Israeli Air Force to lose Middle East Air Superiority Capability to the Saudis in the near future

ROFLOL that's the biggest BS story Ever
"I have seen the worst that man can do.and I can still laugh loudly"
R.J. Goldman

http://www.usidfvets.com
"Jack White" wrote in message
om...
"Matt A.00 01 is Matthew Ackerman" wrote in message
...
BTov wrote:
(Jack White) wrote in message
. com...
The Eurofighter Typhoon will give the Saudi Armed Forces the
capability maintain air superiority over any country in the Middle
East including Israel.

so what?

Israel has the best pilots and crews in the Middle East, but the
Eurofighter Typhoon is such a superior aircraft with INCREDIBLE BVR
capability superior to any aircraft in the Middle East that even
though Saudis are lazy and spoiled, the Eurofighter Typhoon will give
the Saudis the best Airforce in the Middle East. The only way Israel
can gain back Air Superiority over Saudi Arabia would be if Israel
were to buy tons of F-22 Raptors.

wutever

Saudi Arabia has a much bigger GDP than Israel and has Trillions of
dollars of Oil Reserves so there's no way Israel can on its own
compete with a country like Saudi Arabia in an arms race.

& saudis bemoan poor palistanians while their arab whole is giving
only 5%.. ;L

The only way Israel can gain back air superiority is if US taxpayers
will again have to pay BILLIONS of dollars like they always do for
Israel, this time for Israel to get FREE F-22 Raptors from the US
Taxpayers.

it may be interesting to test this eurofighter against arrows..

Arrows are ABMs not SAMs. They are designed to take a Balistic Missile
out
at Apogee so nothing hits Israel. They are very effective at doing
that,
100 percent of the tests with real Balistic Missiles to be interecepted
were
succesfully hit by the system at the warhead not the main body as the
Patriorts did. The Patriot was orginally designed to take out high
flying
aircraft not missiles. That is why the body of the rocket stage is what
got
hit by it every time and the warhead then still fell to earth intact
about
1/2 the time. The US lost most of the first Gulf War Casualties to a
"shot
down" SKUD's warhead that hit a building housing a lot of miltiary
personel.
The Arrow uses a different system of firing a group of shaped charges at
the
warhead secton of the missile and body both. The real ideal is to force
the
warhead itself to explode due to the charges going off on it. Hardly
cost
effective to shoot down a plane. Israel has several other means of
taking
out incoming aircraft. It has 12 Patriot Batteries, 1000s of SAMs on
the
ready and then their air to air capabilities and own air to air misiles
and
guns. They never faced even odds 1 to 1 and no matter what aircraft the
enemy flew they shot them all down and lost very few of their planes to
it.
I pitty any Arab pilot shot down those at home confront, he better speak
the
words I surrender in perfect Hebrew or he is dead. They common Israeli
does
not speak the symetic variation called Arabic. It is not their
responsibility to know for sure the intention of an enemy that comes
down in
a parachute in their back yard. Their real responsibility is to shoot
first
if not Isreali and ask later.


In joint flight manuvers the Israeli Pilots in the Israeli built jets
went
up against US pilots in F116s and though supposedly up against the best
of
the best they had a "kill" ratio of 5 to 1. For every simulated hit on
them
they had simulated a hit of five US top pilots flying the most
sophisticated
fighter made in the world at the time. Arab Air forces run from IAF
pilots
or they die, that is always been the only choices they had and still
will
have even 20 years from now.

Look, it's obvious that Israeli pilots are the best in the middle east
and perhaps the best in the world, but they're NOT as good as you
think they are either.
I'll give you some examples of why they're not as good as you think
they are.
In the Yom Kippur War even Syria shot down AT LEAST 36 Israeli Air
Force aircraft in a SINGLE DAY.
There were 23 SA-6 Sam Batteries in Syria before the start of the Yom
Kippur War, and at the END OF THE YOM KIPPUR WAR, the Israeli Air
Force was only able to take out 3 of those 23 SA-6 batteries at a
great loss of Israeli Aircraft.
The IDF GROUND FORCES did take out a few more of those SA-6 batteries,
but the Israeli Air Force certainly was NOT up to the challenge of
taking on the SA-6 during the Yom Kippur War.
Here's another example, I've read on several different military sites
that there were a dozen or more Pakistani Air Force Pilots who went
over to arab countries during the 6 Day War and the Yom Kippur War to
see how well they could do against the Isreli Air Force since they had
already racked up great kill ratios against the Indians.
They wanted to see "how good they really were" as it were against a
great air force like the Israelis.
They claim that these Pakistanis shot down at least 10 Israeli air
craft in the 6 day war and at least 1 Israeli aircraft in the Yom
Kippur war without the Israeli Air Force even shooting down 1 of these
Pakistani pilots.
It's NOT just the Pakistanis who claim this, even this Indian Air
Force historian guy who made this Indian Air Force website claims
that.
http://jaganpvs.tripod.com/pakpilots.htm
Here's the homepage of this Indian site.
http://jaganpvs.tripod.com/




This website from New Zealand claims that Pakistani pilots shot down
10 Israeli aircraft in the 6 day war, and at least 1 Israeli aircraft
in the Yom Kippur War.
http://www.scramble.nl/pk.htm
Here's the homepage of this site from New Zealand.
http://www.scramble.nl/

I also did do a google search to find out what kind of kill ratios
Soviet Pilots had against the Israelis when Soviet pilots flew for
Arab Air Forces, but I didn't find anything.


BTW, as even if Israeli pilots are the best in the world, they still
can't be in the same league as the Americans or Europeans because of
the number of and the quality of equipment that the Europeans and
Americans have.
I'd even have to put the Spanish Air Force above the Israeli Air Force
when the Spanish get all their Eurofighter Typhoons(they have already
got their first batch of Eurofighter Typhoons I understand).
No matter how good an Israeli pilot in an F-15I or F-16I would be,
he/she just CAN'T compete with an American Pilot in an F-22 Raptor or
a European pilot in a Eurofighter Typhoon.
The Israelis just don't have stuff even close to as good as the Meteor
BVR air to air missile for example.
Most of Western Europe will have these missiles on their fighter
planes soon.








--�
MattA
?subject=HepatitusC-Objectives

Matt's Hep-C Story web pages are back at a home. No more drop down ads
to get in your way. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/matta00

Truth about Howard Aubrey AKA madyan67:
http://www.geocities.com/lord_haha_libeler/

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 10:53:02 -0400, wrote:
ROFLOL that's the biggest BS story Ever
"I have seen the worst that man can do.and I can still laugh loudly"
R.J. Goldman

Was it really necessary to quote 180 lines merely to add that small
comment?

BTW, could you please respect Usenet community values by not
top-posting in future.

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable. That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the thread.

Oh yeah . . . I almost forgot . . . please **** off!


On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:39:35 +0100, (phil hunt)
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 10:53:02 -0400, wrote:
ROFLOL that's the biggest BS story Ever
"I have seen the worst that man can do.and I can still laugh loudly"
R.J. Goldman

Was it really necessary to quote 180 lines merely to add that small
comment?

BTW, could you please respect Usenet community values by not
top-posting in future.

--
A: top posting

Q: what's the most annoying thing about Usenet?

"Richard Cranium" wrote in message

When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable.

Wrong.

Do a google search sometime and find out just how "acceptable" top-posting
is.

That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the thread.

Wrong again. No newsreader automatically places the response at the top of
the "thread". I think you meant "message".

Newsreader software puts the reply where *you* type it, sparky. If you'd
move your flabtabulous arm just a bit and mash your flipper on the mouse
button you'd get the cursor below the quoted text and then your replies
would be un****ed. But I doubt if you'll do that. You're too busy mailing
205 friends a "VIRUS ALERT!!!111oneone" warning that you were forwarded from
Bill Gates himself! (I mean it must be true - it says "Bill Gates" in the
"FROM" line!)

HTH HAND KTHXBYE.

--
http://www.delversdungeon.dragonsfoot.org
Remove the X's in my email address to respond.
"Damn you Silvey, and your endless fortunes." - Stephen Weir
I hate furries.

