[ErroneousBosh]

> It's expected for military operations to fly without transponder

It's been a problem specifically with US military aircraft for years that they just wander into other people's airspace with transponders off and expect to have it all to themselves.

We should just start shooting down anything big enough to need a transponder that is not using one. Doesn't matter who's in it, doesn't matter what it's for.

[dxdm]

> We should just start shooting down anything big enough to need a transponder that is not using one. Doesn't matter who's in it, doesn't matter what it's for.

Maximum destructive, irreversible response.

Even if you think this is sometimes warranted, have you thought of the edge cases? You seem perfectly happy to be shot down yourself, sitting in your airplane with a failed transponder.

What's gotten into you to want to kill people so much?

[ErroneousBosh]

There are already things in place for dealing with failed transponders.

It's bad enough that the US already deliberately shoot at their allies (look at all the "friendly fire" incidents the US cause) without them sneaking about in protected airspace without identifying themselves.

If there's a military plane flying around without any identification, it's either a Russian flight up to no good or an American one up to no good.

[shlant]

> We should just start shooting down anything big enough to need a transponder that is not using one. Doesn't matter who's in it, doesn't matter what it's for.

indistinguishable from what someone in the current administration would come up with

[ErroneousBosh]

Unfortunately the current administration just lets the Americans and the Russians tell it what to do and puts up with murderous attacks from both with a shrug of the shoulders.