Chinese spy balloon over Montana?

[SoCal Deek]

1 minute ago, Roundybout said:

 

Yes lol our national defense keeps working and I will remain zen until something requires me to not be zen. 

 

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/9480589/surveillance-balloon-canadian-forces-response/

 

 

We spend a trillion dollars on our armed forces, it's the one thing that neither side can screw up too badly. 

You keep going back to words like panic and zen. I believe you COMPLETELY misunderstand the national discussion. But….carry on. 

[sherpa]

It wasn't a Canadian fighter, it was a US F-22.

From your very own link:

     "it was a U.S. F-22 that “successfully fired at the object.”

[Roundybout]

2 minutes ago, sherpa said:

It wasn't a Canadian fighter, it was a US F-22.

From your very own link:

     "it was a U.S. F-22 that “successfully fired at the object.”

 

Through NORAD. Trudeau ordered it. 

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

You keep going back to words like panic and zen. I believe you COMPLETELY misunderstand the national discussion. But….carry on. 

 

What is the national discussion? That Biden let a balloon in? It's already been proven that these balloons have been making their way over here for years. I'm really not surprised. 

[wnyguy]

12 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

 

No no, you misunderstand me. My point is why should I care? Why should any of us care? Let the damn government sort it all out. 

You do realize this is a political forum in which topics relating to the government are discussed, right? These things being shot down by the American military may, in some small way, relate to the government that handles the US Armed Forces. You don't care about it, that's fine. I'm sure there is a thread that you may care about somewhere on this vast message board, feel free to go there.

4 minutes ago, sherpa said:

It wasn't a Canadian fighter, it was a US F-22.

From your very own link:

     "it was a U.S. F-22 that “successfully fired at the object.”

Please don't confuse him with facts, he doesn't care.

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

 

Through NORAD. Trudeau ordered it. 

 

What is the national discussion? That Biden let a balloon in? It's already been proven that these balloons have been making their way over here for years. I'm really not surprised. 

Oh brother. You see no reason for people to discuss the fact that US fighter planes are firing actual missiles over North America? Really? I can’t wait to find out when it will become discussion-worthy. 

[B-Man]

 

"The government will sort it out"

 

 

 

UH-HUH: 

All those spy balloons have had only a ‘limited’ benefit for China, White House claims

 

https://fortune.com/2023/02/13/china-spy-balloons-limited-benefit-white-house-national-security-council/

 

 

 

 

If the benefit Beijing was looking for was to gauge the mettle of our commander-in-chief, those balloons have been immeasurably valuable.

 

 

 

[sherpa]

5 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

 

Through NORAD. Trudeau ordered it. 

 

 

Trudeau authorized it.

Even in the NORAD org, Trudeau does not have the authority to "order" US engagements.

Biden did as well, and it was shot down by a US F-22.

[Doc]

Dems are always late to the party. Romney says in 2012 that Russia is our biggest geopolitical foe and they scoff ant the time, and then 4 years later they’re tear the country apart because they’re convinced the President is a Russian asset.  Now China sends a spy balloon over the US and it’s “why should I/we care?”  

[Tiberius]

2 hours ago, Doc said:

Dems are always late to the party. Romney says in 2012 that Russia is our biggest geopolitical foe and they scoff ant the time, and then 4 years later they’re tear the country apart because they’re convinced the President is a Russian asset.  Now China sends a spy balloon over the US and it’s “why should I/we care?”  

They did not attack us until 2016. 2012 was before 2016 

[Tommy Callahan]

And again, the left references the big lie.

still cant accept the results of the election. SMH

 

 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2023 by Chris farley

[Biden is Mentally Fit]

3 hours ago, Doc said:

Dems are always late to the party. Romney says in 2012 that Russia is our biggest geopolitical foe and they scoff ant the time, and then 4 years later they’re tear the country apart because they’re convinced the President is a Russian asset.  Now China sends a spy balloon over the US and it’s “why should I/we care?”  

“China is going to eat our lunch? Come on man. They’re not bad folks.” 
 

