145
Comments (10)
sorted by:
7
The_peoples_hammer [S] 7 points ago +7 / -0

I would think there is at least some policies in place that would prevent a missile going through a public airport no?

4
BaronFalcon 4 points ago +5 / -1

I'm wondering if it's just the missile container. Lots of empty ordnance containers running around.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
5
BaronFalcon 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yea, either I missed that, or they updated the article. Good catch.

in this instance the missile had a “live” warhead, however was not armed.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
BaronFalcon 2 points ago +3 / -1

When I went back to read the article again, it says the shipment was part of a fighter aircraft parts shipment to a local defense contractor. Maybe Amazon just contracted the transport. Or maybe Amazon is low key in the international arms market.

2
NADSAQ 2 points ago +3 / -1

nah they’re probably just a 2 trillion dollar company the honest way

5
BaronFalcon 5 points ago +5 / -0

Ya there are a lot of unanswered questions.

Amazon: “The missile has been safely removed from the premises. There is no threat to our associates and Amazon Air operations have not been disrupted.”

Nothing to see here.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
3
Kek_The_World 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yes. But let’s give the post office millions and millions of tax payer dollars when amazon is undercharged. It’s like giving our tax dollars directly to Bezos. This is what the Democrats want to do rather then pass a stimulus for the middle class.