Australia spent billions on jet fighters off the plan. Now, we’re having trouble even flying them

[beijingwalker]

I know F-35 is the context, I said you say everything can be discussed, and ignore the context.

Did you even know what you said? Do I need to remind you again?

I said eerything about F-35, this context, you still can't get it? I m still fine with talking about everything about this context, good or bad.

beijingwalker said:
It's about F-35 , everything about it can be discussed.

 

[jhungary]

I said eerything about F-35, this context, you still can't get it? I m still fine with talking about everything about this context, good or bad.

Exactly which part of "you cannot talk about context when it suit you narrative" you do not understand?

You said everything can be talk about F-35, that's talking something out of context. Again, show me where in the entire article it talk about "Crashes" If so, where is the context of crashes come from?

You cannot eat the cake and have it dude.

 

[beijingwalker]

Exactly which part of "you cannot talk about context when it suit you narrative" you do not understand?

You said everything can be talk about F-35, that's talking something out of context. Again, show me where in the entire article it talk about "Crashes" If so, where is the context of crashes come from?

You cannot eat the cake and have it dude.

You are just impossible, F-35 is the context and everything about IT can be discussed, you can talk it cashes or it doesn't crash, everything can be discussed, which part of this logic you still can't understand?

 

[jhungary]

I said eerything about F-35, this context, you still can't get it? I m still fine with talking about everything about this context, good or bad.

beijingwalker said:
It's about F-35 , everything about it can be discussed.

Then you are taking this out of context, do you understand what is "out of context"?

You are just impossible, F-35 is the context and everything about IT can be discussed, you can talk it cashes or it doesn't crash, everything can be discussed, which part of this logic you still can't understand?

Then you are taking something out of context. Then I can say this article is about Australia. Everything in Australia can be discussed in this post, because the first word of the OP title is Australia, is it not?

 

[beijingwalker]

Then you are taking this out of context, do you understand what is "out of context"?

I didn't force you to talk about F-35 crashes, you can talk about it doesn't crash, it's still about F-35, you sound like that we can only talk about its crashes, this is a very absurd claim.

 

[jhungary]

I didn't force you to talk about F-35 crashes, you can talk about it doesn't crash, it's still about F-35, you sound like that we can only talk about its crashes, this is a very absurd claim.

Again, just because you don't force me to talk about F-35 crash does NOT EQUAL to this article is about F-35 crash, again, please do show me where in this article talk about F-35 crashes.

You can talk about F-35 crashes, as much as I can talk about everything about Australia in this article, does that make sense to you.

Again, you cannot claim "Context" only when it suit you, do you understand that?

 

[beijingwalker]

Again, just because you don't force me to talk about F-35 crash does NOT EQUAL to this article is about F-35 crash, again, please do show me where in this article talk about F-35 crashes.

Where did I say this article about F 35 crashes? but since this article is about this plane, should talking about its crashes be banned in this thread?

 

[jhungary]

Where did I say this article about F 35 crashes? but since this article is about this plane, should talking about its crashes be banned in this thread?

Then you are taking it out of context, because it was no where mentioned.

Does that make any sense to you? I never said you cannot talk about that, but you said I cannot talk about which Chinese Aircraft have less than 5 crashes in 13 years. If you think mine idea is out of context, then how yours are within the context of this article?

 

[beijingwalker]

please do show me where in this article talk about F-35 crashes.

Where did I say this article is about F 35 crashes? but since this article is about this plane, should talking about its crashes be banned in this thread?

 

[jhungary]

Where did I say this article is about F 35 crashes? but since this article is about this plane, should talking about its crashes be banned in this thread?

Sure, then can we talk about which aircraft in China crashes less than 5 times in the last 13 years? Because you said I need to open a new post for it. This is about plane, right?

And if you can talk about something not mentioned in this article, then why I have to open a new post for it?

 

[Beast]

Now you are asking about context. It's YOU who said "it's about everything" not about "context"

You cannot talk about context when it suit your narrative dude.

Again, am I wrong to say this article is about Australia? Yes or No?


I am still awaiting an answer from you.

You do think the planes that were build before 2015 did not fly at all? And J-20 must be an embarrassment if you don't want to answer that question then?

What are you talking about? You mean F-35 crashed 3 times while no J-20 crashed and perfect record so far?

 

[beijingwalker]

Does that make any sense to you? I never said you cannot talk about that, but you said I cannot talk about which Chinese Aircraft have less than 5 crashes in 13 years. If you think mine idea is out of context, then how yours are within the context of this article?

This jet crashed twice in a mere couple of months is also true.

And if you can talk about something not mentioned in this article, then why I have to open a new post for it?

Do you mean because this article didn't mention F35's crashes, I can talk about it?

 

[jhungary]

This jet crashed twice in a mere couple of months is also true.


Do you mean because this article didn't mention F35's crashes, I can talk about it?

J-11 was crashed 7 times in the last 10 years is also true. So?

I never said you cannot talk about something here, you did. Remember this?

This thread is about F-35,which suffered 2 crashes in 2 months, as for airplanes from other countries, you can start a new thread to find out.

What are you talking about? You mean F-35 crashed 3 times while no J-20 crashed and perfect record so far?

You mean J-11 crashed 7 times and the PLA is shit?

Talk to me in 8 years when J-20 is 13 years old, then we will talk.

 

[beijingwalker]

J-11 was crashed 7 times in the last 10 years is also true. So?

I never said you cannot talk about something here, you did. Remember this?

I mean we should focus on F 35 in this thread cause it's about this airplane, there many thousands of another types of airplanes, if we like to have a detailed discussion about other airplanes, we can open new threads. it's following this forum's rule to do so.

 

[jhungary]

I mean we should focus on F 35 in this thread cause it's about this airplane, there many thousands of another types of airplanes, if we like to have a detailed discussion about other airplanes, we can open new threads. it's following this forum's rule to do so.

But then if you are talking about F-35 safety record, which was not mentioned in this article at all by the way, then why I can't talk about Chinese Aircraft safety record for comparison? Why I need to open another thread for it?

Again, you said I can't talk about stuff that are not related to this article, and F-35 safety record itself is not related to this article, so hypocrite much??