that had been apparently reported as being off course and most probably abducted, should have been allowed to fly over New York without any intervention by fighter aircraft? Doesn`t New York have an Air-defence system?
2007-09-11 05:24:18 · 17 answers · asked by Sue 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Certainly I would not have wanted the planes to be shot down as I am absolutely not a terrorist, nor support the idea.Someone`s got it wrong!Just a free-thinker.Why were the fighters told planes over the sea, by the way?Strange!
2007-09-11 08:52:18 · update #1
No, on 9/11/01, there was no system or policy in place to have the military intercept and bring down hijacked aircraft.
I'm wondering why those of us who answered with simple facts, presented without spin, were given thumbs downs?
2007-09-11 05:28:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 4⤋
They do now, but then it was unthinkable. One has to understand the two planes came from places that were very close. Being off course for fifteen minutes is not that very long. I know one plan came from Boston, probably only a twenty minute flight from NYC. So when it was clear things were wrong, the people in control did not know what to think and clearly did not know what to do. Obviously we have learned alot from this experience. When the private plane flown by that baseball player crashed into one of the buildings in NYC, he was being pursued by a fighter jet, and he clearly was not off course that long either. So there is a defense system in place now, that was not expected to be needed six years ago. If you have not noticed there are alerts all the time now, and articles in the papers reporting weird sightings asking for information. We are much more vigilent now, which might explain why we have not had another terrorist attack since. Unfortunately Spain and England have not been so lucky. However, even there, there hve been great strides. The last plan was twarted considerably. We are getting smarter and faster in response. Let us thank those who are keeping us safe. This is who we should salute on this most memorable occasion.
2007-09-11 05:34:08 · answer #2 · answered by William S 2 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Nor were there sufficient numbers of combat aircraft on standby with fighter jocks sitting around just waiting for the call to go up and shoot down a civilian aircraft.
This wasn't the Battle of Britain and even if it had been, those guys would have needed the go ahead from Churchill to do what you're suggesting.
Hindsight's amazing in it's clarity, isn't it?
2007-09-11 05:31:50 · answer #3 · answered by The emperor has no clothes 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Honest American has it right, 67 scrambles of fighter jets in 2000, why not on Sept 11 when 4 airliners went off course, all they had to do was follow protocol and the towers would still be standing(fact) and to the idiot who says they turned off the transponders so they were not on the radar screens, you mean to tell me that all a soviet bomber has to do is turn off is transponder and it can't be tracked, give your head a firm shake!!!!
2007-09-11 09:40:30 · answer #4 · answered by wtfsept11 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They do not have any such defense.
You can thank your government for all of the military cuts in the 80's and 90's. Remember all those base closings.
There was nothing in range and nothing that could be launched fast enough to do anything about this. Fighter pilots both then and now were trained for this, but could not have responded in enough time to intercept these aircraft.
With any government I see in the future, be it republican or democrat, I don't see anything changing in the near future.
The press has everyone convinced that any military spending is a bad thing. But then people wonder what happened and want to place blame when something like this happens.
The best way to fix our broken government is to vote out any incumbent. They are not doing their job. Let them know that we are not satisfied and they can be replaced.
2007-09-11 05:42:17 · answer #5 · answered by Mad Jack 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Its a case of 20/20 hindsight. Before 9/11, no one would have believed that people would use jet airliners as missiles. A movie called "executive decision" was made about a president having to make the decision to shoot down and air liner prior to 9/11. Nowadays the premise wouldn't even work for that movie, they would shoot it down almost automatically.
2007-09-11 05:37:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
well think about this for a second.
if the jets HAD been taken down, how would we ever have known what their intentions were in the first place?
lets just say that 9/11 never happened BECAUSE the jets were taken out before any of them hit their targets.
how would we perceived our leaders now?
2007-09-11 05:48:22 · answer #7 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yeah i can't believe those new york morons didn't have an entire squadron of fighters ready to scramble at any time in case they have to shoot down a civilian airliner aimed at a building i mean that sort of thing happens all the time you'd think they'd be ready for it right?!?!?!
2007-09-11 05:51:57 · answer #8 · answered by f0876and1_2 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Never realized how many LYING NEO_CONS were on this board!They don't tell you about the 67 strays the airforce intercepted in the year prior to 9/11!They don't tell you about how Dickie Cheney was simulating multiple hijackings the morning of 9/11!
2007-09-11 05:44:12 · answer #9 · answered by honestamerican 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Sadly no, and the jets came in 18 minutes apart.. by the time the fighters were scrambled it was all over..
2007-09-11 05:42:22 · answer #10 · answered by Antiliber 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Not at that time. The pilots had turned off the transponders so no one knew exactly where they were. They didn't show up on radar. There were fighters scrambled but were lead to believe the incoming planes were out over the ocean, so that's where they went. Besides, they had no missles attached to them anyway, so the best they could have done would be to fly into them.
2007-09-11 05:30:03 · answer #11 · answered by Jim C 5 · 3⤊ 4⤋