• 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

Integrityrespec said:
Wow! Joe is so decisive and strong. LOL. He's a joke. So shooting this one down on the west coast just puts the lie to the administrations explanation of why they let the other fly across the country. I'm sure Xi told him to behave.
Click to expand...
Nope, the 2 are not the same. The first one was at a much higher altitude and was much larger than this one. Are you calling our soldiers liars?
 
ClaraD said:
the military said that the object at 65000 ft was not a danger to anyone on the ground and that if it was shot down it could become a danger...it was over land, not water...and as soon as it came to a lower altitude and was over water, they shot it down. You really think our military is incompetent and that is sad.
Click to expand...

... the balloon crossed over Alaska, then Canada, then entered CONUS over Montana. The military only scrambled a plane to follow it after people started posting pictures of it in the sky over Montana.

And how would they know that a balloon at 60,000 feet was no danger to people on the ground? What if it dropped a payload to drop? Heck, what if the balloon accidental popped over a populated area?
 
Great. A weenie-wagging contest between nuclear nations. :rolleyes:
 
jmotivator said:
... the balloon crossed over Alaska, then Canada, then entered CONUS over Montana. The military only scrambled a plane to follow it after people started posting pictures of it in the sky over Montana.

And how would they know that a balloon at 60,000 feet was no danger to people on the ground? What if it dropped a payload to drop? Heck, what if the balloon accidental popped over a populated area?
Click to expand...
Do you have top secret clearance? If not, you don't know when they spotted it or when they started checking it out. You also don't know who did what or recommended what.
 
Cardinal said:
You were under no obligation to take on the position that the unmanned claim was false, but you did anyway. You just couldn't help yourself.
Click to expand...

You built another straw man, I see. Keep punching, Cardinal. :rolleyes:
 
jmotivator said:
... the balloon crossed over Alaska, then Canada, then entered CONUS over Montana. The military only scrambled a plane to follow it after people started posting pictures of it in the sky over Montana.

And how would they know that a balloon at 60,000 feet was no danger to people on the ground? What if it dropped a payload to drop? Heck, what if the balloon accidental popped over a populated area?
Click to expand...
this second one wasn't at 60,000 ft, it was at 40000 and it was much much smaller than the first one.
 
stealthycat said:
“We’re going to remain vigilant about our airspace,” he added. “The president takes his obligations to protect our national security interests as paramount.”

LOL

except at the southern border
and Afghanistan debacle
and when China sends surveillance balloon across the USA
Click to expand...
um, he has more detentions than Trump ever did...that shows our border is far more secure under Biden than under Trump.
 
This balloon issue seems to be ballooning out of proportion
 
jmotivator said:
You built another straw man, I see. Keep punching, Cardinal. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Well, you're free to correct the record then. Do you or don't you believe that the object was unmanned? Because you stated before that you don't believe it.
 
Aside from the possibility that this could be another Chinese weather balloon, what else could it be and why? Aren't there regulations on who can fly what and where?
I think Alaska relies a lot on air transport, so that could be a legit concern.
 
jmotivator said:
You can stop shooting your argument, it's already dead.

Weird that the same rules didn't apply to an identified Chinese spy balloon, isn't it? Why didn't Joe shoot it while it was entering Alaskan air space, rather than leaving South Carolina air space? :unsure:
Click to expand...
The same rules did apply. They shot it down over water. The Chinese balloon was not a threat to air traffic. Dude you keep running out of things to say and trying to invent new things that aren't any better. Sorry buddy, you just don't have anything to whine about here.
 
Lovebug said:
Aside from the possibility that this could be another Chinese weather balloon, what else could it be and why? Aren't there regulations on who can fly what and where?
I think Alaska relies a lot on air transport, so that could be a legit concern.
Click to expand...
It could indeed just be a weather balloon
 
Napoleon said:
“Mr Kirby said there was little information available about the object at the time it was shot down, but clarified that it was “much smaller than the spy balloon we took down last Saturday” and had “no significant payload.”

“We’re calling this an object because that’s the best description we have right now,” he said. “We do not know who owns it, whether it’s state-owned or corporate-owned or privately-owned. ”
Click to expand...
It's a UFO.

Unidentified Floating Object.
 
jmotivator said:
... the balloon crossed over Alaska, then Canada, then entered CONUS over Montana. The military only scrambled a plane to follow it after people started posting pictures of it in the sky over Montana.

And how would they know that a balloon at 60,000 feet was no danger to people on the ground? What if it dropped a payload to drop? Heck, what if the balloon accidental popped over a populated area?
Click to expand...
They assessed that it didn't have a payload to drop, and that it was in no danger of "popping."

The risk was minimal and the intelligence gained from it was massive. And it was brought down safely over water where the debris could be collected and analyzed.

Sounds like the military knows what it is doing.
 
Napoleon said:
I don’t think a reasonable response is to just start shooting at everything at 40,000 feet and ask questions later.
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on if it exploded on contact...
 
Napoleon said:
You should probably read more information about this. It wasn’t a balloon - in fact they were explicit that it was not the size or shape of the recent balloon and are not willing to refer to it as a balloon. They described it as a cylindrical, silvery, object the size of a car moving at fast speeds that appeared to be unmanned and without a propulsion system. Pilots have reported seeing such objects for decades and have never collided with one.
Click to expand...
Who described it this way?
 
lwf said:
It wasn't unidentified. It was identified by the pilots. They just haven't released this information to the public at this point.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom