POSTED BY LAUGHING_WOLF • [FEBRUARY 19, 2013]
UPDATE BELOW, BUMPED
There is a lot, and I mean a LOT of pants-wetting going on right now about the Bear Bomber(s) that circled Guam (except they apparently didn't). Part of me really wants to say "Get off my lawn!" to the media involved.
Part of the problem lies in that many news services are (badly) pulling from a story by Bill Gertz in the Washington Free Beacon. While I question parts of his story, the pulls from it (for those I've seen) are very poorly done, though I've seen what I think was an update to one to make corrections (or at least give it some basic editing). So, take this with a grain of salt and know that by the time this goes up, some of those stories may be fixed a bit.
First, some of the stories are either very poorly written or very poorly edited, not sure which. While Bill's story quotes the Air Force as stating there were two Bear bombers, some of the versions I've seen elsewhere mix tenses and numbers. FYI, two is not a fleet, but does make sense on several levels having to do with intel and flight safety.
Second, the Bear is nuclear capable but in the past rarely nuclear armed. There is a huge freakin difference there. Could we tell if it was nuclear armed? Not from looking at it; but, suspect (insert whistling idly here) there are ways to tell. Bill says his sources say there were armed with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. Me, I have to question this as I am not getting any such confirmation nor can I find any official statement so stating. I've put in a formal inquiry to see what response I get in public. I will also note that we have rarely stated that any plane had any particular type weapon on it, as that tends to tell others about our intel capabilities..
READ MORE-
No comments:
Post a Comment