Live data from Hacker News

U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

cnbc.com

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#921

I'm very surprised that China would take the risk of fueling a political firestorm when these balloons are only marginally more effective than the satellites they already have. These intrusions are clearly a violation of our airspace and could even be considered an act of war. What the hell was Xi thinking? Is he trying to communicate that China can do whatever it wants with impunity? Did he even authorize this fligh…

Or what if, it's not a spy balloon and a genuine mistake?

I heard U.S. officials say that it's definitely a spy-balloon. They refused to say how they know this, but I assume they have their sources.

But a balloon has to intrude in someone's airspace. Doing so could trip off an international incident, like it has now.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#922

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or what if, it's not a spy balloon and a genuine mistake?

I heard U.S. officials say that it's definitely a spy-balloon. They refused to say how they know this, but I assume they have their sources. But a balloon has to intrude in someone's airspace. Doing so could trip off an international incident, like it has now.

They already said it was a mistake and unintentional.

But hey, they're the enemy to the USA right, so of course you'd believe everything they do is intentional and intended for subversion.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#923

I'm very surprised that China would take the risk of fueling a political firestorm when these balloons are only marginally more effective than the satellites they already have. These intrusions are clearly a violation of our airspace and could even be considered an act of war. What the hell was Xi thinking? Is he trying to communicate that China can do whatever it wants with impunity? Did he even authorize this fligh…

> What the hell was Xi thinking? You are levelling yourself to think someone whose education ends with grade school to be actually thinking. He has done so many stupid things over the last decade. And in China, all foreign politics are internal politics. Playing strong against the rest of world, at least by how it looks, will bring more power to him within CCP.

True that. Their political system is extremely dangerous if it depends on the mental disposition of one man.

If Xi has a bad day he could start a nuclear confrontation with no one able to reign him in.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#924

Earlier quoted context omitted.

electronics is damaged by water likely, it could have more chance to survive if hit the ground.

You can always dry things out. Hitting the ground is harder than hitting water, and it really depends on how they took out the balloon (if they were able to hit it with a small puncture, the balloon would come down more softly, but guns don’t really go to 60k, so it was probably a missile right?

You can see video of the impact- it looks like the missile hit the payload, not the balloon, and spattered it. In light of comments about self destruct, this may have been an effort to disrupt mechanisms that would have completely incinerated sensitive material by instead breaking the sensitive material into pieces

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#925
post #25

I had seen reports that the balloon was the length of 3-4 school busses but it appears that was misreported and just repeated. The PAYLOAD was the length of 3-4 school busses. I haven’t been following this much until today/ vaguely aware as an amusing background story. But, has anyone seen high res photos of the balloon or someone doing back of the envelope math on the size of the balloon portion? I ask simply becaus…

...and what's the volume in SI Olympic pools?

EDIT how lazy of me, 285ft diameter, and assuming spherical shell, gives 166 Olympic pools.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#926

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you believe the Chinese officials, they had lost control of the balloon. Things that go up must famously go down, though that's not their department said Wernher Von Braun.

It's a bit strange how they are simultaneously upset that their balloon got shot down and claiming they had lost control of it.

The only thing I find strange is that they didn't throw in something about hurting the feelings of the Chinese people[0] for good measure. They like to call this Wolf Warrior diplomacy; but it really comes across more as crying wolf diplomacy.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurting_the_feelings_of_the_...

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#927
post #382

I feel like the balloon takedown was seriously mishandled. Imo it should have been shot down right after it crossed our borders and before it started move over populated areas. That way there would be no surveillance and you could examine the payload. Now that it’s in the water, you may not even find it.

Do you think that did not occur to the military? I’m sure that if they blundered, it was not in some way that was so obvious. Either they simply didnt know about it until it was too late, or they had some reason to not shoot it then that you’re not aware of. The idea that they decided not to do so for no good reason is silly.

