New NSA docs contradict 9/11 claims

[jeff47]

126. Your questions are very easily answered

By law, the military can't attack anyone inside the US, unless there is an invasion of the US. That's why there was a huge controversy when W created "Northern Command" - it's supposed to plan for military operations inside the US, but it would be illegal to perform such operations.

So even if there were any SAMs at the Pentagon, it would not be legal to fire them.

Not to mention that a SAM doesn't make the plane go "poof" like in a video game. Shooting down the plane would make the plane crash into civilians. The military would rather absorb the hit on a heavily reinforced military building than let it destroy a very large number of lightweight civilian buildings. Compare the damage and deaths between the WTC and the Pentagon, and you'll see why.

Where were the missiles that should have protected the air space of DC?

Strapped under the wings of F-15s flying in from Cape Cod. They hadn't arrived yet when the plane hit. And they weren't being sent to intercept the plane anyway because nobody knew it was there.

Before 9/11, our air defense doctrine was to intercept aircraft over the ocean before they reached the US. So our defenses were set up to do that, not respond to an attack originating inside the US. Because the threat model was Soviet bombers, not commandeered civilian aircraft.

As part of this doctrine, radar systems inside the US were not built to detect aircraft. They were built to trigger transponders in aircraft. This requires much lower power radar, so there's major benefits for doing it this way. More powerful radars were essentially "pointed" outside the US, looking for incoming bombers.

Since the 9/11 hijackers turned off the transponders, there was no way to know exactly where the aircraft were. They weren't in the view of the more powerful radars. So no one knew the plane was flying towards the DC area, so it couldn't be intercepted.

AWACS aircraft were put into the air as the situation unfolded, because they have radar that can detect aircraft with transponders turned off. That's why it was possible to send fighters to intercept the plane that crashed in the corn field. But AWACS aircraft were not "on standby", so it took a bit to get into the air (gotta find the crew, fuel the aircraft, figure out where exactly to fly the plane, and so on).

How come he wasn't with the VP and SOS discussing what to do next behind closed doors?

Because he's largely unnecessary for such a response. The Secretary of Defense is a bureaucrat. His primary job is to pay the bills and oversee the civilians that work for the DoD.

The people who actually know something about military strategy are the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They would be the ones consulted on a military response, and in fact they were the ones consulted on a military response.