To: Jet Jaguar; Sparky1776; militant2; TaMoDee; freedumb2003
To: Jet Jaguar
Not bad. I wonder how much explosive they'd pack though?
I also wonder if it still has the same warhead design (great for airborn go fasters) or different for surface targets?
To: Jet Jaguar
Somali pirates mother ships are legitimate targets
fire at will
To: Jet Jaguar
Can it distinguish turbans from similarly shaped rocks?
5 posted on
12/10/2009 5:01:18 PM PST by
Flightdeck
(Go Longhorns)
To: Jet Jaguar
The next episode of Dogfights: The Death of the Iranian Navy
To: Jet Jaguar
Think of this technology in the hands of the wrong people. Not good for those serving as sea in the Navy.
9 posted on
12/10/2009 5:28:51 PM PST by
sasportas
To: Jet Jaguar
Couldn’t this same task been accomplished about 30 years ago with an F-16?
13 posted on
12/10/2009 5:48:19 PM PST by
caver
(Obama's first goals: allow more killing of innocents and allow the killers of innocents to go free.)
To: Jet Jaguar
A MOAB is more effective and definitely sends a message. :-)
15 posted on
12/10/2009 5:55:46 PM PST by
rbosque
(11 year Freeper! Can't get rid of me Jim! Well, you can but you've put up with me so far.)
To: Jet Jaguar
A fairly simple missile.
Great bang for the buck.
The only technology that this country produces anymore is for the military. Rather see money go here than ACORN or the Clinton's political advisor's.
To: Jet Jaguar
Hmmmmm.....cigarette boats.....Somali pirates.....Hmmmm
20 posted on
12/10/2009 6:33:58 PM PST by
stboz
To: Jet Jaguar
I’ve known about this missile for over a decade. I wondered when it was going to hit prime time.
22 posted on
12/11/2009 12:14:17 AM PST by
Hillarys Gate Cult
(The man who said "there's no such thing as a stupid question" has never talked to Helen Thomas.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson