10 ms·

> Airline sources told Reuters the grounding of flights was believed to be tied to the Pentagon's use of counterdrone technology to address Mexican drug cartels

by sva_ 8mo ago

> Airline sources told Reuters the grounding of flights was believed to be tied to the Pentagon's use of counterdrone technology to address Mexican drug cartels' use of drones of the U.S.-Mexico border. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-halts-all-flights-texass-el-paso-airport-10-days-2026-02-11/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-halts-all-flights-texass...

guerrilla 8mo ago
I personally don't think that's the whole story. They're likely going to act against the cartels to take out cross-border drone capabilities and are preparing for S-A retaliation as well.
- morpheuskafka 8mo ago
  A cartel using a SAM against a US civilian aircraft would massively solidify public opinion against them just like 9/11 or the Iran hostage crisis. The US has been trying to extent the "foreign terrorist" label and casus belli to drug activities forever to justify military operations (ex. the "arrest" of Maduro was for drugs, not oil/Cuba/political stuff). That would be a massive self-own on the cartels part. (And if it did happen, just like 9/11, it would be used as justification for anything even remotely immigration or drug related at every level.)
  - trenning 8mo ago
    My understanding over the US/MX cartel relations is performing an invasion and “act of war” would solidify asylum status claims by Mexican residents and throw a wrench into the whole immigration scheme every administration plays. But then again this time seems different, laws aren’t followed or upheld. Human rights are a fleeting staple.
    - pjc50 8mo ago
      Starting a war with Mexico would be a pretext for interning everyone of "Mexican" ethnicity, citizen or otherwise, as was done to Japanese nationals.
      - _heimdall 8mo ago
        Its mincing words a bit, but an attack targeting drug cartel assets wouldn't necessarily be viewed as a war with Mexico. It could lead to that for sure, and the Mexican government could declare it an act of war, but we did just see the US literally invade a foreign country and arrest their sitting leader without war being declared on either side.
        eesmith 8mo ago
        The US hasn't declared war since World War II. I suspect Mexicans would view it as another Pancho Villa Expedition, which was also event where neither side declared war.
        _heimdall 8mo ago
        We declared war on drugs and on terror, maybe AIDs and Covid as well? Though you're right, we haven't declared war on another state since WWII despite being in multiple wars over that time.
        eesmith 8mo ago
        I assumed when you wrote "war being declared" you meant in Constitutional sense which reserves to Congress the power to declare war. Not in the metaphorical "war on poverty" sort of way. FWIW, examples in addition to Maduro are Aguinaldo (Philippines), Noriega (Panama), Hussein (Iraq), and Aristide (Haiti). (Technically speaking, the US didn't recognize Philippine independence so didn't consider Aguinaldo to be its president, but instead a rightful cession from the Kingdom of Spain due to the Treaty of Paris, which ended the Spanish–American War, where the US had made a formal declaration of war.) (Also, the US says Aristide's departure was voluntary.)
  - guerrilla 8mo ago
    > A cartel using a SAM against a US civilian aircraft would massively solidify public opinion against them In what world is public opinion not universally against the cartels? It's hard to take you seriously after that.
    - djcapelis 8mo ago
      > In what world is public opinion not universally against the cartels? It's hard to take you seriously after that. I think you’re getting tripped up by some specific wording and managing to miss the point the poster was making. The point should be taken seriously even if imprecisely articulated. While most folks are against the cartels, there’s a much wider range of belief on how much they warrant government or military intervention and to what degree we should be spending various resources on them. The historical state of play was(is?) that cartels are criminal organizations which are generally a policing matter that has escalated to specialized policing agencies and multinational networks of policing agencies. The marked escalation of the military into this is a more recent piece that is somewhat more controversial. One doesn’t have to be “in favor of the cartel” to ask questions about whether our military should be bombing boats or invading countries to ostensibly neutralize organizations that historically have been subject to policing operations. To go back to the parallel… the public wasn’t in favor of Al Qaeda before 9/11 either, but there was a huge difference in the level of response the public was in favor of after. It turned from an intelligence monitoring level of response into an active military invasion of multiple countries.
      - vkou 8mo ago
        The best part about bombing the boats is that the second strikes on them were war crimes, while the few survivors that were picked up... All ended up repatriated. If they were all drug runners, why weren't they put on trial? Why was so much effort made to sink all the evidence? Why did an admiral resign, when told to do this? Everybody involved, starting from the people pulling the trigger, to the people giving the orders should be getting a fair trial and a swift punishment for that little stint of piracy and murder. But these people all act like there is no such thing as consequences.
  - sh34r 8mo ago
    I take it you don’t know much about the Troubles, then. The SAM missiles would be saved for returning ICE Air flights, not Delta.
- TitaRusell 8mo ago
  What does that even mean? Cartels can buy those DJI drones from China by the container load. Russia and Ukraine can't stop drones. Does the US have a secret weapon?
  - dylan604 8mo ago
    > Does the US have a secret weapon? It sounds like that's what was being tested requiring the NOTAM. We just don't know if it did or didn't work. It could have failed so badly they decided to just shut it down, or it could have worked so successfully they decided no more testing was needed.
  - guerrilla 8mo ago
    > Russia and Ukraine can't stop drones. Does the US have a secret weapon? That does actually seem to be what they are saying now, yes.
- anigbrowl 8mo ago
  What cross-border drone capabilities, drug deliveries? People are talking like the cartels are conducting Ukraine-style drone warfare and blowing up Americans on the regular. Let's stick to a factual baseline here.
  - guerrilla 8mo ago
    Well, turns out I was right, so I can't help you there if you didn't understand what I said.
    - anigbrowl 8mo ago
      Right about what? You're just flattering yourself without any substance.
      - guerrilla 8mo ago
        My original comment turned out to be accurate. I'm not sure what you don't understand.
datsci_est_2015 8mo ago
This admin is focused on the message of stopping the inflow of drugs to the US. There are probably some true believers, and there are probably some reactionary accelerationists. There’s also significant evidence of amateurism, misinformation, and incompetence. All of that coming together, I see this action coming out of meeting where - one party was convinced that this would solve the fentanyl epidemic - one party was hoping this would escalate military action in Mexico - one party was convinced that America had lost its masculine bravado and taking swift and unprecedented action like this would make their wife respect them again - one party was busy making “bets” on Kalshi
- RiverCrochet 8mo ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut3I6gFmlls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut3I6gFmlls
- delaminator 8mo ago
  > reactionary they want to overthrow the Jacobites > accelerationists how's that going to work ?
  - pjc50 8mo ago
    Reactionary accelerationists want a local war of some sort so they can grab war powers and then roll back all the US's post-WW2 social progress (and most of the New Deal too).
    - delaminator 8mo ago
      My understanding is accelerationists or liberals to go full hog so that they can go "see".
