Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Gay State Conservative

If we’re talking about a situation like the one President Bush found himself in, on 09/11/2001, that refueling capability is a must.

We’re hearing so much minutia these days. It almost causes one to question if what we are hearing is true.


5 posted on 09/27/2017 4:00:25 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (John McBane is the turd in the national puch-bowl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: DoughtyOne

It almost causes one to question if what we are hearing is true.

With Pop Mechanics, I wouldn’t trust them. I cancelled my script 20 some years ago when they found religion, global warming.


8 posted on 09/27/2017 4:03:56 PM PDT by eyeamok (Idle hands are the Devil's workshop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne
From the article:

Proponents of the cut argue that aerial refueling is not necessary considering no president has ever used the capability, not even George W. Bush who loitered over the Gulf of Mexico in Air Force One for eight hours after the 9/11 attacks.

11 posted on 09/27/2017 4:07:08 PM PDT by ican'tbelieveit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: DoughtyOne
If we’re talking about a situation like the one President Bush found himself in, on 09/11/2001, that refueling capability is a must.

No need for aerial refueling between Sarasota and Bossier City, nor between Bossier City and Omaha. By the time they could have gotten a tanker up from Bossier, he would have been about there anyway.

30 posted on 09/27/2017 5:44:08 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson