It would be a little cold for the sharks, wouldn’t you say?
Only if you don’t care if an unknown craft and payload is crossing thousands of miles of territory.
If the craft and payload are unknown, then the best way to know them is to capture them, and that means downing it in a location which is accessible and where the odds of collateral damage are low.
The sensor package. Calling it the payload is correct.
If the craft and payload are unknown the best way to avoid exposure to a weapon is before it arrives.
I think we can safely conclude that the odds of China attempting to start World War III by flying a single weapon across the ocean strapped to a balloon are slim to nil.
I think we can safely conclude that they know our response to incursions into our airspace.
Yeah, they probably figured that out when they did this three times during the Trump administration and he didn’t shoot them down or tell anyone about them.
The revelation started Mark Esper, the former president’s own Secretary of Defense, who said he was never made aware of such incidents.
So before you try to make some kind of political point you need to stake a position. Are you agreeing with Biden for wanting it shot down days ago or with Trump for allegedly allowing them access over US territory?
I’m saying that the people who know a lot more about the situation than armchair generals on the internet made a valid assessment of the risks of shooting the balloon down right away versus observing it until it was safer to shoot it down.
And that assessment could have been made over the Aleutian Islands where it would have been safe to shoot down and deny China access to US airspace.
Because, as we all know, the calm, warm, brilliant blue waters of the Bering Strait are a much more hospitable environment to search for a downed balloon in than the shores of the Carolinas. 
Yes, it was a much better place to stop an intrusion into US airspace. Your argument that it was somehow an inconvenience to the military is a massive red herring.
So again, do you approve of Biden’s desire to shoot it down on Wednesday or not?
You assume that “stopping an intrusion into US airspace” was the primary objective. Which of these do you figure is more advantageous to us:
-
Observing Chinese technology in action and capturing it as intact as possible, allowing us to learn what their capabilities are, what information they’re trying to acquire, and how to better prevent them from doing so in the future, or;
-
Flexing our big burly biceps so that everyone knows we’re Big Bad Manly Men?
You can’t answer the question regarding Biden’s desire to shoot it down on Wednesday because it destroys your political position. If Biden wanted it shot down on Wednesday then it makes sense that he would have wanted it shot down earlier than that. It traveled a considerable distance from China to Alaska and then down through Canada. They had plenty of opportunity to observe it. This is a red herring argument.
He wanted it shot down as soon as possible. Which turned out to be after it was over the Atlantic.
The earliest possible would be the Aleutian Islands.
It was over the Aleutians last Saturday.
He ordered it shot down on Tuesday.
Unless you’re proposing that the DoD has access to a time machine, the earliest possible was once it was over the Atlantic.
I propose nothing. I said it should have been shot down over the Aleutian Islands. YOUR the one who dragged Biden and Trump into this. But Biden wanted it shot down before it traveled any further so the logic that it should have occurred earlier stands.
“I propose nothing”, said the man who then offered a proposition.
So you’re saying Biden made the right call, and therefore that Trump made the wrong call by not shooting down the three previous balloon incursions?
I didn’t expect that from you.