. This media circus… It's a much better PR look if it was shot down and the public never knew about it, or maybe even better if we did know it was taken out before crossing the country.
redcrayon said:I'm female.aggielostinETX said:redcrayon said:I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
Hey man, I'm a big supporter of the military. But the recent history has not left a great taste in a lot of peoples mouths.
I get it but there are still loyal, very smart people in the Pentagon. But they have civilian leadership. That's just the facts. Even if they advised shooting it down over the Aleutian Islands, they can't just do that unilaterally. Read Eliminatus' post.
Apologies. I "hey man" everybody.
I get it we all have leader ship, but at some point someone's gonna take accountability for this, which appears to be a failure, that this balloon was allowed to fly over North America for seven days.
aggielostinETX said:Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:.Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:
So it seems the former military guys here all agree that we should not have shoot it down prior to this. Why did we even let it get here?
This seems like a massive **** up by our military to allow it to even get over our air space. Explain that.
That's what I mean by carrying the water. Y'all seem to be defending, poor performance and bad decisions.
They shot it down so it would fall in water off the East coast near Norfolk where a bunch of Navy water recovery assets are. Yes, they clearly decided to wait to do that. And anybody opining they definitely made a mistake okay you slept in a Holiday Inn Express last night and know for sure that was the wrong approach. Everybody has a right to their opinion.
Do you not think that letting it get over US soil was a mistake?
Has anybody been hurt yet by this? Apparently no, and they shot it down in a way and over water near Norfolk naval base making it as easy as possible to recover it.
So folks against what they did, can you 100% say with factual evidence that approach was wrong?
Can you say with 100% accuracy that it was correct? What Intel was gathered as a traversed over Alaska and then over the rest of the country. What are they gonna use that intel for? Any ideas?
No I can't. But can you? Or is this just a political points scoring contest. Biden is president so…whatever approach was taken was bad?
Recover the balloon as intact as possible and examine it.
What is your background in? Conspiracy theory and message board applications?aggielostinETX said:Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:.Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:
So it seems the former military guys here all agree that we should not have shoot it down prior to this. Why did we even let it get here?
This seems like a massive **** up by our military to allow it to even get over our air space. Explain that.
That's what I mean by carrying the water. Y'all seem to be defending, poor performance and bad decisions.
They shot it down so it would fall in water off the East coast near Norfolk where a bunch of Navy water recovery assets are. Yes, they clearly decided to wait to do that. And anybody opining they definitely made a mistake okay you slept in a Holiday Inn Express last night and know for sure that was the wrong approach. Everybody has a right to their opinion.
Do you not think that letting it get over US soil was a mistake?
Has anybody been hurt yet by this? Apparently no, and they shot it down in a way and over water near Norfolk naval base making it as easy as possible to recover it.
So folks against what they did, can you 100% say with factual evidence that approach was wrong?
Can you say with 100% accuracy that it was correct? What Intel was gathered as a traversed over Alaska and then over the rest of the country. What are they gonna use that intel for? Any ideas?
Your inability to accept the fact of spy games and letting this balloon dance across the US says it all. There is more at play here then the tangible object. We did this for a reason if we saw no threat.
The buck should stop at the top. But it's not like the military can come out now and say exactly how we got to this point. They aren't protected like politicians.aggielostinETX said:redcrayon said:I'm female.aggielostinETX said:redcrayon said:I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
Hey man, I'm a big supporter of the military. But the recent history has not left a great taste in a lot of peoples mouths.
I get it but there are still loyal, very smart people in the Pentagon. But they have civilian leadership. That's just the facts. Even if they advised shooting it down over the Aleutian Islands, they can't just do that unilaterally. Read Eliminatus' post.
Apologies. I "hey man" everybody.
I get it we all have leader ship, but at some point someone's gonna take accountability for this, which appears to be a failure, that this balloon was allowed to fly over North America for seven days.
I don't think the admin thought the public would ever know about this. We'll see who they throw under the bus for it.
So now that we shot this thing down, we are going to hand it back over to the Chinese, right?
I mean, we will do that after take it apart to see how the Chinese have ripped this technology off from us, copied whatever files are on it (assuming it transmitted all the important things already), find out the data transmission protocols it uses, and installed a virus on the storage media on it. Right?
And we won't ask for anything it return, right?
I mean, we will do that after take it apart to see how the Chinese have ripped this technology off from us, copied whatever files are on it (assuming it transmitted all the important things already), find out the data transmission protocols it uses, and installed a virus on the storage media on it. Right?
And we won't ask for anything it return, right?
You don't know that
A Russian balloon would have been shot down right away.StandUpforAmerica said:Today, the U.S. sent a powerful message to the world: If a hostile nation invades our airspace with spy equipment, we'll let it loiter around our strategic military sites for days before we take it out.
— Election Wizard 🇺🇸 (@ElectionWiz) February 4, 2023
I bet Putin is quaking in his boots.
Putin didn't give 10% to the big guy.
Your take is wrong. It is not about ease of recovery, there was (and still) a chance that the instrumentation will detach and sink to the bottom of the ocean, thus complicating recovery. More likely is that a water landing is less destructive than a ground landing.Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:.Pumpkinhead said:aggielostinETX said:
So it seems the former military guys here all agree that we should not have shoot it down prior to this. Why did we even let it get here?
This seems like a massive **** up by our military to allow it to even get over our air space. Explain that.
That's what I mean by carrying the water. Y'all seem to be defending, poor performance and bad decisions.
