top | item 34862709

Pentagon Declines to Answer If It Shot Down $12 Balloon with $400k Missile

46 points| sahin | 3 years ago |zerohedge.com | reply

46 comments

order
[+] NovemberWhiskey|3 years ago|reply
The F-22 costs more than $50,000 per flying hour to operate. The USAF flew the F-22 for approximately 28,000 hours in FY2021; but that $1.4bn expense is less than 1% of their annual budget.

We're talking about a $400K missile so much, why?

[+] NoZebra120vClip|3 years ago|reply
Well, rather than poring over armed forces budgets, most of us are checking our W-2s around this time of year, and I tell you what: I can hardly afford the Secret Service bullets.
[+] _-david-_|3 years ago|reply
They need to fly to ensure that new pilots learn and older pilots remain polished. They don't need to blow up a pico balloon if that is what it was.
[+] pydry|3 years ago|reply
Coz it's either that, Seymour Hersh or exploding trains and the last two are kind of awkward.
[+] sabujp|3 years ago|reply
two missiles apparently
[+] lost_tourist|3 years ago|reply
Because the republicans want a red herring for the next election to use against Biden.
[+] fma|3 years ago|reply
They didn't recover the object...so they wouldn't be able to answer either way. I'm surprised they couldn't do a visual inspection and say yep...it's a pico balloon. And if it was, I'm pretty impressed a missile can hone in on something like that.
[+] abudabi123|3 years ago|reply
The Cuban Missile Crisis had backdoor communication to resolve the urgent problem of the day. That object in a spy thriller movie could be a backdoor object.
[+] emrah|3 years ago|reply
Why did they blow up the balloons instead of trying to capture them in one piece and perhaps study them? What if they had something dangerous on board that could spread everywhere in the air upon getting blown to pieces?!
[+] mardifoufs|3 years ago|reply
I don't think there's a way to capture a balloon at 80 000 ft of elevation. Also, balloons would be just about the worst way to reliably deliver a payload without risk of it coming back to you. And there's also the fact that it's a scenario that has never happened, and there's nothing that would lead us to believe it has any chance of happening.
[+] krono|3 years ago|reply
Blowing stuff up is just another means of communication

Looking at that train derailment incident with the chemical spill and fire that recently took place in Ohio, it seems to me that the established order is rather willing to take the exact type of risk you describe

[+] hotpotamus|3 years ago|reply
I'd accept a few million from the DoD to begin a feasibility study of capturing them with a large butterfly net.
[+] scyzoryk_xyz|3 years ago|reply
Theatrics.

Pentagon money well spent, bang for the buck, if those factored in.

[+] panarky|3 years ago|reply
If you find you're angry about a large government wasting half a million dollars, then you'll be really angry when you find out how much it actually wastes.

And then when you find out that government waste is a fraction of the waste in private enterprises, well, you probably won't be angry about that at all.

Because the personality that rages at public waste never seems to be all that concerned with the much greater level of private waste.

[+] grandmczeb|3 years ago|reply
The assumption here is that there’s a symmetry between private parties wasting their own money and the government wasting the public’s.
[+] sabujp|3 years ago|reply
you're wrong about the private waste, I'm angry about it also but I can't do anything about that. But as a tax payer in the top 2% in the US I am justified in my anger towards the US govt wasting tax payer dollars shooting AIM-9x in F-22s to blow up balloons.
[+] MuffinFlavored|3 years ago|reply
why can’t an enterprise be more efficient if profit is their motive?
[+] abudabi123|3 years ago|reply
Two $400K missile a shot were needed to bring down one balloon at the target price range $12 to $180. The first sidewinder missile missed.
[+] elliekelly|3 years ago|reply
Zero Hedge is an even less reliable source of information than the narrator in the blog’s favorite book (or, more likely, movie).
[+] sander27home|3 years ago|reply
This is how American military was defeated with absolute humiliation by Talebans and Vietnamese. The opponents simply overwhelm your expensive toys with cheap counter measures. Even American soldiers like Deltas and Rangers couldnt afford to get slaughtered by untrained enemy combatants in the hundreds of thousands. Imagine China flood American skys with a million balloons with fentanyl powders. How effective is American patriots and THAAD and F35 going to defend against that? No wonder American was defeated in Afghanistan after spending 10T ISD and 20 years there. This obsessions with wonder weapon is one of the reason how Hitler loss to Stalin Russia. Guess Americans have to relearn that lesson.
[+] AbrahamParangi|3 years ago|reply
Both zerohedge and Snowden are sources that you should basically never be listening to. They are intensely unreliable and Snowden’s essentially a state mouthpiece for the Russian government at this point.
[+] am44jnsf|3 years ago|reply
using a laser would be a much more practical weapon against a balloon. Anyway, Bing better stop sending up those balloons.
[+] cafard|3 years ago|reply
Where's Frank Luke when you need him?
[+] johnea|3 years ago|reply
It was only $400K?

Must have been one of those old icky missiles that desperately needed replacement anyway.

U.S. defense spending will OBVIOUSLY have to go up:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/02/16/ukraine-w...

Military spending as percentage of GDP:

  World total  2,113  2.2  100%
1 United States 801.0 3.2 38%

2 China 293.0 1.7 14%

3 India 76.6 2.4 3.6%

4 United Kingdom 68.4 2.1 3.2%

5 Russia Russia 65.9 3.1 3.1%

I mean, we're only spending 1/3 of all the money spent on military in the world!! How lame is that?

We need to shoot down those weather baloons with $1M missiles!!!