Can China’s Top Guns Fly?

[jhungary]

Here is an example of how we NORMALLY turn a jet...

F-22s use refueling 'pit stop'

Hot pitting is routine. Even in peacetime, we train as if the jet is required to take off for war in a few hours. Not every air force does this. Does China?

You cannot argue with Chinese logic here. They think they are right and that is the way and direction they will be heading, without even sure where will they ended up

When did Chinese pilot shoot down their aircraft? Arrogant breed failure... The American always think they will be top and never defeated will be the catalyst for your failure.

PAF constantly participate in red flag. Their info for us will help us understand most of the NATO aerial warfare and American tatics.

Precisely why PLAAF acquire AEW, AWACS, BVRAAM/PL-12 missiles and acquire C4IS plus datalink to modernise ourselves. All this are modern on western/NATO experience but with a touch of Chinese, modify on our needs. Which you NATO and American known nothing of...

blah blah blah.......

standard Chinese reply, we WILL lose because we are too arrogant. Come back and talk to us when you successfully defeat ANYBODY

PAF constantly participate in red flag

PAF only participate 1 red Flag exercise, in 2010. Where is the "Constantly" come from??

Red Flag exercise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All in all, you are just 吹緊水, come back to me when you have real data, not the one made up by you.

Same moronic reply as in another thread.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chinese-defence/249634-pentagon-paying-china-data-band-width.html

Wonder why you no longer reply to my question on that post anymore. After pure chest thumping action lol. All talk no substance

 

[Beast]

You cannot argue with Chinese logic here. They think they are right and that is the way and direction they will be heading, without even sure where will they ended up



blah blah blah.......

standard Chinese reply, we WILL lose because we are too arrogant. Come back and talk to us when you successfully defeat ANYBODY



PAF only participate 1 red Flag exercise, in 2010. Where is the "Constantly" come from??

Red Flag exercise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All in all, you are just 吹緊水, come back to me when you have real data, not the one made up by you.

Same moronic reply as in another thread.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chinese-defence/249634-pentagon-paying-china-data-band-width.html

Wonder why you no longer reply to my question on that post anymore. After pure chest thumping action lol. All talk no substance

Why do you think from 2010 is not enough? In fact, with just a few encounter by PAF. We already know deep enough of NATO doctrine. If not why would we go for modernise PLAAF with AEW, AWACS and others?

As for that thread you mention. Until now you have not answer my true enquires, so why shall I reply you? But since you ask for it.

Of cos I know every countries will spy on each other even friendly one. But why would American only pick on Chinese satelites? Banning any American component of satelite for Chinese launch an accuse only China openly on espionage and only make a U-turn to use Chinese satelite for bandwidth which not only is a slap on its own mouth but contradict its own statement. As for the encryted BS, as long as its using our bandwidth, it can be crack. So it shows American at top is either brainless or double standard.

 

[Psyops]

China has already defeated the US in war. The US can only beat small defenceless countries. Until they can prove it against either China or Russia, the US military will remain a paper tiger. Unfortunately for the US, no amount of weapons and money can buy courage for its soldiers.

 

[jhungary]

Why do you think from 2010 is not enough? In fact, with just a few encounter by PAF. We already know deep enough of NATO doctrine. If not why would we go for modernise PLAAF with AEW, AWACS and others?

As for that thread you mention. Until now you have not answer my true enquires, so why shall I reply you? But since you ask for it.

Of cos I know every countries will spy on each other even friendly one. But why would American only pick on Chinese satelites? Banning any American component of satelite for Chinese launch an accuse only China openly on espionage and only make a U-turn to use Chinese satelite for bandwidth which not only is a slap on its own mouth but contradict its own statement. As for the encryted BS, as long as its using our bandwidth, it can be crack. So it shows American at top is either brainless or double standard.

First thing first

You said "PAF constantly participate in red flag"

So, the answer to the question of

Why do you think from 2010 is not enough?

is NO, Not Enough, I hardly think one tie participation can be called "Constantly"
and no, Buying AEW, AWAC, Logistic and Tanker is not adapting Western Doctrine.

You buy them but do you know how the west use them??

Of cos I know every countries will spy on each other even friendly one. But why would American only pick on Chinese satelites? Banning any American component of satelite for Chinese launch an accuse only China openly on espionage and only make a U-turn to use Chinese satelite for bandwidth which not only is a slap on its own mouth but contradict its own statement. As for the encryted BS, as long as its using our bandwidth, it can be crack. So it shows American at top is either brainless or double standard.

