Aircraft Carrier and airspace?

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

They may play those games on a simulator, but most military pilots so
value the privilege of flying they do their best not to put it at risk
by displaying that kind of judgment.

Obviously, one military pilot decided to put his privilege at risk. And I
suspect the military didn't bother to revoke that privilege, which is why it
kept its actions (if any) secret. It wouldn't do to publicly announce that
the pilot got off scott-free.

Utter and total nonsense.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic aka Anthony Atkielski, Moron wrote in
:

writes:

They may play those games on a simulator, but most military pilots so
value the privilege of flying they do their best not to put it at
risk by displaying that kind of judgment.

Obviously, one military pilot decided to put his privilege at risk.
And I suspect the military didn't bother to revoke that privilege,
which is why it kept its actions (if any) secret. It wouldn't do to
publicly announce that the pilot got off scott-free.

Wrong again, moron.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

How would you have any clue what goes on in the military from down deep
in your bunker?

I know that some fighter pilots with ego and judgement problems try to
terrorize civilian aircraft.

Non sequitur.

You haven't a clue how real military engagements work ...

This wasn't a military engagement, despite the pilot's fantasies to the
contrary.

Non sequitur.

Try and stay on subject and tell us about your vast military experience.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

How would you have any clue what goes on in the military from down deep
in your bunker?

I know that some fighter pilots with ego and judgement problems try to
terrorize civilian aircraft.

You haven't a clue how real military engagements work ...

This wasn't a military engagement, despite the pilot's fantasies to the
contrary.

You are a moron.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Gig 601Xl Builder writes:

Here's the problem you are looking at from a legal standpoint and
wanting to add a legal tag to it. They aren't. They would be looking
at you as a threat.

CARRIER DESTROYS DEADLY CESSNA IN MILITARY-FAMILY CONFLICT

Yes, that makes a really good headline.

And just how many weapons do you think were tracking that Bear the
whole time?

Tracking is routine, shooting is not.

Anthony, you're a ****ing moron. Go stick your head back up your ass.
That is something which will benefit mankind.

Gig 601Xl Builder wrote:



Maybe it's "nothing"... after all just a few months ago a pair of
Russian
TU-95 Bear bombers overflew the USS Nimitz. One of them flew directly
over
the Nimitz at 2000 feet and no one shot them down.

And just how many weapons do you think were tracking that Bear the whole
time?

Nobodys gonna blink twice if they splash an airplane from the united
states of Cessna...

Keep in mind that while the bear was overflying our fleet, we'd been
flying nuclear armed bombers just outside their territorial limits for
years.. and until they had developed SAMs that could reach, we'd
violated and overflown their airspace with impunity for years. It was a
game with a KNOWN adversary.

A plane approaching that doesn't respond and is unidentified will be
making a bad gamble. Remember the Vincennes?