Update 08/23/2006: See link at the end of the original post!

A few months ago, I added a few thoughts I had about the efforts by the green people to balance the system of the Earth, and thereby the Universe….I just now realized that’s the same thinking before Copernicus had his ideas accepted, so this set of Earth centric thinking is actually medival at it’s very core….

Anyhow….yesterday’s paper had an interesting article:

“Trying to help the ozone, with unintended effects”

WASHINGTON – Cool your home, warm the planet.

When more than two dozen countries undertook in 1989 to fix the ozone hole over Antarctica, they began replacing chloroflourocarbons in refrigerators, air conditioners and hair spray.

But, using other gases that contain chlorine or fluorine also contributes greatly to global warming.

CFCs destroy ozone, the atmospheric layer that helps protect against the sun’s most harmful rays, and trap the earth’s heat, contributing to a rise in average surface temperatures.

In theory, the ban should have helped both problems. But the countries that signed the Montreal Protocol didn’t realize that CFC users would seek out the cheapest alternative.

The chemicals that replaced CFCs are better for the ozone layer, but do little to help global warming. These chemicals, too, act as a reflective layer in the atmosphere that traps heat like a greenhouse.

Wow…first it was the skies are getting too dirty, so we have to clean up the plannet, so we don’t have an ice age, only to find out a clearer atmosphere allows more of the sun’s energy to reach us, and thereby heats up the atmosphere, so we now are in a warming cycle.

I’m not for blatant waste and environmental destruction, but I think it’s quite arrogant of us to think we can possibly comprehend the mechanisms involved with the plant’s climatology, and try to pass laws to make “the system” conform to the desires of a few people who need more grant money to justify their jobs….

So, I open up Netscape this moring, and one of the featured articles is about how the ozone hole has stabilized:

“Ozone hole stable, say scientists”

Leading scientists in the United States say the hole in the ozone layer of the Earth’s atmosphere above the Antarctic appears to have stopped widening.

The ozone layer blocks the Sun’s ultra-violet rays, exposure to which is harmful to humans, animals and plants.

International agreements were reached to end the use of ozone-depleting chemicals called CFCs after the hole was discovered in 1986.

It is hoped the hole may “heal” fully over the next 60 years.

So…here we are. Some scientists say it’s stable (note in the main article on the stability of the hole, the Dr Susan Solomon is the scientist quoted is the one who originally “found” the hole”). Who are we to believe now?

Over the weekend, I got a little busy in pulling over posts from the “Junior” blog and then updated links. It’s a long and tedious process, but when you have to a scan through a number of posts you did a year to almost two years ago, you see some interesting things. Well, I did any way….

I’m trying to get some of the more notable posts over, and not pursuing the project in any particular sequence, as some posts spanned several writings, and crossed boundries of months.

I mentioned some of the earlier issues of moving from Blogger to my own domain and switching to WordPress as my blogging software in this post.

One of the pitfalls is Blogger only lets you work with up to 300 posts. Those you can pull up and edit. After that, the best bet to get to older posts is to go to the blog, select the month, then right click and “View Source”. You can’t edit that page that comes up, but you can copy and paste the contents into NotePad. From there, I cut and paste the specific posts into WordPress, just like I was wrtinig it new…

I have been trying to faithfully retain the time the original article is posted, which can be done by putting the original data into the “Time Poststamp” on the entry in WordPress, and making sure the “Edit TimeStamp” box is checked when you publish. That way, the post moves to the right place in the blog time continum for historical purposes.

Anyhow…as I have seen Capt Lex doing lately (and who would not want to emulate a fine idea?), he has posted links to some older posts of his own. Here are a few of my personal favorites:

• The Battle Off Samar – 60th Anniversary
• What is Happening in Iraq Because of the Vietnam Experience – Part I
• “Sir, would you like to conn the ship?”

Enjoy!

