Next time, the Chinese balloon might be a weapon.

[MarathonMike]

Beautress made a great point in her thread about the Chinese balloon. It could have been loaded with anthrax or some other airborne poison. Or how about instead of spy equipment, maybe next time it's carrying a nuclear dirty bomb? What that balloon did was show the world how the number one superpower doesn't know how to defend it's own airspace. The world already knows we can't/won't defend our own border.

 

[MarcATL]

Remember folks, Trump had three of such balloons under his careful watch.

Nothing was said by anyone.

 

[MarathonMike]

Remember folks, Trump had three of such balloons under his careful watch.

Nothing was said by anyone.

BAHAHAHAHA!!! Marc thinks US Presidents are responsible for surveillance of US airspace!!!

 

[frigidweirdo]

Beautress made a great point in her thread about the Chinese balloon. It could have been loaded with anthrax or some other airborne poison. Or how about instead of spy equipment, maybe next time it's carrying a nuclear dirty bomb? What that balloon did was show the world how the number one superpower doesn't know how to defend it's own airspace. The world already knows we can't/won't defend our own border.

Say, for example, the balloon had anthrax. How would you defend against this?

Shoot it down? You might release the anthrax anyway.


Some things you simply cannot defend against.

What you do it you have a deterrent, if you attack us, we'll hit you back harder.... it's all you can do.

 

[bodecea]

BAHAHAHAHA!!! Marc thinks US Presidents are responsible for surveillance of US airspace!!!

So....you are admitting that President is not responsible?

 

[occupied]

Way more effective ways to do any of that than to send a balloon. Aerosols released into the stratosphere tend to stay there for quite some time and are blown vast distances. Not to mention that an armed surveillance platform would be an overt act of war.

 

[MarathonMike]

Say, for example, the balloon had anthrax. How would you defend against this?

Shoot it down? You might release the anthrax anyway.


Some things you simply cannot defend against.

What you do it you have a deterrent, if you attack us, we'll hit you back harder.... it's all you can do.

Say, for example, the balloon had anthrax. How would you defend against this?

If I were in charge, I would have ordered high altitude drones to intercept it as soon as we detected it over Alaska. Then take the balloon back over the Pacific Ocean and bring it down.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Beautress made a great point in her thread about the Chinese balloon. It could have been loaded with anthrax or some other airborne poison. Or how about instead of spy equipment, maybe next time it's carrying a nuclear dirty bomb? What that balloon did was show the world how the number one superpower doesn't know how to defend it's own airspace. The world already knows we can't/won't defend our own border.

You know they have nukes right?

 

[jotathought]

Remember folks, Trump had three of such balloons under his careful watch.

Nothing was said by anyone.

.. and? Does that change the outcome for Biden's irresponsibility? Two wrongs don't make a right

 

[occupied]

If I were in charge, I would have ordered high altitude drones to intercept it as soon as we detected it over Alaska. Then take the balloon back over the Pacific Ocean and bring it down.

Why would you want to show a surveillance balloon our best stuff and true capabilities? We shot their new thing down with thirty year-old technology. These balloons seem more like some despot's pet project rather than something truly effective.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If I were in charge, I would have ordered high altitude drones to intercept it as soon as we detected it over Alaska. Then take the balloon back over the Pacific Ocean and bring it down.

And do you think this is an effective use of money?

There has been NO THREAT of anthrax or anything else. Balloons could come from ANYWHERE. They could launch them over California if they chose to....

Basically, like building a wall when no wall is necessary, and fund would be better off spent in a different manner

 

[basquebromance]