"The Balloon !"

[StringJunky]

Methinks 66000ft will no longer be left unwatched.

[toucana]

16 minutes ago, iNow said:

Really? According to the Department of State, they've an entire fleet of these balloons performing similar operations in 40 different countries across five continents right now. This was hardly a one-off.

The question was why did the Chinese regard this balloon program to be of such importance as to be worth the colossal risk of flying one of these units over the continental USA, right on the eve of a long-planned meeting between the Chinese premier Xi Jin Ping and Antony Blinken  the US SoS ? This meeting was of particular importance to the Chinese political leadership given the recent tensions between PRC and USA over Taiwan, and the new Speaker McCarthy's stated intention of visiting Taiwan in person in the near future. It is hard to imagine any possible military intelligence gain could have justified taking such a disastrous political risk as the one the Chinese wound up taking which led to the cancellation of Blinken's visit (and any possible follow up visit by the POTUS himself).

One explanation favoured by analysts is that when Xi Jin Ping consolidated his political power as the absolute authoritarian dictator of China last autumn, he effectively tried to squash all possible forms of dissent by effectively taking direct control of the PLA as well as the CPC. One difficulty of doing so is that you effectively pre-empt any effective form of delegation of powers, and any form of competent lower level critical analysis as well. It's rather like what might have happened if Trump had tried to take over the day-to day-running of the Pentagon. A dictator lacks the time or the competence to devote proper attention to running the military, and they also suppress  any competent analysis of the possible political consequences of operational intelligence decisions.

 

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, toucana said:

of such importance as to be worth the colossal risk of flying one of these units over the continental USA, right on the eve of a long-planned meeting between the Chinese premier Xi Jin Ping and Antony Blinken

Probably because they'd already done it AT LEAST 5 times in the past without issue or even detection in most cases (i.e. the risk you describe as "colossal" was actually almost nonexistent) 

3 minutes ago, toucana said:

One explanation favoured by analysts is that when Xi Jin Ping consolidated his political power as the absolute authoritarian dictator of China last autumn, he effectively tried to squash all possible forms of dissent by effectively taking direct control of the PLA as well as the CPC

Fair and likely valid, but IMO peripheral to this particular situation under discussion here. 

[toucana]

4 minutes ago, iNow said:

Probably because they'd already done it AT LEAST 5 times in the past without issue or even detection in most cases (i.e. the risk you describe as "colossal" was actually almost nonexistent) 

Chinese official sources are currently playing down the significance of Blinken's now cancelled visit - which tells it's own story  - https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/04/china-response-blinken-canceled-trip-00081201

In reality, Blinken was due to travel to China this Sunday for several days of talks with Chinese leadership about such topics as Taiwan, human rights, Chinese territorial claims in the  South China Sea, North Korea, Russia's war in Ukraine, trade policy, and climate  change. These are not minor matters. This was a serious and important meeting which has now been thrown in the dumpster for no worthwhile intelligence gain  - *That* was the 'colossal risk' I referred to.

[TheVat]

I find it interesting that the balloon was spotted right away on its approach - over the Bering Sea, in fact.  Was this balloon and payload larger than the previous ones, making it easier to spot, or did we just happen to get lucky this time and be looking in the right place?  I don't know if all the answers are going to be declassified on this.  I wonder if this was a case of the Chinese SIGINT people getting cocky, "hey, we've floated a half dozen of these over, without fuss, wooohooo!..."  

It could be lack of competent analysis of political ramifications, but that's true of a lot of what nations do even when there is good delegation of decision-making and chain-of-command.  When humans gets cocky and besotted with cool tech, judgment often goes out the window.  

 

[Externet]

On 2/5/2023 at 7:33 AM, toucana said:

One stated reason for the initial reluctance of the US Airforce to shoot down the Chinese balloon spotted over Montana was the risk of debris falling onto populated areas below.

Because they wanted the show of $hooting a missile to explode instead of plain bullets to deflate slowly until landing softly from slow leaks...

[toucana]

2 hours ago, TheVat said:

I find it interesting that the balloon was spotted right away on its approach - over the Bering Sea, in fact.  Was this balloon and payload larger than the previous ones, making it easier to spot, or did we just happen to get lucky this time and be looking in the right place?  I don't know if all the answers are going to be declassified on this.  I wonder if this was a case of the Chinese SIGINT people getting cocky, "hey, we've floated a half dozen of these over, without fuss, wooohooo!..."  

