A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

More Justice Department Hiding



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old January 17th 19, 09:19 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
news18
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 468
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 15:58:43 -0800, sltom992 wrote:

On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:47:57 AM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2019 at 11:38:01 AM UTC-5,
wrote:


Hey dippy - I have flown over it in bombers at 5,000 ft. So shove
your "pictures" since I looked at it through open bomb bay doors.


What bombers that carried internal payloads flew over north vietnam at
5000'? The only bombers the US used extensively in vietnam were B-52's
which generally dropped their payload in the 30,000' range. it wasn't
likely a b-52 (or any tactical bomber) would be flying at 5000' over
hostile territory - that's well within range of a shoulder-launched AAM
in that era.

Even so, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of a
road under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?

Not only are you smarter and more well-informed than anyone in this
forum, you also have super vision powers!


As John pointed out. Most of the Ho Chi Minh trail wasn't trails at all
but dirt roads.


Lol, the predictable Tommie side shuffle.

what has me wondering that since Vietnam has mountains to 10,000 feet and
Cambodia to 6,000 feet, what was Tommie doing at 5,000? looking for rock
filled clouds?


Ads
  #82  
Old January 17th 19, 09:20 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
news18
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 468
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 16:01:25 -0800, sltom992 wrote:

On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:47:57 AM UTC-8,
wrote:

What bombers that carried internal payloads flew over north vietnam at
5000'? The only bombers the US used extensively in vietnam were B-52's
which generally dropped their payload in the 30,000' range. it wasn't
likely a b-52 (or any tactical bomber) would be flying at 5000' over
hostile territory - that's well within range of a shoulder-launched AAM
in that era.

Even so, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of a
road under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?

Not only are you smarter and more well-informed than anyone in this
forum, you also have super vision powers!


As John pointed out, most of the Ho Chi Minh trail wasn't a jungle trail
but was dirt roads. You don't believe they moved tons of material on
their backs do you?


Lol, another tommie side shuffle and the answer has already been posted,
and for once it is on topic.

  #83  
Old January 17th 19, 11:40 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 28
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 6:56:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:47:57 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2019 at 11:38:01 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 4:36:19 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 12:41:08 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Tuesday, January 8, 2019 at 3:35:22 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
rOn Tue, 8 Jan 2019 10:15:18 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Monday, January 7, 2019 at 11:16:53 AM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 09:06:37 -0800, sltom992 wrote:

On Sunday, January 6, 2019 at 7:04:24 PM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2019 07:00:36 -0800, sltom992 wrote:

So, no you weren't aware and need a reference but yes you were aware.
I am never surprised by your statements.

Most people who know even a lttle bit about "cloud seeding" will know
that claiming it affected the weather was at best a dubious long shot.
Somewhere around there is a apaper showeing that "rain dances" have a
greater correlation to the claim of "afffecting the weather".

It is not in the least "dubious" and was actually used by the CIA in the
Vietnam war to mire the North Vietnamese and Cambodians down in mud and
mire. There's no questioned that it worked. There is also no question
that NASA has used cloud seeding to eliminate clouds in order to have
clear weather for space launches.

Yawn, if you cloud seed in an area and time when it s going to rain
naturally, then you can hardly "cloud seeding worked".

Contrails have been blamed for large scale cooling along flight paths
which are growing more and more numerous. These contrails are nothing
more than cumulous clouds. At any moment in the USA there are 3,000
aircraft in the air. And they use the dirtiest of fuel.

And dirty fuel emits particles that water vapour coalesces about. So your
point is?

Of course you can't make blue sky rain. But they could make it rain in places where they wanted the rain to fall when it would normally be falling in
Thailand. Laos and Cambodia would receive the rain so that the
north Vietnamese couldn't travel down the Ho Chi Minh Trail. This
prevented attacks from the back side of the dividing line. This ALL
worked. In fact North Vietnam admitted that they were beaten. But
after Lyndon Johnson pulled American Troops out of South Vietnam he
cut all military aid to the South and that gave the North the
advantage again.


