The use of specific balloons in the US is the topic. Not Ukraine or other wars. The overwhelming assumption is that China doesn't want to get into a kinetic, hot war. At least not here. Taiwan maybe, but not now.
Enough thrust to have some control over your route is far different from unlimited LIFT, or enough for any payload you want which is what you started with. Using a balloon in the first place suggests light weight, and that seems to be the case.
None of this should be surprising to you, you're failing the Turing test.
The USA using the countermeasure balloons in Iraq and quite possibly Syria. You brought it up. How those balloons don't work. Instead you'd use them like a terrorist with the chemical weapons. Because they're not a first strike vehicle. Despite of painting any targets for. First Strike. The article read can potentially be equipped with hypersonics.
But then you went out of your way to call the article fiction and have this absurd conversation. It's now back to the denial, we were getting somewhere, don't worry it happens after clarity. Then it's sorrow. But I don't think you'll get there.
What did you write. It's not only the autism, it's the memory loss. You wrote it's not a balloon if it has the thrust. It is called something else if a balloon navigates a course, and despite of the Montgolfier brothers, attaching an elephant.
The use of specific balloons in the US is the topic. Not Ukraine or other wars. The overwhelming assumption is that China doesn't want to get into a kinetic, hot war. At least not here. Taiwan maybe, but not now.
Enough thrust to have some control over your route is far different from unlimited LIFT, or enough for any payload you want which is what you started with. Using a balloon in the first place suggests light weight, and that seems to be the case.
None of this should be surprising to you, you're failing the Turing test.
The USA using the countermeasure balloons in Iraq and quite possibly Syria. You brought it up. How those balloons don't work. Instead you'd use them like a terrorist with the chemical weapons. Because they're not a first strike vehicle. Despite of painting any targets for. First Strike. The article read can potentially be equipped with hypersonics.
But then you went out of your way to call the article fiction and have this absurd conversation. It's now back to the denial, we were getting somewhere, don't worry it happens after clarity. Then it's sorrow. But I don't think you'll get there.
What did you write. It's not only the autism, it's the memory loss. You wrote it's not a balloon if it has the thrust. It is called something else if a balloon navigates a course, and despite of the Montgolfier brothers, attaching an elephant.
Tedious, tediously. Go to rehab.
None of what you're saying is honest. You're either deliberately creating strawmen, a bot, or can't read.
Do I detect the Sorrow?