> My interest, again, is more
> upstream – why did the air defenses fail? How did the alleged hijackers
> manage to elide the US air defenses and why did the authorities lie to
> or evade the 9-11 Commission as two of the commissioners have claimed in
> a new book?
Well, for starters, U.S. air defenses are not what people think they are. The U.S. relies on a strategy of forward offensive strategy, with bases around the world and carrier groups. The air defense in the continental U.S. was always looking for an incoming missile attack, not a few plans flying into New York City. And I've read that the U.S. is closing down Cheyenne Mountain, which further demonstrates how little the U.S. military takes the possibility of an airborne attack.
Who in the world would attack the U.S. right now by air?
After the 9/11 attacks, the government started airspace patrols over Washington. It later suspended them, citing costs. But the whole exercise was such a fucking joke. One day I was walking through Arlington, looked up and saw one of these patrols. This patrol was such a serious national security task that the B-2 bomber was making slow barrel rolls.
I don't think it can be argued that the U.S. air defenses failed. The 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by skyjackers taking over airplanes. As released tapes and transcripts have shown, air traffic controllers took some time to figure out what was happening. And even if they had decided sooner that the planes has been skyjacked and had informed the air force, nobody would have assumed that these planes were going to be crashed into buildings. They would have sent up planes to escort the planes, not to shoot them down.
One last thing, there were no anti-aircraft batteries on the White House or the Pentagon. Such a thing would have been dangerous at the Pentagon, as that building was directly under the flight path of commercial airliners.
Chuck