January 11, 2011
— DrewM You know, the one they weren't supposed to have until 2020, which meant we could safely cancel the F-22 program? Yeah, that one.
And the normally secretive Chinese wanted to make sure everyone saw it.
There's a reason for the change in policy.
More than anything, the PLA has taken on a different tone. Emboldened by the notion that China’s rise is unstoppable, its military has shed its traditional secrecy to become a brash, even boisterous interest group that openly advocates for policies, brandishes its new equipment and makes other claims like never before.“Over the years, the Chinese military doctrine was ‘hide and bide’ – hide your resources and bide your time,” Vice Adm. David J. “Jack” Dorsett, director of U.S. naval intelligence, told reporters this week. “They now appear to have shifted into an era where they’re willing to show their resources and capabilities.”
Also of note about the test? It's timing. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates just happens to be in China now.
U.S. officials said that President Hu appeared to be taken by surprise when Mr. Gates asked him about the test flight during a meeting, hours after pictures and accounts of it began appearing online.Analysts said that would be an embarrassment for China’s top leader—who in theory controls the military as chairman of the Central Military Commission—just as Chinese officials anxiously try to make sure Mr. Hu’s planned trip to the U.S. next week goes smoothly.
If the military deliberately kept Mr. Hu in the dark, that would reinforce concerns that hawkish elements in the military are increasingly driving China’s foreign policy—including ties with the U.S.—and that they are trying to enhance their power in China’s domestic politics ahead of a leadership transition next year.
“It was clear the civilian leadership was uninformed” of the J-20 test, said a senior U.S. defense official after the meeting between Mr. Gates and Mr. Hu.
There's really no good option here. Either Hu knew about the test and went along with the proactive timing or...he didn't know and other players are exerting pressure. Players like the Defense Minister who says China is preparing for, "Military Conflict In Every Strategic Direction"?
What could go wrong?
All of this comes on the heels of Gates announcing budget cuts for the Department of Defense. In addition to canceling major weapons programs like the Marines next generation amphibious assault vehicle (which given costs and the unlikely nature of an opposed amphibious assault in a world with modern missiles is certainly defensible and a discussion worth having), Gates is also talking about cutting troop numbers after years of expanding the Army and Marine Corps.
As I watched his presentation last week with Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all I could think of was what they were really saying was, "Honestly, history won't repeat itself again.".
Problem is, the Chinese are showing us that they are doing everything to ensure that yes, it will.
Posted by: DrewM at
11:26 AM
| Comments (129)
Post contains 515 words, total size 4 kb.
Which, with a first flight today, is probably not a terrible bet. The F-22 took what, 8 years? 15 if you count the fly-off?
Posted by: Waterhouse at January 11, 2011 11:30 AM (Gx9Qb)
Posted by: Dr Spank at January 11, 2011 11:31 AM (2IDCB)
So B+rry's gonna buy some J-20's from the Chicoms with money we borrow from the Chicoms so we can have parity with the Chicoms?
check, check, and check
Hell even if we built our own fighter we would be doing it with money we owe the Chicoms.
*pats self on back for brillant insight into how effed up we are*
Posted by: torabora at January 11, 2011 11:32 AM (Y35JT)
Posted by: JAFKIAC at January 11, 2011 11:32 AM (dVKuK)
Posted by: Libtard at January 11, 2011 11:33 AM (ngD76)
Now it's Cold War II, the sequel. This time with an unstable rising power
and a bitch-punk as POTUS. Great
Posted by: HUMAN UNIT-DESIGNATE: SantaRosa of : Stan at January 11, 2011 11:33 AM (UqKQV)
Posted by: Bitchy leftist America-hater at January 11, 2011 11:34 AM (H2fiJ)
Posted by: Vic at January 11, 2011 11:34 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: ORWELL: DESIGNATE GEORGE at January 11, 2011 11:34 AM (AZGON)
Thank goodness we have a bunch of Brewster Buffaloes mothballed in the Nevada desert to counter this new Chinese fighter.....
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 11, 2011 11:35 AM (TAjuH)
You, sir, are just not appropriately enamored with the great, efficient machine that is China.
Posted by: Thom Friedman at January 11, 2011 11:35 AM (5Rurq)
Posted by: Libtard at January 11, 2011 03:33 PM (ngD76)
Germany. USSR. 1941
History is fun; the future, no so much
Posted by: HUMAN UNIT-DESIGNATE: SantaRosa of : Stan at January 11, 2011 11:35 AM (UqKQV)
Bald and beautiful: Beauty queen suffering from alopecia could be first Miss America with no hair
Posted by: momma at January 11, 2011 11:35 AM (penCf)
Posted by: Old Meme-ories at January 11, 2011 11:36 AM (dYKl3)
In 48hrs I'll have us a war with those lousy sonsabitches and I'll make it look like their fault!
Posted by: sifty patton at January 11, 2011 11:36 AM (bGCCl)
Posted by: Cicero at January 11, 2011 11:36 AM (QKKT0)
Posted by: George Orwell at January 11, 2011 11:37 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: The Emperor at January 11, 2011 11:37 AM (mconA)
and a bitch-punk as POTUS. Great
Posted by: HUMAN UNIT-DESIGNATE: SantaRosa of : Stan at January 11, 2011 03:33 PM (UqKQV)
Who ya calling bitch punk?
Posted by: Jimmy Carter having kim chi in Pyongyang with Swedish hookers at January 11, 2011 11:39 AM (Y35JT)
Posted by: joncelli at January 11, 2011 11:39 AM (RD7QR)
LOL, that has to be one of the worst military aircraft ever built. And to think it won out over the F4F.
Posted by: Vic at January 11, 2011 11:40 AM (M9Ie6)
So I'm not surprised the Ruskies and the Chicoms have their 5th gen fighters in the pipeline. I'm bothered that we're cutting the F-22 and F-35 when we could be padding our lead. Especially as the F-15s and 16s are getting long in the tooth. It wasn't too long ago we retired the F-14 and replaced it with the Superbug. While the AIM-120 missile is great, it still didn't replace all the capabilities of the AIM-54 Phoenix (notably range).
I know they're pushing for drones, but the drones in the pipe don't equal the abilities of the F-22 & F-35.
As for the AAV, I think you can make the case for giving the Marines more immediate firepower than they'd get relying on helicopter support. Would a LAV or Stryker variant work better? The AAV7 is pretty old too, and its slow.
Posted by: Iblis at January 11, 2011 11:40 AM (9221z)
Posted by: tarpon at January 11, 2011 11:41 AM (g0QB8)
I'm more concerned with the shitty grammar in the water.
Posted by: sifty does not dial shit back at January 11, 2011 11:41 AM (bGCCl)
Posted by: Marcus at January 11, 2011 11:42 AM (CHrmZ)
Posted by: George Orwell at January 11, 2011 11:42 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: joncelli at January 11, 2011 11:42 AM (RD7QR)
LOL, that has to be one of the worst military aircraft ever built. And to think it won out over the F4F.
Posted by: Vic at January 11, 2011 03:40 PM (M9Ie6)
Grease works wonders!
Posted by: Greasy Palm at January 11, 2011 11:42 AM (Y35JT)
The Finns loved the Buffalo, they had a 39:1 kill rate against Soviet Aircraft and produced 36 aces who flew the Buffalo.
Posted by: Holger at January 11, 2011 11:43 AM (YxGud)
The F-16 lookalikes are J-10s, I think. It looks like they were the chase planes here, though why the video shows them taking off I have no idea.
Posted by: Waterhouse at January 11, 2011 11:43 AM (Gx9Qb)
Posted by: Chinese Official to Remain Nameless at January 11, 2011 11:43 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: joncelli at January 11, 2011 03:42 PM (RD7QR)
We sink the helicopter carriers and go home to victory over round eye parade!
Posted by: Chicom Overlords at January 11, 2011 11:44 AM (Y35JT)
The Chinese will fly first class or dock here in cruise ships paid for by our taxpayers.
Posted by: sifty does not dial shit back at January 11, 2011 11:44 AM (bGCCl)
Posted by: Holger at January 11, 2011 11:45 AM (YxGud)
LOL, that has to be one of the worst military aircraft ever built. And to think it won out over the F4F.
Heh. I just KNEW that someone would get that.
Even worse than its dismal performance, the Buffalo just plain looked bad. Like watching a fat chick in spandex riding a moped.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 11, 2011 11:45 AM (TAjuH)
So what? The CHICOMS have a new 5th generation fighter, but WE have smart diplomacy and the Lightworker.
Yeah, we are sooo boned......
