"For all I know, you are an army nurse."
Nope, just a pilot like you. I have read the reports and found them lacking and with too many un-explained details (rocket fuel residue on the seats has always been an issue with me that was never properly explained). Also, the selfrightous comment is because you have not backed up anything with any facts. I wold like to change my opinion, it would make me feel better about things. I would really like to hear why you think something else happened and what do you think it was?
By the way what do you have against Army Nurses?
Since you are a pilot, you should understand my initial argument with the theory presented in this article. If there was rocket fuel residue on aircraft seats than the following must be true 1. the rocket motor was still burning when the missile impacted the aircraft, 2. There is almost no evidence that describes the VERY noticeable and memorable smoke trail of every Navy SAM employed by our Navy and therefore the motor must have been smokeless. 3. The warhead did not function. 4. the missile must have struck the aircraft in an almost perpendicular flightpath. I repeat, show me a missile that meets those criteria, and all consider this article something other than Cashill's continued effort to line his wallet with money made from a tragedy.