It could be lack of competent analysis of political ramifications, but that's true of a lot of what nations do even when there is good delegation of decision-making and chain-of-command.  When humans gets cocky and besotted with cool tech, judgment often goes out the window.  

 

The Pentagon just announced they shot down another 'object' on orders from POTUS. It was over Alaska this time, and reported to be flying at 40,000 feet.

[Alex_Krycek]

4 hours ago, toucana said:

The Pentagon just announced they shot down another 'object' on orders from POTUS. It was over Alaska this time, and reported to be flying at 40,000 feet.

The Alaska object is described to be significantly smaller than the Chinese spy balloon with an elongated "tic tac" oval shape, and cannot be attributed to any country.  

Unlike recent days, I doubt we'll be seeing images of the Alaska object's debris broadcast all over the media...

Edited February 11, 2023 by Alex_Krycek

[iNow]

8 hours ago, toucana said:

In reality, Blinken was due to travel to China this Sunday for several days of talks with Chinese leadership

Some say that Xi was excited about the visit as he’s been looking for ways China and US can help each other. He’s facing some very real challenges inside his country and wants to find ways of doing business, but not everyone around him is very happy about his total and complete power and want to sabotage him where they can (in other words, he didn’t even know about the balloon). 

6 hours ago, Externet said:

Because they wanted the show of $hooting a missile to explode instead of plain bullets to deflate slowly until landing softly from slow leaks...

You may as well be suggesting you empty a swimming pool with a macaroni noodle. That balloon was huge and shooting it with a BB gun wasn’t gonna cut it (pun intended)

45 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Unlike recent days, I doubt we'll be seeing images of the Alaska object's debris broadcast all over the media...

No, but it is frozen in the waters off the Alaskan coast and debris is being collected for analysis. 

[Alex_Krycek]

21 minutes ago, iNow said:

No, but it is frozen in the waters off the Alaskan coast and debris is being collected for analysis. 

And no photos will emerge of this incident whatsoever.  Interesting.

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

And no photos will emerge of this incident whatsoever.  Interesting.

How so? Will you please be more explicit about what you’re insinuating? I don’t follow. 

[StringJunky]

39 minutes ago, iNow said:

Some say that Xi was excited about the visit as he’s been looking for ways China and US can help each other. He’s facing some very real challenges inside his country and wants to find ways of doing business, but not everyone around him is very happy about his total and complete power and want to sabotage him where they can (in other words, he didn’t even know about the balloon). 

You may as well be suggesting you empty a swimming pool with a macaroni noodle. That balloon was huge and shooting it with a BB gun wasn’t gonna cut it (pun intended)

No, but it is frozen in the waters off the Alaskan coast and debris is being collected for analysis. 

200m high

[Alex_Krycek]

23 minutes ago, iNow said:

How so? Will you please be more explicit about what you’re insinuating? I don’t follow. 

I find it interesting what the US military chooses to show to the general public, and what it chooses not to show.  

First, we have the incident with the Chinese spy balloon.  The spy balloon got significant press coverage: it was tracked flying across the continental US, there was the big debate about whether to shoot it down or not, we had photos of the US Navy recovering it off the coast near Myrtle Beach, SC, the FBI assembling the evidence in a warehouse.  You name it - we were shown it.  It's been made into a big spectacle and all have been invited to come and see.  

Now, this Chinese spy balloon could just have easily been kept quiet and classified.  There are numerous other incidents of surveillance by foreign adversaries that occur on a regular basis which are not publicized.  Why was the public given such a show with this one?

The result of all his sensational publicity is that a clear and vivid perception has been created in the minds of the American public about what it is the US Military shoots down when it comes to unknown objects.  The idea that these objects are Chinese balloons, adversarial surveillance craft of some kind, has really been hammered home these last few days in terms of imagery, narratives, press coverage, etc.  Attention, time, and energy in spades.  There is now an anchoring point that the public can revert back to when confronted with future unknowns.  