Posted by: maddogg at January 11, 2011 11:45 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Anachronda at January 11, 2011 11:45 AM (6fER6)
Posted by: Vladmir Vladmirovich, Defender Of Siberia at January 11, 2011 11:45 AM (QgAFR)
Posted by: the mind of the modern liberal at January 11, 2011 11:45 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: china needs women at January 11, 2011 11:46 AM (bGCCl)
Posted by: Anachronda at January 11, 2011 11:46 AM (6fER6)
Posted by: Iblis at January 11, 2011 11:48 AM (9221z)
Using a toned-down Blue Dress uniform as Class A is better; going back to the pre-1957 'dark olive drab' and taupe "Pinks & Greens" would be even better
Posted by: HUMAN UNIT-DESIGNATE: SantaRosa of : Stan at January 11, 2011 11:48 AM (UqKQV)
Not really even in the same league I don't think.
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at January 11, 2011 11:48 AM (KlAWi)
The Buffaloes might have been a good bird if Brewster actually done a better job making them, which would have allow them to improve the design. As it was, they sucked at production, and the Navy turned to the (improved) F4F from Grumman to fill their needs - and when I say improved, I mean Leroy Grumman tossed out his old design and came up with a new one for the F4F.
Getting back on topic, it is clear that SECDEF Gates is, far from being a responsible adult in an administration of children, become an adult enabler of the administration children's irresponsible behavoir. He has gotten away with too much cuts and too much dismantling of the military because he has a reputation as a responsible cabinet member. It is time for him to GO, because he is hurting the military too much.
And BTW, I think we need a next-gen fighter soon - either the F-22 or the F-35 - as well a lot of weapon systems. And I think we need more defense spending, not less. We need to maintain, rebuild and expand the military's capabilities. The world getting more dangerous, and hostile nations will not look at America's good intentions (We want to cut the defense budget! That makes us good people!) but our capabilities to fight and/or deter them.
As for Ron Paul - he signed himself on the same team with Barney Frank's on defense. That should have sealed his fate, period. He is not serious about defense and national security. We might have been able to afford that 15 years ago. Not now.
Posted by: Allo12 at January 11, 2011 11:48 AM (mBe14)
Posted by: joncelli at January 11, 2011 11:49 AM (RD7QR)
BONDS(VARIANT;CHINESE:SUB-VARIANT;WAR), [ACTION-SEQUENCE;COMMAND] BUY(QUANTITY;MORE).
Posted by: UNCLE:ZHAO-JING at January 11, 2011 11:49 AM (94WgM)
I'm not a medico but familiar enough with these type of situations to know that though she's got a way to go yet, this is a very, very good milestone on her recovery.
Posted by: jakee308 at January 11, 2011 11:49 AM (fhTf7)
Stir-fry engineering!
/I denounce myself
Posted by: Waterhouse at January 11, 2011 11:51 AM (Gx9Qb)
It seems like only Saturday the media was telling us she was dead.
Posted by: nickless at January 11, 2011 11:51 AM (MMC8r)
So what? The CHICOMS have a new 5th generation fighter, but WE have smart diplomacy and the Lightworker.
Yeah, we are sooo boned......
JugEars is just waiting for the right opportunity to announce the new TIE fighter contract with GM/UAW. After all, the TIE has all those green technology solar panels on the wings. Perfect for the new renewable world.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 11, 2011 11:52 AM (TAjuH)
Posted by: maddogg at January 11, 2011 11:52 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at January 11, 2011 03:48 PM (KlAWi)
Neither does the JSF. It's probably more akin to that then the Raptor.
Posted by: DrewM. at January 11, 2011 11:52 AM (HicGG)
the tides there are so wide-ranging and complex that a Whole Lotta guys did an amazing job--otherwise most of the landing craft would have been stranded on mud, hundreds of yards from short
Posted by: HUMAN UNIT-DESIGNATE: SantaRosa of : Stan at January 11, 2011 11:52 AM (UqKQV)
Posted by: A Velvet Painting of Al Franken at January 11, 2011 03:35 PM (C1wuB)
Hmmm.... Chinese version of the Soviets Bison Bomber?
The Sovs made a very few of them, but put them on display... at one airshow having them fly past the stands numerous times making it look like they had a large number of them...
America actually was so worried, they changed fighter designs and plans to combat the largly nonexistant Bison Threat...
Posted by: Romeo13 at January 11, 2011 11:53 AM (AdK6a)
Because the next President will either pull us out of the hole or lay the headstone over the hole.
In stark terms, we need weapons that can kill or seriously hurt the feelings of about 400 million Chinese if it ever got real. God forbid.
A super-stealthy fighter plane that carries enough missiles and cannon ammo to kill 12 planes and drop 5 bombs ain't gonna go it.
Especially if we got 20 of them.
