Posted on 09/28/2011 5:44:34 AM PDT by MindBender26
For twenty years – long before 9/11 – the danger of terrorists armed with surface to air missiles shooting at passenger planes has been the secret fear of many top political leaders. In the late 90s, a terrorist network was nabbed trying to bring them into Newark Airport, but the airline industry and the government have done nothing to equip passenger airplanes with any defense against these always deadly missiles.
Now Barack Obama has committed the ultimate sin: He has let 20,000 surface-to-air missiles escape from military depots in Libya. According to ABC News “U.S. officials had once thought there was little chance that terrorists could get their hands on many of the portable surface-to-air missiles that can bring down a commercial jet liner. But now that calculation is out the window, with officials at a recent secret White House meeting reporting that thousands of them have gone missing in Libya.” An estimated 20,000 of these “portable, heat-seeking missiles have gone missing from unguarded Army weapons warehouses.”
Senator Barbara Boxer, of the Senate’s Commerce, Energy, and Transportation Committee said that “matching up a terrorist with a shoulder-fired missile, that’s our worst nightmare.
And now, thanks to Obama’s carelessness and his unnecessary decision to intervene in Libya, it may be our future reality.
ABC News describes the missing missiles as “four to six-feet long and Russian-made, [they] can weight just 55 pounds with launcher.” They are accurate within a range of more than two miles. That a terrorist could sit on a boat off JFK airport and shoot down a passenger plane as it ascends could now be a real possibility.
In the Iraq War, during the run-up to the 2004 election, there were reports of unguarded US military depots from which insurgents allegedly stole thousands of explosives. The story broke in the week before the election and Kerry took down all his other ads and focused on this issue, first reported in the New York Times. By Election Day, it was proven that the report was bogus, adding to Kerry’s woes. Now, faced with this massive blunder and security threat, we hear nothing but the sounds of silence from any of the mainstream media except, to its immense credit, ABC News.
We need to assign a top priority to hunting down these missiles. In Afghanistan, our troops jumped through hoops to corral all the Stinger Missiles left over from the Russian War. This potential leak of these dangerous weapons is vastly more threatening. Obama needs to face this issue squarely and publicly. And we all need to learn the cost we may pay from having elected a rank amateur as president
Not to mention deeming it an “accident” while the wreckage is still ablaze (November 2001).
could now be a real possibility? Hello? Somebody seriously said this without referencing the obvious?
Don’t be stupid, at least not on purpose. TWA 800 was FAR outside the threat envelope for a man portable AA missile.
That assumes a fair election will take place in November 2012.
I am skeptical about these numbers.
1) 20,000 portable surface-to-air missiles just on its face is an incredible stockpile for a small state such as Libya. I wonder if RPGs or artillery rockets are being lumped together with the SAMS to make up these numbers.
2) How many reports do you recall of Libyan soldiers trying to shoot down NATO jets and gunships with such weapons. I vaguely recall one instance of NATO rebel allies firing on a NATO bomber. If Libya had such an abundance of weapons, they’d have used them freely.
The pictures (out of Libya) did show surface to air, in the past probable(cover-up). Cannot argue with the eyewitness reports from another pilot near the area. Europe and possibly Israel could be the first to be hit with these weapons, if the information is not misinformation, though from all gleamed at the present the information does not appear as misinformation. If is misinformation there is some media organization working with the laser company to gain entry for installation on aircraft of the system to scramble the surface to air projectile. Could know rather soon whether or not this was / is misinformation. Planes being shot out of the sky would definitely say this information is not misinformation. Wondering if our security apparatus will wait till this takes place (planes being shot down)?
1) I’m surprised to learn that terrorists don’t already have surface-to-air missiles.
2) I don’t see how we could possibly defend against them, unless we do extreme things such as deporting all Muslims.
3) I’d guess that hi-jacking a plane would still be preferred, since you can then fly the plane into objects. I’m also very concerned about terrorists or an Islamic state (kinda redundant) using a nuclear weapon or emp. Until they can do that, shooting down planes could be a very effective war/terrorism strategy for them.
Where did you get the idea that the thefts were from US bases?
Critical thinking comes up with this: it doesn’t necessarily mean the rebels getting shot at by NATO got the missiles. Could have been someone else, who didn’t care about shooting down NATO aircraft.
There are systems that can reduce the risk of a plane being hit. No systems in place on commercial planes that I know of. The pilot has to see it coming for to be deployed.
