nauseus

I think VV may have included a wee bit of sarcasm in his comment.

Connery was a hard act to follow in that role. Moore was different but I thought he was great, especially as The Saint before that.

Yes, at that altitude. You add in qualifiers to suit yourself. But balloons were "snagged" using the old method at lower altitudes and at slower speeds. Gingrich is living in the past and should have been more careful with what he said.

Sean Connery

M61 Vulcan Gatling-style rotary cannon - 20mm - 6,000 rounds per minute. Only 480 rounds so all gone in less than 5 seconds.

Well effectively that's what I said. They used to do it but not anymore.

I think all that happens in most organizations and I could say the same about several of Biden's appointees. However, the brass hats are senior military (career) officers who have far more experience in their own fields than most civilian White House staffers, who drift in and out of different appointments.

Newt's quoted words here are actually correct, because he uses the past tense. The Skyhook and Fulton recovery systems were used by the US until 1996. Maybe they kept a set of kit in the museum, Just for posterity of course.

I think it was noticed but perhaps the plan was to keep this quiet??

Bill, I think that you of all would recognize the term "brass hats". The only one close to that club on your list was ex General Flynn, who was forced to resign for allegedly misleading Pence about his conversations with the Russian envoy.

Perhaps this reaction-gauging was the main objective of the show?

The difference in altitude was much less but, yes, the cannon option was not really feasible.

The experts had already decided to let the balloon float across the US, this time, but it looks like there may be pressure for that policy not to become a regular event.

My post was to describe a possibility in the event of another balloon arrival, in case they decided to bring it down earlier if there is a next time. They have already shown that they can bring a balloon down from 60.000 feet, in a precise area, and then send in a "few machines to scoop up all the debris". Only a single ship, suitably equipped, is required for the recovery and the shallow shelf sea bottom is mostly soft and flat around the Aleutians. Yes, the weather is often bad over there but there are fair weather windows and the priority would be to stop the balloon from drifting across the entire North American continent rather than worrying about the junk, which could be collected later.

Backs to the wall lads!

Modified B17 in the Bond movie but Hercules was used in the other one - can't remember the name of it.

Well I never said he didn't take advice but I think Trump would have done the same. That's why they have all those brass hats around them.

Nonsense. They could bring balloons down close to a choice of several significant shelf areas, where the water depth is <50m. ROV's could be deployed to locate and recover any debris - if they actually wanted to bother doing that.

Helping Joe out over there I hope?

I think Biden said that the US had been talking to Beijing throughout - I would expect that. It is the potential for harmful payloads which concerns me most. I think I read that anti-surveillance measures were taken, at least over mainland USA.

Joe Biden is the C-in-C and has the call. I'll leave you with that worrying thought.

Like I said, not easy at 60,000ft. The F-22 could not match the altitude of the balloon. Limited options.

Because they don't make them like they used to.

Why would I admit to something both unproven and also challenged by former government people? You loathe Trump so much that you cannot contain your own speculation, bias and rants. But to the topic, there has been little evidence yet to show the real reason for this balloon visit but it does seem that it can carry quite an amount of equipment or cargo. We don't yet know what that cargo is this time, or what it could be in the future, under another balloon. Why take the chance of allowing one to drift over the whole country?

Speak for yourself.