Lue Elizondo Warns That Shooting Down UAPs Would "Poke the Bear" and Be a Mistake

Lue Elizondo has warned against shooting down unidentified aerial phenomena, calling it a mistake and a provocation that risks "poking the bear." His comments come as reports have circulated that President Trump put together a plan to start shooting down UAPs in order to bypass what legacy programs and the deep state are doing and get independent data.

The reported plan to shoot down UAPs and bypass the "deep state"

There have been a couple of different reports describing a plan President Trump had put together to start shooting down UAPs. The stated purpose was to bypass what some legacy programs and the deep state are doing and to get the government's own data directly, rather than relying on those existing channels.

My reaction when I first heard that news was to question whether it is the smartest plan in the world. If you do not really know what these objects are, just because they are in the airspace and you are not privy to additional information, no matter how powerful the office you hold is, is it wise to shoot down something without knowing whether it has superior intelligence or superior technology?

Elizondo's warning against shooting down UAPs and not poking the bear

In the clip, Elizondo referenced a specific program, which he described as "a very real plan that was being developed." He said he would not be surprised if other, similar plans have also been executed. He said that what he would not recommend is pursuing a plan like that for the purposes of shooting down a UAP.

Elizondo said he has been asked before why the government does not just shoot these objects down, and his answer is that doing so would be a mistake and a provocation. He compared it directly to why the United States does not shoot down Russian aircraft at present: "They may not be our allies, but we don't want to poke the bear, no pun intended." He added that it is really up to the people making these decisions, and that he believes "intent goes a long way."

Why I think shooting first could backfire if these objects do not follow our rules

As I see it, Elizondo is raising the point that a lot of people would raise instinctively: do not start shooting things down. His comparison to Russian planes makes sense to me, because even aircraft that are not allies are not shot down, precisely to avoid starting an incident. Hypothetically, if these objects do not abide by our rules, then telling them they have flown into United States airspace may not mean anything to them, especially if it has been their airspace longer than it has been ours.

If these objects are simply flying through and doing what they normally do, and then get shot down, that does not strike me as the best plan, particularly if they can do the things that have been rumored, such as moving in ways that fight space and time or involve antigravity. It reminded me of the scene in Independence Day where the initial attempt to knock the ships down just results in the attacking aircraft getting destroyed instead.

The way I read what Elizondo is saying, an aggressive move like that risks provoking a response along the lines of, "we've been putting up with these things, these creatures, these humans for too long, now they're shooting us out of the sky, unleash hell." That is the scenario his warning seems to be pointing toward.

Why I find it baffling that no one is asking officials about this directly

What I also find baffling is that these reports are surfacing at high levels, from people who currently hold or have held serious credentials, and yet the follow-up questions are not being asked at press conferences or in interviews. David Grusch, who held a high-level clearance, has continued working with Representative Burchett and others, has testified on Capitol Hill, and recently spoke with Dr. Phil, making these same kinds of claims. Elizondo, meanwhile, is being talked about as a potential first UAP czar.

Then there is Coulthart's report that Trump reportedly ordered a program to potentially shoot these objects down. My frustration is that no reporter at these press conferences seems to be connecting the dots: asking whether that program was approved to do this, and then asking Elizondo, the man potentially being considered for the UAP czar role, why his recommendation is the opposite. "Where are these questions?" is the point I keep coming back to. Even in a podcast interview or a ten minute sit-down with any of these people, that disconnect between the reported directive and Elizondo's public warning against it has not been addressed.

So I am curious what people think when they hear this. Is shooting down UAPs a horrendous idea, or should any unidentified object flying over the country simply be shot down and examined afterward, regardless of whether it turns out to be a foreign country's technology? Or should officials take seriously what people who are described as being fairly locked into this information are saying, which is: do not shoot them down.