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

Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 631 posts

Re: Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

#581

Post by sh34r »

HillRat wrote: post #448
noelsusman wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't really pass the sniff test. Why would you need a 10 day closure to deal with a drone incursion? I'm guessing DoD and the FAA were squabbling over a test the military wanted to run, and it didn't go up the chain fast enough to get resolved before testing was scheduled to begin. Edit: Here's the actual notice from the FAA[1]. Note that it was issued at 0332 UTC, but the restrictions weren't scheduled to go into…

Recent updates say this was a unilateral call by FAA because DOD was refusing to coordinate with them for creating safety corridors for DOD drones and/or HEW usage. Issues came to a head after DOD shot down a highly threatening mylar party balloon, which FAA evidently considered to be a somewhat reckless use of military weaponry in a US city's airspace.

FAA ought to be drowning Kegseth’s DoD in bureaucracy at every possible opportunity, after the massacre over the Potomac River a year ago. They deserve no leniency whatsoever.

Re: Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

#582

Post by mmooss »

margalabargala wrote: post #575
mmooss wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That conflates two very different things: * A conventional military war, on a battlefield: Neither Saddam Hussein's military nor the cartels nor the Taliban would last long against the US. * An unconventional insurgency: The Iraqis quickly turned to this approach and it worked very well for them, as it did for the Taliban. The Taliban won, and the Iraqi insurgency almost drove the US out of Iraq and was eventually co…

The Taliban did not "win" their insurgency. The US decided to leave because staying was not politically popular, and left. They were not beaten by the Taliban, they were beaten by the political climate at home. If someone is actively kicking your ass, then they decide that you aren't worth the effort to keep hurting and decide to walk away, that doesn't mean you "won" the fight even if you get what you want afterward…

The Taliban control what they and the US and allies fought for. That's winning. Your personal requirement of how it must be won is not important - nobody cares how it was done and it doesn't change the outcome. The Taliban don't care and the US and its allies don't care.

It's also a perfectly common, expected way to win a war: First, wars always end with political solutions. The most well known principle of warfare is that it is 'politics conducted by other means' (i.e., by violence rather than by law or diplomacy). If there is no political solution, the war never ends. That's why the US didn't win the war in Afghanistan after decades - they couldn't create a stable political solution because they were unable to impose one on the Taliban, who in the end imposed one on the US and its allies.

Victory by outlasting enemy resources, including political will, is fundamental to warfare; wars end when resources to fight (for the political outcome) run out, but few end in total kinetic destruction of those resources - someone runs out of money or political will. It's also the explicit strategy of insurgencies. Enemies of the US know it very well and have used it for generations - that is how North Vietnam won, for example. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, the Afghans famously told them, 'you have the clocks (the technology), we have the time'.

Re: Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

#583

Post by ribosometronome »

jacquesm wrote: post #532
lysace wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fox News first reported that the airborne object was intercepted after raising concerns of a potential drone operating near the southern border. Officials later concluded the object was not an unmanned aircraft but a party balloon, a U.S. official told the outlet. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-military-shot-down-party... US military shot down party balloon near El Paso after drone suspicion, official says Would…

Just think about the terrorist potential here. Buy a $10 party balloon, let it go near a major airport and they'll panic and shut down the airport. That's a lot of havoc for a couple of bucks.

Panic, shut down the airport, and reveal their top secret methods of defense against actual attacks.

Re: Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

#584

Post by sh34r »

morpheuskafka wrote: post #363
guerrilla wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally don't think that's the whole story. They're likely going to act against the cartels to take out cross-border drone capabilities and are preparing for S-A retaliation as well.

A cartel using a SAM against a US civilian aircraft would massively solidify public opinion against them just like 9/11 or the Iran hostage crisis. The US has been trying to extent the "foreign terrorist" label and casus belli to drug activities forever to justify military operations (ex. the "arrest" of Maduro was for drugs, not oil/Cuba/political stuff). That would be a massive self-own on the cartels part. (And if…

I take it you don’t know much about the Troubles, then. The SAM missiles would be saved for returning ICE Air flights, not Delta.

Re: Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

#585

Post by BobbyTables2 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #505
boringg wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>. "The FAA and DOW acted swiftly to address a cartel drone incursion. The threat has been neutralized, and there is no danger to commercial travel in the region. The restrictions have been lifted and normal flights are resuming." https://x.com/SecDuffy

“Threat” might be an exaggeration. https://www.newsweek.com/us-military-shot-down-party-balloon...

* 99 red balloons go by … *

Re: Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

#586

Post by PearlRiver »

retired wrote: post #552
jacquesm wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just think about the terrorist potential here. Buy a $10 party balloon, let it go near a major airport and they'll panic and shut down the airport. That's a lot of havoc for a couple of bucks.

Schiphol Airport has large No Balloons signs when you go down to the train station. Aluminum balloons can create havoc on the overhead power lines. It recently shut down the train service for the morning.

The Netherlands did not even blink when unknown actors (read Russians) were flying drones around the country but balloons is too much.

Re: Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

#588

Post by ultrarunner »

reactordev wrote: post #454
ultrarunner wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your use of "our" makes me wonder if the people of Mexico see the drug cartels as "theirs".

Merely pointing out that the US administration is operating like a cartel now a days. I doubt Mexicans see the Mexican cartels as “theirs” in the same way. Cartels have only been interested in paying off politicians and (as far as I’m aware) weren’t interested in being politicians. However, our politicians here… would LOVE to be Cartel members and make millions it seems. Because they definitely don’t give a shit abou…

Absolutely. I suppose my question was really more interested in the perceived legitimacy (or lack thereof).

Re: Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

#589

Post by AngryData »

antonymoose wrote: post #237
Noaidi wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did that full force of the US military work out in Vietnam?

Millions of dead Vietnamese. In any case that was a war against a hardened, experienced, determined enemy fighting for its freedom from any form of colonial occupation, both as a formal military and as an insurgent force in South Vietnam. I scarcely think the Mexican population would rise up in defense of the cartels here.

The problem is you can't just target the cartels, the cartels are made up of random Mexican people. There is an almost guarantee that any significant US strikes would be 90%+ civilian casualties.

Re: Officials Claim Drone Incursion Led to Shutdown of El Paso Airport

#590

Post by 8note »

_heimdall wrote: post #393
pjc50 wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starting a war with Mexico would be a pretext for interning everyone of "Mexican" ethnicity, citizen or otherwise, as was done to Japanese nationals.

Its mincing words a bit, but an attack targeting drug cartel assets wouldn't necessarily be viewed as a war with Mexico. It could lead to that for sure, and the Mexican government could declare it an act of war, but we did just see the US literally invade a foreign country and arrest their sitting leader without war being declared on either side.

its a lot more expensive than the US properly controlling what weapons are leaving its borders.

rather than arming the cartels to fight against the mexican government, thr US could just... not

Post reply on HN