Venezuela thread

Page 37 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Pens1566

Lifer
Oct 11, 2005
13,973
11,678
136
A disguised P-8 in civil markings seems like an excellent way to get everybody with twitchy trigger fingers to start downing 737s full of civilians. By that I mean if you have this capability you do not use it unless in dire circumstances.

It would track with all the commercial aviation warnings and traffic being interrupted/diverted from the southern Caribbean though.

Wouldn't want a Southwest 737 to Aruba being mistaken for Warcrimes-1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K1052

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
53,546
48,070
136
How does no one say anything to them? And then no only do they still go through with it but the people who made it happen still go through with it, from the painters to the pilots?

I expect this was an existing asset that is now being wildly misused by the most irresponsible people we have, namely a violent drunk (Hegseth) and a pack of cowboy murderers (JSOC).
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
6,498
2,645
136
A disguised P-8 in civil markings seems like an excellent way to get everybody with twitchy trigger fingers to start downing 737s full of civilians. By that I mean if you have this capability you do not use it unless in dire circumstances.

You mean like when Russian's shootdown Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 or Iran Air Flight 655 by the US?

My best guess if it was a P-8 or similar aircraft, it wasn't in civil markings it was just minimal markings.
Of course visual aircraft identification is always difficult from a distance. That is why as a matter of policy, civilian airliners try to steer well clear of any combat zone.

6ily7qqjbn4f1.jpeg

p-8a-poseidon_009.jpg
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
53,546
48,070
136
You mean like when Russian's shootdown Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 or Iran Air Flight 655 by the US?

My best guess if it was a P-8 or similar aircraft, it wasn't in civil markings it was just minimal markings.
Of course visual aircraft identification is always difficult from a distance. That is why as a matter of policy, civilian airliners try to steer well clear of any combat zone.

View attachment 136616

View attachment 136617

I think it is probably worse if there is indeed a civ marked P-8 flying around armed since 1) the 737 is an immensely popular plane and 2) there are probably at least a half dozen countries worried about these morons trying a decapitation strike.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivwshane

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
6,498
2,645
136
I think it is probably worse if there is indeed a civ marked P-8 flying around armed since 1) the 737 is an immensely popular plane and 2) there are probably at least a half dozen countries worried about these morons trying a decapitation strike.

If it was a Civ marked P-8, the lack of windows would be kind of a giveway that it wasn't civilian. Also considering all the plane spotting that goes on, I doubt it would escape notice and not be photographed at somepoint.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
53,546
48,070
136
If it was a Civ marked P-8, the lack of windows would be kind of a giveway that it wasn't civilian. Also considering all the plane spotting that goes on, I doubt it would escape notice and not be photographed at somepoint.

Depends where it lives I think. If we indeed own one of these you'd really want to keep it out of sight on the ground. In the air you couldn't tell unless you got really close. With the moderate size, the aux tanks, and aerial refueling capability there is really nowhere you couldn't stash it to maintain secrecy.
 
Dec 10, 2005
29,491
15,012
136
Just absolute morons to burn a covert asset for this bullshit.
Also, like the military's great strength is supposed to be its logistics. This really screams like a two bit operation put together by a bunch of idiots who don't know that and who think that the Navy Seals are going to win WW3 and not just be blown to smitherines by a barage of artillery fire.

Like, you couldn't figure out how to move any other asset from around the world for your murder spree?
 
Last edited:
Dec 10, 2005
29,491
15,012
136
To take a word out of the conservative lexicon, Republicans are such cucks for giving away their institutional power. Trump shits on them day in and day out, and they open their mouths to scoop it all in and ask for seconds. Also, the War Powers Act is pretty horseshit. Foreign actions outside of a clearly defined attack requiring immediate response should require Congressional authorization. The current setup is like closing the barn door after the horse galloped off into the sunset. (And then a War Powers resolution can still be vetoed, making the whole process extremely useless).

The Senate on Wednesday blocked a resolution that sought to force President Trump to seek congressional approval for any U.S. military action related to Venezuela.

Republican leaders were able to garner enough support for their procedural maneuver to kill the resolution after Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Todd Young of Indiana flipped their position and joined the effort to stop it from coming up for a vote.

The shift brought about a 50-50 tie, which was broken late Wednesday in favor of Republican leadership by Vice President JD Vance, in his role as president of the Senate.
Mr. Hawley and Mr. Young were part of a group of five Republicans who last week joined all Democrats in supporting the measure aiming to curb the president’s war powers.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
36,274
10,579
136
To take a word out of the conservative lexicon, Republicans are such cucks for giving away their institutional power. Trump shits on them day in and day out, and they open their mouths to scoop it all in and ask for seconds. Also, the War Powers Act is pretty horseshit. Foreign actions outside of a clearly defined attack requiring immediate response should require Congressional authorization.
This is the second vote in the Senate regarding Trump and Venezuela.
Both times Republicans have, essentially, affirmed that war is their policy.
It might as well be a declaration of war, ambiguous as it is to say the President can do whatever he wants.

But hey, they can accurately tell you they never cast a vote FOR war... just two votes against stopping one.
I mean, it's Republicans. Why would they ever vote to save lives, to not take lives? That's not who they are.