• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

Balloon/UAP Sightings & Shootdown(s)

China is strong-arming Biden into not revealing what was actually on that balloon. That, and it’s a national security risk. There was likely something “else” on that balloon we weren’t supposed to find. Think high altitude delivery system. What for, TBD.

My issue is he is clearly taking it up the wazoo from China. This is just more evidence of what most Americans already know. This is what happens when a President is compromised, and a nation is FAR TOO DEPENDENT on a geopolitical enemy.

I am going to propose an alternate theory for Biden's response. It's a measured response that seems to be designed to ratchet down tensions to let some sort of diplomatic rapprochement to occur.
There seems to be a prevailing mood on both sides that China and the US are headed towards conflict. In the big picture, the balloons may not be worth increasing tensions between us now when there are other priorities (Ukraine, Taiwan). Why ramp up tensions now and bring on conflict sooner over this? Why not brush it off to buy time to deal with current challenges and time to plan more strategically for future challenges? Better yet, maybe the conditions come about through diplomacy that stave off a conflict altogether.

Historical Example:
Many people have skewered British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain for signing the Munich peace deal in 1938 that gave Hitler the Sudetenland in exchange for "peace for our time". Hitler broke the deal when he invaded Poland in 1939, and Chamberlain has been painted a fool for signing the deal. However, it did buy the UK and France an extra year to prepare and arm for the coming war. (which worked out so swell for France... /sarcasm )
 
China is strong-arming Biden into not revealing what was actually on that balloon. That, and it’s a national security risk. There was likely something “else” on that balloon we weren’t supposed to find. Think high altitude delivery system. What for, TBD.

My issue is he is clearly taking it up the wazoo from China. This is just more evidence of what most Americans already know. This is what happens when a President is compromised, and a nation is FAR TOO DEPENDENT on a geopolitical enemy.

Personally, I found it highly suspicious that they waited till it was off the coast till they shot it down. :cool:
 
I am going to propose an alternate theory for Biden's response. It's a measured response that seems to be designed to ratchet down tensions to let some sort of diplomatic rapprochement to occur.
There seems to be a prevailing mood on both sides that China and the US are headed towards conflict. In the big picture, the balloons may not be worth increasing tensions between us now when there are other priorities (Ukraine, Taiwan). Why ramp up tensions now and bring on conflict sooner over this? Why not brush it off to buy time to deal with current challenges and time to plan more strategically for future challenges? Better yet, maybe the conditions come about through diplomacy that stave off a conflict altogether.

Historical Example:
Many people have skewered British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain for signing the Munich peace deal in 1938 that gave Hitler the Sudetenland in exchange for "peace for our time". Hitler broke the deal when he invaded Poland in 1939, and Chamberlain has been painted a fool for signing the deal. However, it did buy the UK and France an extra year to prepare and arm for the coming war. (which worked out so swell for France... /sarcasm )

Interesting theory. (y)
 
I am going to propose an alternate theory for Biden's response. It's a measured response that seems to be designed to ratchet down tensions to let some sort of diplomatic rapprochement to occur.
There seems to be a prevailing mood on both sides that China and the US are headed towards conflict. In the big picture, the balloons may not be worth increasing tensions between us now when there are other priorities (Ukraine, Taiwan). Why ramp up tensions now and bring on conflict sooner over this? Why not brush it off to buy time to deal with current challenges and time to plan more strategically for future challenges? Better yet, maybe the conditions come about through diplomacy that stave off a conflict altogether.

Historical Example:
Many people have skewered British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain for signing the Munich peace deal in 1938 that gave Hitler the Sudetenland in exchange for "peace for our time". Hitler broke the deal when he invaded Poland in 1939, and Chamberlain has been painted a fool for signing the deal. However, it did buy the UK and France an extra year to prepare and arm for the coming war. (which worked out so swell for France... /sarcasm )
But The UK and France did not prepare for war and it gave Hitler more time to prepare, which he did.
 
Please continue the discussion of the House Subcommittee Hearing on UAPS/UFOS here:
 
From KNewz:
Chinese Spy Balloons Linked to Hypersonic Missile Program to Prepare for 'Merciless' Attacks on U.S.

The Washington Times had a similar article here that is behind a paywall. Unfortunately, this article from Knewz is the only other info I found on this that was not behind a paywall.

High-altitude spy balloons from China are linked to the nation's hypersonic missile program, according to a new report.

Knewz.com has learned that the report, prepared by a group of researchers at China's National University of Defense Technology, was made public in Beijing in October.

The U.S. Air Force shot down an alleged spy balloon from China on the South Carolina coast in February 2023.

Spy balloons have been used by China for surveillance and gathering info from far away targets for a while now, but the latest findings linked them with something deadlier.

The spy balloons fall under the command of the Strategic Support Force, a separate branch of the military in China in charge of espionage, cyberattacks, and electronic and psychological warfare.
According to the reports prepared by the National University of Defense Technology entitled Near Space Operations Command, the military of China is trying to set up a command that would control both high-altitude surveillance balloons as well as hypersonic missiles.

The new operations command China is trying to set will also control solar-powered unmanned aerial vehicles and other support equipment, in addition to a repertoire of numerous spy balloons.

Hypersonic missiles are something China is a "world leader" in, according to The Washington Times. Citing a recent annual report by the congressional U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, the outlet stated that the ones possessed by China can be armed with both nuclear and conventional warheads.

According to the report prepared by the National University of Defense Technology, hypersonic missiles are capable of striking precise targets within minutes of launch and can avoid air defense systems mid-flight.

"Hypersonic weapons can attack rocket launch sites, [destroying] the enemy’s ability to fire anti-satellite missiles on our civilian satellite networks... These attacks must be precise, overwhelming and merciless. This could change the pace of battles and bring a major impact to how a war would end," the report stated, according to The Washington Times.

According to the report, China is modernizing its arsenal with the new command center as part of its efforts to usher in the age of "near space combat," i.e. conflicts in the high-altitude aerial zone which constitutes a rather gray area vis-a-vis international laws.

Experts from China have theorized that this is where future conflicts will take place, as the "near space" is essentially sovereign airspace out of legal reach.

"The understanding of near-space combat command needs to be deepened... It is necessary to adjust the hierarchy of command and control powers, selection of command methods, implementation of executive orders and support for command communication," reads the research report from the National University of Defense Technology.

However, Michael Listner, founder and principal of Space Law and Policy Solutions, has contested China's claims about "near space" being a sovereign lawless zone, claiming that the nation is deliberately trying to stir legal ambiguity and calling China's argument a "dangerous" one.

"Legally, there is no such creature as ‘near-space’... The stratospheric region above a sovereign nation is still sovereign airspace. But it appears the PRC is initiating a lawfare operation to create a legal ambiguity to justify not only balloon flights, but hypersonic weapons as well," said Listner.

According to The Washington Times, a report by the U.S. military’s Indo-Pacific Command’s joint operational law team also echoes Listner's statement: "There is no ‘near space’ in international law – only airspace and outer space, and [high-altitude balloons] fly in airspace."
 
Could have been

could have been any ground base system as well
What is the broadcast height for antenna mounted wireless internet system? Getting internet from above would be easier than trying to lock on to towers below.
 
Perhaps the Chinese were probing our ability to detect and respond to these intra-atmosphere satellites. Could this be their lower-tech surveillance alternative in the event their (Chinese) satellites are knocked out by an adversary (say the US) in the event of a conflict (perhaps a move on Taiwan)? Were they testing their ability to clandestinely use our own infrastructure in support of this endeavor?
 
Perhaps the Chinese were probing our ability to detect and respond to these intra-atmosphere satellites. Could this be their lower-tech surveillance alternative in the event their (Chinese) satellites are knocked out by an adversary (say the US) in the event of a conflict (perhaps a move on Taiwan)? Were they testing their ability to clandestinely use our own infrastructure in support of this endeavor?
*puts on tinfoil hat* They control the birds man..... *takes off hat*
 
What is the broadcast height for antenna mounted wireless internet system? Getting internet from above would be easier than trying to lock on to towers below.
the ballon was a lot closer to ground based systems rather than Starlink at an orbit of 370+/- miles.
It could have been starlink, my only point is to not just assuming it is so. There isn’t really a lock on. There were plenty of options for the ballon at 6 or 7 miles line of site above the ground.
 
What is the broadcast height for antenna mounted wireless internet system? Getting internet from above would be easier than trying to lock on to towers below.

https://www.travelpulse.com/news/te...t-wi-fi-how-do-we-get-internet-at-40-000-feet
This ATG transmission of data (first in 3G and new rolling out into ATG-4 speeds) works essentially the same way as your cellular data works now, except for one surprisingly obvious difference. The transmission dishes on the cell towers leased by Gogo (more than 160 across the continental U.S., Alaska and soon Canada) point up, rather than down.
 
Rural Wi-Fi internet was able to transmit up to five miles line of site if the conditions were optimal.
If they were going to use satellite they could just as easily used one of their own satellites.
 
Back
Top Bottom