Breaking News

27 thoughts on “Breaking News

  1. They keep trying but they are trying too hard. Just not funny.

    The balloon may or may not be “spying” but if most probably is not. Why would it be? Anybody can rent a plane and fly it just about anywhere they want. And they could go where they want without depending on the direction of the wind. The decision has been made to not shoot it down for very valid reasons – things dropping from the sky are dangerous.


    1. Fly anywhere they want? I’m guessing being so intelligent as you claim that restricted airspace, flight paths, no fly zones and NORAD do not exist. Neither does SIGINT.


    2. Nope

      The airspace over most military installations is restricted.

      Back when I was actively flying, planning a flight over Virginia was often a zig zag because we have so many restricted areas.

      Just like you can’t fly over Area 51 in Roswell, NM


      1. “Nope”

        I said “just about.” I have a pilot license as well. I know that there are some areas where you may not fly DIRECTLY overhead. So you got me on a nit pick, but are you really going to argue that a balloon moving where the winds take it is the way to gather intelligence that you cannot get from a plane, a car, a satellite or Google Maps?

        Liked by 1 person

  2. The Bee stings.

    OF COURSE Stumble Joe has surrendered to a balloon. There are reports the man had been trying to surrender to Russia over Ukraine, but China is bigger.


  3. If it is an attempt by the Chinese to “spy” on us, they are even more incompetent than the Russian military. The thing is visible with the naked eye. There’s nothing it can do that their satellites can’t do better… without being seen.

    I know some here won’t believe this, but shooting it down should not be the first option. It may have a backup defense that would disperse biohazards if shot down. There are ways to neutralize it without shooting it down. I’d bet money EMPs can take out any electronics onboard. And probably already have.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. You can be sure it didn’t transmit diddly squat from the moment it was detected to the moment it was shot down.

      There were two reasons to shoot it down over the ocean.

      (1) To recover the equipment onboard, check for biohazards, and determine exactly what the thing was designed to do. A soft landing in the ocean would preserve more of the equipment and if there were any biohazards onboard, they wouldn’t be spread over populated areas. Plus, if any piece of that falling equipment had so much as put a dent in a daisy, FOX News would have been screaming about how Biden had endangered people’s lives.


      MAGATs need to learn the lesson of Hamlet. “To be or not to be” — “To act or not to act.” In the end, going mad and doing nothing (Ophelia); pretending to go mad and doing nothing (Hamlet); and going off half cocked (Laertes), all ended up in death. The only survivor was Fortinbras. When his father was murdered he left the country; gathered an army, and returned to avenge his father’s death. Fortinbras acted, but he acted with restraint. That is the lesson of Hamlet. Act. But act with restraint.

      MAGATs waiver between being Ophelia and Laertes. FOX is Hamlet. Thank God, Biden is Fortinbas.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. BTW, why use a $400,000 missile to shoot down a balloon, F-22s have a 20mm cannon.

        Were they afraid the balloon would take evasive action? They fired from so close the missile didn’t even detonate.


        1. “BTW. . . ”

          Take it up with the military. They were given the green light on Wednesday and the details were left to them. The military decided where and how to bring the balloon down. Their decision to wait until the debris fell into the sea appears to be prudent. And the choice of a missile was theirs as well.

          The right-wing media critique that a cannon should have been used you are parroting is ridiculous. The balloon was well above the service ceiling of an F-22 when it was struck. I will speculate that if the missile did not explode, that was a choice made not a sign it was too close to the launching aircraft. Puncturing the balloon would allow the payload to descend with less damage than an explosion. Video shows just that.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. The video shows the missile striking the rigging for the instrument package below the balloon.

            And I didn’t say Biden made the choice to use a missile, I just asked why such a choice was made.

            The F22 can perform combat maneuvers at 60,000 feet and can arch above that. It was within cannon range.

            Of course there could still be some good reason for the choice, but the instrument package falling under a shredded envelope would be far more recoverable than one free falling separated from the envelope,


          2. “The video shows the missile striking the rigging for the instrument package below the balloon.”

            That is not the video I saw. The one I saw showed the balloon venting and collapsing above the payload which then began streaming downward.

            The official service ceiling of the F-22 is 50,000 feet. It was already 8,000 feet above that when it fired that single missile at the target that was thousands of feet higher.

            Your expertise in every field of human endeavor never ceases to amaze. Now you know more about air-to-air engagements and the top secret capabilities of the F-22 than the professional airmen who fly it. Simply amazing.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. Didn’t read the link again

            According to the link, the F22 cannot only operate at 60,000 ft, it can maneuver at that altitude, the only fighter that can.


          4. “Didn’t read the link again”

            I have no idea what link you are referring to.

            Having done some research – you should try it some time – I know that the cannon on the F-22 is a fixed, forward firing gatling gun. To fire such a weapon into a target that may or may not massively explode as you barrel after your bullet stream at very high speed does not seem prudent. Apparently, the Air Force did not like that idea much either.

            There is absolutely no reason for your second guessing about elementary aerial tactics. It is just one more attempt to smear the President since you can no longer whine about the balloon not being shot down.

            Liked by 2 people

          5. “Helium balloons do not explode”

            Of course not. But the payload was very substantial and it would not be a stretch to think it might be rigged to explode rather than give up its secrets.

            The munitions fired by the cannon are designed for accurate use at around 1000m – a lot closer than two miles even if the bullets can travel that far. It is very much a secondary weapon on the F-22. Your quibbling over the military’s choice of munitions is part and parcel of the attempt to keep the “issue” alive. IMHO.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. Why use a $400,000 missile? I dunno. Maybe J.D. Vance and his shotgun weren’t available. Maybe Hunter Biden gets a commission on missiles. I’ll bet there’s a contract for missiles on his laptop. Why don’t you ask QAnon?

          Liked by 2 people

          1. I didn’t say anything about Biden.

            There may be a good reason, but it seems to me that if the intent is to recover anything useful, venting the envelope would be more useful.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s