But your point was they could not BECAUSE they fly over the Pentagon. I say they do not fly over the Pentagon becuse it is restricted airspace.
Loose Change - Part II
- Thread starter Kiwiwriter
- Start date
- Status
But your point was they could not BECAUSE they fly over the Pentagon. I say they do not fly over the Pentagon becuse it is restricted airspace.
realitybites
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,066
I believe on 9/11, once it was known what was going on, the airspace over New York became restricted.
I don't recall the missile defense systems hidden within the World Financial Center all of a sudden popping out with guns blazin'.
Although, admittedly, that woulda' been hella-cool.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Where did I say they could not? Planes landing and taking off from Reagan fly over it hundreds of times a day.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Why did you think that?
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Point being is that the airspace over Disney World is restricted. The stuff about the Disney characters toting military weapons was just to make the point, in a humorous way, that this doesn't mean there is a missile defense system in place there.
OK guys - welcome sbrown and relax - its been a giddy day around here.
sbrown asked a question and got bad directions about a press notice saying "Pentagon" announces, etc.
Cruisers and Destroyers have missle defense systems because that's what they do for a living - the Pentagon well, see above about what goes up, must come down.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
That's very diplomatic, for a guy from Brooklyn.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
Interesting. According to that map it's a little over 4,000 feet from the end of the runway to the Pentagon.
XXX
Thinker
- Joined
- May 23, 2006
- Messages
- 151
Yes, it sounds like the person you are talking to SBrown thinks all these things about the Pentagon (you can't fly overhead or near it, it has an auto-defense system) is someone who just thinks it has to be that way and hasn't done the necessary research.
As I said, they already were on alert after a few "false hits" beforehand. Think about this. You've seen how close they are thanks to the previous links, right? When air traffic controlers are jammed and they put LOTS of planes into a holding pattern, where do you think those planes go?
As I said, they already were on alert after a few "false hits" beforehand. Think about this. You've seen how close they are thanks to the previous links, right? When air traffic controlers are jammed and they put LOTS of planes into a holding pattern, where do you think those planes go?
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
Please check this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/21/AR2005072101930.html
Restricted air space incursions are relatively regular in DC. Having a MDS would end up with a civilian plane getting shot down. That is why they can, and do, send fighter jets to intercept the incursions. My link in post #1257 goes in to great detail about what civilian pilots need to know about restricted air spaces, especially over DC.
Restricted air space incursions are relatively regular in DC. Having a MDS would end up with a civilian plane getting shot down. That is why they can, and do, send fighter jets to intercept the incursions. My link in post #1257 goes in to great detail about what civilian pilots need to know about restricted air spaces, especially over DC.
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
Regnad Kcin said:
I agree with you for the most part, and if SBrown meant no harm, all well and good.
Perhaps I'm a bit touchy, but so many CT questions sound reasonable at first but tend to the over simplistic. I'll guess that they are meant less to gain information or insight and more to produce a measure of doubt on the part of the audience. Let's look at the one we're discussing:
"Doesn't the Pentagon have a missile defense system?"
Hmm, seems like they should. It's the Pentagon, the nation's center for defense. Defense is what goes on there. Why, they must have the best defense that budgetary dollars can buy! The best in the world!
But hey, they were attacked. Successfully, too. Something's not right here. Somthing's not right here at all...
You see? The question is suggestive.
Now, I can't prove that SBrown is up to shenanigans with his/her "question" without more info or a display of a continued pattern of behavior (see: geggy). For your reminder of this basic requirement of discourse, thanks.
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2006
- Messages
- 17,078
This graphic is instructive: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2005/07/22/GR2005072200108.html
"No-fly zone" in that context means only regularly-scheduled commercial flights can fly there.
"No-fly zone" in that context means only regularly-scheduled commercial flights can fly there.
Oh, brother.
I suppose at this point we might do our visitors a service, and pre-emptively point out that the Pentagon also does not have a battalion of combat Marines to protect against ground troops, a squadron of tanks, its own fighter wing, etc., in addition to its non-existent anti-aircraft guns or missiles.
Just because it's involved with the military does not mean it's built for combat. It's an office building. It has relatively little tactical military value. Aside from security issues, it's just not that special. Passive measures only.
Otherwise, they would never have built it in such a sensitive area. If you're expecting the heavy heat, you build out in the middle of nowhere, like Cheyenne Mountain or Malmstrom Air Force Base. It would seriously suck to repel an attack, only to have the Capitol wiped out by near misses.
And people are laughing because you should be able to answer these questions for yourself. I would fail a fourth-grade research report that made such assertions. Nothing personal, we like to help, but you must also participate in your own education.
I suppose at this point we might do our visitors a service, and pre-emptively point out that the Pentagon also does not have a battalion of combat Marines to protect against ground troops, a squadron of tanks, its own fighter wing, etc., in addition to its non-existent anti-aircraft guns or missiles.
Just because it's involved with the military does not mean it's built for combat. It's an office building. It has relatively little tactical military value. Aside from security issues, it's just not that special. Passive measures only.
Otherwise, they would never have built it in such a sensitive area. If you're expecting the heavy heat, you build out in the middle of nowhere, like Cheyenne Mountain or Malmstrom Air Force Base. It would seriously suck to repel an attack, only to have the Capitol wiped out by near misses.
And people are laughing because you should be able to answer these questions for yourself. I would fail a fourth-grade research report that made such assertions. Nothing personal, we like to help, but you must also participate in your own education.
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
Funny, I almost made the exact same post, R.Mackey. Well, the 'office building' part, anyway. You fleshed it out rather well.
Last edited:
JamesB
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 27, 2006
- Messages
- 2,152
There are plenty of high quality commercially available aerial photographs available out there, google maps and such. Could someone please point out the anti-aircraft batteries surrounding the Pentagon? Or are they hidden by the Klingon cloaking devices?
- Status