• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US shoots down ‘high-altitude object’ over Alaska, White House says

Napoleon said:
What hypocrisy? These situations are apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

They are, and that is why it's hypocritical. They expect the "conservative response" to be the same for two very different scenarios. We expect different responses to identified threats than unidentified objects...

It's not too much to ask that our government shows the ability to identify targets before shooting missiles at them. This has the same kind of knee jerk MO as that time that Biden and the DOD wanted to show they were on the ball in Afghanistan following the airport bombing by blowing the shit out of an Afghani aid worker and his family...
 
Napoleon said:
No.

1) I’m not in favor of shooting things for no reason other than you don’t know what they are.

2) How many flights are there at 40,000 feet in the arctic?

3) This wasn’t a concern with the balloon so what makes this different?
Click to expand...
a lot.

The highest certified altitude of an airliner was Concorde's 60,000 feet. Today some of the corporate jets can fly at 51,000 feet.
 
Napoleon said:
No.

1) I’m not in favor of shooting things for no reason other than you don’t know what they are.

2) How many flights are there at 40,000 feet in the arctic?

3) This wasn’t a concern with the balloon so what makes this different?
Click to expand...
Seriously?

Well it was self propelled. So they didn't know where it would go next.

That's how it is different and why it doesn't matter how many flights were over the arctic.
 
Napoleon said:
No.

1) I’m not in favor of shooting things for no reason other than you don’t know what they are.

2) How many flights are there at 40,000 feet in the arctic?

3) This wasn’t a concern with the balloon so what makes this different?
Click to expand...
The highest certified altitude of an airliner was Concorde's 60,000 feet. Today some of the corporate jets can fly at 51,000 feet.
 
jmotivator said:
They are, and that is why it's hypocritical. They expect the "conservative response" to be the same for two very different scenarios.

It's not too much to ask that our government shows the ability to identify targets before shooting missiles at them. This has the same kind of knee jerk MO as that time that Biden and the DOD wanted to show they were on the ball in Afghanistan following the airport bombing by blowing the shit out of an Afghani aid worker and his family...
Click to expand...

Oh no, in that the conservative response has been perfectly consistent: criticize Biden regardless of the circumstances.
 
ClaraD said:
a lot.

The highest certified altitude of an airliner was Concorde's 60,000 feet. Today some of the corporate jets can fly at 51,000 feet.
Click to expand...
Some people just can't let go of their first, uninformed, emotional reaction.
 
Galactic Spin said:
Seriously?

Well it was self propelled. So they didn't know where it would go next.

That's how it is different and why it doesn't matter how many flights were over the arctic.
Click to expand...
He is saying Artic like it is Antarctica and it isn't...it is Alaska we are talking about....they have flights all over Alaska because it is the easiest method of moving supplies.
 
jmotivator said:
They are, and that is why it's hypocritical. They expect the "conservative response" to be the same for two very different scenarios. We expect different responses to identified threats than unidentified objects...

It's not too much to ask that our government shows the ability to identify targets before shooting missiles at them. This has the same kind of knee jerk MO as that time that Biden and the DOD wanted to show they were on the ball in Afghanistan following the airport bombing by blowing the shit out of an Afghani aid worker and his family...
Click to expand...
they do not have to identify anything...it is within our airspace and jeopardizing aircraft....and it was there without permission. Are you going to check out the burglar in your home before you shoot him?
 
good. maybe Biden finally internalized the fact we cant allow undentified floating objects in our airspce
 
Cardinal said:
Oh no, in that the conservative response has been perfectly consistent: criticize Biden regardless of the circumstances.
Click to expand...

Well yeah, because Biden always ****s everything up. Remember when he wanted to show he was hot on the trail of those airport bombers in Afghanistan by blowing the shit out of a guy and his family as they were bringing water to refugees?

Know the target. It's not too much to demand.
 
D
ClaraD said:
a lot.

The highest certified altitude of an airliner was Concorde's 60,000 feet. Today some of the corporate jets can fly at 51,000 feet.
Click to expand...
You didn’t answer the questions. There are no flight paths anywhere near where this object was.

05B234ED-65FB-46DE-A8DB-5D49E37A54C9.webp
 
jmotivator said:
Well yeah, because Biden always ****s everything up. Remember when he wanted to show he was hot on the trail of those airport bombers in Afghanistan by blowing the shit out of a guy and his family as they were bringing water to refugees?

Know the target. It's not too much to demand.
Click to expand...

You don't even care that it was unmanned. You probably thought it might have been, and the fact that it wasn't had no bearing on you.

As I said, your hypocrisy is performative.
 
Cardinal said:
You don't even care that it was unmanned. You probably thought it might have been, and the fact that it wasn't had no bearing on you.

As I said, your hypocrisy is performative.
Click to expand...

I don't trust their determination of a thing they already stated they couldn't identify...
 
jmotivator said:
I don't trust their determination of a thing they already stated they couldn't identify...
Click to expand...
Okay, then the object was identified and you can rest easy. If you don't accept their claim that it was unmanned then you don't have to accept the claim that it was unidentified.

That said, thanks for the admission that you're not here to debate in good faith.
 
Napoleon said:
So now the military is shooting things out of the sky without knowing what they are. Nice.
Click to expand...
You don't need to know what it is, dammit. If you see something fly over the skies of MURICA, you take your gun and you shoot sky high.
 
uptower said:
I'm confused. Should these things be stopped "as soon as they get to Alaska" or after they've been observed, identified and tracked across the country? Should they be shot down over Montana where there's "nothing but cows and telegraph poles" apparently, or over the sea where their parts might get wet? Or now, should they be left alone altogether and not shot down at all?

The tiny right-wing portion of my brain is wracked with dissonance. Things were so much simpler when Trump was president and suddenly everything the government did was right.
Click to expand...

First, is this story true.
Second, 40,000 is the altitude airlines fly at (this one over Alaska). 65,000 is above all aircraft.

Not apples to apples is my point.
 
ClaraD said:
there is huge differences here...our military recommended this one be downed and it was over water and not over land.
Click to expand...
The last one was over water at times as well -Aleutian islands.
Th military doesnt have a clue - they are too worried about offending China
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom