politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Why were they classified to begin with if there was nothing to hide?
Even if there's no alien technology, reports will show capabilities and limitations of US radars and other methods of detecting foreign objects. And there's likely stuff about US experimental craft in there as well. Even if outdated, that's something that the DOD isn't going to want out there.
Great points.
My concern was that they'd be hiding how powerful their tech is, but you make it sound like they could also be covering up its weaknesses.
Those are two different ways of looking at the same thing, since either way lets other countries know how to do things undetected.
Hm. I would imagine if their tech was so advanced, it'd be possible other nations wouldn't be able to compete with it.
Of course, keeping them in the dark would let them advance even further while their adversaries 'relax.'
Even the best tech has its weakness's and blind spots, for example if memory serves me right modern body armor isnt exactly immune to arrows and bolts. Plus some tech produces weird blind spots by being too good, if you've got a radar that can detect every bird in 100 mile radius you need to filter out birds but now small drones are also most likely filtered out.
Yes, but that doesn't mean enemies' technology is advanced enough to exploit it.
I used the crossbow and bow example with body armor for a reason. Brute forcing something with seemingly simple tech can be rather effective. Sure your super fancy computerized lock may have a million combinations and can change its code at random but ive got a blowtorch from the 50s and a hammer. You see what I mean simple tech can exploit more advanced tech if used properly.