Quite simply, you don't know what you are talking about. Firstly, the
so called "Ho Chi Minh Trail" wasn't a "trail" it was a series of
paths, roads and byways, some with considerable improvement including
camp facilities that allowed the Northerners to transport supplies to
their troops in the south using trucks, bicycles, water buffalos, and
human porters.

The idea that "if it rains that won't be able to use the trail" is one
of the more stupid ideas that the U.S. had during the war. The idea
that all movement stops during the monsoon is ludicrous. It would mean
that nothing moved in most of South East Asia for nearly half of each
year.

And proof? Well, I guess that the fact that the North did supply their
people in the South all year round is proof, isn't it? And, even
General Westmoreland stated that he thought there was "no appreciable
increase" in rain from the project.

As for N. Vietnam admitting that they were beaten? I guess you'll have
to prove that as it appears to be just another one of your pipe
dreams.

I might add that Thailand has since about 1969 has had an official
"cloud seeding" project. The results vary from year to year but
overall the project has not been a resounding success, other than as a
political act to demonstrate the "government's concern" for the
farmers.

Firstly there were no "road improvements" that anyone in the US would call an improvement - muddy car tracks over a dozen miles are what they were.

Errr... I hate to be the one to tell you but the so called Ho Chi Minh
trail wasn't in the United States. And, (1) I have seen actual
photographs of portions of the trail, taken by Special Forces troops,
that had interdicted parts of the trail showing the man made
improvements, (2) the U.S. bombed portions of the trail and lo and
behold in a week or so the damage was repaired and (3) by 1974 the
"trail" had become a 2 lane paved highway.


Secondly you can't "increase" the amounts of rain by seeding but only have it occur in other areas than it would have fallen.

Strange as the intent of Operation Popeye (the rain making program
that you have been talking about) was stated to be: " to induce rain
and extend the East Asian Monsoon season in support of U.S. government
efforts related to the War in Southeast Asia".

Unfortunately it wasn't a success and from the minutes of the Senate
hearing of May 19, 1874:
"While this program had an effect on the primitive road conditions in
these areas the results were certainly limited and unverifiable."


Thirdly the North Vietnamese surrendered at the Paris Peace Treaty and then because the Democrats wouldn't continue to support the South Vietnamese military and continue air support the North Vietnamese simply ignored the Treaty and the Democrats used that as an election point.

Where did you get the idea that the N. Vietnamese "surrendered". What
actually effectively happened was that the U.S. withdrew from the war
basically for political reasons and agreed to support the South
logistically.

President Lyndon B. Johnson halted bombing operations over the
northern portion of the North Vietnam (Operation Rolling Thunder), in
order to encourage Hanoi to begin negotiations. Shortly thereafter,
Hanoi agreed to discuss a complete halt of the bombing, and a date was
set for representatives of both parties to meet in Paris, France. The
sides first met on May 10, with the delegations headed by Xuân Thuy,
who would remain the official leader of the North Vietnamese
delegation throughout the process, and U.S. ambassador-at-large W.
Averell Harriman.

For five months, the negotiations stalled as North Vietnam demanded
that all bombing of North Vietnam be stopped, while the U.S. side
demanded that North Vietnam agree to a reciprocal de-escalation in
South Vietnam; it was not until October 31 that Johnson agreed to end
the air strikes and serious negotiations could begin.

"The Paris Agreement Treaty would in effect remove all remaining US
Forces, including air and naval forces in exchange for Hanoi's POWs..
Direct U.S. military intervention was ended, and fighting between the
three remaining powers temporarily stopped for less than a day...

The agreement's provisions were immediately frequently broken with no
response from the United States. Fighting broke out in March 1973, and
North Vietnamese offenses enlarged their control by the end of the
year. Two years later, a massive North Vietnamese offensive conquered
South Vietnam. "

Tom, I keep telling you that "it is better to remain silent and be
thought a fool then to open your mouth and prove it" but you just
don't listen.


cheers,

John B.

