Trump and Hegseth are.

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.

Since this plane is military, it was obviously a plot coerced by Trump personally to destroy the sovereignty of everyone else, and he must be taught a lesson by shooting down his little toy planes.

There's alot of TDS going around, and it's hard to break it, especially if it didn't break already.

This is what they're using, the legal theory is basically tren de aragua cartel and their drugs is an "invasion" of the USA and is "sufficiently connected" to the Venezuelan government to trigger the act's wartime powers.

Many of his ardent supporters are confused as to what we’re doing in Venezuela right now and feel it’s the opposite of what they voted for.

You certainly don’t expect this level of surprises from someone’s second term, but the unprecedented path of his political career has certainly made it much different.

Over 77 million people voted against Trump.

About 73 million were not old enough to vote.

Did you even read the comment thread before responding to GP? You're just spreading misinformation.

Maybe you should reflect on why people who have lead others in combat have decided that there should be rules to war before you declare that rules of war are a bad idea.

If our aircaft were flying transponders-on during all these exercises then suddenly went dark, it’d signal imminent attack. This keeps them guessing. Possibly we’re even playing around with having them on some of the time for some aircraft, and off at other times.

We don’t do that with AWACS and such near Russia because we’re not posturing that we may attack them any day now, and want to avoid both accidental and “accidental” encounters with Russian weapons by making them very visible. In this case, an accidental engagement by Venezuelan forces probably isn’t something US leadership would be sad about.

Is that increase in precision much larger than the plane itself? If it's not then it couldn't possibly matter in this application.

Further radar is not a static image. The radar is constantly sweeping the sky, taking multiple measurements, and in some cases using filtering to avoid noise and jitter.

> GPS Lat & Long Barometric Altitude Ground speed & track angle Rate of climb/descent

You get or synthesize every one of those with radar as well.

"The occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects FOR FUTURE COLONIZATION by any European powers." (emphasis mine)

https://usinfo.org/PUBS/LivingDoc_e/monroe.htm

Doesn't sound to me like owning your mistake.

Isn't the famous quote:

'I'll never apologize for the United States of America, I don't care what the facts are'.

in the context of that after all?

I don't know about accidental, but if anyone thinks Russia is not ballsy about butchering civilians, they need a refresher on Russia's wars during the last few decades. Last few years would be enough too. It's a principle of their military affairs.

It depends also on the website you are using to track. I have an ADSB receiver that publishes to multiple tracking websites (the same data, unfiltered), and not all of them publish all the data. Flightradar24 doesn't show most of the military aircraft - I can see them on my local tracking interface but they are not shown on their website.