Who is dumber?

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by ds52262, Apr 8, 2009.

  1. ds52262

    ds52262 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    0
    There were two stories in the news this week that made me ask "who is dumber?"

    The first involved the troubled young Canadian who led a two ship of F-16's across the country. Not very bright when you consider the potential of being turned into a flaming pile of scrap metal.

    The second invovled the four young men who shot and killed Marcus Luttrell's therapy dog "DASY". After killing the dog and leading the "Lone Survivor" across 4 counties in Texas they had the nerve to trash talk the former Navy Seal. I really dont think it is Marcus they need to fear, but some of his angry friends who make a living out of dispatching the garbage of this world.

    So I ask who is dumber?
     
  2. wilbur5672

    wilbur5672 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would say that there is more than enough 'dumbness' on the first one to cover both of your examples. Why was a plane with a "troubled" individual piloting it allowed to fly into the US all the way to Missouri? We were extremely lucky that no innocent Americans were killed. Perhaps he wasn't shot down because the F-16s were not armed. The last is pure speculation on my part. Therefore, the dumbness vote on my part goes to the Dept of Homeland Security.
     
  3. LineInTheSand

    LineInTheSand USCGA 2006

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    8,759
    Likes Received:
    1,011
    Department of Homeland Security? Sounds like NORAD's job to me (which includes U.S. and Canada). The Air Force is in charge of that area (and that's DoD).

    Try again Wilbur.


    My vote is for the dog killers.
     
  4. wilbur5672

    wilbur5672 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    You might have hit on a problem with this new department, figuring out who is in charge. Irregardless, Customs and Border Patrol is taking credit for their successful coordination of the incident on their website this morning. I suppose had the plane flown into a building, they would be blaming NORAD.

    Just my guess, but I doubt if the final decision to shoot down a possible terrorist aircraft penetrating our border would be left up to DoD.

    I would also guess that the real terrorists (can we still call them that?) have taken an interest in this and are studying our response closely.
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2009
  5. bruno

    bruno Retired Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,001
    Likes Received:
    301
    I guess that I am completely lost on the logic here- it would seem to me that tracking a dinky little plane for all that time and then arresting the pilot when he landed would be seen by most folks as a success. Why would anyone want the first response to be shooting this plane down? Proportional response is pretty much always the watchword. Just because something is a potential threat doesn't mean it's actually one- follow that logic and the conclusion is the Russians shooting down Korean Air because it was off course over Kamchatka. It seems like Northcom et al... did exactly what they are supposed to do.

    I vote for the Dog killers as well.
     
  6. wilbur5672

    wilbur5672 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    "I guess that I am completely lost on the logic here- follow that logic and the conclusion is the Russians shooting down Korean Air because it was off course over Kamchatka."

    I am also lost on the logic of your analogy. Had the Korean Air plane been stolen by a ''deranged'' unknown, it might be considered similar.

    My fear is that we have become complacent. I have little doubt what would have happened had this incident occurred on 9/11. What has changed about our enemy since then?
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2009
  7. LineInTheSand

    LineInTheSand USCGA 2006

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    8,759
    Likes Received:
    1,011
    You might want to review who owns the airspace around the United States. Exactly which CBP aircraft would have shot down the plane Wilbur? (PLEASE ANSWER THAT QUESTION). I recommend googling "NORAD" to determine who is charged with this. That doesn't mean there isn't coordination with other DHS. Also, do you really think that F-16s would be scambled without weapons? You do understand how readiness works, correct? And if terrorists are studying they're saying "ah, if we send a plane, it will be intercepted by planes that are able to shoot it down in a second, let's find another way to do this."
     
  8. LineInTheSand

    LineInTheSand USCGA 2006

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    8,759
    Likes Received:
    1,011
    Except, when they're "unknown" then you don't really know if they're "deranged". You might also be interested in the number of times planes fly into airspace they shouldn't be in (its more than you think).

    The difference, the plane was escorted, and took no action which was immediately dangerous. I understand the fear of complacency , but I think you overlook the fact that at the "operators" level, these things are taken very seriously.
     
  9. Zaphod

    Zaphod Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,952
    Likes Received:
    4
    Wait! Hold it!

    ALL ENGINES STOP!!!

    What the HELL is THAT all about? First I've heard of it! :mad:

    You got a link?

    Found one. Sweet merciful Jesus. WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT, OVER? :mad:

    Yeah, the Dumb****-Of-The-Year Award goes to these cretins, and as you can imagine, they were up against some pretty stiff competition!

    They're lucky to be alive.

    Each letter in "DASY" represented one of the members of his fallen team. Is this guy ever going to catch a break? :frown:
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2009
  10. wilbur5672

    wilbur5672 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Exactly which CBP aircraft would have shot down the plane Wilbur? (PLEASE ANSWER THAT QUESTION)."

    THE QUESTION WOULD NOT BE THE OBVIOUS WHO PULLED THE TRIGGER BUT WHO WOULD AUTHORIZE IT.

    "I recommend googling "NORAD" to determine who is charged with this."

    I am sure that if we carefully examined the mission statements of both DHS and NORAD, we would find that DHS is tasked with the knowledge to access the possible terrorist thread of an unauthorized aircraft entering our airspace. If 9/11 happened today, are you saying the USAF, in lieu of DHS, would be in charge. They own all the airplanes.
    "You might also be interested in the number of times planes fly into airspace they shouldn't be in (its more than you think)."

    Probably very few that are confirmed stolen where the pilot leaves a suicide note and then fails to acknowledge an F-16 escort and continues to fly all the way to Missouri. Did we know that he did not have explosives on board? In his flight over most of the midwest, how close did he get to overflying a school? I hope that this incident gets a very thorough debrief and analysis. My knee-jerk reaction is that we were lucky this time.
     