First of all, no, the Pent does not just complaint about the Chinese trying to decrypt the US code, and you say there are no friendly espionage conducted by friendly stage. And I did proof you wrong just that. By showing you 3 news article.

Secondly. I have already said Using Chinese satellite does not give the Chinese any edge on decoding our code.

And I did explained to you why we ban Chinese company laying Communication Network in the US while using the Chinese Satellite in Africa. You don't read the whole post is your problem, but the answer is already given.

I think you mixed up the idea of hacking and stealing information (Otherwise known as Information Espionage)

They can hack you anywhere they want, as long as your target have an open network/gateway (ie a network that connected to a internet)
However, some sensitive information (Like Federal Financal data, like interest rate, exchange rate, or some super-duper Military secret) are store under departmental Intranet or even close circuit network. Which you do not have open connection. Then you have to be inside US soil if you want to hack those information.

Our government is not stupid, they KNOW no matter how well your encryption/decryption technology is/are, there will always be risk if you put them over the open network. So some information cannot literally be hack unless you control the US Communication Infrastructure. That's why you see ZTW or Huiwei was forbidden to bid the US communication infrastructure.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...ng-china-data-band-width-4.html#ixzz2SI8EzEHU

Double standard or protecting our national security?

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Most of the training of the Air Force is done in the country. How many times do you get a chance to get training done with other air forces? Once or twice per year? That is barely enough to be considered as "drills"; like I said before, and as demonstrated before, the exchanges between the Air Forces are a sign of friendship and a way to compare tactics, not to "practice", so to speak. China can also "compare tactics" and update its doctrine simply by studying and examining. They have done some serious dissecting of American doctrine and tactics used in the Gulf War, which saw a complete renewal of PLAAF doctrine and reorganization of PLAAF structure and command.

The J-10 serviceability is yet unknown to most of us, so please stop with the "articles" that are probably written by the same people who thought the J-11B was crashing. The J-10's crash rate is not higher than other aircraft and so far there has been no grounding or investigations into any aspect of it.

The J-10 defeated the J-11, Su-27SK, Su-30MKK, and J-11B in virtually every major combat simulation. Some of the scores include 7:1, 13:1, 4:1, etc. You need to do more research.

And no, China never offered the J-10 to Myanmar.

J-11, Su-27, Su-30MKK? The Su-27 is being retired. Su-30MKK is being moved to second line service. I see that you have left out the J-11B, which has a AESA, RAM, composites, IRST, MAWS, 132 kN engine, which will provide a much stealthier, versatile, and electronically-capable platform than the Su-30MKI. You also have left out the J-10B, which already has significantly upgraded capabilities compared to the J-10A, about to enter service. Let's not forget about the J-15 and J-16, all of which feature similar upgrades seen on the J-11B, which will enter production in 2014. China has more Flanker fighters than Russia and 120 of them are the J-11B while even more locally-developed 4.5 generation Flankers are entering service.

Now, onto transports. I see that you have conveniently left out the fact that China has some 100+ Y-8 along with the Y-9, IL-76, and is awaiting the Y-20 currently in testing. But that's alright, because India's 10 C-17s will obviously be "enough", right? It must be fun to reduce your enemy's numbers on paper, isn't it.

No dedicated refueling aircraft? Please go to YouTube and search up "J-8 refuel" or "J-10 refuel".

The Y-20 is also being converted to refueling aircraft.

And once again, you have left out the PLAAF's KJ-200, Y-8 AWACS, Y-8T, Y-8Q, Y-8J, Y-8EW, etc, which make up the bulk of the PLAAF's EW fleet. Oh, by the way, the KJ-2000 features a L-band AESA radar that tracks simultaneously in all directions, which provides far superior tracking, detection, and scanning capability compared to all Russian, Indian, and American EW aircraft.

Funny how you stress "quality over quantity" while your post clearly implies that what Russia and United States has over China is ... well, you named it: quantity.

Be careful what you call a "paper tiger" because if that's the standard then I'm afraid IAF and Russia's aging force might as well be paper mice.

