Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

abcnews.go.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 593 posts

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#391

Post by runarberg »

handedness wrote: post #342
pasabagi wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who are we comparing them to, though? The US Military publically ran (and runs) an international network of torture camps. I don't think the US military is especially bad: rather, all militaries are awful, all war is unadulturated evil, and any attempt to make it 'clean' through ROEs or accountability procedures is stupid.

The whole point is that they are without comparison. There is no other force like it in the world. By definition it may have to be that way (if it should exist, which I'm not entirely sure it should), but so long as there are UN peacekeepers there will be armed troops where nobody's really both motivated and able to prosecute their war crimes with any reliability. The legal framework surrounding UN peacekeeping is in…

> Regardless, your comparison reminds me that even Abu Ghraib resulted in numerous prison terms.

Since this is HN I might as well provide the data:

In total 11 soldiers were convicted, of which 9 served time in prison:

- Former Spc. Armin Cruz - 8 months

- Former Sgt. Javal Davis - 6 months

- Pfc. Lynndie England - 3 years (released after 1 year and 5 months)

- Former Staff Sgt. Ivan Frederick - 8½ years (released on parole after 4 years)

- Former Cpl. Charles A. Graner Jr. - 10 years (paroled after 6 and a half years)

- Former Spc. Sabrina Harman - 6 months

- Former Spc. Roman Krol - 10 months

- Former Spc. Jeremy Sivits - 1 year

- Former Sgt. Michael J. Smith - 179 days

And the two who served no prison time were:

- Former Sgt. Santos A. Cardona - 90 days of hard labor

- Former Spc. Megan Ambuhl Graner - Discharged from the army without prison time

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#392

Post by taneq »

elorant wrote: post #175
giantg2 wrote: post #133

Imagine if you launch a balloon for say $10k so that your adversary has to spend $400k on a missile plus $70k x number of planes x hours in flight. And now do it multiple times per week. Seems like a decent strategy.

A balloon that requires a missile to be brought down has to be really big, like soccer field big. In which case it won’t cost just $10k.

Did it require it, or was that just what they used?

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#393

Post by taneq »

jrockway wrote: post #347
prawn wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, plane flying overhead. You shoot it down. Who's going to be held responsible? The airline or the people taking it out of the sky? Where's the line drawn if the dangerous thing I mentioned before has a practical use? Maybe the balloon is filled with a mix that is toxic to something (crop, livestock, etc). Or there's a component of the payload that is dangerous when hit by a missile or making contact with the groun…

> OK, plane flying overhead. You shoot it down. Who's going to be held responsible? The airline or the people taking it out of the sky? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007 There may be airlines with slogans like "come fly the friendly skies", but entering controlled airspace without a flight plan or 2 way comms with ATC is anything but friendly. You can try it yourself! Rent a C172 and do some s…

He who owns the media is the good guy, after all.

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#394

Post by awwaiid »

braingenious wrote: post #291
phpisthebest wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Looked it up. In 2020 we spent $2bn on the UN. We brought in $3421bn, so (ignoring that we overspent by 2x) that is like 0.06%. if you make $100k you pay like $18k in federal tax. So that comes out to $10.50 or so.

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#395

Post by morpheos137 »

oneoff786 wrote: post #151
akmarinov wrote: post #11

Have aliens invaded and we just don’t know about it, the government holding them off lowkey? Edit: Now China’s shooting them down! https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/02/12/china-says...

People need to understand that if you’re being attacked by a FTL capable alien invader, you are so incredibly f**ed that it just does not matter. People don’t write popular sci fi novels about realistic alien invasions because they would be so utterly one sided and brief that it simply wouldn’t make a good story.

"The Killing Star" is a good one.

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/190678

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#396

Post by dismalpedigree »

PeterisP wrote: post #343
moose_man wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have their own space station dude. They also have tons of satellites, including LEO satellites. China is not some poor country.

Starlink is in a completely different class of "tons of satellites" as other platforms simply due to the SpaceX launch vehicles. China has a total of 600-ish satellites together for all purposes. Starlink has 3500-ish right now, and the already licensed plans are for 12000 by 2026. When(if!) Starship starts launching satellites, a single launch can put in orbit more military satellites than China has ever launched, a…

I predict a Chinese version of Starship within 18 months of a successful launch. The Chinese industrial espionage machine is unmatched.

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#398

Post by idlewords »

kiddz wrote: post #363

It seems like the reporting is that two out of three objects are said not to be balloons. I don’t know of any terrestrial technology that can be that large (size of car) aloft for multiple hours/days that hovers. Am I correctly groking the news here?

No, you're not. The descriptions are consistent with these objects being balloons or dirugibles. The terrestrial technology that can keep a cylinder the size of a car afloat for days is called "hydrogen".

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#399

Post by handedness »

viscanti wrote: post #218
handedness wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UN is certainly something more than that, and not literally just a forum. They have an active duty peacekeeping force of approximately 81K people. While that's similar in size to the active duty forces from a nation like a Peru or Chile, the Blue Helmets have had a de facto quasi-blanket immunity when committing war crimes, and have some pretty horrifying history in places like Central Africa. For example: "Consi…

> The UN is certainly something more than that, and not literally just a forum. Maybe it depends if you're a UN member with a veto or not. It's possible that having a veto changes how one would perceive and interact with the UN.

Certainly. Nukes, too.

Re: Military shoots down another high-altitude object, over Lake Huron: officials

#400

Post by idlewords »

kiddz wrote: post #385
theteapot wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car sized balloons. Gliders. "Hover" is conjecture.

I say hover because the pentagon is saying the same object was seen twice in two days. . . The day before it was in Montana then 24 plus hours later in Michigan. “A unidentified object has been shot down by U.S. forces over Lake Huron, according to the Department of Defense. The object appears to be the same object that had been detected over Montana a day earlier, said officials.“ https://www.npr.org/2023/02/12/1156…

"Hover" implies more directional control than a balloon would have, the ability to stay in one spot. So far all the descriptions are consistent with just regular floating.
Post reply on HN