Hey dippy - I have flown over it in bombers at 5,000 ft. So shove your "pictures" since I looked at it through open bomb bay doors.


What bombers that carried internal payloads flew over north vietnam at 5000'? The only bombers the US used extensively in vietnam were B-52's which generally dropped their payload in the 30,000' range. it wasn't likely a b-52 (or any tactical bomber) would be flying at 5000' over hostile territory - that's well within range of a shoulder-launched AAM in that era.

Even so, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of a road under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?

Not only are you smarter and more well-informed than anyone in this forum, you also have super vision powers!


We would fly in at 20,000 and at the SAM sites would drop down to
5,000 ft to more accurately hit them.


sure, let's get even closer to a SAM site. HAte tot tell you, but the accuracy of a B-52 was sch that a targeted 1/4 mile could be completely incinerated from 30,000 feet, so there was no need to get inot such range that a SAM could hit its target from a lunch within a few seconds. You may have been a passenger in a recon, but you never flew a bombing mission.


Not that it mattered a great
deal since they were put up again next run.


Again, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of a road (dirt or not) under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?

  #84  
Old January 17th 19, 03:50 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,260
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 1:19:10 AM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 15:58:43 -0800, sltom992 wrote:

On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:47:57 AM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2019 at 11:38:01 AM UTC-5,
wrote:


Hey dippy - I have flown over it in bombers at 5,000 ft. So shove
your "pictures" since I looked at it through open bomb bay doors.

What bombers that carried internal payloads flew over north vietnam at
5000'? The only bombers the US used extensively in vietnam were B-52's
which generally dropped their payload in the 30,000' range. it wasn't
likely a b-52 (or any tactical bomber) would be flying at 5000' over
hostile territory - that's well within range of a shoulder-launched AAM
in that era.

Even so, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of a
road under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?

Not only are you smarter and more well-informed than anyone in this
forum, you also have super vision powers!


As John pointed out. Most of the Ho Chi Minh trail wasn't trails at all
but dirt roads.


Lol, the predictable Tommie side shuffle.

what has me wondering that since Vietnam has mountains to 10,000 feet and
Cambodia to 6,000 feet, what was Tommie doing at 5,000? looking for rock
filled clouds?


I was flying in B52's. What were you doing? What service did you ever attempt to get in? None, because losers will always be losers.
  #85  
Old January 17th 19, 07:29 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,260
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 3:40:49 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 6:56:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:47:57 AM UTC-8, wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2019 at 11:38:01 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 4:36:19 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 12:41:08 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Tuesday, January 8, 2019 at 3:35:22 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
rOn Tue, 8 Jan 2019 10:15:18 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Monday, January 7, 2019 at 11:16:53 AM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2019 09:06:37 -0800, sltom992 wrote:

On Sunday, January 6, 2019 at 7:04:24 PM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2019 07:00:36 -0800, sltom992 wrote:

So, no you weren't aware and need a reference but yes you were aware.
I am never surprised by your statements.

Most people who know even a lttle bit about "cloud seeding" will know
that claiming it affected the weather was at best a dubious long shot.
Somewhere around there is a apaper showeing that "rain dances" have a
greater correlation to the claim of "afffecting the weather".

It is not in the least "dubious" and was actually used by the CIA in the
Vietnam war to mire the North Vietnamese and Cambodians down in mud and
mire. There's no questioned that it worked. There is also no question
that NASA has used cloud seeding to eliminate clouds in order to have
clear weather for space launches.

Yawn, if you cloud seed in an area and time when it s going to rain
naturally, then you can hardly "cloud seeding worked".

Contrails have been blamed for large scale cooling along flight paths
which are growing more and more numerous. These contrails are nothing
more than cumulous clouds. At any moment in the USA there are 3,000
aircraft in the air. And they use the dirtiest of fuel.

And dirty fuel emits particles that water vapour coalesces about. So your
point is?