“If they had operational, portable SAMs, they would have used them against NATO.”
Not necessarily. They probably didn’t want NATO to know they had them and it gave them time to ship them out of the country. They will soon be coming across the US/Mexican border. FUBO.
Because “Now Barack Obama has committed the ultimate sin: He has let 20,000 surface-to-air missiles escape from military depots in Libya.”
IIRC, the US CIC only controls US military depots. Or so I thought.
If we knew where to look for them, why didn't we take them out with all the bajillion sorties we were flying? I mean, if you are flying bajillions of sorties, aren't anti-aircraft depots just down the list from radar, command, and control systems?
That a terrorist could sit on a boat off JFK airport and shoot down a passenger plane as it ascends could now be a real possibility.
This direct reference to TWA 800 like is s pretty tongue in cheek comment, even for Morris. Are you telling us you KNOW something, Dickie?
It isn't hard to envision the kind of "security" around airports and flight paths we're going to "need" now. Of course, we have to presume there really were these 20,000 missiles in inventory that Gadaffi somehow wasn't using against anybody to save his sorry skin. I guess he was busy at the time.
My point is that this story stinks in more ways than one.
From 2005
UK News
Britain buys Russian surface-to-air missiles in fight against terrorism
By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
12:01AM GMT 13 Dec 2005
Britain has secretly bought dozens of sophisticated Russian surface-to-air missiles, some of which are believed to have fallen into terrorist hands, to develop counter measures against them.
There are significant fears that the weapon, which can be packed into a golf bag and assembled and fired very rapidly by one person with minimal training, will be targeted at civil and military aircraft.
Defence experts have spent the past year experimenting with the shoulder-launched missile in order to protect British aircraft and service personnel.
The Daily Telegraph knows the exact make of the missile but has withheld the information on the advice of the D-Notice committee.
The weapon has reportedly been purchased by Libya in a multi-million dollar deal. Both Syria and Iran are in negotiations to buy hundreds and Vietnam, Brazil, India and Ukraine already have it in their armoury.
But there are worries that in Iraq the missile has already fallen into the hands of insurgents who could use it to devastating effect against British or American transport planes carrying hundreds of troops.
It would also have a dire impact on the economy if terrorists were able to use it to bring down a passenger aircraft in Europe or America.
Britain used arms dealers experienced in the Russian market to approach a state-owned arms manufacturer to purchase the system. The missiles and launchers were imported into Britain in an estimated £2.8 million deal.
Ministry of Defence scientists and gunners from the Royal Artillery have test-fired them at UK bases. Britain is thought to be trying to buy another batch of missiles and the test results will be pooled with the Americans.
The SAM flies higher, farther and faster and homes in on images as well as heat, making it capable of taking out Cruise missiles in flight.
It is very rugged, able to survive being submerged in water for 30 minutes or dropped on to a concrete surface from six feet. It is the ideal weapon for terrorists, who “no doubt” have some in their armoury, according to defence sources.
In January a London businessman, Hemant Lakhani, was jailed for 47 years in America after he attempted to buy 50 missiles in a sting operation that involved the CIA and Russian security services.
There have been reports in the Russian press that the SAM has been passed to French terrorists intent on attacking a civilian aircraft in France or elsewhere in the European Union. There has also been intelligence that up to 150 missiles were stolen from a Georgian military depot.
Earlier versions of the SAM were responsible for destroying at least eight American and British aircraft in the 1991 Gulf war, an American F16 in Kosovo in 1999 and a Russian Mi-26 helicopter, killing 121 troops it was carrying in Chechnya in 2002.
The American government has begun tests on a laser device that can be bolted on to an airliner to disrupt heat-seeking missiles.
Fear of flying could cripple the commercial aviation industry and paralyse the economy if an American airliner is destroyed by a shoulder-launched missile, the Rand Corporation, an independent think-tank, reported this year.
The 20,000 figure would sound more in line if they were RPG’s vs. MANPADS
Blunder?
IT WAS PLANNED YOU IDIOTS.
It was predicted widely, described as it happened,
and NOT ONCE did NATO or the CIC defend Americans.
Wasn’t our SEAL TEAM Helicopter shot down with one of these portable SAM’s ?????
RE: If they had operational, portable SAMs, they would have used them against NATO.
Not necessarily. NATO military aircraft have advanced countermeasures to these weapons. They would have actually made themselves more vulnerable if they used them because of the signature when fired. Just look at recent conflicts where SAMs were employed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.