Re: Does ANY audio mag use DBT?

On May 10, 12:14=A0pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
<artygu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 10, 11:16=A0am, ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 9, 6:33=A0pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > <artygu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > On May 9, 6:21=A0pm, ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > On May 9, 3:06=A0pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > <artygu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > On May 9, 3:50=A0pm, ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On May 9, 10:42=A0am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > > > <artygu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > > > On May 9, 7:07=A0am, "TT" <TTencerNoS...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote=
:
>
> > > > > > > > "Arny Krueger" <ar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> > > > > > > >news:yZKdnST58J6IpLnVnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > > > > > > I'm glad you're online, how's my apology coming?
>
> > > > > > > > BTW was it painful when you had both your feet removed
from =
your mouth?
>
> > > > > > > People like GOIA and 2pid suffer no embarassment when they
are=
 proven
> > > > > > > dead-wrong.
>
> > > > > > Shhhtards idea of proof is anything he says.
>
> > > > > You have, for example, underwhelmed me with your military
'experti=
se'.
>
> > > > Still waiting to know how we'll get a 1000 =A0F-16s over the
Taiwan
> > > > straits.
>
> > > Still wondering if we would declare all-out war on the Chinese going
> > > against all of our published policies.
>
> > > This (of course) begs the question of how we'd these aircraft there,
>
> > =A0 I suspect it was you who conveyed our sentiments to Sadam
> > on his plans for Kuwait.
>
> > > since according the the USAF they're what shoots down enemy aircraft
> > > even WITH the F-22.
>
> > =A0But 1000s aren't required with the F-22.
> > Why do these simple little dots all lined up in a tidy little
> > row remain disconnected in your silly little brain?
>
> Go back and reread the study that you posted, 2pid. That's exactly
> what the USAF said. The F-22 can *track* a large amount of aircraft
> but cannot *attack* them. It "increases the efficiency" of current
> aircraft. You still need all of those other aircraft, 2pid, at least
> according to the USAF study that *you* posted.

 But not nearly as many as without the F-22...
a position you advocate which is not feasible as you won't be
able to get that many aircraft to the battlefield in question.

>
> Duh.
>
> An F-22 can carry a maximum of eight air-to-air missiles. We have
> about 200 F-22s. Whether we will get any more is in doubt for now.
> That's 1600 air-to-air missiles, assuming all 200 aircraft are on
> station during the attack, which is not likely, and assuming a 100%
> kill ratio, again not very likely.

  Your position started out...the enemy has no answer for the F-16.
When that was thoroughly debunked you
morphed into the enemy has no answer for 1000 F-16s ignoring that
we can't get 1000 F-16s to the battlefield, but with a combination
of F-16s and F-22s a much smaller number of aircraft is a
significantly
more credible deterrent.

ScottW