Of course you can't make blue sky rain. But they could make it rain in places where they wanted the rain to fall when it would normally be falling in
Thailand. Laos and Cambodia would receive the rain so that the
north Vietnamese couldn't travel down the Ho Chi Minh Trail. This
prevented attacks from the back side of the dividing line. This ALL
worked. In fact North Vietnam admitted that they were beaten. But
after Lyndon Johnson pulled American Troops out of South Vietnam he
cut all military aid to the South and that gave the North the
advantage again.


Quite simply, you don't know what you are talking about. Firstly, the
so called "Ho Chi Minh Trail" wasn't a "trail" it was a series of
paths, roads and byways, some with considerable improvement including
camp facilities that allowed the Northerners to transport supplies to
their troops in the south using trucks, bicycles, water buffalos, and
human porters.

The idea that "if it rains that won't be able to use the trail" is one
of the more stupid ideas that the U.S. had during the war. The idea
that all movement stops during the monsoon is ludicrous. It would mean
that nothing moved in most of South East Asia for nearly half of each
year.

And proof? Well, I guess that the fact that the North did supply their
people in the South all year round is proof, isn't it? And, even
General Westmoreland stated that he thought there was "no appreciable
increase" in rain from the project.

As for N. Vietnam admitting that they were beaten? I guess you'll have
to prove that as it appears to be just another one of your pipe
dreams.

I might add that Thailand has since about 1969 has had an official
"cloud seeding" project. The results vary from year to year but
overall the project has not been a resounding success, other than as a
political act to demonstrate the "government's concern" for the
farmers.

Firstly there were no "road improvements" that anyone in the US would call an improvement - muddy car tracks over a dozen miles are what they were.

Errr... I hate to be the one to tell you but the so called Ho Chi Minh
trail wasn't in the United States. And, (1) I have seen actual
photographs of portions of the trail, taken by Special Forces troops,
that had interdicted parts of the trail showing the man made
improvements, (2) the U.S. bombed portions of the trail and lo and
behold in a week or so the damage was repaired and (3) by 1974 the
"trail" had become a 2 lane paved highway.


Secondly you can't "increase" the amounts of rain by seeding but only have it occur in other areas than it would have fallen.

Strange as the intent of Operation Popeye (the rain making program
that you have been talking about) was stated to be: " to induce rain
and extend the East Asian Monsoon season in support of U.S. government
efforts related to the War in Southeast Asia".

Unfortunately it wasn't a success and from the minutes of the Senate
hearing of May 19, 1874:
"While this program had an effect on the primitive road conditions in
these areas the results were certainly limited and unverifiable."


Thirdly the North Vietnamese surrendered at the Paris Peace Treaty and then because the Democrats wouldn't continue to support the South Vietnamese military and continue air support the North Vietnamese simply ignored the Treaty and the Democrats used that as an election point.

Where did you get the idea that the N. Vietnamese "surrendered". What
actually effectively happened was that the U.S. withdrew from the war
basically for political reasons and agreed to support the South
logistically.

President Lyndon B. Johnson halted bombing operations over the
northern portion of the North Vietnam (Operation Rolling Thunder), in
order to encourage Hanoi to begin negotiations. Shortly thereafter,
Hanoi agreed to discuss a complete halt of the bombing, and a date was
set for representatives of both parties to meet in Paris, France. The
sides first met on May 10, with the delegations headed by Xuân Thuy,
who would remain the official leader of the North Vietnamese
delegation throughout the process, and U.S. ambassador-at-large W..
Averell Harriman.

For five months, the negotiations stalled as North Vietnam demanded
that all bombing of North Vietnam be stopped, while the U.S. side
demanded that North Vietnam agree to a reciprocal de-escalation in
South Vietnam; it was not until October 31 that Johnson agreed to end
the air strikes and serious negotiations could begin.

"The Paris Agreement Treaty would in effect remove all remaining US
Forces, including air and naval forces in exchange for Hanoi's POWs.
Direct U.S. military intervention was ended, and fighting between the
three remaining powers temporarily stopped for less than a day...