Posted by: sifty does not dial shit back at January 11, 2011 11:54 AM (bGCCl)
Posted by: jakee308 at January 11, 2011 03:49 PM (fhTf7)
I was in the ICU not too long ago, this situation is very definitely a flashback, though I was in no way as bad shape as she was when she arrived.
I know it will take a long time, but I hope she gets to get back to a relatively normal life. Fingers crossed.
Posted by: Merovign, Bond Villain at January 11, 2011 11:54 AM (bxiXv)
ESCRIPTIVE(SUB-CATEGORY-CONCEPT-DERIVATIVE)]BEINGPosted by: UNCLE:ZHAO-JING at January 11, 2011 11:55 AM (94WgM)
Posted by: Waterhouse at January 11, 2011 11:55 AM (Gx9Qb)
Posted by: George Orwell at January 11, 2011 11:55 AM (AZGON)
(what, too soon?)
Posted by: Jared The Nut Loughner at January 11, 2011 11:55 AM (hbv0S)
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 11, 2011 11:57 AM (xxgag)
That's pretty telling right there. Look at the length of their fighter vs. ours- multi-role bomber/fighter? Or can't do the squeezing of tech into the tight spaces?
Posted by: Mr Wolf at January 11, 2011 11:58 AM (hbv0S)
Here's some good news: Giffords is now breathing on her own.
Only when I can be there to heal here completely, will I rest...
Hang in there Gabby, this time-
You've. Got. Me.
Posted by: BARKY[ACTION][SEQUENCE]AFFIRMED at January 11, 2011 11:58 AM (94WgM)
Posted by: DrewM
Probably, but a lot of people seem to be comparing this thing to an F-22. And a lot of people seem to forget that airframe/engines is only about 30# of what makes an awesome aircraft.
Avionics BABY! That is what makes an awesome modern aircraft.
When people start talking about what great avionics the chi-coms make, then I will start paying attention.
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at January 11, 2011 11:59 AM (KlAWi)
Heh. I just KNEW that someone would get that.
Even worse than its dismal performance, the Buffalo just plain looked bad. Like watching a fat chick in spandex riding a moped.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 11, 2011 03:45 PM (TAjuH)
If you wanted to name a sleek and fast, highly maneuverable cutting edge fighter, you'd want to go with the Buffalo. It sings falcon-like aerial combat.
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 11, 2011 11:59 AM (xxgag)
If they could generate an army of Doom Hamster paratroopers, they would really have something.
They'll just reverse-engineer 'em from the Israeli Spy Squirrels.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 11, 2011 12:00 PM (TAjuH)
Posted by: maddogg at January 11, 2011 12:01 PM (OlN4e)
Posted by: curious at January 11, 2011 12:02 PM (p302b)
Posted by: George Orwell at January 11, 2011 12:02 PM (AZGON)
Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at January 11, 2011 12:04 PM (ZRm0r)
Posted by: curious at January 11, 2011 12:05 PM (p302b)
True but as the old saying goes, quantity has a quality all its own.
The other thing is the Chinese are probably more nimble in their procurement and development process. We put so many eggs in high tech baskets that it takes years and years to develop new systems (look at the EFV). The Chinese seem more experimental and I doubt they have to worry about contractor challenges (see the KC-X debacle).
Posted by: DrewM. at January 11, 2011 12:06 PM (HicGG)
Posted by: EC at January 11, 2011 12:06 PM (f4TZ2)
If you wanted to name a sleek and fast, highly maneuverable cutting edge fighter, you'd want to go with the Buffalo. It sings falcon-like aerial combat.
Thunderbolt II....more popularly known as the Warthog. The exception that proves the rule. If sleek, fast and cutting edge don't count, that is.
But seriously, I've been despondent for years over the demise of the 'Hog assembly line.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 11, 2011 12:06 PM (TAjuH)
And they're also smarting from several centuries of being militarily bested by "barbarian" Westerners.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at January 11, 2011 12:06 PM (9hSKh)
A half hour later, you wanna shoot down another one.
Posted by: EC at January 11, 2011 12:06 PM (f4TZ2)
Posted by: Tibia at January 11, 2011 12:09 PM (R/42U)
Posted by: JamesT at January 11, 2011 12:09 PM (blYjC)
Posted by: curious at January 11, 2011 12:09 PM (p302b)
We got over 500 Warthogs in service or in mothballs. And I am not sure but I'd wager its service life is longer due to far less stress on the airframe.
Posted by: Holger at January 11, 2011 12:10 PM (YxGud)
Posted by: EC at January 11, 2011 12:11 PM (f4TZ2)
True but as the old saying goes, quantity has a quality all its own.
Yeah but the corollary "quality has a quantity all its own" also applies. Think 1991 and hordes of Iraqi Republican Guard T72s vs. a handful of US Army M1 Abrams.
Also known as "a target-rich environment".
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 11, 2011 12:11 PM (TAjuH)
They don't have any black people, or any hispanics. They don't even have any native americans! All they have are Chinese people and a few Tibetans (who look kinda Chinese, truth be told). That's not diverse at all.
Countries without diversity are condemned to the lowest rungs of economic development ... like that backwater Tokyo where nothing is ever invented and nothing at all impressive is ever accomplished.
The reason Japan and Haiti are so desperately poor is the same -- lack of diversity. With millions of Japanese living in mud-huts and shanty towns due to the earthquakes that destroy any building Japan ever tries to build. It's why there is no structure in Tokyo more than 3 stories high.
It is an iron law of the universe that skyscrapers cannot be built without diversity. All modern technology relies on diversity. Take the iPhone. It would be impossible for a non-diverse society like China to ever build the iPhone.
Seriously, what an implausible image. Imagine some mythical Chinese factory where an all Han Chinese staff of thousands build a technological marvel like the iPhone. Row after row of Chinese without a diverse face among the tens of thousands of employees.
Luckily we know the truth, that diversity is strength. America could never have gone to the moon if NASA engineers in the 1960s were all white guys with horn-rimmed glasses.
So don't worry your little heads about crazy impossibilities like a non-diverse China building advanced stealth jets. It's a scientific fact that it's impossible.
Posted by: Clubber Lang at January 11, 2011 12:12 PM (QcFbt)
Posted by: Sean at January 11, 2011 12:14 PM (9Gi0o)
Posted by: t-bird at January 11, 2011 12:14 PM (FcR7P)
Posted by: t-bird at January 11, 2011 12:16 PM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Clubber Lang at January 11, 2011 04:12 PM (QcFbt)
/golf clap
Well played Sir, well played...
Posted by: Romeo13 at January 11, 2011 12:16 PM (AdK6a)
can there be any doubt left that Obama's plan is to cripple this country in every way possible?
is there any conservative left who can say with a straight-face that destruction is not his intentional goal?
then say so, say it loud, say it proud and never back off it.
the only reason they keep winning is because we keep letting them trick us into not fighting.
Posted by: Shoey at January 11, 2011 12:16 PM (ehKDD)
Posted by: rdbrewer at January 11, 2011 12:17 PM (TPgM8)
Posted by: rdbrewer at January 11, 2011 12:19 PM (TPgM8)
Posted by: Holger at January 11, 2011 04:10 PM (YxGud)
You would lose that bet. Every time it fires its main gun it puts stress on everything in/on the aircraft. My older brother used to repair the avionics in that thing. He said that gun literally shook the stuff apart.
Posted by: Vic at January 11, 2011 12:20 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: ed at January 11, 2011 12:23 PM (Urhve)
Posted by: curious at January 11, 2011 04:09 PM (p302b)
That's funny...
watch your dog around that one.
Posted by: garrett at January 11, 2011 12:24 PM (94WgM)
I mean come on, they had gun powder for how long? And the only "real" use they had for it was pretty lights in the sky.
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at January 11, 2011 12:26 PM (KlAWi)
Compared to the stress a F-15 or F-16 would go through in high-g maneuvers?
Posted by: Holger at January 11, 2011 12:34 PM (YxGud)
Posted by: sig at January 11, 2011 12:35 PM (T5Fwu)
generally we do tease one another although he is big on saying the chinese invented noodles and I am big on saying that it took the Italians to make them magnificent.
he was born in taiwan but was raised in NY so I don't know where he is getting all this nationalistic pride for a place his parents left when he was 9 months old.
Posted by: curious at January 11, 2011 12:38 PM (p302b)
Did you mean your sock to be: "Uyghur"
Posted by: curious at January 11, 2011 12:41 PM (p302b)
Posted by: tmi3rd at January 11, 2011 12:44 PM (WRtsc)
Years of expanding the military? If you haven't boticed the wars being waged or how stretched the military was to handle two small conflicts one has to wonder what would happen if the USA was ever forced to fight a real power.
If Iraq was a challenge imagine how pressed we'd be if Mexico invaded. How about cutting the pork for welfare queens and rebuild our military.