Sorry Silvey. THIS is where the cursor appears in Agent when a
message is opened for reply. As for the rest of your response, please
understand that my post was meant to be ironic. And you are correct .
.. . I did mean "message". I don't understand your reference to
"mailing 205 friends, etc.", unless you're just being a bit of a
dip****. In that case, YOU can un**** this message by copying and
pasting this paragraph to the location of your choice.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 03:56:43 GMT, "Bill Silvey"
wrote:

"Richard Cranium" wrote in message

When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable.

Wrong.

Do a google search sometime and find out just how "acceptable" top-posting
is.

That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the thread.

Wrong again. No newsreader automatically places the response at the top of
the "thread". I think you meant "message".

Newsreader software puts the reply where *you* type it, sparky. If you'd
move your flabtabulous arm just a bit and mash your flipper on the mouse
button you'd get the cursor below the quoted text and then your replies
would be un****ed. But I doubt if you'll do that. You're too busy mailing
205 friends a "VIRUS ALERT!!!111oneone" warning that you were forwarded from
Bill Gates himself! (I mean it must be true - it says "Bill Gates" in the
"FROM" line!)

HTH HAND KTHXBYE.

--
http://www.delversdungeon.dragonsfoot.org
Remove the X's in my email address to respond.
"Damn you Silvey, and your endless fortunes." - Stephen Weir
I hate furries.

(Richard Cranium) wrote:

Sorry Silvey. THIS is where the cursor appears in Agent when a
message is opened for reply.

You're quite correct, BUT...is it such an onerous task to move it
down to the bottom of the text that you want to quote and start
typing your reply there?...let me know if you don't know how to
do that and I'll send detailed instructions...
--

-Gord.

No, it's certainly not a big deal to move text down. The fact is that
many of the messages I respond to on this NG are voluminous loads of
crap that I usually replace (to save bandwidth) with a simple:

Snip

Posting at the bottom does make sense if one wants and/or expects
others to read an entire thread chronologically. However,
soc.culture.palestine is so full of morons (and I recognize that I may
be one of them) that most things should only be posted/read once,
under penalty of loss of brain cells. Indeed, many things here would
be best typed by the author-moron and totally deleted before posting.
I don't know if the same applies to the other affected NG.


On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:38:16 GMT, "Gord Beaman" )
wrote:

(Richard Cranium) wrote:

Sorry Silvey. THIS is where the cursor appears in Agent when a
message is opened for reply.

You're quite correct, BUT...is it such an onerous task to move it
down to the bottom of the text that you want to quote and start
typing your reply there?...let me know if you don't know how to
do that and I'll send detailed instructions...
--

-Gord.

Richard Cranium wrote:
When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable. That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the thread.


It makes it considerably more difficult to follow a thread. The only thing
proper bottom posting requires is trimming quotations to one or two paragraphs
max. Then you have an excellent, quite readable post.

Most top posters just reply to the comment and don't bother to trim anything off
the bottom. They add a tremendous amount of unnecessary bandwidth to any
newsgroup.

I prefer that I be able to read both the reference and the reply without having
to scroll excessively. I don't see that as too much to want.


--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

Well if a Schnerd says it, I'm sure that Mr. McCarthy agrees.
Therefore, I disagree and will top post this response in opposition.

BTW - did you really bang Candace??

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 11:39:52 -0400, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN"
wrote:

Richard Cranium wrote:
When the reply posting is far more interesting than the original post,
top posting is not only acceptable, it is preferable. That's why some
newsreaders automatically place the response at the top of the message.


It makes it considerably more difficult to follow a thread. The only thing
proper bottom posting requires is trimming quotations to one or two paragraphs
max. Then you have an excellent, quite readable post.

Most top posters just reply to the comment and don't bother to trim anything off
the bottom. They add a tremendous amount of unnecessary bandwidth to any
newsgroup.

I prefer that I be able to read both the reference and the reply without having
to scroll excessively. I don't see that as too much to want.


--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

Richard Cranium wrote:
Well if a Schnerd says it, I'm sure that Mr. McCarthy agrees.
Therefore, I disagree and will top post this response in opposition.

BTW - did you really bang Candace??


Of course. I left her smoking.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com