Gambit has already answered ur assertion to the value of exercises.
I never said anything about j-10s crashing,just that their maintainence problems keep them grounded.It was in the chinese forum itself check out-ur chinese members reported how the j-11 crushed j-10.
If su-30mkk is being moved to second line service then china doesn't really have much left as frontline fighters.
As for the j-11,its new ws-10 engine itself is a failure.The chinese engines lasted 30 hrs before they needed servicing compared with 400 for the russian engines.
And NO it doesn't have AESA radar,there are PLANS to deploy an aesa radar.Well The IAF also PLANS to deploy zhuk aesa radar on the sukhoi upgrades.
It also lacks the Powerful bars radar of the mki.Its radar is far weaker than the later bars of the mki.The j-11b's radar as far as i know can track track 10 targets and engage 2 simultaneously.This is because the j-11's basic radar is an upgrade of the older su-27s radar not that of the su-30.
The sukhoi's bars can track 15 and engage 4.
It does not have THrust vector,so is at an disadvantage in WVR.
The israeli jammer and electronic countermeasures are also superior.Infact the LITENING targeting pod is used by the USAF,the german air force,the RAF,the IsAF and many others.Thus its precision ground attack ability is also superior.
The sukhoi -30 mki also has 12 hardpoints to the j-11s 10 and can carry more firepower.
So the next time u spam bullshit about how j-11 is uberpowered over the mki do ur reserach.
And no i didn't leave out 100 + y-8 transports.The y-8 is the chinese designation to the old and reverse engineered ,slightly modified antonov-12.And u don't have 100+.Only around 60 remain in service.These are totally obsolete machines.And i had mentioned them by the name an-12.The chinese reverse engineered name is y-8.

And yes sadly,the globemaster IS the best strategic transport aircraft in the world.Due to its ability to land in rough areas and its massive payload.Right now IAF's ability to reinforce from the air is better than PLAAF's obsolete transport fleet.

And i never said 'no' tanker aircraft.I said no DEDICATED tanker aircraft.All u have are 10 stopgap old h-6 badger bombers converted to this role.These are 50s era tupolev aircraft.Even ur airforce knows this and is now trying to acquire ill-78 from russia.Btw did u see the numbers of tankers and transports in USAAF and rusaf?Half the USAAF is support aircraft.Thats how imp support aircraft is in modern warfare.The pathetic state of the PLAAF in this regard shows its antiquated mentality ,and because it has no contact with other airforces they don't get to learn either.

Now as to the AWACS thing.China has 5 kj-2000 mounted on il-76 platforms and these i mentioned because they are relevant in a modern combat scenario against the PLAAF.
It also has 7 kj-2000 mounted on the obsolete y-8 platform.And 16 more y-8 for reconssaince.
Now if u think y-8 awacs has any value as more than a defensive AWACS platform u are delusional.Its not even a jet aircraft.Its a turbopropeller driven aircraft ,lol.
In the scenarios likely to include the PLAAF,an attempted invasion of the indian N-E border ,seizure of taiwan or diayou islands where the awacs has to monitor enemy airspace and get close and not just sit back and monitor its own airspace,a role for which clearly these were optimized...if u think a turbopropeller driven aircarft has any hope of survival in a modern airspace close to enemy lines....again pray to confucius for wisdom.
This is why u will not see a single air force with turbopropeller AWACS,USA uses e-3 an E-4 sentry those are based on boeing 747/707.The PHALCON and russia's a-50 are based on the turbojet ill-76 as are 5 of china's only modern AWACS those 5 kj-2000 awacs.Even the new indian indigineous awacs uses the embraer -145 jetliner as platform not some useless 50's era turboprop platform.

Now as for the super duper kj-2000 that houses a radar that supposedly no other air force can match.not even the USA or russia.It begs the question why chinese were begging to israel to supply them PHALCON,and this was developed only after the usa sanctioned the move.So believe all the CCP propaganda u want on ur super duper worldbeater kj-2000.

So now i see u have also conveniently avoided the question of how u expect a military hierachy,with rigid centralized control and interference from political commissars at every level to be equal in efficiency of human material to an independent organization.And lower flying hours on top of that.

So yes you are right i WAS wrong,the PLAAF shouldn't be called paper tiger..thank you for correcting me..its more appropriate title is paper mice.

 

[Beast]

is NO, Not Enough, I hardly think one tie participation can be called "Constantly"
and no, Buying AEW, AWAC, Logistic and Tanker is not adapting Western Doctrine.

You buy them but do you know how the west use them??