An Air Force with aircraft averaging 25 years and a fleet smaller than 1914 shows what our capabilities are and why Korea and Japan are seeking closer ties with the PRC.
Posted by: Ellie Light at January 11, 2011 12:56 PM (PTpqi)
Just a note for those who are saying that this thing can't possibly be as stealthy as the F-22 is:
It doesn't have to be.
Even if it were only twenty percent as stealthy, given that the Chinese have the financial and technical capability to crank out a thousand airframes, that suffices to deliver a rude, hard, freezing-cold-ice-water-bucket-in-the-sleeping-face reset to all of our current military planning assumptions.
And, if that's true, we're boned.
Because thanks to Barky (with an assist from GWB, who appointed the idiot Gates in the first place), we're locked into the F-35 now. A program which is becoming increasingly apparent as an utter failure.
The F-35 is slow and fat and has lousy signature management compared to the F-22. The VTOL version may not work at all, and even if it ever does, the design compromises it forced onto the non-VTOL variants ends up horribly reducing their performance.
The F-35 is far, far behind manufacturing schedule, with no realistic hope of catching up to the planned schedule at this point. That means a huge portion of the existing U.S. fighter fleet will simply age out of service before it can realistically be replaced.
And, thanks to Barky (and GWB who appointed the idiot Gates), the F-22 shutdown means that even though the main assembly line is still running at a trickle, the upstream component manufacturing lines are shut down and dispersed and will take five years to restart from scratch.
I think our only hope right now is if Northrop Grumman stil have the blueprints for the YF-23, and can gear up fast on a high urgency program to build an enlarged, lengthened version of that bird. They certainly were talking about that with USAF at one point.
Posted by: torquewrench at January 11, 2011 01:25 PM (aWrFJ)
Posted by: vermin at January 11, 2011 01:30 PM (FjiUG)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 11, 2011 01:49 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: archie bunker at January 11, 2011 02:18 PM (0YS61)
It looks like they took the front half of the YF-23 and the back half of the F-35, glued them together, and added an extra engine.
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at January 11, 2011 02:30 PM (nD3Pg)
Posted by: anonymous irishman at January 11, 2011 02:38 PM (JNCX1)
Posted by: red speck at January 11, 2011 05:07 PM (/vfpn)
It seems like only Saturday the media was telling us she was dead.
Posted by: nickless at January 11, 2011 03:51 PM (MMC8r)
And shortly before that Kos was saying she was dead to them.
Posted by: torabora at January 11, 2011 05:22 PM (Y35JT)
You don't shoot your best customer. I'm not worried. ~Libtard
Customer? Arrangement has change. You not customer no more,..now you mugging victom. Eithuh way, give me my money!
Posted by: PRC Who has Parity at January 11, 2011 08:32 PM (J74Py)
The J-10 looks more like the Israeli Lavi than any other fighter.
The Lavi had a ground breaking avionics package and is rumoured to have been sold to China.
Posted by: PRC Who has Parity at January 11, 2011 08:49 PM (J74Py)
Posted by: Brian at January 12, 2011 01:19 AM (sYrWB)
Welcome to our website
===== http://www.1shopping.us/ =======
accept paypal and free shipping
We need your support and trust!!!
Dear friends, please temporarily stop your footsteps
To our website Walk around A look at
Maybe you'll find happiness in your sight shopping heaven and earth
You'll find our price is more suitable for you.
===== http://www.1shopping.us/ ========
Posted by: addjian13 at January 12, 2011 05:38 AM (pzkXl)
Posted by: 4rc at January 12, 2011 06:41 PM (xCWwQ)
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">Cheap Jerseys</a>
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">2011 Super Bowl Jerseys</a>
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">Discount NFL Jerseys</a>
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">Cheap NFL Jerseys</a>
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">Cheap MLB Jerseys</a>
Posted by: 2011 SUPER BOWL JERSEYS at January 13, 2011 05:20 PM (6YgUs)
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">Cheap Jerseys</a>
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">2011 Super Bowl Jerseys</a>
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">Discount NFL Jerseys</a>
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">Cheap NFL Jerseys</a>
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/">Cheap MLB Jerseys</a>
<a href="http://www.cheapjerseys.us/mlb-jerseys-c-50.html">Cheap Baseball Jerseys</a>
Posted by: 2011 SUPER BOWL JERSEYS at January 13, 2011 05:24 PM (6YgUs)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.1968 seconds, 257 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: ParisParamus at January 11, 2011 11:28 AM (del3r)