BillsFanNC Posted Thursday at 07:50 PM Posted Thursday at 07:50 PM 8 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Can you point me to any of the “many” military experts? I would like to read up on their thoughts. They're hunkered down with the virologists. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted Thursday at 07:51 PM Posted Thursday at 07:51 PM 41 minutes ago, sherpa said: Ya. So how'd they do, and I am quite aware of their air defense weapons. Answer.... Zero. One rarely hears of fighter jets going down but they certainly do. Say the chance is 1/1000 and giving this info increases it to 2/1000. You good with that?
ScotSHO Posted Thursday at 07:54 PM Posted Thursday at 07:54 PM 1 minute ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: One rarely hears of fighter jets going down but they certainly do. Say the chance is 1/1000 and giving this info increases it to 2/1000. You good with that? @SectionC3 needs to know where you got those numbers. He lectured someone endlessly for weeks about a similar issue. I fully expect the same grilling here for you.
BillsFanNC Posted Thursday at 08:00 PM Posted Thursday at 08:00 PM Look at Quack with the 0.001 chance hypotheticals! An absolute clown.
sherpa Posted Thursday at 08:04 PM Posted Thursday at 08:04 PM 7 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: One rarely hears of fighter jets going down but they certainly do. Say the chance is 1/1000 and giving this info increases it to 2/1000. You good with that? I'm not sure what your point is here, but if the US lost a fighter, (and "jet" is a senseless redundant), it would be known. I'm not good with the leak, but in my humble view, the consequences, which amount to ZERO, have been grossly overstated for political reasons. Clean it up and move on. Existing policy re the Houthis is way better than it was three months ago, which resulted in getting an F-18 shot down, and very nearly two. The stupid, ungodly expense of simply defending against missile and drone attacks was idiotic, not that the commander in chief was even aware of it. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted Thursday at 08:17 PM Posted Thursday at 08:17 PM 11 minutes ago, sherpa said: I'm not sure what your point is here, but if the US lost a fighter, (and "jet" is a senseless redundant), it would be known. I'm not good with the leak, but in my humble view, the consequences, which amount to ZERO, have been grossly overstated for political reasons. Clean it up and move on. Existing policy re the Houthis is way better than it was three months ago, which resulted in getting an F-18 shot down, and very nearly two. The stupid, ungodly expense of simply defending against missile and drone attacks was idiotic, not that the commander in chief was even aware of it. My point is it increases the risk of a jet being shot down by a finite amount of exactly what that amount is I don’t know but analysts seem to agree it’s not zero.
Pokebball Posted Thursday at 08:18 PM Posted Thursday at 08:18 PM (edited) 5 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: No. D's are absolutely correct in keeping this issue in Americans thoughts. R's are absolutely wrong in not admitting the seriousness of this event and pulling all levers to stop it from happening again. The Rs need to investigate how this happened and make corrections, so this doesn't happen again. I think everyone agrees with that. The left's feigned outrage after Hillary used her personal server for 4 years and Joe storing CLASSIFIED information in his garage, just appears a tad bit subject to me. Hypocrisy at its finest. Edited Thursday at 08:37 PM by Pokebball 1
sherpa Posted Thursday at 08:27 PM Posted Thursday at 08:27 PM 3 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: My point is it increases the risk of a jet being shot down by a finite amount of exactly what that amount is I don’t know but analysts seem to agree it’s not zero. The odds is losing an airplane over Yemen are far greater if it is from mechanical issues. This entire thing, as a threat to US forces is ridiculous and purely political. For the fourth time, it was was stupid and needs to be fixed, but the claim that it was a threat to US forces is grossly exaggerated. Previous policy pf tolerating drone and missile launches resulted in the friendly fire destroying of an F-18, and nearly two, but for the rapid action of an LSO on the back of a carrier who saw it an transmitted to make the second missile stupid. Make it political. I don't really care, bit it is nonsense.
JDHillFan Posted Thursday at 08:32 PM Posted Thursday at 08:32 PM 15 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: My point is it increases the risk of a jet being shot down by a finite amount of exactly what that amount is I don’t know but analysts seem to agree it’s not zero. “Many” analysts?
Joe Ferguson forever Posted Thursday at 08:41 PM Posted Thursday at 08:41 PM 12 minutes ago, sherpa said: grossly exaggerated. perhaps but definitely increased. that's bad enough for me. and lying about it at the top levels of the government when it's obvious they're lying is disgusting. 1
nedboy7 Posted Thursday at 08:50 PM Posted Thursday at 08:50 PM (edited) “The whole point about aviation safety is that you have to have the humility to understand that you are imperfect, because everybody screws up. Everybody makes mistakes,” said Lt. John Gadzinski, a former Navy F-14 pilot who flew combat missions from aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf. “But ultimately, if you can’t admit when you’re wrong, you’re going to kill somebody because your ego is too big.” He and other pilots said that each day since Monday, when The Atlantic published an article about the chat disclosures, had brought a stunning new revelation. First came the news that Mr. Hegseth had put the operational sequencing, or flight schedules, for the F/A-18 Hornets targeting the Houthi militia in Yemen on March 15 in the unclassified Signal group chat, which included several other senior officials. “We intentionally don’t share plans with people who don’t need to know,” said one Navy F/A-18 pilot, who has flown frequently in missions in the Middle East. “You don’t share what time we’re supposed to show up over a target. You don’t want to telegraph that we’re about to show up on someone’s doorstep; that’s putting your crew at risk.” He and several other current and former pilots spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid reprisals from the Pentagon and from allies of President Trump What the ***** to transgender liberal snowflake pilots know right? Cmdr. Parker Kuldau, a former Navy F/A-18 pilot, called Mr. Hegseth’s disclosures, and subsequent response to them, “infuriating.” “It’s so beyond what I would expect from anyone in the military,” said Commander Kuldau, who also flew combat missions in the Middle East. “The idea that the secretary of defense, who should know better, has done this, is just mind-boggling.” DUMB ASS IT WAS A HOAX!!! 25 minutes ago, sherpa said: The odds is losing an airplane over Yemen are far greater if it is from mechanical issues. This entire thing, as a threat to US forces is ridiculous and purely political. For the fourth time, it was was stupid and needs to be fixed, but the claim that it was a threat to US forces is grossly exaggerated. Previous policy pf tolerating drone and missile launches resulted in the friendly fire destroying of an F-18, and nearly two, but for the rapid action of an LSO on the back of a carrier who saw it an transmitted to make the second missile stupid. Make it political. I don't really care, bit it is nonsense. I thought you were an independent thinker. You have said this over and over. Yet you have zero ability to criticize your ***** cult. Edited Thursday at 08:51 PM by nedboy7
sherpa Posted Thursday at 09:04 PM Posted Thursday at 09:04 PM (edited) 16 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: I thought you were an independent thinker. You have said this over and over. Yet you have zero ability to criticize your ***** cult. I have criticized it over and over and over. Maybe you can't read. What I am claiming is that the threat is being exaggerated for political reasons. Are those two views hard to understand? Further, I am not part of any cult, and whenever that claim is made, it marks the claimer as a goof. Edited Thursday at 09:08 PM by sherpa
Joe Ferguson forever Posted Thursday at 09:22 PM Posted Thursday at 09:22 PM 17 minutes ago, sherpa said: I have criticized it over and over and over. Maybe you can't read. What I am claiming is that the threat is being exaggerated for political reasons. Are those two views hard to understand? Further, I am not part of any cult, and whenever that claim is made, it marks the claimer as a goof. clearly, the pilots quoted above had much greater concern over the incident than you did. So let's not pretend yours is the only informed position. 1
sherpa Posted Thursday at 09:30 PM Posted Thursday at 09:30 PM 2 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: clearly, the pilots quoted above had much greater concern over the incident than you did. So let's not pretend yours is the only informed position. I'm not pretending anything. I understand their concern as it was a major screw up and needs to be fixed. You can find anyone on the internet to make any claim you want. But what happened? Nothing. I taught Soviet anti air systems and am familiar with the basics of these, which are derivatives. You could tell the Houthis that we were going to strike this target at this time using this weapon and this delivery maneuver, and it wouldn't matter. Any successful shot would be pure luck, and surely not the result of what this foolish leak was about.
4th&long Posted Thursday at 09:34 PM Author Posted Thursday at 09:34 PM 2 hours ago, sherpa said: Ya. So how'd they do, and I am quite aware of their air defense weapons. Answer.... Zero. That's not what this is about and you know it. The US better be able to hit a terrorist group or we are really wasting our time here. Get a clue.
Doc Posted Thursday at 09:35 PM Posted Thursday at 09:35 PM Again, Waltz's aide needs to be fired and probably prosecuted for deliberately adding Goldberg to the Signal chat group. That was no accident. It's not like a butt-dial: you have to look up his Signal handle and then send the link to him. And Goldberg didn't hack-into the chat group, which would be far more troubling. 1 1
4th&long Posted Thursday at 09:37 PM Author Posted Thursday at 09:37 PM 1 hour ago, sherpa said: I'm not sure what your point is here, but if the US lost a fighter, (and "jet" is a senseless redundant), it would be known. I'm not good with the leak, but in my humble view, the consequences, which amount to ZERO, have been grossly overstated for political reasons. Clean it up and move on. Existing policy re the Houthis is way better than it was three months ago, which resulted in getting an F-18 shot down, and very nearly two. The stupid, ungodly expense of simply defending against missile and drone attacks was idiotic, not that the commander in chief was even aware of it. Horse sh it. If Biden and his team did this the crying on the right would go on for months. Hell you guys are still cryingabout things they did! Biden was senile and his administration wasn't near the clown show trump is running. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted Thursday at 09:45 PM Posted Thursday at 09:45 PM (edited) 15 minutes ago, sherpa said: I'm not pretending anything. I understand their concern as it was a major screw up and needs to be fixed. You can find anyone on the internet to make any claim you want. But what happened? Nothing. I taught Soviet anti air systems and am familiar with the basics of these, which are derivatives. You could tell the Houthis that we were going to strike this target at this time using this weapon and this delivery maneuver, and it wouldn't matter. Any successful shot would be pure luck, and surely not the result of what this foolish leak was about. Two pilots' names are listed here. Seemingly they were honorably discharged and satisfactory as pilots. so it' not really about finding someone on the internet making a claim I want. It's about people with similar qualifications and experience coming to vastly different conclusions than you. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/youre-going-to-kill-somebody-pilots-fume-as-hegseth-blows-off-responsibility-for-leak/ar-AA1BN3Bz Edited Thursday at 09:46 PM by Joe Ferguson forever
BillsFanNC Posted Thursday at 09:50 PM Posted Thursday at 09:50 PM I'd put it at 10% honest mistake and 90% nefarious "mistake" Of all the journalists that could have been mistakenly added to a sensitive chat it is Russia, Russia, Russia, suckers & losers, Iraq WMD hoaxer Goldberg? 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted Thursday at 10:21 PM Posted Thursday at 10:21 PM 30 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: I'd put it at 10% honest mistake and 90% nefarious "mistake" Of all the journalists that could have been mistakenly added to a sensitive chat it is Russia, Russia, Russia, suckers & losers, Iraq WMD hoaxer Goldberg? You mean he's an excellent reporter that finds and publishes important stories that withstand the scrutiny of time?
Recommended Posts