There's a lot of open source to know that how to use those thing since western are too boastful that they talk too much online and leak out too much thing and our espionage is propably the best in the world. If not, how will we know what to make? Like Swedish AESA Erieye similiar with our KJ-200?

First of all, no, the Pent does not just complaint about the Chinese trying to decrypt the US code, and you say there are no friendly espionage conducted by friendly stage. And I did proof you wrong just that. By showing you 3 news article.

Secondly. I have already said Using Chinese satellite does not give the Chinese any edge on decoding our code.

And I did explained to you why we ban Chinese company laying Communication Network in the US while using the Chinese Satellite in Africa. You don't read the whole post is your problem, but the answer is already given.



Double standard or protecting our national security?

Don't tell me you are so naive to think that anything going thru or bandwidth will be saved. As long as anything going thru our bandwidth, nothing will be safed.

Finally as for your friendly espionage. That's an absurd word to use. No espionage can be called friendly. Or you going to make up another term call friendly massacre?

I didn't know American education is so absurd

 

[jhungary]

There's a lot of open source to know that how to use those thing since western are too boastful that they talk too much online and leak out too much thing and our espionage is propably the best in the world. If not, how will we know what to make? Like Swedish AESA Erieye similiar with our KJ-200?

lol, again, is not what to make, or what to have, but how to use them.

Don't tell me you are so naive to think that anything going thru or bandwidth will be saved. As long as anything going thru our bandwidth, nothing will be saved.

Finally as for your friendly espionage. That's an absurd word to use. No espionage can be called friendly. Or you going to make up another term call friendly massacre?

I didn't know American education is so absurd

First of all, it's "Safe" not saved. you play a game you "Saved" you game.

The "safety" of our data is as explained not put thru more risk than you have a Chinese want to access the Mainframe illegally inside US, and this does happen.

You can try and decode the 1 dimension data if you like, waste the time, money and man power try to crack those data from Africa. Or you can try and decode the mainframe in Pentagon which will result in a total lost of worldwide intel. you are saying, you should go for African Satellite only. Really intelligent choice. NOT

There are 0 value for Chinese except for monetary reward from renting a satellite and US does not lose any thing as much as allowing a Chinese in US. if you fail to grasp this, then you have a lower understanding level than I original throught

Finally as for your friendly espionage. That's an absurd word to use. No espionage can be called friendly. Or you going to make up another term call friendly massacre?

there are no Friendly massacre, but there are "Friendly Fire"

Again, I don't see the problem adding friendly in front of espionage. If you have a problem that's probably just you.

Your reply as if want to insult me more than you care about what you wrote lol..

Then why don't you just use name calling? Save you a lot of time

 

[Beast]

Gambit has already answered ur assertion to the value of exercises.
I never said anything about j-10s crashing,just that their maintainence problems keep them grounded.It was in the chinese forum itself check out-ur chinese members reported how the j-11 crushed j-10.
If su-30mkk is being moved to second line service then china doesn't really have much left as frontline fighters.
As for the j-11,its new ws-10 engine itself is a failure.The chinese engines lasted 30 hrs before they needed servicing compared with 400 for the russian engines.
And NO it doesn't have AESA radar,there are PLANS to deploy an aesa radar.Well The IAF also PLANS to deploy zhuk aesa radar on the sukhoi upgrades.
It also lacks the Powerful bars radar of the mki.Its radar is far weaker than the later bars of the mki.The j-11b's radar as far as i know can track track 10 targets and engage 2 simultaneously.This is because the j-11's basic radar is an upgrade of the older su-27s radar not that of the su-30.
The sukhoi's bars can track 15 and engage 4.
It does not have THrust vector,so is at an disadvantage in WVR.
The israeli jammer and electronic countermeasures are also superior.Infact the LITENING targeting pod is used by the USAF,the german air force,the RAF,the IsAF and many others.Thus its precision ground attack ability is also superior.
The sukhoi -30 mki also has 12 hardpoints to the j-11s 10 and can carry more firepower.
So the next time u spam bullshit about how j-11 is uberpowered over the mki do ur reserach.
And no i didn't leave out 100 + y-8 transports.The y-8 is the chinese designation to the old and reverse engineered ,slightly modified antonov-12.And u don't have 100+.Only around 60 remain in service.These are totally obsolete machines.And i had mentioned them by the name an-12.The chinese reverse engineered name is y-8.

