Input | Output |
---|---|
Link | Youtube |
Published | 2023/02/18 |
Theme | |
Status | article incomplete |
Beau says:
Beau addresses inaccuracies and questions about surveillance balloons, expressing surprise at admissions, clarifying technology, and criticizing fear-mongering commentators.
Concerned citizens
Detailed explanations and nuances in Beau's analysis of surveillance balloons and the Biden administration's handling of the situation.
#Surveillance #Balloons #BidenAdministration #Criticism #Technology
Well, howdy there, internet people.
It's Beau again.
So today we are going to talk a little bit more
about balloons and inaccuracies and answer three questions.
I have to be honest, I am so over the balloon conversation
from the very beginning.
This isn't a big deal.
Surveillance over flights happen all the time.
But these three questions, I think they'll be entertaining to answer.
So the first two are from one person.
I'm curious if Bo will change his tune now that it is known the Biden administration
lied and that they watched the first balloon being launched and had been tracking it for
about one week before it entered US airspace over Alaska.
to say, Beau. Okay, honestly, that is totally shocking to me. That is just, it's mind-blowing
that that happened. Not that they were tracking it from long before it passed over the Aleutian
Islands, because I have a video ten days before you sent this message, saying that that was
the case and that they were lying about it.
I'm shocked that they admitted it.
Generally speaking, it's not a good idea to disclose how soon you can pick something up,
and this is all covered in that other video.
So I mean, I absolutely pointed out that they were lying about the fact that they didn't
pick it up until it got to Alaska.
There's two other little tidbits that need to be talked about here.
First, the Biden administration was not watching it since it took off from China.
You can't possibly believe that people in the White House are alerted every time a balloon
lifts off in China.
Some person in a bunker somewhere was staring at a screen watching it.
It wasn't the Biden administration.
framing it that way and saying it that way and it probably you probably got
that from a news outlet that was trying to do what news outlets do and be very
partisan. It casts doubt on whether or not your questions in good faith but I
don't need to change my tune about this because I started singing that song
before Fox or wherever told you that you should be mad about it. The other really
cool part about it is that if they admitted this and they said we could
pick it up there the technology that they have to pick this stuff up the way
they're doing it is so good they can disclose it and there's not a
a countermeasure that can be used to disrupt it.
So one more reason to really not be worried about the balloons.
The same person has a follow-up.
The second lie that he repeated was that the Biden administration had to wait until it
completed its mission, I don't think I ever said that, and it was over water before shooting
it down safely.
you say, Beau. I don't really understand that. There are two things that this can mean. One
is that there's information out there saying that they tried to shoot it down earlier and
were unable to. Maybe it means that. We'll get to that in a second. I'm certain that
wherever that might have occurred would be a pretty desolate area. So it could
mean that, or it could be drawing on the other balloons that have been knocked
out of the sky. And that's what I think it is. I would point out that I know that
one of the balloons that was knocked out of the sky, not the one they waited to
cross over to get over the ocean, but one of the other ones didn't have a payload.
payload. It was just fabric. And I think another one was like a ham radio or something like
that. Didn't have a huge payload. Didn't run the risk of causing damage on the ground
or creating a seven mile wide debris field. That initial balloon that they shot down off
the coast was huge. The payload was huge. When people were talking about it, they were
describing it in the terms of how many school buses it was.
I want to say it was three, might have only been two, but either way, it's not something
you want dropping on your house.
So it would have to be done in a desolate area, doing it over the water or maybe if
it passed over a really isolated area in the desert would be the only real places to do
it safely anyway. Okay, so again that's context. The balloons aren't the same
size. And then a third question from a different person. Should we really be
spending $400,000 per shot on these balloons? I know it seems absurd. I know
it seems absurd, but the answer is yes. The balloon is moving very, very slowly.
The plane is moving very, very quickly.
The range of the guns isn't as long as you might think.
So the distance that closes, how quickly that distance closes is, I mean, it's fast.
It happens very, very quickly.
Those guns were designed to fight other planes traveling at roughly the same speed.
So when you're moving at the speeds these planes are moving, these balloons are pretty
much stationary and it's a risk to the pilot and the incredibly expensive aircraft.
So they use the missiles, which yeah, I mean that seems super expensive and there's probably
a better way to do it, but I mean I would imagine they could probably get away with
using, I don't even know if they have those, I would say training missiles, but I don't
even know if those exist in that fashion.
But yeah, a lot of times criticism comes in from pundits and commentators who really lack
the context to make the criticism that they're making. Like the idea that it
was the Biden administration watching it. That wasn't happening. I mean,
somebody in the White House does not get notified every time something enters the
air anywhere in the world. Somebody in the Department of Defense, somebody was
watching it. And that's not a surprise. The only surprising part about that is
that they admitted it. That's a little uncomfortable for me, to be honest. I'm
very accustomed to, you know, the federal government lying about stuff like that.
But it's not surprising that they picked it up beforehand.
Most commentators who are aware of how this stuff works, everybody was saying that long
before it was admitted, long before anybody in the media tried to turn it into an outrage
of the day.
It's generally a bad idea to disclose means and methods.
In fact, that's the point of the other video.
I'll put it down below.
The balloon situation is not something worthy of being scared about or outraged about.
I think the Biden administration might have overcorrected a little bit, but I don't see
what they've done as being horribly wrong.
People were scared, and this was a way to make people feel safe.
I don't necessarily think they needed to take out ham radios or whatever it is they've been
hitting.
But if it was something that could be seen from the ground and scare people, there was
probably a reason they did it.
Because a lot of commentators who like to generate an outrage of the day turned the
initial surveillance balloon into something scary when they didn't need to.
So anyway, it's just a thought, y'all have a good day.
{{Shirt}}
{{EasterEgg}}