I don't think there's a way to capture a balloon at 80 000 ft of elevation. Also, balloons would be just about the worst way to reliably deliver a payload without risk of it coming back to you. And there's also the fact that it's a scenario that has never happened, and there's nothing that would lead us to believe it has any chance of happening.

Easy, you use another balloon to grapple it, reduce lift, and therefore bring it down in a controlled manner. Of course this takes engineering and thought versus using a missile we can readily reorder.

It's not about thought and engineering. If it was actually useful to do that, the military would've had no problem developing a solution like that. In fact, air to air missiles are infinitely more complex and engineered than any grappling balloon could ever be.

It's just that it makes no sense to build something that is completely useless, for a scenario that won't happen.

Wonder how much time and money it would take to create a maneuverable balloon that could rise 80k feet and precisely make contact with another balloon (that may also have some maneuvering controls).

Ah yes, “easy”.

They wasted $500,000 on a missile when they could have spent billions on balloon force.

Send up a similar balloon but with people.

You wouldn’t even need people, a drone would be fine

What makes you think it was at anywhere near 80 000 ft?

Maybe I'm confusing this one with the other balloon earlier this month? I could swear one of them was that high.

Theatrics.

Pentagon money well spent, bang for the buck, if those factored in.

And now next years budget is justified with more money dedicated to missile manufacturers.

just make it a magnitude cheaper, but order 10 times as many, same deal, better PR!

They better be ready, because next guy is definitely going to launch 10x balloons for a grand total of “next to nothing”!

Exactly but why the theatrics? To cover up the huge event from the week before: https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/world-int/22973-us-and-norway-b...

The point isn't to trick you into thinking it's real. It doesn't matter if you know it's all a bunch of bullshit. The administration literally conducted an act of war the week before. The theatrics are done to cover everything up. To make this bullshit the forefront of your mind rather then the blowing up of nord streams 1 and 2.

They are not that competent. At best you could say they spend most of their time tricking themselves. But that's an American speciality not confined to the military.

I'd accept a few million from the DoD to begin a feasibility study of capturing them with a large butterfly net.

Blowing stuff up is just another means of communication

Looking at that train derailment incident with the chemical spill and fire that recently took place in Ohio, it seems to me that the established order is rather willing to take the exact type of risk you describe