If they haven't already crashed, that means they were flown away and landed somewhere and are presumably being prepped for an attack. You need a runway to land these (and a way to refuel them) and they should be really hard to hide. The story seems unlikely to me, as far as planes being flown away and hidden without people noticing. I want to be right on this one. I hope you are as wrong as possible.
would you rather INSERT MISSING VERB HERE an anti-muslim president?
That's going to be looooong walk for them.
Thinking about this...
Here's what (I think) they could do: force down a jet over their air space, and send up one of the missing jets to act as a sort of substitute for the other jet. I think it's possible so that air traffic in say, NYC, wouldn't be able to discern if it was an expected jet, vs. a jet with no passengers so that all the allowable cargo and passenger weight was made up of explosives.
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but aren't flight simulator programs fairly accurate? I was under the impression that 16 year old kids could at least come close to flying, simply from those simulations and minimal other training. From what I understand, taking off & flying are easy; the landing is hard. I don't think they need to land if they repeat 9/11.
Anybody remember when that Asian aircraft had the 'bumpy' landing at NYC and couple of girls were killed by emergency vehicles?
IIRC, the problem occurred because NYC had a problem and the gear needed for the autopilot to land the plane wasn't functioning, thus forcing the pilot to actually land it. I.e., if you know how to use the autopilot you don't need to know how to land a plane.
Fern
When MH370 went missing there was talk by aircraft specialists that if the plane was flown close enough to another it wouldn't show up. It would, at most, appear as a 'ghost' image on radar.
Fern
Anybody remember when that Asian aircraft had the 'bumpy' landing at NYC and couple of girls were killed by emergency vehicles?
IIRC, the problem occurred because NYC had a problem and the gear needed for the autopilot to land the plane wasn't functioning, thus forcing the pilot to actually land it. I.e., if you know how to use the autopilot you don't need to know how to land a plane.
Fern
Unless those aircraft are packed with American hostages, I can't see them getting anywhere near US soil without getting used for target practice. They would be treated just the same as if they were North Korean kamikaze style fighter jets entering our airspace. Suicide whether they reached their targets or not.
In addition, I'm certain our military has learned a lot irt how they should respond to another similar 9/11 scenario.
I can imagine a lot of research has been allocated toward finding ways to safely force down an commercial aircraft that has been hijacked.
I don't think that's not how air traffic control works. No one would know anything is wrong about any particular flight until it veered off course. A plane heading for National airport could divert to hit the capitol or white house in minutes.
We found these weapons and all the others we KNEW they had except for a couple, anthrax and something else IIRC; we just didn't find the ones we THOUGHT they had and almost certainly never did. They are still highly dangerous, which is why they have not yet been destroyed. Iraq has to build a facility and have it certified before they can begin destroying them, else they would surely kill the workers and perhaps the general public around them. My brother-in-law works at one of the facilities which recently destroyed chemical weapons including Sarin and VX weapons manufactured just after World War II as well as some others (phosgene and mustard gases IIRC) dating from World War I - although again if I remember correctly, his facility merely dissembled and repackaged components which were actually destroyed elsewhere. Russia did the same. I think we both finished in 2012 or 2013 if memory serves. These things have a loooong shelf life, but an important part of maintaining them includes periodic inspection (X-ray IIRC) to make sure the shell hasn't corroded to the point of rupturing. With our stock, inspections were done every ten or fifteen years if memory serves and some small portion always had to be discarded. I doubt Iraqi technology in the 80s was any better than ours in the thirties, so I'd assume a significant portion of these would no longer be viable and another significant portion would fail if used conventionally. I know the CIA publicly stated that some Iraqi-manufactured Sarin (that made with Iraqi-made precursors which were less pure than the French precursors and those weapons built as pre-mixed rather than binary-stored) had an effective shelf life of no more than a few months, so it's possible that these things are much less toxic than designed.