J. Biden 2019

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

They did not attack us until 2016. 2012 was before 2016 

It’s what’s known as foresight. No doubt a concept as unfamiliar to you as it was to Saint Barack when he said to Romney “the 80s called and want their foreign policy back”. Like you several times a day on this board, he proved to be a lightweight. 

Edited February 14, 2023 by JDHillFan

[Tiberius]

25 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

 

It’s what’s known as foresight. No doubt a concept as unfamiliar to you as it was to Saint Barack when he said to Romney “the 80s called and want their foreign policy back”. Like you several times a day on this board, he proved to be a lightweight. 

I'm a lightweight? Umm..ok buddy 

 

And Biden is now doing a good job against Putin, who got use to being praised and pampered with Trump

 

Biden is not an appeaser 

[Biden is Mentally Fit]

6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

 

 

Biden is not an appeaser 

Hard to say. He did just let China fly a spy balloon over our country from coast to coast before taking action. Tell me again why that was ok? 

[Tiberius]

Just now, JDHillFan said:

Hard to say. He did just let China fly a spy balloon over our country from coast to coast before taking action. Tell me again why that was ok? 

That isn't appeasement so the question is moot 

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

That isn't appeasement so the question is moot 

 

True, it's incompetence.  If not dereliction of duty.

[The Frankish Reich]

I don’t know much about this guy (apparently a regular on a news network I rarely watch) but I found this to be the best explanation so far of what China is playing at and how it isn’t much cause for concern. The China part starts more than halfway through. The first part (Ukraine) is interesting too. 

[Doc]

3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I don’t know much about this guy (apparently a regular on a news network I rarely watch) but I found this to be the best explanation so far of what China is playing at and how it isn’t much cause for concern. The China part starts more than halfway through. The first part (Ukraine) is interesting too. 

 

If it wasn't much cause for concern...why shoot it down then?

[sherpa]

24 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I don’t know much about this guy (apparently a regular on a news network I rarely watch) but I found this to be the best explanation so far of what China is playing at and how it isn’t much cause for concern. The China part starts more than halfway through. The first part (Ukraine) is interesting too. 

 

24 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I don’t know much about this guy (apparently a regular on a news network I rarely watch) but I found this to be the best explanation so far of what China is playing at and how it isn’t much cause for concern. The China part starts more than halfway through. The first part (Ukraine) is interesting too. 

 

 

I didn't see anything about China or surveillance balloons, and a resume check shows absolutely nothing lending credence to a claim he would know anything about that.

He was an enlisted Navy guy who was one of the POW camp instructors, and he recently volunteered to fight in the Ukraine.

What gives him any knowledge of balloon surveillance technology?

Not that I heard him say anything about that in the link.

Edited February 14, 2023 by sherpa

[The Frankish Reich]

1 hour ago, sherpa said:

 

 

 

I didn't see anything about China or surveillance balloons, and a resume check shows absolutely nothing lending credence to a claim he would know anything about that.

He was an enlisted Navy guy who was one of the POW camp instructors, and he recently volunteered to fight in the Ukraine.

What gives him any knowledge of balloon surveillance technology?

Not that I heard him say anything about that in the link.

He says he was assigned to the NSA, so if he’s telling the truth he knows something about signal intelligence. 
Why shoot it down if it’s no risk? His take: because WE will learn a whole lot more about China and its surveillance programs/capabilities by shooting it down over the shallow continental shelf/ocean, where it can be easily retrieved and analyzed. That is, a whole lot more than China would have ever learned from the surveillance itself. The fact that the Navy has already retrieved the business end of the balloon lends credence to his theory (he says that part is pretty much a piece of cake for the Navy). 

[reddogblitz]

11 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I don’t know much about this guy (apparently a regular on a news network I rarely watch) but I found this to be the best explanation so far of what China is playing at and how it isn’t much cause for concern. The China part starts more than halfway through. The first part (Ukraine) is interesting too. 

 

I saw this on Bill Maher Friday night. While watching I was thinking, wow, what a great opportunity for @Tiberius to put his money where his mouth is and fight against Russia. If they'll take a 60 year old man, surely they'd take him too.  What's he waiting for?