And yes sadly,the globemaster IS the best strategic transport aircraft in the world.Due to its ability to land in rough areas and its massive payload.Right now IAF's ability to reinforce from the air is better than PLAAF's obsolete transport fleet.

And i never said 'no' tanker aircraft.I said no DEDICATED tanker aircraft.All u have are 10 stopgap old h-6 badger bombers converted to this role.These are 50s era tupolev aircraft.Even ur airforce knows this and is now trying to acquire ill-78 from russia.Btw did u see the numbers of tankers and transports in USAAF and rusaf?Half the USAAF is support aircraft.Thats how imp support aircraft is in modern warfare.The pathetic state of the PLAAF in this regard shows its antiquated mentality ,and because it has no contact with other airforces they don't get to learn either.

Now as to the AWACS thing.China has 5 kj-2000 mounted on il-76 platforms and these i mentioned because they are relevant in a modern combat scenario against the PLAAF.
It also has 7 kj-2000 mounted on the obsolete y-8 platform.And 16 more y-8 for reconssaince.
Now if u think y-8 awacs has any value as more than a defensive AWACS platform u are delusional.Its not even a jet aircraft.Its a turbopropeller driven aircraft ,lol.
In the scenarios likely to include the PLAAF,an attempted invasion of the indian N-E border ,seizure of taiwan or diayou islands where the awacs has to monitor enemy airspace and get close and not just sit back and monitor its own airspace,a role for which clearly these were optimized...if u think a turbopropeller driven aircarft has any hope of survival in a modern airspace close to enemy lines....again pray to confucius for wisdom.
This is why u will not see a single air force with turbopropeller AWACS,USA uses e-3 an E-4 sentry those are based on boeing 747/707.The PHALCON and russia's a-50 are based on the turbojet ill-76 as are 5 of china's only modern AWACS those 5 kj-2000 awacs.Even the new indian indigineous awacs uses the embraer -145 jetliner as platform not some useless 50's era turboprop platform.

Now as for the super duper kj-2000 that houses a radar that supposedly no other air force can match.not even the USA or russia.It begs the question why chinese were begging to israel to supply them PHALCON,and this was developed only after the usa sanctioned the move.So believe all the CCP propaganda u want on ur super duper worldbeater kj-2000.

So now i see u have also conveniently avoided the question of how u expect a military hierachy,with rigid centralized control and interference from political commissars at every level to be equal in efficiency of human material to an independent organization.And lower flying hours on top of that.

So yes you are right i WAS wrong,the PLAAF shouldn't be called paper tiger..thank you for correcting me..its more appropriate title is paper mice.

There was never a cash of J-10 crashing into Su-30MKK, no Chinese J-10 being grounded. WS-10 being failure? Check out J-11B and see who is lying about WS-10 being failure. You indians love selective posting. There are talk about PLAAF pilot in Chinese forum being one of the finest in the world . Why I didn't heard you mention about it here?

You can take random post of some amatuer Chinese forum as your source? This show more or less of your agenda.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

You know i am waiting for a reply from sinosoldier especially on his supreme j-11,how su-30mkk's are now being relegated to second line units,the political comissars and the dreaded turboprop awcas of the PLAAF.

 

[Beast]

lol, again, is not what to make, or what to have, but how to use them.



First of all, it's "Safe" not saved. you play a game you "Saved" you game.

The "safety" of our data is as explained not put thru more risk than you have a Chinese want to access the Mainframe illegally inside US, and this does happen.

You can try and decode the 1 dimension data if you like, waste the time, money and man power try to crack those data from Africa. Or you can try and decode the mainframe in Pentagon which will result in a total lost of worldwide intel. you are saying, you should go for African Satellite only. Really intelligent choice. NOT

There are 0 value for Chinese except for monetary reward from renting a satellite and US does not lose any thing as much as allowing a Chinese in US. if you fail to grasp this, then you have a lower understanding level than I original throught



there are no Friendly massacre, but there are "Friendly Fire"

Again, I don't see the problem adding friendly in front of espionage. If you have a problem that's probably just you.

Your reply as if want to insult me more than you care about what you wrote lol..

Then why don't you just use name calling? Save you a lot of time

Besides, the wrong spelling. Seems like you have not much to contributed to counter my post.

As for espionage, it is already not a friendly action. trying to gauge espionage with selective term is already absurb. Of cos friendly nations do spy on each other. But the rule is do it at your own risk and bear all responsible if get caught.

