False.
This is the first time that domestic things are brought up, in response to me saying this.
You’ll notice I say this to this right here
Which in the context Relates to me bringing up this
Which I said in response to… This.
Which if we put into the context, related to this
So quit rearranging the context to fit your means. I did not once bring up aircraft until someone else did; and even then in an out of context narrative.
honestly i always expected the the KF41 to be a premium vehicle since the Puma and it do share plenty of similarities
I recently read an article about a dutch crew competing in this years US sullivan cup on an Abrams.
So one of the modern Abrams tanks for the french tree as well
This is reading comprehension 101 and you’re failing at it.
Point A always implied Germany’s situation in ARB (bonus point! you’re the only person here to not know that), because that’s what we always talk about when we mention capability gaps so y’know, i’m actually gonna throw this back at you “if you look over forums, it will take you practically no time to find the posts”.
You serious??? You are aware we just wanted the KF41 to be added, i think plenty of us would ahve been ok with an autocannon variant to be a premium in the first place.
This is realy a joke that it not being a tech tree vehicle is a deal breaker for you
You quoted him on that with a completely diffferent theme when he was talking about domestic plane options and You changed the theme to your convenience, he talked about planes and then You talked about the PUMA when he wasnt even talking about ground in that moment
I think everyone should just create a coalition and demand Abroomz for themselves;
/s
Considering I, not once, brought up aircraft before that point, it doesn’t hold true. You brought them up in a conversation that had nothing to do with them. Perhaps you may need a reading comprehension clinic however if you think I did?
It is an answer. Just not one you like.
You’ll note that, as much as I hate to say it, the EFT has superior flight models and missiles available to it because US development has reached a point of slowing down and/or moving on to different aircraft. These planes will not be able to keep up with the capabilities of the EFT, however they definitely could come at the same time as that and be an answer, which I fully understand.
IF the EFT gets everything it could, theoretically the US jets shouldn’t be able to aside from the F-22 and maybe the F/A-18D/E. Although admittedly it’s a rather big IF.
Ah, so me asking for Gaijin to fix glaring problems with the US are unjustified. Glad to hear.
He quoted me in response to me talking about tanks, and moved it to airplanes. Pretty clear that I didn’t bring up planes, and I even mention in my response to him that he is moving my post out of context and that I was referring to tanks.
He changed the theme at his convenience, and I mentioned that. Learn to read.
Show me the context on which I refer to airplanes in the conversation until you bring it up. Show me how I am expected to understand that that is in referal to planes. Show me where I’m this conversation I bring up Germany and it’s (lack) of planes before you.
You all act as if planes were the starting, and end, point of this conversation. The start point was the Lynx, and the discussion of it. Everything up until you come in is in reference to the Lynx; including the Quotes I use and the conversation I am having. You simply shift it to planes because that is rather what you would like to focus on.
But I have implied them, and you in your blisful ignorance completely failed to account for that.
You brought them up in a conversation that had nothing to do with them.
Because they’re a part of my original argument? I’m still confused how you’re letting that fly over your head.
It is an answer.
Having an answer to something implies that it can “counter” or at least “parry” it, the F-4F ICE is incapable of either, it’s not an answer… or if you’re so adamant that your reasoning can’t be wrong, ICE is a “bad answer”.
You’ll note that, as much as I hate to say it, the EFT has superior flight models and missiles available to it because US development has reached a point of slowing down and/or moving on to different aircraft. These planes will not be able to keep up with the capabilities of the EFT, however they definitely could come at the same time as that and be an answer, which I fully understand.
Last I checked F-15EX is a very good rate fighter and F-18E has excellent AoA, of course they’re worse than the EFT in certain type of flight characteristics but at the same time they’re also better in others. On the other hand, there’s nothing that the F-4F ICE can do against the F-15C in a dogfight if both players are at the same skill level.
Ah, so me asking for Gaijin to fix glaring problems with the US are unjustified. Glad to hear.
Here’s how to know you’re ignoring the context and implications of my statements honestly - I AM VERY OBVIOUSLY talking about vehicle additions and demands that make little or zero sense (remember the “gib F-15E to fight the MiG-29”? cause I do).
I do, although I never said that and I did not agree with it because it’s stupid. Yes that is intentional ignorance because I personally did not do that and acting as if I am a whole when I am one is a bit ridiculous. And yes, US tears, just as German or a Russians tears, are 95% of the time unjustified. It is not exclusive to the US.
When You talked about the addition of the ICE he quoted You on that part and asked you what domestic options to fill the gaps, and talked about the idea of adding no domestic options for germany but instead You called it ridículous, since You tought the ICE is a capable domestic answer and then changed the theme to the PUMA when he wasnt talking about that
How is this suddenly a problem when the US is on the receiving end? And it’s fine when it’s other nations on the receiving end:
Show me. Show me where I bring up the ICE before when he brings up the competition of Su-27s and F-16s. Show me. Quote me where I say “the ICE”. Show it to me.
Show me the context in which I refered to the Puma when talking about the “capability gap” (it ain’t there). I didn’t tie it to your point because there was no need to since it’s an independent clause that isn’t meant to debate whether KF 41 is better than Puma and whatnot, while making it clear that it’s about vehicles that are meant to plug a capability gap. It was yours and yours only interpretation that lead you to mention the Puma - we actually have a name for this type of fallacy - false premise.
You simply shift it to planes because that is rather what you would like to focus on.
I shifted it to planes to give you exmaples of instances when we ask for foreign vehicles and how our requests for those differ from the example you brought up, this really shouldn’t be that hard to understand.
showed you already 3 times man cmon
I’m not ignoring it, I didn’t see it. Gaijin when you get multiple responses from the same thread at once just says “2 replys in X thread”, and you had been buried with 5 other replies. Also, I am one person. I cannot see everything.
You have showed me after he brought up planes. I explicitly asked for before; because you said clearly that I brought it up before he did and so I want proof.
Edit: here is proof, PROOF, I did not bring up planes.
So stop saying I did.