Then we have the Alaska object.  From what's been described it's markedly different in terms of its size, shape, appearance, and flight characteristics.  The US gov also won't attribute it to any country, as they so quickly did with the Chinese balloon.  In all of  the press coverage I've read about the Alaska object, the Chinese spy balloon story is woven into the same article.  I haven't seen a single article about the Alaska object that hasn't in some way referenced the Chinese spy balloon story.  It's a tactic of misdirection, the old conjurer's trick - where the idea or perception that you want someone to conclude is the fact is linked, or connected, with an objectively unknown situation.  Those without strong critical thinking skills will subconsciously link what you have referenced from the past as the factual explanation for the new unknown scenario. In this case the American public will conclude that the Alaska object is the same as the Chinese Spy balloon; they won't give it a second thought.   

Meanwhile, whatever was shot down over Alaska can be quietly collected with little publicity or fanfare.  I suspect that any future reports of objects being shot down or unknown aerial objects in general will be linked with the Chinese spy balloon story also, since that narrative has been effectively anchored already.    

Edited February 11, 2023 by Alex_Krycek

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Why was the public given such a show with this one?

Maybe bc the public could see it and start making a fuss about it 

3 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

The US gov also won't attribute it to any country

Yet

Also, +1 for actually explaining your stance. Appreciated 

[swansont]

7 hours ago, Externet said:

Because they wanted the show of $hooting a missile to explode instead of plain bullets to deflate slowly until landing softly from slow leaks...

I thought we covered this already.

16 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

I find it interesting what the US military chooses to show to the general public, and what it chooses not to show.  

First, we have the incident with the Chinese spy balloon.  The spy balloon got significant press coverage: it was tracked flying across the continental US, there was the big debate about whether to shoot it down or not, we had photos of the US Navy recovering it off the coast near Myrtle Beach, SC, the FBI assembling the evidence in a warehouse.  You name it - we were shown it.  It's been made into a big spectacle and all have been invited to come and see.  

Was it the military that showed the public, or was it the news? As you say, there was significant press coverage. The video toucana posted was from Ward Carroll (who or whatever that is.) Not the DoD.

 

16 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Now, this Chinese spy balloon could just have easily been kept quiet and classified.  There are numerous other incidents of surveillance by foreign adversaries that occur on a regular basis which are not publicized.  Why was the public given such a show with this one?

If the press had the info, it could not have been kept quiet. How do you know that there aren’t aspects that are classified? 

 

[StringJunky]

12 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

I find it interesting what the US military chooses to show to the general public, and what it chooses not to show.  

First, we have the incident with the Chinese spy balloon.  The spy balloon got significant press coverage: it was tracked flying across the continental US, there was the big debate about whether to shoot it down or not, we had photos of the US Navy recovering it off the coast near Myrtle Beach, SC, the FBI assembling the evidence in a warehouse.  You name it - we were shown it.  It's been made into a big spectacle and all have been invited to come and see.  

Now, this Chinese spy balloon could just have easily been kept quiet and classified.  There are numerous other incidents of surveillance by foreign adversaries that occur on a regular basis which are not publicized.  Why was the public given such a show with this one?

The result of all his sensational publicity is that a clear and vivid perception has been created in the minds of the American public about what it is the US Military shoots down when it comes to unknown objects.  The idea that these objects are Chinese balloons, adversarial surveillance craft of some kind, has really been hammered home these last few days in terms of imagery, narratives, press coverage, etc.  Attention, time, and energy in spades.  There is now an anchoring point that the public can revert back to when confronted with future unknowns.  

Then we have the Alaska object.  From what's been described it's markedly different in terms of its size, shape, appearance, and flight characteristics.  The US gov also won't attribute it to any country, as they so quickly did with the Chinese balloon.  In all of  the press coverage I've read about the Alaska object, the Chinese spy balloon story is woven into the same article.  I haven't seen a single article about the Alaska object that hasn't in some way referenced the Chinese spy balloon story.  It's a tactic of misdirection, the old conjurer's trick - where the idea or perception that you want someone to conclude is the fact is linked, or connected, with an objectively unknown situation.  Those without strong critical thinking skills will subconsciously link what you have referenced from the past as the factual explanation for the new unknown scenario. In this case the American public will conclude that the Alaska object is the same as the Chinese Spy balloon; they won't give it a second thought.   

Meanwhile, whatever was shot down over Alaska can be quietly collected with little publicity or fanfare.  I suspect that any future reports of objects being shot down or unknown aerial objects in general will be linked with the Chinese spy balloon story also, since that narrative has been effectively anchored already.    

Perhaps, in general, governments like to keep this sort of stuff under wraps, so they cn exploit these things geopolitically... stuff like equipment secrets they discover and don't want their adversary to know they know. The balloon we saw was perhaps too blatant to apply the usual protocols of secrecy and so they  had to talk about it and react publicly.

[Alex_Krycek]

Just now, StringJunky said:

Perhaps, in general, governments like to keep this sort of stuff under wraps, so they cn exploit these things geopolitically... stuff like equipment secrets they discover and don't want their adversary to know they know. The balloon we saw was perhaps too blatant to apply the usual protocols of secrecy and so they  had to talk about it and react publicly.

Could be the case.  The cat got out of the bag.

[StringJunky]

21 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Could be the case.  The cat got out of the bag.

It seems plausible to me. Countermeasures can be learned and applied. The adversary would then be using a lemon, completely unaware.

Edited February 11, 2023 by StringJunky

[iNow]

We know this answer. The government DID keep it quiet. Until, that is, people started posting about it. Then they HAD to respond. But they knew it was there and had discussed it internally well before any of us knew. 

If only the public were this worried about TikTok, but that’s too hard to see and isn’t shiny like a big balloon. 

[Alex_Krycek]

41 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

It seems plausible to me. Countermeasures can be learned and applied. The adversary would then be using a lemon, completely unaware.

I mean, balloons have been used to infiltrate US airspace as far back as WW2 when the Japanese floated them over.  So not exactly a novel tactic.

[StringJunky]

7 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

I mean, balloons have been used to infiltrate US airspace as far back as WW2 when the Japanese floated them over.  So not exactly a novel tactic.

Right. OK.

[exchemist]

14 hours ago, iNow said:

Really? According to the Department of State, they've an entire fleet of these balloons performing similar operations in 40 different countries across five continents right now. This was hardly a one-off.

@toucanamentioned that. We know it seems important to them. We don’t know why, though. What does it do that satellites don’t, for instance?

[studiot]

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

@toucanamentioned that. We know it seems important to them. We don’t know why, though. What does it do that satellites don’t, for instance?

iNow already answered that

 

On 2/5/2023 at 10:56 PM, iNow said:

The balloon collected intelligence about how the U.S. responds. 

They watched the ballon cross into Alaska and how we responded. They watched how the government and military responded the entire next week. 

They watched the news coverage and national freak out on social media. The conspiracy theories that were most cited. The anger and disappointment at Biden. They watched family members sniping at each other.

They watched what other things and places we stopped watching while watching this.

Now the next time when they want to deploy a virus against our banking system or energy grid, or just want more leverage in a negotiation over carbon credits and trade… they’ll just float a balloon across the continental US so we look up and watch it like wide-eyed children. 

“Oooohhh… shiny!”

 

Although the US has watched such incursions before, I further suggest this time presents new information because of Ukraine. China and Russia have become very pally recently.

[exchemist]

30 minutes ago, studiot said:

iNow already answered that

 

 

Although the US has watched such incursions before, I further suggest this time presents new information because of Ukraine. China and Russia have become very pally recently.

Is there a source for that hypothesis , or is it a personal speculation?

I suppose it is possible it was indeed a stunt, or test, to sow confusion and watch reactions, but that does not seem to account for China having a whole fleet of them, sent to all corners of the world.

[swansont]

10 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Perhaps, in general, governments like to keep this sort of stuff under wraps, so they cn exploit these things geopolitically... stuff like equipment secrets they discover and don't want their adversary to know they know. The balloon we saw was perhaps too blatant to apply the usual protocols of secrecy and so they  had to talk about it and react publicly.

In the US, information is classified if release of the information is a threat to national security (that’s supposed to be the only reason)

That the public knows the information does not change this; if someone leaks classified info to the press, it’s still classified. And as I pointed out earlier, even if knowledge of the balloon isn’t classified, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t details that are. (about the payload, for example)