      - ben_w 8mo ago
        For my entire life, the US's idea of "liberals" is extremely small-c-conservative, Chesterton's fence style. The Republicans may wave the "Conservative" flag, but they're the only ones I see going full-hog on pretty much anything. That said, pre-Trump Republicans were milquetoast in comparison to what has happened over the last 13 months. Assuming US democracy doesn't collapse before the next transition of power, I wouldn't want to guess if the next Democrat government will continue this trend or be as full-hog in disregarding all checks-and-balances constraints on executive power to get stuff done.
belter 8mo ago
"FAA abruptly lifts order halting El Paso airport flights for 10 days" - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/11/faa-el-paso-airport.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/11/faa-el-paso-airport.html don't attribute to security concerns...what can be explained by incompetence...
boringg 8mo ago
>. "The FAA and DOW acted swiftly to address a cartel drone incursion. The threat has been neutralized, and there is no danger to commercial travel in the region. The restrictions have been lifted and normal flights are resuming." https://x.com/SecDuffy https://x.com/SecDuffy
- ajross 8mo ago
  [flagged]
  - boringg 8mo ago
    I'm merely passing on live information to update the conversation. Don't shoot the messenger.
    - ajross 8mo ago
      And I was merely commenting on the likely veracity of the quote you posted. No shooting happening here.
      - pavel_lishin 8mo ago
        HackerNews will be shut down for 10 days as we deploy counter-messenger technology.
        Spooky23 8mo ago
        Good news, the messenger has been neutered. You may continue messaging.
        hagbard_c 8mo ago
        Productivity will go up, stress levels will go down, there will be fewer cases of down-vote-button-induced-carpal-tunnel-syndrome - DVBICTS - so it sounds like it is worth a try.
      - codys 8mo ago
ndiddy 8mo ago
Looks like they shot the drone down with a laser: > UPDATE (CNN): Source briefed by FAA tells me that military activity behind the El Paso flight ban included unmanned aircraft operations and laser countermeasure testing in airspace directly adjacent to civilian routes into El Paso International. Airspace restriction just lifted. https://x.com/petemuntean/status/2021586247827828812 https://x.com/petemuntean/status/2021586247827828812
- lysace 8mo ago
  Good thing they allocated 10 days of airspace shutdown for taking out a single (edit: or a few) drone(s). I get the feeling this was a case of really wanting to test a new weapon combined with general organizational dysfunction for something unusual like this. On CNN, they talked about how a shutdown like this would be the first time something like this has happened since 9/11. Is that really correct?
  - SoftTalker 8mo ago
    How do we know it was a "single" drone, or that they knew for sure that it was?
    - ssl-3 8mo ago
      Indeed. So with this lack of information: Why 10 days? Why not 3, or 12, or some other number instead? Or: Why must there be a number? Is the officious equivalent of "We've got some shit to deal with, so El Paso's airspace is closed for now" insufficient?
      - mh- 8mo ago
        > Or: Why must there be a number? NOTAMs require a range of timestamps for which they're in effect.
      - dunham 8mo ago
        CNN is now reporting that the FAA had a meeting scheduled with the DoD on the 20th to discuss use of the system, but someone decided to use the system earlier. (The 20th is one day short of 10 days.) They also report that CBP was operating it. https://lite.cnn.com/2026/02/11/us/faa-el-paso-texas-flight-restrictions-hnk https://lite.cnn.com/2026/02/11/us/faa-el-paso-texas-flight-...
tclancy 8mo ago
Well this could get ugly. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2021613820553335090 https://x.com/Acyn/status/2021613820553335090
outside1234 8mo ago
The only confirmed thing they have shot down was a child's birthday balloon
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]