The agreement's provisions were immediately frequently broken with no
response from the United States. Fighting broke out in March 1973, and
North Vietnamese offenses enlarged their control by the end of the
year. Two years later, a massive North Vietnamese offensive conquered
South Vietnam. "

Tom, I keep telling you that "it is better to remain silent and be
thought a fool then to open your mouth and prove it" but you just
don't listen.


cheers,

John B.

Hey dippy - I have flown over it in bombers at 5,000 ft. So shove your "pictures" since I looked at it through open bomb bay doors.

What bombers that carried internal payloads flew over north vietnam at 5000'? The only bombers the US used extensively in vietnam were B-52's which generally dropped their payload in the 30,000' range. it wasn't likely a b-52 (or any tactical bomber) would be flying at 5000' over hostile territory - that's well within range of a shoulder-launched AAM in that era.

Even so, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of a road under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?

Not only are you smarter and more well-informed than anyone in this forum, you also have super vision powers!


We would fly in at 20,000 and at the SAM sites would drop down to
5,000 ft to more accurately hit them.


sure, let's get even closer to a SAM site. HAte tot tell you, but the accuracy of a B-52 was sch that a targeted 1/4 mile could be completely incinerated from 30,000 feet, so there was no need to get inot such range that a SAM could hit its target from a lunch within a few seconds. You may have been a passenger in a recon, but you never flew a bombing mission.


Not that it mattered a great
deal since they were put up again next run.


Again, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of a road (dirt or not) under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?


I hate to tell you moronic fool - I was a Bomb/Nav technician on B52's. I wasn't supposed to fly on them, but the stateside bases would send the people they didn't like to Guam and that meant that the good shop technicians would stay at home. So about every other fight, something would break down that would have to be repaired in-flight and I would go with them because no one else wanted to be there with the fireworks.

But be sure and tell us all about it from a complete position of ignorance you damn fool.

If there's one thing that's so delightful it's looking at the sort of lunatic crap you spout out of your mouth.

Tell me about these "jungle canopies" while you're stupid enough to say mountains in the same breath you damn fool. Or better yet - tell us that B52's bombed from 30,000 ft. Apparently you're of the opinion that an electro-mechanical computer is of infinite accuracy.
  #86  
Old January 17th 19, 09:01 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 28
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 6:56:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:47:57 AM UTC-8, wrote:



I hate to tell you moronic fool - I was a Bomb/Nav technician on B52's. I wasn't supposed to fly on them, but the
stateside bases would send the people they didn't like to Guam
and that meant that the good shop technicians would stay at home.


So that tells us two things about you - you weren't a good technician, and no one liked you. Sometimes things never change. FWIW - I've been to Guam. Not exactly a "hardship tour".

But be sure and tell us all about it from a complete position of ignorance you damn fool.


I know nothing about repairing B-52s, but that wasn't the point, which you've now evaded for the third time.

If there's one thing that's so delightful it's looking at the sort of lunatic crap you spout out of your mouth.


Like....the north vietnamese surrendered? _that_ kind of lunatic crap?

Tell me about these "jungle canopies" while you're stupid enough to say mountains in the same breath you damn fool.


Are you under the impression that there aren't jungles with mountains, or vice versa?

And for the third time now, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of a road (dirt or not) under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?

Or better yet - tell us that B52's bombed from 30,000 ft.


from someone who was the

" The B-52s were restricted to bombing suspected Communist bases in relatively uninhabited sections, because their potency approached that of a tactical nuclear weapon. A formation of six B-52s, dropping their bombs from 30,000 feet, could "take out"... almost everything within a "box" approximately five-eighths mile wide by two miles long. - Neil Sheehan, war correspondent, writing before the mass attacks on heavily populated cities including North Vietnam's capital.