Sorry, I have not noticed any of my post with name calling of you. But the term friendly espionage really makes me laugh

 

[gambit]

Why do you think from 2010 is not enough?

Because once is only an 'intro'. At Red Flag, for any first time participant, there may be restrains not related to the exercises at all, that may limit the guest from fully exploiting the opportunities offered by the overall exercises.

For example...

Red Flag – Jonesblog

It turns out that the French Air Force has participated in Red Flag many times, but this was the first time the Dassault Rafale has made an appearance making for a unique opportunity for US pilots to become familiar with the aircraft. However, Lcl Grandclaudon was surprised that very little academic effort was spent by the participants in familiarizing themselves more thoroughly with the aircraft of other air forces. Of course we discussed the practical reasons why this was not possible including concerns with intellectual property and issues of national security on the part of the US, France and India, but nevertheless, it was felt that more academic time might have been a valuable investment.

You do not know what the Pakistani Air Force did at that one time Red Flag, what the PAF learned, and how far did the PAF pilots extended themselves to get whatever they learned. And if they did not extended themselves, whatever they give to China will be incomplete.

In fact, with just a few encounter by PAF. We already know deep enough of NATO doctrine. If not why would we go for modernise PLAAF with AEW, AWACS and others?

There is no 'In fact' about this. Even if the Pakistani Air Force shared everything it knows about Red Flag with China, that one time cannot endow with sufficient knowledge and understanding of NATO doctrines, which is vastly more comprehensive than anything China possess.

Finally as for your friendly espionage. That's an absurd word to use. No espionage can be called friendly. Or you going to make up another term call friendly massacre?

I didn't know American education is so absurd

Look at your own education. The context of 'friendly' here is the nature of the relationships between the parties, not of the acts of espionage.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

There was never a cash of J-10 crashing into Su-30MKK, no Chinese J-10 being grounded. WS-10 being failure? Check out J-11B and see who is lying about WS-10 being failure. You indians love selective posting. There are talk about PLAAF pilot in Chinese forum being one of the finest in the world . Why I didn't heard you mention about it here?

You can take random post of some amatuer Chinese forum as your source? This show more or less of your agenda.

Ok first of all i don't know what ur talking about,i never said anything about anyone crashing.He started the whole talk abouit crashing.I said about the reports of j-10 as a maintainence nightmare.China doesn't release data on its crashes.
And ws-10 is a failure.Other ur govt wouldn't be investing billions to build a proper jet engine.China has admitted it can't build a proper engine yet.ws-10 engines need servicing after 30 hrs compared to 400 for russian engines.This is also why china buys more al-31f turbofans from russia,instead of using ws-10 .Infact even the j-10 uses it coz the ws-10 failed.

I don't know which chinese forum ur talking about,i meant the chinese defence section of PDF.
Search history a few pages back,ull find a thread titles j-11 crushes j-10 started by a chinese member with chinese sources.
So i'm not taking random posts.

And as for chinese pilots,u get lesser flying hrs and are bossed around by your political commissars,with political interference in military affairs u'll never be as good as an independent organization that doesn't have to worry about commissars intruding at every step.In any case ur transport and tanker fleet are obsolete and near useless for a airforce of ur size.Only shows plaafs antiquated mentality of quantity over quality and that it hasn't caught up to modern doctrines yet.They dont have any exposure to foreign airforces so no help there either.
Also u never answered anything on how the j-11 is superior to mki?How y-8 50's era turboprop AWACS will make us shake in our boots.
Good day.

 

[jhungary]

Besides, the wrong spelling. Seems like you have not much to contributed to counter my post.

As for espionage, it is already not a friendly action. trying to gauge espionage with selective term is already absurb. Of cos friendly nations do spy on each other. But the rule is do it at your own risk and bear all responsible if get caught.

Sorry, I have not noticed any of my post with name calling of you. But the term friendly espionage really makes me laugh

Was gonna say the exact same word as Gambit said but he posted his 3 minutes before me, no point repeating.

I appear to have no answer your point is purely there are no point in your comment to begin with.

Until you have something solid, this is it for me, time for late lunch

 

[Psyops]

Was gonna say the exact same word as Gambit said but he posted his 3 minutes before me, no point repeating.

I appear to have no answer your point is purely there are no point in your comment to begin with.

Until you have something solid, this is it for me, time for late lunch

Running away again? Seems like an American specialty

 

[gambit]

Running away again?

What else can we do against fools and ignorants?