| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Signs, Portents, and the Weather- |
| Air Force ordered to stand-down tomorrow |
| 2007-09-13 |
| Contrary to rumors surrounding the Air Combat Command's stand-down of all 100,000 active-duty airmen ordered for tomorrow, the U.S. will not be devoid of fighter aircraft to protect the nation. Michael Kucharek, spokesman for NORAD and USNORTHCOM, told WND the stand-down does not include the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserves assigned to NORAD. About 70 percent of the aircraft involved in NORAD alerts are Air National Guard or Air Force Reserves aircraft, according to Kucharek. Meanwhile, NORAD and USNORTHCOM will be on alert status Sept. 24 when the U.N. convenes a high-level meeting on climate change and the following day when the General Assembly begins its 62nd Session in New York City. The stand-down Friday was ordered by Gen. Ronald Keys to conduct a command-wide review of operations, safety procedures and checklists after the Aug. 30 incident at Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota, according to the Air Force Times. At Minot, six cruse missiles with nuclear warheads were loaded onto a B-52H and flown to Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana – without the bomber crew or ground command realizing nuclear weapons were on the aircraft. Military sources insisted to WND the incident was a procedural glitch and there is no suspicion within the military of any other purpose. At the U.N. Monday, Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon will chair the meetings, and numerous heads of state are likely to attend. According to Kucharek, Canadian and U.S. NORAD aircraft will be armed and on alert status, prepared to scramble from unspecified NORAD airbases. Kucharek told WND the aircraft involved in the alert will be F-15s and F-16s assigned to the NORAD Air Defense Deterrence Mission. Under Operation NOBLE EAGLE, which NORAD has conducted since 9/11, fighters on alert have scrambled from alert sites and diverted from irregular air patrols more than 2,400 times, Kucharek told WND. More than 44,000 sorties have been flown in support of the missions, including support from tanker and AWACS aircraft. "NORAD and USNORTHCOM missions," Kucharek said, "are conducted in close collaboration with homeland defense, security and law enforcement partners to prevent air attacks against North America and to safeguard the sovereign airspaces of the United States and Canada by responding to unknown, unwanted and unauthorized air activity approaching and operating within these airspaces, and to provide aerospace and maritime warning for North America." As WND reported, NORAD is a bi-lateral U.S.-Canada command and USNORTHCOM is a U.S. continental military command that works with its counterpart Canada Command. Kucharek also confirmed NORAD and USNORTHCOM were scheduled Oct. 15-20 to conduct exercise Vigilant Shield '08, a series of field exercises testing response abilities against a variety of potential threats, including the simulated detonation of three radiological dispersal devices within the USNORTHCOM and U.S. Pacific Command areas of responsibility. The primary locations for the Vigilant Shield '08 field exercises will be Oregon, Arizona and the territory of Guam. WND reported Bush administration plans to utilize USNORTHCOM as a U.S. military command to direct the operations of troops deployed in a wide range of continental North American emergencies, including health epidemics, natural disasters, terrorist events and even domestic violence or civil disorder. This raises of few important questions. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #20 I continue to maintain that America has the most sterling track record regarding stewardship of its nuclear arsenal. However unfortunate, concomitant to that stewardship is the necessary discipline of anyone who becomes lax in their handling of these maleficent weapons. Per 'moose, the timing seems a little inopportune but the spirit of this exercise is entirely justified. Even the remote possibility that a single nuclear device could go astray due to preventable mistake or error is simply unacceptable. It is precisely such a blunder that our deadliest enemies seek to capitalize upon. Were it not for the unusual degree of peril America now faces with respect to Islam, I might have more sympathy for those who are about to suffer mightily due to this monumental snafu. In light of Islam's threat, I am obliged to step aside and let the courts martial have at it. If America is to be this world's preeminent nuclear superpower, we'd damn well better act like it. I believe we can, right down to any potential future use that looms on the horizon. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-09-13 21:32 |
| #19 Another Nostradamus and Guam Taotamona production of almost an Oliver Stone film - D *** NGED DELICIOUS PENN STATE PIZZA SUBS! Time to complain to Professor Atta. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-09-13 21:17 |
| #18 The standdown was announced several days ago. You can figure that the mistake will end the careers of a dozen or more officers and senior enlisted. This was a very BAD thing and the Air Force will probably do a bit of housecleaning. I would expect that there may even be a courtmartial or two out of it, depending on the level at which the rules were breached. |
| Posted by: Chuck Simmins 2007-09-13 20:47 |
| #17 And why also mention an upcoming exercise and how the administration plans to use the AF as part of its disaster preparedness operations? Moose, it sounds like they released the standdown notice in a weekly press briefing that covered a lot of topics. Just a normal document dump. And having the "stand down" on Friday before payday is the perfect time to get peoples attention. Normally we'd have one foot out the door planning our weekend from the moment we reported for work. Not tomorrow. The deputy commander (designated hard ass) and first shirt will be ripping new ones all day long. Glad I'm retired. |
| Posted by: Steve 2007-09-13 19:42 |
| #16 Stand down affects nuclear capability primarily. Not necessary to have buffers, B1s and B2s available but they are always on 24 hour alert status regardless. |
| Posted by: Jack is Back! 2007-09-13 15:45 |
| #15 Id save any unaccounted for nuke until the DNC, is in full swing, that would be "Maximum Effect". |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-09-13 14:57 |
| #14 Oscar Theater2320, especially. It is never a wise idea to do a stand down indifferent to other events. It has been two weeks since the Pinnacle - Dull Sword event, so why not pick uncontroversial Wednesday, Thursday, or next Monday or Tuesday for the stand down? If for no other reason, Friday could result in a major, but otherwise normal, correction to the stock market. By tying up your personnel in a stand down, they may personally lose millions of dollars in stock market trades. And we are still in the what we could call the "Petraeus window" of higher than normal terrorist act concerns. If, as might be the case, the AF is getting a pre-Iran shakedown inspection, that is all well and good too. But still not a good day for a stand down. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-09-13 14:17 |
| #13 Hmmmm, so many choices! I'd go with Mecca, Medina, Qom, Islamabad, Tehran... Darn, is that all I get? |
| Posted by: Titus Hayes4699 2007-09-13 13:18 |
| #12 You could join the Pakistani Hockey League then there would be no difference. |
| Posted by: ed 2007-09-13 13:09 |
| #11 Hey #5. . . . . . . . . But if we have to attack now. . . I would have to miss hockey practise. Next to no mention of this whole affair in the MSM up here. It's as if Minot was a million miles away instaed of being right next door. |
| Posted by: Canuckistan sniper 2007-09-13 13:06 |
| #10 well, if i really have to pick one, i vote for Dearborn -- there's far too many Bay Area Lizards that i'm sure good Rantburgers wouldn't want to vaporize... (tho' if it must be, a little warning to be out of town would be nice!) |
| Posted by: Querent 2007-09-13 13:01 |
| #9 - Also, that B52 incident was a cover story to steal a nuke to use as a black ops against a city in CONUS, to start a war with iran Ooooh, can we pick? San Francisco? Dearborn? How to decide, how to decide... LOL |
| Posted by: Laurence of the Rats 2007-09-13 12:50 |
| #8 Actually, I took Anonymous5089's comments as ironic / sarcastic in nature. That said, I can be pretty dense sometimes. |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2007-09-13 12:43 |
| #7 anonamoose : paranoid RMV : professional Experiences in different Services, at different times, at different levels, perhaps. Certainly different areas of expertise. As for dear anonymous5089, he wades through the mud so that we don't have to. It's useful to know what the conspiracy nuts are spouting, as well as the Progressive netroots; we're then prepared when such memes edge into the mainstream |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-09-13 12:16 |
| #6 Just because they aren't flying doesn't mean we can't put them in the air quickly. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2007-09-13 11:44 |
| #5 Canadians, your time is attack is NOW! |
| Posted by: ed 2007-09-13 11:35 |
| #4 anonamoose : paranoid RMV : professional |
| Posted by: Oscar Theater2320 2007-09-13 11:30 |
| #3 Moose, this is pretty much the way things have always been handled. The issue with the nukes was not a minor administrative error, it was a fubar of epic proportions. The one thing that the services cannot be casual with is nuclear weapons. The fact that only the Munitions Squadron commander was sacked in the first 24 hours is indicative of how flat-footed the AF command structure was taken by this. The command-wide stand-down for review and "education" is a common practice when the AF wants to emphasize something. The exemption of the fighters assigned to NORAD and NORTHCOM is not unusual because they don't deal with nukes anymore. As to points 2 and 3, it looks like these were responses to questions posed by the WND. Picking the day for a stand-down was probably done independently of any considerations about potential disasters. It is unlikely that ACC would be involved in any immediate response to a catastrophe, certainly not an immediate nuclear response. With regard to point 3, the fact that USNORTHCOM has responsibility for military actions within the US including the use of troops and equipment for disaster relief is nothing new. |
| Posted by: RWV 2007-09-13 11:19 |
| #2 Note that conspiracy theories are already flying wild : - El Al has no flights on the 14th, hence the jooooooos know the "neocons" are gonna pull an another 9/11, just like the 4000 joooos not showing up at the WTC on 9/11 (well, IIUC, El Al has no flight on friday and saturday because of shabbat, but, who am I to disturb good conspiracy theories with that?) - Also, that B52 incident was a cover story to steal a nuke to use as a black ops against a city in CONUS, to start a war with iran So, all in all, you're screwed; it's finished. End of line; OWG on its way. The NWO has won. It was nice knowing you. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2007-09-13 11:06 |
| #1 1) A service-wide stand down over a minor administrative error that nobody cared about, or even knew about, until the AF made an issue of it? 2) Several catastrophes have been predicted for tomorrow, Friday, September 14. It is a triple witching day on Wall Street, terrorist threat level is heightened because of the Petraeus testimony, and rumors about. Why pick that day to have a stand down? 3) And why also mention an upcoming exercise and how the administration plans to use the AF as part of its disaster preparedness operations? |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-09-13 10:14 |