20,000 shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles say bye bye

[kvnchrist]

What the heck are these people who run our military and those who run the military thinking? Can they see past their own noses with this stuff.

 

I just heard after we used thousands of bombs, smart bombs and guided missiles, hundreds of sorties to take out Gaddafi's armor and troops, things that could do no harm outside their own country, Nato moronically forgot about the weapons supply depots and Army bases that housed several thousand of lethal weaponry that could very well cause terrible destruction, all over the world. How could these people not know what Gaddafi had purchased for his military and why did they not dispose of these armaments depots if they couldn't airdrop troops to guard these facilities.

 

I know President Obama wanted to have no boots on the ground, but what about the Nato countries placing troops to guard these facilities, or at least blow them up.

 

Now we have potentially 20,000 shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles floating around somewhere and will most likely be the item to buy on the black market. How could these morons not look out for the welfare of their own countries, while jumping to the aid of people we have no clue about.

 

 

Anti-aircraft missiles.

 

 

I was in the military for 8.5 years and worked as an air defense personel. I never fired a stinger, but I've seen them fired up close and personal. In the Battery, which is a artillery company. 5 -7 solders per squad, formed into 4 separate squads, makes up a platoon, and on the average 3-4 platoons, plus a maintenance platoon makes up a battery. Anyway our battery had 3 platoons of platformed fired anti-aircraft and a platoon of stinger missile personnel.

 

I have held a stinger on my shoulder and can tell you, you can carry 2-3 on a motorcycle, easily. You can stop, set up and fire a stinger missile in less than a minute, if you practice and dissappear just as quickly These things have an effective range of up to 15,700 feet (4,800 m) and at altitudes between 600 and 12,500 feet (180 and 3,800 m.

 

These things are devastating and have proximity fuses, so if they miss close enough, they can easily take down a jet liner.

 

 

stinger missils

 

 

I kinow they are saying that he had Russian missiles, but who is to say if they aren't equivalent to the stingers.

[Flintlockecole]

Quite the blunder.

[crimsonblade1]

They will end up being fired at US choppers in Iraq and Afghanistan. I dunno if anyone remembers the defeat the Soviet Union had in Afghanistan, but they went from raising hell in Afghanistan with choppers, to them dropping out of the sky in mass when we handed them shoulder fired surface to air missiles. They work just as good on US choppers. Edited September 29, 2011 by crimsonblade1

[kvnchrist]

They will end up being fired at US choppers in Iraq and Afghanistan. I dunno if anyone remembers the defeat the Soviet Union had in Afghanistan, but they went from raising hell in Afghanistan with choppers, to them dropping out of the sky in mass when we handed them shoulder fired surface to air missiles. They work just as good on US choppers.

 

 

I am more worried about civilian aircraft. Military aircraft have safeguards, like white phosphorus flairs and exhaust dampening. Civilian aircraft are far more vulnerable. Imagine 10,000 9/11's without the world trade center, happening all over the world. This reaches far wider than just the few countries that looked the other way.

[crimsonblade1]

They will end up being fired at US choppers in Iraq and Afghanistan. I dunno if anyone remembers the defeat the Soviet Union had in Afghanistan, but they went from raising hell in Afghanistan with choppers, to them dropping out of the sky in mass when we handed them shoulder fired surface to air missiles. They work just as good on US choppers.

 

 

I am more worried about civilian aircraft. Military aircraft have safeguards, like white phosphorus flairs and exhaust dampening. Civilian aircraft are far more vulnerable. Imagine 10,000 9/11's without the world trade center, happening all over the world. This reaches far wider than just the few countries that looked the other way.

 

After a few get blow out of the sky by stinger missiles, they will start putting defense systems on civilian airliners. Seeing as how they always wait until after the fact before they take measures to defend against it. I think Israel has already done this on some of their airlines.

Edited September 30, 2011 by crimsonblade1

[elvinkun]

Well, It is bad, not trying to say otherwise, on the other hand, I wouldn't even think about "10'000 9/11s" - this is not the first, nor the last time large supply of military grade explosives / missles / assault rifles / etc dissapeared - and I do believe it will be, as usually, divided, divided, divided and sold, so this group will have 50 new launchers, that group 30 ... Noone wants to keep thousands, because it's hard to hide that. Mostly likely it will end up dispersed across the less stable states of Africa and Middle east, but considering what all is there already... It's not that big deal. Some mia travel all the way to terrorists, but most will be used to wage local wars. Most likely. Maybe someone will find the supply before that happens, maybe there was no supply to begin with - you never know. Edited September 30, 2011 by elvinkun

[greywaste]

yeah, check out all the yellowcake they found in an unguarded warehouse there too

[Vindekarr]

Well frankly Stingers have been on the market for a long time, now there's more stock, but they've been in the shop window for a long time. Hell a bunch of them got nicked from an Australian army base a few years ago and never got recovered so it's hardly the dawn of a new dark age.

[McclaudEagle]

They should have been secured by troops, regardless of the "no boots on the ground" mission. The other option of course would have been to destroy the storage facility they were in, but that would have been a potentially dangerous move. If the facility was also storing chemical weapons, then blowing them up would be just as bad as letting them be used. The chemical gases would spread throughout the area and kill many people.

 

The problem now is that they're in unknown locations, and there's thousands of miles of land to cover to find them. In the process of trying to keep their backsides in their government seats, they've potentially created an enormous threat to military and civilian aircraft. People will potentially pay with their lives for the sake of a bit of politics. Also, because of this blunder, it's actually made the government look worse by showcasing their incompetence.

[kvnchrist]

As far as I'm concerned. War is war. If you are in for a penny, you are in for a pound. The people who are bombed don't care if you have boots on the ground or not. they are just as dead. Their relative are just as angry at you and these might be the very people that have these weapons. This goes directly back to my thread on ARE WE THE WORLD'S POLICE.!

 

The ramifications of this will be heard, most likely for decades to come, untill these weapons are too old to be effective, at all. The idea that commercial airliners would install expensive anti-aircraft missile technology is maddening and was quite preventable. The expense would be enormous, and the price would be passed down to the consumer. This will effect our travel industry far more than 9/11 ever thought of being.

 

The decision to enter into this, and the decision to not have boots on the ground, were both a political decision. The buck stops at the Whitehorse and I'm sure the every time a airliner comes down in flames, the opposition will not be shy in pointing this out. Just like the blunders in the last administration's wars, we are now stuck in a situation that we can't fully, ever extricate ourselves. This just keeps on getting better and better, doesn't it.