by sva_ 8mo ago

guerrilla 8mo ago

I personally don't think that's the whole story. They're likely going to act against the cartels to take out cross-border drone capabilities and are preparing for S-A retaliation as well.

morpheuskafka 8mo ago
A cartel using a SAM against a US civilian aircraft would massively solidify public opinion against them just like 9/11 or the Iran hostage crisis. The US has been trying to extent the "foreign terrorist" label and casus belli to drug activities forever to justify military operations (ex. the "arrest" of Maduro was for drugs, not oil/Cuba/political stuff). That would be a massive self-own on the cartels part. (And if it did happen, just like 9/11, it would be used as justification for anything even remotely immigration or drug related at every level.)
- trenning 8mo ago
  My understanding over the US/MX cartel relations is performing an invasion and “act of war” would solidify asylum status claims by Mexican residents and throw a wrench into the whole immigration scheme every administration plays. But then again this time seems different, laws aren’t followed or upheld. Human rights are a fleeting staple.
  - pjc50 8mo ago
    Starting a war with Mexico would be a pretext for interning everyone of "Mexican" ethnicity, citizen or otherwise, as was done to Japanese nationals.
    - _heimdall 8mo ago
      Its mincing words a bit, but an attack targeting drug cartel assets wouldn't necessarily be viewed as a war with Mexico. It could lead to that for sure, and the Mexican government could declare it an act of war, but we did just see the US literally invade a foreign country and arrest their sitting leader without war being declared on either side.
      - eesmith 8mo ago
        The US hasn't declared war since World War II. I suspect Mexicans would view it as another Pancho Villa Expedition, which was also event where neither side declared war.
        _heimdall 8mo ago
        We declared war on drugs and on terror, maybe AIDs and Covid as well? Though you're right, we haven't declared war on another state since WWII despite being in multiple wars over that time.
        eesmith 8mo ago
        I assumed when you wrote "war being declared" you meant in Constitutional sense which reserves to Congress the power to declare war. Not in the metaphorical "war on poverty" sort of way. FWIW, examples in addition to Maduro are Aguinaldo (Philippines), Noriega (Panama), Hussein (Iraq), and Aristide (Haiti). (Technically speaking, the US didn't recognize Philippine independence so didn't consider Aguinaldo to be its president, but instead a rightful cession from the Kingdom of Spain due to the Treaty of Paris, which ended the Spanish–American War, where the US had made a formal declaration of war.) (Also, the US says Aristide's departure was voluntary.)
- guerrilla 8mo ago
  > A cartel using a SAM against a US civilian aircraft would massively solidify public opinion against them In what world is public opinion not universally against the cartels? It's hard to take you seriously after that.
  - djcapelis 8mo ago
    > In what world is public opinion not universally against the cartels? It's hard to take you seriously after that. I think you’re getting tripped up by some specific wording and managing to miss the point the poster was making. The point should be taken seriously even if imprecisely articulated. While most folks are against the cartels, there’s a much wider range of belief on how much they warrant government or military intervention and to what degree we should be spending various resources on them. The historical state of play was(is?) that cartels are criminal organizations which are generally a policing matter that has escalated to specialized policing agencies and multinational networks of policing agencies. The marked escalation of the military into this is a more recent piece that is somewhat more controversial. One doesn’t have to be “in favor of the cartel” to ask questions about whether our military should be bombing boats or invading countries to ostensibly neutralize organizations that historically have been subject to policing operations. To go back to the parallel… the public wasn’t in favor of Al Qaeda before 9/11 either, but there was a huge difference in the level of response the public was in favor of after. It turned from an intelligence monitoring level of response into an active military invasion of multiple countries.
    - vkou 8mo ago
      The best part about bombing the boats is that the second strikes on them were war crimes, while the few survivors that were picked up... All ended up repatriated. If they were all drug runners, why weren't they put on trial? Why was so much effort made to sink all the evidence? Why did an admiral resign, when told to do this? Everybody involved, starting from the people pulling the trigger, to the people giving the orders should be getting a fair trial and a swift punishment for that little stint of piracy and murder. But these people all act like there is no such thing as consequences.
- sh34r 8mo ago
  I take it you don’t know much about the Troubles, then. The SAM missiles would be saved for returning ICE Air flights, not Delta.
TitaRusell 8mo ago
What does that even mean? Cartels can buy those DJI drones from China by the container load. Russia and Ukraine can't stop drones. Does the US have a secret weapon?
- dylan604 8mo ago
  > Does the US have a secret weapon? It sounds like that's what was being tested requiring the NOTAM. We just don't know if it did or didn't work. It could have failed so badly they decided to just shut it down, or it could have worked so successfully they decided no more testing was needed.
- guerrilla 8mo ago
  > Russia and Ukraine can't stop drones. Does the US have a secret weapon? That does actually seem to be what they are saying now, yes.
anigbrowl 8mo ago
What cross-border drone capabilities, drug deliveries? People are talking like the cartels are conducting Ukraine-style drone warfare and blowing up Americans on the regular. Let's stick to a factual baseline here.
- guerrilla 8mo ago
  Well, turns out I was right, so I can't help you there if you didn't understand what I said.
  - anigbrowl 8mo ago
    Right about what? You're just flattering yourself without any substance.
    - guerrilla 8mo ago
      My original comment turned out to be accurate. I'm not sure what you don't understand.

datsci_est_2015 8mo ago

This admin is focused on the message of stopping the inflow of drugs to the US. There are probably some true believers, and there are probably some reactionary accelerationists. There’s also significant evidence of amateurism, misinformation, and incompetence. All of that coming together, I see this action coming out of meeting where - one party was convinced that this would solve the fentanyl epidemic - one party was hoping this would escalate military action in Mexico - one party was convinced that America had lost its masculine bravado and taking swift and unprecedented action like this would make their wife respect them again - one party was busy making “bets” on Kalshi

RiverCrochet 8mo ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut3I6gFmlls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut3I6gFmlls
delaminator 8mo ago
> reactionary they want to overthrow the Jacobites > accelerationists how's that going to work ?
- pjc50 8mo ago
  Reactionary accelerationists want a local war of some sort so they can grab war powers and then roll back all the US's post-WW2 social progress (and most of the New Deal too).
  - delaminator 8mo ago
    My understanding is accelerationists or liberals to go full hog so that they can go "see".
    - ben_w 8mo ago
      For my entire life, the US's idea of "liberals" is extremely small-c-conservative, Chesterton's fence style. The Republicans may wave the "Conservative" flag, but they're the only ones I see going full-hog on pretty much anything. That said, pre-Trump Republicans were milquetoast in comparison to what has happened over the last 13 months. Assuming US democracy doesn't collapse before the next transition of power, I wouldn't want to guess if the next Democrat government will continue this trend or be as full-hog in disregarding all checks-and-balances constraints on executive power to get stuff done.

belter 8mo ago

"FAA abruptly lifts order halting El Paso airport flights for 10 days" - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/11/faa-el-paso-airport.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/11/faa-el-paso-airport.html don't attribute to security concerns...what can be explained by incompetence...

boringg 8mo ago

>. "The FAA and DOW acted swiftly to address a cartel drone incursion. The threat has been neutralized, and there is no danger to commercial travel in the region. The restrictions have been lifted and normal flights are resuming." https://x.com/SecDuffy https://x.com/SecDuffy

ajross 8mo ago
[flagged]
- boringg 8mo ago
  I'm merely passing on live information to update the conversation. Don't shoot the messenger.
  - ajross 8mo ago
    And I was merely commenting on the likely veracity of the quote you posted. No shooting happening here.
    - pavel_lishin 8mo ago
      HackerNews will be shut down for 10 days as we deploy counter-messenger technology.
      - Spooky23 8mo ago
        Good news, the messenger has been neutered. You may continue messaging.
      - hagbard_c 8mo ago
        Productivity will go up, stress levels will go down, there will be fewer cases of down-vote-button-induced-carpal-tunnel-syndrome - DVBICTS - so it sounds like it is worth a try.
    - codys 8mo ago

ndiddy 8mo ago

Looks like they shot the drone down with a laser: > UPDATE (CNN): Source briefed by FAA tells me that military activity behind the El Paso flight ban included unmanned aircraft operations and laser countermeasure testing in airspace directly adjacent to civilian routes into El Paso International. Airspace restriction just lifted. https://x.com/petemuntean/status/2021586247827828812 https://x.com/petemuntean/status/2021586247827828812

lysace 8mo ago
Good thing they allocated 10 days of airspace shutdown for taking out a single (edit: or a few) drone(s). I get the feeling this was a case of really wanting to test a new weapon combined with general organizational dysfunction for something unusual like this. On CNN, they talked about how a shutdown like this would be the first time something like this has happened since 9/11. Is that really correct?
- SoftTalker 8mo ago
  How do we know it was a "single" drone, or that they knew for sure that it was?
  - ssl-3 8mo ago
    Indeed. So with this lack of information: Why 10 days? Why not 3, or 12, or some other number instead? Or: Why must there be a number? Is the officious equivalent of "We've got some shit to deal with, so El Paso's airspace is closed for now" insufficient?
    - mh- 8mo ago
      > Or: Why must there be a number? NOTAMs require a range of timestamps for which they're in effect.
    - dunham 8mo ago
      CNN is now reporting that the FAA had a meeting scheduled with the DoD on the 20th to discuss use of the system, but someone decided to use the system earlier. (The 20th is one day short of 10 days.) They also report that CBP was operating it. https://lite.cnn.com/2026/02/11/us/faa-el-paso-texas-flight-restrictions-hnk https://lite.cnn.com/2026/02/11/us/faa-el-paso-texas-flight-...

tclancy 8mo ago

Well this could get ugly. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2021613820553335090 https://x.com/Acyn/status/2021613820553335090

outside1234 8mo ago

The only confirmed thing they have shot down was a child's birthday balloon

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]