Then there's this, from "Fifty Shades of Friction Combat Climate, B-52 Crews, and the Vietnam War by Mark Clodfelter, Professor of Military Strategy, The National War College at the National Defense University - https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Portals/68/...asestudy-2.pdf :

"B-52s flew between 30,000 and 35,000 feet in three-ship “cells,” where the first bomber led the one behind it by 1 mile, and the third bomber was 1 mile behind the second aircraft (with 500- foot altitude variations among the three, and the second and third bombers offset to the right and left, respectively, of the lead). A formation of two cells could obliterate almost everything inside a rectangular area five-eighths of a mile wide by 2 miles long."

Apparently you're of the opinion that an electro-mechanical computer is of infinite accuracy.


Infinite? no.

We'd still love for you to regale us of how you could discern the condition of a road (dirt or not) under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away.
  #87  
Old January 17th 19, 11:56 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
news18
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 468
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 07:50:37 -0800, sltom992 wrote:

On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 1:19:10 AM UTC-8, news18 wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 15:58:43 -0800, sltom992 wrote:

On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:47:57 AM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Friday, January 11, 2019 at 11:38:01 AM UTC-5,
wrote:

Hey dippy - I have flown over it in bombers at 5,000 ft. So shove
your "pictures" since I looked at it through open bomb bay doors.

What bombers that carried internal payloads flew over north vietnam
at 5000'? The only bombers the US used extensively in vietnam were
B-52's which generally dropped their payload in the 30,000' range.
it wasn't likely a b-52 (or any tactical bomber) would be flying at
5000' over hostile territory - that's well within range of a
shoulder-launched AAM in that era.

Even so, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of
a road under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?

Not only are you smarter and more well-informed than anyone in this
forum, you also have super vision powers!

As John pointed out. Most of the Ho Chi Minh trail wasn't trails at
all but dirt roads.


Lol, the predictable Tommie side shuffle.

what has me wondering that since Vietnam has mountains to 10,000 feet
and Cambodia to 6,000 feet, what was Tommie doing at 5,000? looking for
rock filled clouds?


I was flying in B52's. What were you doing? What service did you ever
attempt to get in?


err, isn't this the one that stayed at 30,000 feet?

I applied but timing was off as the war was winding up. Before that I was
in the high school cadet program. I've also been in volunteer rural fire
service and volunteer state emergency service, but my main service
activity in life was running bicycle rides/tour to encourage people to
ride bicycles.


None, because losers will always be losers.


Well apart from getting that wrong, you certainly are. Something about
protesting too much comes to mind Tommie.

  #88  
Old January 18th 19, 04:06 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,465
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On 1/17/2019 6:56 PM, news18 wrote:
... my main service
activity in life was running bicycle rides/tour to encourage people to
ride bicycles.


sigh I always thought I'd be good at that. I'm jealous.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #89  
Old January 18th 19, 03:09 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,260
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 1:01:49 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 6:56:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:47:57 AM UTC-8, wrote:



I hate to tell you moronic fool - I was a Bomb/Nav technician on B52's. I wasn't supposed to fly on them, but the
stateside bases would send the people they didn't like to Guam
and that meant that the good shop technicians would stay at home.


So that tells us two things about you - you weren't a good technician, and no one liked you. Sometimes things never change. FWIW - I've been to Guam.. Not exactly a "hardship tour".

But be sure and tell us all about it from a complete position of ignorance you damn fool.


I know nothing about repairing B-52s, but that wasn't the point, which you've now evaded for the third time.

If there's one thing that's so delightful it's looking at the sort of lunatic crap you spout out of your mouth.


Like....the north vietnamese surrendered? _that_ kind of lunatic crap?

Tell me about these "jungle canopies" while you're stupid enough to say mountains in the same breath you damn fool.


Are you under the impression that there aren't jungles with mountains, or vice versa?

And for the third time now, are you going to tell us you could discern the condition of a road (dirt or not) under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away?

Or better yet - tell us that B52's bombed from 30,000 ft.


from someone who was the

" The B-52s were restricted to bombing suspected Communist bases in relatively uninhabited sections, because their potency approached that of a tactical nuclear weapon. A formation of six B-52s, dropping their bombs from 30,000 feet, could "take out"... almost everything within a "box" approximately five-eighths mile wide by two miles long. - Neil Sheehan, war correspondent, writing before the mass attacks on heavily populated cities including North Vietnam's capital.

