On May 6, 4:53 pm, vkarla...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On May 5, 12:51 pm, "Your Uncle Larry" <Lar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > <vkarla...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> > > On May 4, 2:24 am, "Your Uncle Larry" <Lar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > >> <vkarla...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> > >>news:1178259327.634091.231170@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > >> > On May 3, 9:27 am, "Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj" <urj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >> Very good, even if not satire. :)
>
> > >> >> vkarla...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > >> >> > On Apr 29, 4:30 am, "Your Uncle Larry" <Lar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > >> >> > wrote:
>
> > >> >> >> Actually didn't Russia just become the world's number 1 arms
> > >> >> >> ex****ter?
>
> > >> >> > Not according to you. You have been bragging for years that
Russian
> > >> >> > arms ex****ts are useless and worthless; and India and all
other
> > >> >> > Russian customers are switching to US-made weapons.
>
> > >> >> > But in reality, yes, Russian ars ex****ts are soaring, because
> > >> >> > Russian
> > >> >> > arms, just like Russian space ****ps, are much more relaible
and less
> > >> >> > expensive than American ex****ts.
>
> > >> >> One undiscussed yet very basic problem is that weapons
reliability
> > >> >> can only be determined from their use. So bragging about
reliability
> > >> >> means bragging about the results of their use. And the use of
weapons
> > >> >> is to kill, maim, destroy.
>
> > >> > Well, if your point is that modern American bomber planes,
misiles,
> > >> > and guns have been extensively tested and proved reliable in the
> > >> > killing, maiming, and destroying of Yugoslavs, Panmanians,
Haitians,
> > >> > Afghanis, and Iraqis (twice) - OK. Indeed, USA managed to
conquer
> > >> > all these countries, suffering probably 1000 times fewer
casualties
> > >> > than did their victim countries.
>
> > >> > On the other hand, if we speak of space crafts, Russian crafts
dont't
> > >> > kill, maim, destroy. The American crafts do kill, maim, destroy.
> > >> > Sadly, they do that to their own astronaut passengers... That's
why
> > >> > Russian space craft are much more reliable than American ones.
>
> > >> MMMmmm...how so? Wasn't it the Russian R4 that blew up on the
launch pad
> > >> and
> > >> killed 200 people?
>
> > > Definitely not Russian. I have never heard of a Russian space****p
> > > callede "R4" nor of any space****p explosions anywhere in the World
> > > that killed 200, at least not in the last 40 years.
>
> > You should stick to doing what you do best, pu****ng your shopping cart
full
> > of empty cans and bottles along the PCH.
>
> Wrong. You are confusing me with Bobby Fischer. But I would rather
> push carts in sunny California than live in a cold, windy and rainy
> provincial hole where you live.
>
>
>
> > I like how you always leave the kiddie seat open on Friday nights so
your
> > date has a place to sit.
>
> You weren't my date. I just gave you a ride to Belleview. And the
> reason I put you in the child seat is because it has a plastic cover
> to prevent you from soiling my seats with excrement. Of course, I
> later discovered that it wasn't necessary: like your beloved American
> astronauts, you were diapers...
>
That's "wear" not "were".
>
> > The actual number was 165 dead and the rocket was the R-16.
>
> You remind me of a very old Russian joke, told me by my grandfather:
>
> Newspaper correction:
>
> "Our yesterday's article titled "Comrade Ivanov Wins 1 Million Roubles
> Playing Lottery" contained a tiny imprecision:
>
> The amount was 10 thousand roubles, not 1 million.
> Also, It was not Comrade Ivanov but Mister Rabinowitz.
> Also, he was playing cards, not lottery.
> And he lost, not won.
> Otherwise we stand by the correctness of our original article."
>
> The same with you.
>
> It turns out that it was R-16 not R-4.
> And it was not a space ****p but an intercontinental ballistic
> missile.
> And it was not the final product but an experimental prototype.
> And it wasn't Russian but Soviet.
> And it didn't explode in flight but on the launch pad.
> And the number of victims is "over 100" not exactly 165.
> And it happened not recently but half a century ago.
>
> So, how does this relate to our discussion? And how did you expect the
> readers to guess what you were talking about, moron?
>
> /////////////////////////////
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-16
>
> The R-16 was the first successful intercontinental ballistic missile
> deployed by the Soviet Union. During development, a massive failure
> occurred on October 24, 1960, when a prototype rocket exploded on the
> pad killing over 100 personnel.
> ///////////////////////////////////////////////
>
>
>
> > Clear the wax out of your ears and maybe you will hear something?
>
> First of all, I don't wear wax in my ears; unlike you, who has to do
> so in order to close the powerful wind tunnel between your ears. Have
> you considered renting yourself out to NASA or Boeing?
>
> And second, I don't need my ears to read Usenet posts. But ever since
> your *** change operation, you probably do, Cindy Ana Jones-Brooxki. I
> hear men love with their eyes, but women love with their ears.
>
|
