20,000 SAMS MISSING

[JohnR]

Yes, but probably on a few thousand high numbered double-digit sams. Coming soon to AF/PAK, Middle East, and an Airport near you!

Concern will be, uhh, elevated, with prospects of flying over the next few years.

"Still a big concern though. I would have thought we would have seen a similar thing in Iraq."
But that is OK. because Bush made a blunder there is a precedence here and he can still be blamed.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

But that is OK. because Bush made a blunder there is a precedence here and he can still be blamed.

Always the positive thinker aren't ya? Oy vey...

I think it's a pretty safe bet that al Qaeda already has access to SAMs, or could easily get their hands on as many as they want.

An influx of a large number of weapons could encourage their use, sure, but there are a lot of variables here.

As a said, it's a big concern.

-spence

[basswipe]

Originally Posted by spence

As a said, it's a big concern.

-spence

A "BIG CONCERN"?Just ONE can take down a passenger liner and kill hundreds.Thousands are missing...that's a little more than a "big concern" don't ya think?

Why is this a political issue?This is a possible death to many Americans issue.Get a grip people and stop politicizing these threats,
we're ALL in it together!

[UserRemoved]

I tried to find the death threat forum but it seems to have been deleted

Originally Posted by basswipe

A "BIG CONCERN"?Just ONE can take down a passenger liner and kill hundreds.Thousands are missing...that's a little more than a "big concern" don't ya think?

Why is this a political issue?This is a possible death to many Americans issue.Get a grip people and stop politicizing these threats,
we're ALL in it together!

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by rphud

Folks guarding the borders have done a bang up job of keeping things like that out for a long time know. You can be sure there are more out there and have been out there other than the ones from Libya. The shoulder fired ones generally cannot bring down commercial aircraft. Secret Service deployed a bunch around DC after 9-11, but they new they were pretty much pea shooters if another jet liner was inbound on the capital or white house. They would need to shoot out all the engines to bring one down. The preceding is not nearly alarmist enough for the general media these days though.

Watch out for your "neighbor" loading a boatload of propane tanks or fertilizer into the back of his SUV though.

Disagree. The shoulder fired SAMs can bring down a commercial airliner. Maybe not all of the time but 60-80% of the time they are likely succesful. The probability of kill likely increases the newer the design missile.

Originally Posted by spence

Always the positive thinker aren't ya? Oy vey...

I think it's a pretty safe bet that al Qaeda already has access to SAMs, or could easily get their hands on as many as they want.

An influx of a large number of weapons could encourage their use, sure, but there are a lot of variables here.

As a said, it's a big concern.

-spence

A lot of guvmints have been working very hard for a very long time to keep man portable SAMs (and service life extending components like batteries) off the black markets in general and out of AQ hands in particular. They have been fairly successful.

This stirs up a bit oh bleep factor.

As for as my Bush reference, that was my Oi Vaay for your Iraq reference

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

A lot of guvmints have been working very hard for a very long time to keep man portable SAMs (and service life extending components like batteries) off the black markets in general and out of AQ hands in particular. They have been fairly successful.

This stirs up a bit oh bleep factor.

As for as my Bush reference, that was my Oi Vaay for your Iraq reference

Can't believe there's not still a market for them out there.

My Iraq reference wasn't meant to be negative.

-spence

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

Can't believe there's not still a market for them out there.

My Iraq reference wasn't meant to be negative.

-spence

There is a tremendous market out there. MANPADS are a great equalizer in many environments.

Spence, sometimes it is real hard to tell.

(And no, that is based on your bias & track record, not my bias and track record )

(x2 just doesn't feel right using smileys today)

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

There is a tremendous market out there. MANPADS are a great equalizer in many environments.

Spence, sometimes it is real hard to tell.

(And no, that is based on your bias & track record, not my bias and track record )

(x2 just doesn't feel right using smileys today)

The point was that in Iraq we saw a similar dumping of weapons into an uncontrolled situation. A lot of this ordinance was turned right around and used against US troops...but I don't believe we've seen any increase in international terrorism that's been enabled by an influx of weapons.

I don't think the Libyan rebels are stupid and would likely retain as much weaponry as possible to maintain their position or quite likely be employed in sectarian squabbles.

Perhaps the greatest risk is a SAM getting into the hands of someone not affiliated with al Qaeda and just taking a random pot shot.

-spence

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

The point was that in Iraq we saw a similar dumping of weapons into an uncontrolled situation. A lot of this ordinance was turned right around and used against US troops...but I don't believe we've seen any increase in international terrorism that's been enabled by an influx of weapons.

Most of the ordinance used against US forces was not portable sams. SAMs make a horrible IED. The SAMs were used against military and commercial aircraft.

Originally Posted by spence

I don't think the Libyan rebels are stupid and would likely retain as much weaponry as possible to maintain their position or quite likely be employed in sectarian squabbles.

Perhaps the greatest risk is a SAM getting into the hands of someone not affiliated with al Qaeda and just taking a random pot shot.

-spence

I think both of those statements are at minimum naive