Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: Fred J. McCall <fmccall@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:16:50 -0700
PaPaPeng <PaPaPeng@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:
:I read the same stuff too. That's why I proposed only truck portable
:systems. They are cheap, compact, self contained, very rugged, almost
:maintenance free and one time use, strictly for defence.
:
And must be absolutely stable and stationary in order to use.
One more time for the slow-witted Chinese among us: It's not that
easy to paste weapons onto ships.
[Remaining loony justification elided.]
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: PaPaPeng
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- References:
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: Dean A. Markley
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: buff82driver
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: William Black
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: buff82driver
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: PaPaPeng
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: David E. Powell
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: PaPaPeng
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: William Black
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- From: PaPaPeng
- Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- Prev by Date: Re: Iran airs video of navy stand-off
- Next by Date: Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- Previous by thread: Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- Next by thread: Re: Chinese Carriers Again
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|