Yeah DOD has huge office buildings full of trained analysts, yet random people on the internet still think they’d do better.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#928

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or what if, it's not a spy balloon and a genuine mistake?

I heard U.S. officials say that it's definitely a spy-balloon. They refused to say how they know this, but I assume they have their sources. But a balloon has to intrude in someone's airspace. Doing so could trip off an international incident, like it has now.

Yes, it is definitely a silly move if it's really a spy balloon.

But I think it's still too early to draw the conclusion, given the strong Bayesian prior that how unlikely it is for China, with advanced spy satellites and a spy network in the US as accused by three-letter-agencies, to fly a huge, visible by naked-eye, balloon for spying and for starting an international incident.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#929
post #850
post #382

I feel like the balloon takedown was seriously mishandled. Imo it should have been shot down right after it crossed our borders and before it started move over populated areas. That way there would be no surveillance and you could examine the payload. Now that it’s in the water, you may not even find it.

None of it makes sense. They shot it down over the US coast where you are similarly likely to hit a boat or a bather than hitting someone in some empty fields of the midwest (and what about the canadian mountains!). They say it doesn't pose any threat to aviation but nevertheless closed the airports on its path. They say that they are confident it is an intelligence gathering operation by the chinese, but that they d…

They didn’t issue a ground stop for nearby airports until it got to the Carolina coast.

At that point they issued a national security no-fly zone, ground stops at three airports, and issued notices to marine traffic to clear the area.

Re: U.S. military shoots down suspected Chinese surveillance balloon

#930

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is not simply rolled out as a boogeyman. Apart from any of their ambitions, at minimum the worlds reliance on them for various resources and manufacturing capacity almost exclusively has, in the last 2.5 years, been revealed as an extreme flaw and risk to global economic stability when that resource and manufacturing pipeline is disrupted. That is, at a bare minimum, a serious problem that will take years to so…

Why are you worried about the world relying on China? The global economy was actually stabilized by China's zero-covid policy for the past few years because although lockdowns were disruptive, the death and disability of workers is an even greater threat. We now live in an even more unstable time now that China has abandoned this policy since the international community has decided to embrace living with covid. And G…

I am, without complicating things with moral judgements of the different powers involved, simply making the claim that China’s goals are at odds with the West.

You seem to question this claim and yet go on to provide significant support for why China has historical reasons for this. If you are interested, Read further down in the thread of another comment to my post that I responded to and you’ll see that I cover this a little more, but to reiterate a bit of it:

The Opium Wars and Ensuing 100 Years of Humiliation, despite any change to the governmental structure post-revolution, is still very much in the zeitgeist of China’s perception of the West. And China has taken that lesson to heart, in particular the lesson that: just a little technological superiority by an adversary can nonetheless allow a massive nation with significantly more resources but a lower industrial/technological base to be decisively subjugated to the will of a much smaller opponent.

This very much informs Chinas desire to increase it’s power and sphere of influence, along with advancing to the point that it is, at minimum, significantly more self sufficient at a similar level of technological advancement to the west, and preferably more so.

This unavoidably puts its geopolitical goals at odds with the West because this cannot be accomplished to a significant degree without disrupting at least a little bit the power and influence that the west (particularly USA) has in the world.

I am deliberately not bringing anything like forms of government, realpolitik games, moral judgements and human rights issues etc into my claim because those are all extremely complicated topics and muddy the water in addressing the very narrow and simple claim that China’s goals are not the same as the goals of western powers, and this necessarily results in conflicts and disagreements between these powers.

You and I probably disagree and other aspects of these issues, but from what you wrote I don’t thing we disagree on the claim that goals differ, and that is the source of many conflicts, and that this is true before bringing in any value judgements of which side is right/wrong/has the moral high ground/etc, which are separate (thought certainly intertwined) claims.

Finally, to address the dependency issue: a significant reason that countries are worried about over reliance on China is for the same reason people should be worried about having a single point of failure in any critical system.

Post reply on HN