SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : International Precious Metals (IPMCF)
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: KVASIR who wrote (27333)11/18/1997 3:45:00 AM
From: E. Charters  Read Replies (1) of 35569
 
Well if you believe the war statistics you would be right. Its ok until you realize that that stuff was propaganda. That is correct, government lies. It all breaks down when you add up the kills of the aces. The Russian pilots had more kills than the claimed losses on our side. The three top aces come out with almost 71 kills and they had about 25 top aces with more than ten kills apiece!. Plus their aces came out with more kills than ours total! So the 792 to 71 claimed is horsepucky for public consumption.

Talk to anyone who flew a sabre and he will tell you when a mig-15 showed up on the horizon you turned around and scooted. It could outfly you out turn you and out gun you. Migs had well over 100 MPH on sabres and turned inside them and outclimbed them. The only advantage the sabre had was endurance. The MIG had only about one hour in the air unless it had wing pods which slowed its performance.

Vietnam was more horsepucky... the stodgy slow ground attack F4 was no fighter and was no match for a MIG 17 let alone a MIG 21. In aerial combat we were shot down 4 to 1 if not better.

It has all been CIA garbage. A few contemporary documentaries tell it like it is with actual pilots telling the truth now that the secrecy is lifted. But you still see the propaganda out there something like British pilots ate carrots to make their night vision better ( a cover story for radar aboard fighters) and the atomic bomb was built in New Mexico. (It was built in Rolphton Ontario by U of T scientists, 1/2 of whom were women and the average age was 23!)BTW the A bomb was originally supposed to have been tested in Saskatchewan and was later taken by train to New Mexico for explosion. It was made from plutonium from a nuclear reactor running in Rolphton in 1943 that is still there, called Chalk River. The uranium that ran that reactor was mined in Lake Athabaska at Uranium City NWT. If you don't believe me then answer this question. The first bomb was made with plutonium. That much is accepted because they did not have enough enriched uranium yet to build a bomb. (Oakridge had not been built.) So Plutonium being a man made element that can only come from a reactor, where did they get that stuff from if not the reactor that I told you about? Fermi's experiment at Chicago was not until 1947. It ran on enriched uranium, It did not produce it and could not have produced enough plutonium for a bomb as it was experimental and had to be shut down after only a short run.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News