SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Duncan Baird who started this subject2/25/2002 6:41:33 PM
From: TimF   of 1575249
 
Rumsfeld Says Air Patrols May Be Adjusted

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Defense
Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld
indicated Sunday he probably will
scale back the continuous fighter jet
patrols over U.S. cities, but said he
had not yet made a decision.

He raised the possibility of tying the
intensity of the patrols to different levels of threats against the
United States, as assessed by the government.

``My personal view has been that what we need to do is what
we have always done historically, and that's to have different
threat levels. And as we see changes in the threat condition,
adjust up or down,'' Rumsfeld said.

``We have been at a relatively high threat level for some
period of time, which has been appropriate given the threat
information that I read every day,'' he said on NBC's ``Meet
the Press.''

The Air Force's civilian leader told The Associated Press last
week that he wants to end the post-Sept. 11 the current
24-hour, 7-day-a-week patrols and instead leave fighters on
``strip alert'' at airfields, ready to launch in case of emergency.

Asked Sunday about the future of the patrols, Rumsfeld said:
``It's probably going to be a mix of some combat air patrols
over certain locations and strip alerts, and at a lower level.''

But, he cautioned, ``You shouldn't go away with the
conclusion that there is a good possibility of it because ... I
could go back to my office today, read a threat report that
would say to me that would be not a good decision.

``What we need to do is get gradations of threat conditions
and be able to move them up and down, depending on our
best judgment and hope we're right.''

The patrols are tying up about 265 airplanes -- mostly
fighters, refuelers and radar planes -- and about 12,000
airmen, Air Force Secretary James Roche said in the AP
interview.

That compares with 14,000 Air Force personnel committed to
the war in Afghanistan, he said, making the Air Force the only
service with a large-scale commitment to both fronts in the
war on terrorism.

Rumsfeld said it was his hope ``that the threat condition will
be such that we will not need to maintain that level of combat
air patrols ... and we will be able to reduce the stress that's
been put on the force and reduce the cost to the American
taxpayer.''

The Defense Department is working with other federal
agencies to develop a plan for the future of the patrols, he
said.

``It's a matter of my making a judgment as to what's
appropriate for our country. And what it requires is an
analysis of what the threat is and an analysis of what the cost
and the stress on the force is,'' the secretary said.

Roche said he would prefer an adjustment that would place
Air Force fighter jets on ``strip alert'' at certain bases around
the country -- ready to respond to indications of threatening
aircraft. That would replace the current practice of flying
continuous patrols over Washington and New York and
patrolling daily over a rotating group of cities elsewhere.

In addition to the combat air patrols, fighters now are on alert
at more than two dozen bases.

nytimes.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext