Yes, we won’t shoot down a target in a controlled manner at the time of our choosing, but are willing to let some unknown party make the decision of where and when it may come down. This is a HORRIBLE message to send.
As that moron on Fox News asked “what if it had had explosives on it?”, only he meant that as a reason NOT to shoot it down. What the serious F?
Ballistic missiles might have explosives on them, I guess we shouldn’t try to shoot those down either. This approach to defense is really shocking to me.
Ballistic missiles are a known hazard; blowing them up early might endanger some, but will save many more. Counterbattery fire in Ukraine may endanger nearby civilians, but the threat of the enemy artillery is definite.
But we didn't know, this time.
At some point, we need to trust the intelligence community. Did the intelligence community have ANY inkling that this contained a threat beyond the passive one (e.g., pieces of the object braining someone)? In 2020, the US paid something like $85 BILLION dollars to gather information on what the bad guys were doing.
I'm guessing...because I don't know...that the Intel community had no indication that the balloon itself was a physical threat. Unless it dropped on someone. With that, why take the risk?
After all what threat could the balloon pose that COULDN'T be done by the hundreds, if not thousands, of ground operatives the Chinese have here? Want to spread a biological agent? Pass dispensers out to your crew, and let them stash them in dumpsters. Want to blow up a bridge? Park an old van loaded with ANFO under the abutments. Want to take pictures? Park across the street and take out your Iphone, or rent a 172 and fly overhead. Want to collect electronic intelligence? Rent an apartment and set up your gear.
All easier, cheaper, more reliable, and more covert than sending a single balloon careening overhead in sight of God and everybody.
But of course, between the spies and the trigger pullers is the political establishment. I suspect the intel community told the executive branch that the balloon posed no risk other than the potential of falling on someone. POTUS decided to wait until that risk was past, THEN sent in the trigger-pullers.
Sends the wrong message? Perhaps. But I am reminded of the Hollywood producer who was once told that a proposed movie would send a great message. "I tell stories," he said. "If I want to send a message, I use Western Union."
After all, once it was leaving US territory, it no longer posed a threat. The Chinese were never going to recover it; couldn't claim that we destroyed their equipment. But *as* it was leaving our airspace, the military swatted it down like an errant boy to a fly. In sight of citizenry, no less. The message is, "We could have shot it down anytime, but didn't figure it posed a real intelligence threat, and wanted to protect our citizens from potential harm."
Ron Wanttaja
These days this prob gets you a 