  11. ds52262

    ds52262 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    0
    I assure you the F16's did exactly as required. I can also assure you they had the ability to terminate the young Canadians flight at will. I believe the ultimate authority to terminate the flight would have rested with POTUS. As long as he did not present an immediate threat follow and observe seems to be the correct response.

    As for the dog killers. I would not be so afraid of Marcus Luttrell, but would be terrified of his friends practicing a snatch and grab upon release from jail. No one would even know it happened the way the SEAL'S do things.
     
  12. LineInTheSand

    LineInTheSand USCGA 2006

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    8,759
    Likes Received:
    1,011
    Your knee-jerk reaction doesn't take into consideration what people did know, the speed of the response, the joint operational capabilities between DHS and DOD agencies, or the end product. You also never answered the question, EXACTLY WHICH CBP AIRCRAFT WOULD BE USED TO SHOOT IT DOWN?
     
  13. wilbur5672

    wilbur5672 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    "EXACTLY WHICH CBP AIRCRAFT WOULD BE USED TO SHOOT IT DOWN?"

    I GUESS MY PREVIOUS RESPONSE WAS NOT AS OBVIOUS AS I THOUGHT. FROM THE HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE #5 CONCERNING DOMESTIC TERRORIST INCIDENTS:

    "The Secretary of Homeland Security is the principal Federal official for domestic incident management. Pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the Secretary is responsible for coordinating Federal operations within the United States to prepare for, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies. The Secretary shall coordinate the Federal Government's resources utilized in response to or recovery from terrorist attacks"

    FROM THIS, MY ASSUMPTION WOULD BE THAT THE SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY WOULD RECOMMEND TO THE PRESIDENT THAT THE USAF, UTILIZING ONE OF ITS AIRBORNE F-16S, SHOOT DOWN THE AIRCRAFT. IT IS DEFINITELY THE SECRETARY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO COORDINATE ALL FEDERAL OPERATIONS.
     
  14. RaptorDad2013

    RaptorDad2013 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmm... I think YOU'RE RIGHT!

    I think that's the LOGICAL explanation. Probably Secretary Janet called up whoever it was that had those F-16's and said "There's a Cessna 172 flying south from CANADA! It's unauthorized! SHOOT IT DOWN!"

    Then some cooler heads in NORAD might have said -- "You know... perhaps there's a BETTER way to handle this!"

    :biggrin:
     
  15. packermatt7

    packermatt7 USAFA Cadet

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    804
    Likes Received:
    1
    First off, the Canadian's logic was that the F-16s WOULD shoot him down. He is quoted in saying that he wanted his life ended, but was too scared to do it himself... sorta a suicide-by-cop type situation.

    I think the situation was handled well. No one died.

    Besides, it would be hard to do much damage in that tiny Cessna.



    The two scumbags who shot Marcus' dog are the morons. I saw this after watching Marcus on Glenn Beck. They got enjoyment out of shooting dogs... how sick. They're lucky Marcus didn't get a hold of them.
    Only 2 years in prison maximum for each dog they killed, and so far they can only prove one.
     
  16. flieger83

    flieger83 Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    2,852
    Likes Received:
    343
    Folks...no.

    A Cessna 172, even packed to the gills with explosives, simply cruising, is NOT a threat to anyone. WHY would you schwack it?

    Intercept, VID, then shadow...and watch. If it does like this guy did: nothing but fly, there's no reason to take any action. If it turns toward a town...starts to dive toward a building, then perhaps a decision would have to be made,

    But in truth...a C172...it'll almost bounce OFF a large building; there's just no speed/weight. The kinetic energy is small.

    Nope...they made a good call here...just shadow and observe.
     
  17. wilbur5672

    wilbur5672 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    "A Cessna 172, even packed to the gills with explosives, simply cruising, is NOT a threat to anyone. WHY would you schwack it?"

    Then why did they evacuate the Wisconsin capitol building?

    Shortly into the flight, everyone knew the plane was stolen, that he was of Turkish birth, and that he was despondent. Not the profile of someone out for a casual Monday afternoon joy ride and simply lost. Even a blown up Cessna engine plowing through a crowded playground gives me the cold chills. How many opening-day ball parks did he fly over? I know St. Louis was playing just up the crowded interstate from where he tried to land. Assuming that a plane has to penetrate a building is "fighting the last war." A terrorist with sarin gas on board? Hind sight is twenty-twenty and they guessed right this time. My line of thinking was that had they "schwacked" it over Lake Superior, no American lives would have been at least remotely stake.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2009
  18. LineInTheSand

    LineInTheSand USCGA 2006

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    8,759
    Likes Received:
    1,011
    I guess the lesson here is that its really none of your concern about the inner workings of a successful event. All you need to know is, nothing happened, but there was plenty of response.
     
  19. wilbur5672

    wilbur5672 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    "I guess the lesson here is that its really none of your concern about the inner workings of a successful event. All you need to know is, nothing happened, but there was plenty of response."

    This is hardly the response one would expect from a servant of the people to a tax-paying citizen of a "government of the people, by the people, for the people".

    Our new President is being tested daily. My sole hope is that when Al-Qaeda tests us, we will recognize it and not have our Head In The Sand. In my opinion, better safe than sorry.
     
  20. LineInTheSand

    LineInTheSand USCGA 2006

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    8,759
    Likes Received:
    1,011
    Wilbur, if you think for a second that the law enforcement tactics or missions of DHS agencies are fully disclosed every time, you are living in a dream world. There are law enforcement sensitive aspects to responses, and frankly some of it is classified.

    I was attempting to be more diplomatic than saying "Wilbur, you don't know what you're talking about".
     

Share This Page