Then there's this, from "Fifty Shades of Friction Combat Climate, B-52 Crews, and the Vietnam War by Mark Clodfelter, Professor of Military Strategy, The National War College at the National Defense University - https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Portals/68/...asestudy-2.pdf :

"B-52s flew between 30,000 and 35,000 feet in three-ship “cells,” where the first bomber led the one behind it by 1 mile, and the third bomber was 1 mile behind the second aircraft (with 500- foot altitude variations among the three, and the second and third bombers offset to the right and left, respectively, of the lead). A formation of two cells could obliterate almost everything inside a rectangular area five-eighths of a mile wide by 2 miles long."

Apparently you're of the opinion that an electro-mechanical computer is of infinite accuracy.


Infinite? no.

We'd still love for you to regale us of how you could discern the condition of a road (dirt or not) under a jungle canopy from 5000 feet away.


I was there. You don't want to believe me that's fine. But then we have seen that you are a moron incapable of anything. You say that there are mountains along that border that are up to 10,000 ft and then say that the Ho Chi Minh trail was under "a jungle canopy". It doesn't occur to you just how sick in your mind you have to be not to even realize what you're typing.

With ME on-board we bombed SAM sites along the demarcation line between North and South. Later they bombed the military bases in the North which is when we lost 6 bombers.

By ALL means tell us what you know from the supposed authority of someone else. Only a scum bag thinks that he can get away with that.

  #90  
Old January 18th 19, 04:39 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 28
Default More Justice Department Hiding

On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 10:09:41 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 1:01:49 PM UTC-8, wrote:

I was there. You don't want to believe me that's fine. But then we
have seen that you are a moron incapable of anything.


If by 'incapable', you mean supporting my arguments with facts, then sure. However, I don't see anything thing from you other than claims for which you have offered no support. I guess in slow tom world, 'incapable' means rational argument supported with verifiable evidence.


You say that there are mountains along that border that are up to
10,000 ft


I never said that. You're confusing me with another poster. If you can't keep the conversations straight, perhaps you should leave the conversation.

However the ho chi minh trail does cross the annimite mountains in central Vietnam (what was the border between north and south), which reach around 8000 feet. So whoever wrote 10.000 feet wasn't that far off.

and then say that the Ho Chi Minh trail was under "a jungle canopy".


It was. Here's an entry from encyclopedia Britannica:

"Ho Chi Minh Trail, elaborate system of mountain and jungle paths and trails used by North Vietnam to infiltrate troops and supplies into South Vietnam,"

"in South Vietnam. By 1974, the trail was a well-marked series of jungle roads (some of them paved)"

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ho-Chi-Minh-Trail

Care to tell us how that doesn't constitute being under a jungle canopy?

It doesn't occur to you just how sick in your mind you have to be not to
even realize what you're typing.


I know exactly what I'm typing, I've supported it with facts and references you can look at yourself. You've done nothing but name-calling. You seem to have a very difficult time dealing with facts - typical trump supporter.


With ME on-board we bombed SAM sites along the demarcation line between
North and South. Later they bombed the military bases in the North which
is when we lost 6 bombers.


interesting, nut completely irrelevant.


By ALL means tell us what you know from the supposed authority of
someone else. Only a scum bag thinks that he can get away with that.


I see, making a claim and supporting that claim with facts that can be verified makes one a 'scumbag'. No wonder you voted for trump.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hiding GPS In the Down Tube Bret Cahill UK 3 February 10th 16 01:34 PM
Department of awful department Ryan Cousineau Racing 20 July 7th 09 09:12 AM
Hiding bikes around the flat Duncan Smith UK 6 April 22nd 08 07:06 PM
No hiding from chamois? Squat'n Dive Techniques 11 March 6th 08 12:07 AM
Lurker comes out of hiding! rob.northcott Unicycling 15 August 11th 04 02:26 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.