As far as filling a plane with them, likely that would be exactly as effective as the plane itself. To be effective, chemical agents need to be spread reasonably evenly over a large area using a means that does not destroy the chemicals. The Iraqi insurgents tried a couple times using IEDs to spread chemical heads; the blast mostly destroys them. An airliner crash would likely do so even more unless they managed to run it out of fuel, in which case we'd have contaminated ground rather than an effective Sarin attack.
I'm not any more thrilled about having chemical weapons in the hands of the Religion of Peace's most fanatical supporters than I am about having airliners there, but I'm guessing they are more likely to kill themselves than us with the former. Just because something remains highly dangerous doesn't mean it remains an effective weapon.
I can think of a few ways to distribute or even just spray the chemical agents while flying over a city or something but I would imagine it would be far easier and convenient to use a small aircraft procured here in the states. If you can take over come countries airport I assume you can afford a decent Cessna or 10. Private airports means no TSA and you are already near your intended target.
Or you could just, um, read the article?Except that you reference chemical agents that don't exist in entertaining werpossum's attempt to baffle us with bullshit.
What we have are puffed up rumors about second hand reports from anonymous sources about airplanes designed to entertain conspiracy theorists coupled to Iraqi WMD fantasies. Because 9/11, of course. Where's Mr. 9/11 himself, Rudi Giuiliani, when you need him, anyway?
I mean, it's perfectly obvious that the few of us left alive after the poison gas will be forced to live under Sharia Law, right?
In the meanwhile, we could just declare 9/11 to be National Fear Day.
Pfft.
So ISIL can't, or hasn't, recruited any of the radical Islamists in Chechnya?
Fern
I feel for whatever country you're in then I guess, can't be the one I am in.Our air defense system in this country is based off 1960's technology and quite frankly isn't very good. The vast majority of the country doesn't have any sort of radar coverage at all.
I told yall a long time ago obama is a pro-muslim president.
He may not be a muslim, but he is not going to do anything to harm terrorist organizations. The obama administration may kill a few terrorist with drone strikes, kill osama, but in the grand scheme of things isis is about to take over the middle east.
It sounds like Syria ready for the picking, Russian military equipment and everything else going to isis.
What is obama doing? Playing golf.
EDIT
How difficult would it do to strip the airliners, take out the seats, install fuel tanks and extend the range of the planes?
It is not "that" difficult to weld aluminum.
Sorry, but no way do they have 11 people who can fly a commercial aircraft successfully into a target. That takes a lot of training and 9/11 took years of planning and education. If anything, this was an opportunistic snatching of air craft. Then again, if they are stolen, then clearly they have the ability to fly them...hmm. I'm calling BS on the whole story.
Except that you reference chemical agents that don't exist in entertaining werpossum's attempt to baffle us with bullshit.
What we have are puffed up rumors about second hand reports from anonymous sources about airplanes designed to entertain conspiracy theorists coupled to Iraqi WMD fantasies. Because 9/11, of course. Where's Mr. 9/11 himself, Rudi Giuiliani, when you need him, anyway?
I mean, it's perfectly obvious that the few of us left alive after the poison gas will be forced to live under Sharia Law, right?
In the meanwhile, we could just declare 9/11 to be National Fear Day.
Pfft.
Or you could just, um, read the article?
Sorry, that was mean. But I can't really conceive of any method that could pierce your Shell of Knowing, so I'll leave you to your foamy rage.
+1Wow, I'm rarely left without any sort of response but I am not. I guess I'll slowly back away and go relish in my fear of...... fuck if I know, whatever crazy bullshit you said up there.
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but aren't flight simulator programs fairly accurate? I was under the impression that 16 year old kids could at least come close to flying, simply from those simulations and minimal other training. From what I understand, taking off & flying are easy; the landing is hard. I don't think they need to land if they repeat 9/11.
Wow, I'm rarely left without any sort of response but I am not. I guess I'll slowly back away and go relish in my fear of...... fuck if I know, whatever crazy bullshit you said up there.
I was a bit harsh. Why entertain fantasies based on thin air fear mongering, anyway?