They shot it down so it would fall in water off the East coast near Norfolk where a bunch of Navy water recovery assets are. Yes, they clearly decided to wait to do that. And anybody opining they definitely made a mistake okay you slept in a Holiday Inn Express last night and know for sure that was the wrong approach. Everybody has a right to their opinion.
Do you not think that letting it get over US soil was a mistake?
Has anybody been hurt yet by this? Apparently no, and they shot it down in a way and over water near Norfolk naval base making it as easy as possible to recover it.
So folks against what they did, can you 100% say with factual evidence that approach was wrong?
But that is not the point... The point is that China won the propaganda battle. China gave the US a big middle finger and we just sat back and watched it happen. A competent President would take action immediately to assure the American people that ANY threat from a hostile government is met immediately with action.
redcrayon said:I'm female.aggielostinETX said:redcrayon said:I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
Hey man, I'm a big supporter of the military. But the recent history has not left a great taste in a lot of peoples mouths.
I get it but there are still loyal, very smart people in the Pentagon. But they have civilian leadership. That's just the facts. Even if they advised shooting it down over the Aleutian Islands, they can't just do that unilaterally. Read Eliminatus' post.
Unless one knows what options and information was relayed by the Pentagon to the civilian leadership as input to make a decision, it is very hard IMO to opine how good or bad the decision making was.
The same fearless leader Putin who can't even take over Ukraine?StandUpforAmerica said:Today, the U.S. sent a powerful message to the world: If a hostile nation invades our airspace with spy equipment, we'll let it loiter around our strategic military sites for days before we take it out.
— Election Wizard 🇺🇸 (@ElectionWiz) February 4, 2023
I bet Putin is quaking in his boots.
You think he has a chance with us?
I'm as conservative as they come too
I am just making an assumption here without any knowledge of how it would work. Is it possible that we used some type of EW to either jam the communications while it was over the US or that we fried the electronics on it prior to it entering our airspace? I know we have some pretty damn powerful jamming (i.e.F-18 Growler). I just do not know what those capabilities are.
Now with this administration and high level military leadership, I have my doubts on whether or not we bungled that.
Now with this administration and high level military leadership, I have my doubts on whether or not we bungled that.
Yeah, but if you just use common sense on this, you have a pretty good chance at getting it right.Pumpkinhead said:redcrayon said:I'm female.aggielostinETX said:redcrayon said:I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
Hey man, I'm a big supporter of the military. But the recent history has not left a great taste in a lot of peoples mouths.
I get it but there are still loyal, very smart people in the Pentagon. But they have civilian leadership. That's just the facts. Even if they advised shooting it down over the Aleutian Islands, they can't just do that unilaterally. Read Eliminatus' post.
Unless one knows what options and information was relayed by the Pentagon to the civilian leadership as input to make a decision, it is very hard IMO to opine how good or bad the decision making was.
Haven't been keeping up with this thread, but man…what a pathetic show of cowardice by this administration.
My question is would the Biden administration have shot it down if it weren't for the political pressure that was mounting and because a majority of Americans thought of the administration negatively for not doing anything? Or would they have done it this way independent of public opinion?
My money would be on the former. I don't claim to know the right answers here, but I feel strongly that Joe Biden's judgement is worse than just about any US president in history.
My money would be on the former. I don't claim to know the right answers here, but I feel strongly that Joe Biden's judgement is worse than just about any US president in history.
Okay.Pumpkinhead said:redcrayon said:I'm female.aggielostinETX said:redcrayon said:I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
Hey man, I'm a big supporter of the military. But the recent history has not left a great taste in a lot of peoples mouths.
I get it but there are still loyal, very smart people in the Pentagon. But they have civilian leadership. That's just the facts. Even if they advised shooting it down over the Aleutian Islands, they can't just do that unilaterally. Read Eliminatus' post.
Unless one knows what options and information was relayed by the Pentagon to the civilian leadership as input to make a decision, it is very hard IMO to opine how good or bad the decision making was.
Bidens America where China tbags us with a spy balloon
You want public knowledge and open source lines of communication for these decisions?Pumpkinhead said:redcrayon said:I'm female.aggielostinETX said:redcrayon said:I guess you should call the Pentagon and let them know that you are better at physics than they are. I'm sure they'd love your assistance since they're all idiots.TexAgs91 said:redcrayon said:Why would we do that when we had disabled it's ability to gather and transmit data?Rapier108 said:When it was over Montana, there are virtually nothing for it to fall on. Should have been blasted out of the sky right then and there.redcrayon said:
We can't just shoot stuff down and endanger civilians. That debris can kill people and destroy property.
Actually, should have shot it down over the Aleutian Islands.
You can't predict where the debris will land. This isn't that simple.
Actually, we can. Ever heard of physics?
Hey man, I'm a big supporter of the military. But the recent history has not left a great taste in a lot of peoples mouths.
I get it but there are still loyal, very smart people in the Pentagon. But they have civilian leadership. That's just the facts. Even if they advised shooting it down over the Aleutian Islands, they can't just do that unilaterally. Read Eliminatus' post.
Unless one knows what options and information was relayed by the Pentagon to the civilian leadership as input to make a decision, it is very hard IMO to opine how good or bad the decision making was.
The government has handled much worse situations that you will never know about.
Calm down over this balloon.
Featured Stories
See All
21:35
39m ago
893
20:07
1h ago
1.3k
13:15
2h ago
1.3k
Texas A&M adds former Washington CB Jordan Shaw via transfer portal
by Ryan Brauninger