Just blowing off some steam here. If you’re not in the mood for a rant, move along. If you are, scroll down…

A few weeks ago, I found a new blog and I linked into the comments on one of the posts. There were some statements there, presented as the opinions of the commenters, yet and I had personal experience with the issues being discussed. While the comments were not totally off the edge, they were leaning far over the side, ready to fall off the cliff. I entered my own comments. As a basis for my comments, I used my own personal experience, not that of others, as they had discussed. In my remarks, I even admitted that a part of what they stated was true, but there was a far bigger picture to understand. They had formed their opinions based on a small sample size, you might say. I thought it would be useful to provide some more input. I did end on a note indicating I thought that with the ability to research vast amounts of information in the net these days, it would be useful to do some homework, before making those comments. I’ll admit, I could have left that part out.

I went back the next day. The response was interesting, yet I think it encapsulates so much of what happens on the net. The main commenter on that blog launched into me, telling me I had no right to tell them to do their homework, and further more, he didn’t care what I had been doing in 1972 (that was an integral part of the first person report, relating to the issue of Vietnam), since he wasn’t alive at that time anyhow. Besides, he had formed his opinion based on the comment made by one of his friends. Wow. I think his “I don’t care” remark actually summed up his basic demeanor.

The owner of the blog’s response was to tell that guy he was off base, but then she made an interesting point: She was just stating her opinions, and, after all, isn’t that what blogs are all about? Yes, I agree, but the thing that sticks in my throat is what is an opinion.

Too many things these days ask our “opinion.” The many polls and surveys we are bombarded with try to get us to believe that those 1000 people surveyed essentially represent the over all feelings on an issue. That certainly could be the truth, as it used to be, but now that we have “dumbed down” our youth, many times I think the “advice” of those who don’t even know where most other countries in the world are, let alone what the Constitution says may not be the best ones to ask. Opinions, like feelings it seems these days, are our own personal domain, and inviolate.

I have a different view, which may help to bring the understanding of opinions back to reality. Here’s a dictionary definition of “opinion” with the help of Merriam-Webster:

1) Judgment;
2) a belief stronger than impression and less strong than personal knowledge;
3) a formal statement by an expert after careful study.

All great stuff here. Here is more way too detailed analysis:

Judgment, from the same dictionary, in this scenario is best represented by this definition: “the process of forming an opinion by discerning and comparing.”

“A belief stronger than…” I guess it comes down to how you assess the strength of your thoughts on the subject.

“An expert…” is someone “showing special skill or knowledge.”

Ok, I think I was on firm ground in representing my experiences on the subject matter, yet “it’s our opinion” that takes top level position.

Looking at my :”opinions,” I have found they have changed over time, as I have been exposed to, or gained more information. Am I correct in my opinions? Well, if it’s an opinion I hold, then it is something I will have to admit I do not have “strong personal knowledge” of the topic, unless, as an expert, I am asked to comment, then my “opinion” takes on the weight approaching fact.

While in the service, I had to conduct two JAG Manual Investigations as the investigating officer. I essentially wrote two more, but then they were signed by senior officers, who were the designated investigating officers. This is where I learned where “opinions” fit into the hierarchy of information.

A “JAGMAN” had three basic sections:

1) Finding of Fact
2) Opinions
3) Conclusions/Recommendations

The first section listed all the hard, cold facts you found. The supporting documentation for these facts were enclosed in the investigation ad appendices, in order to provide the reviewers up the chain of command with the ability to fact check you. If you couldn’t find a source for it, it wasn’t a fact. That’s pretty easy to understand. For example, let’s say some of the facts are:

1) Seaman Smotz was not aboard the USS NEVERSAIL on March 15th, 2005, when the ship departed 32nd Street Naval Station, San Diego, CA (Appendix A: OI Division Muster Report of 3/15/2005)
2) Seaman Smotz was present for Muster on USS NEVERSAIL on March 14th, 2005 (Appendix B: OI Division Muster Report of 3/14/2005)
3) The Plan of the Day for March 14th, 2005 aboard USS NEVERSAIL listed the time and date for reporting aboard on March 15th, 2005 for the planned Ship’s movement. (Appendix C: USS NEVERSAIL POD 3/14/2005)
4) OI Division Leading Chief Petty Officer Smith read entire USS NEVERSAIL POD to the assembled OI Division during Muster on March 14th, 2005. (Appendix D: Sworn statement of OSC(SW) Leighton Smith, USN dated 3/31/2005)

The opinion section was not how you felt about it, but a series of observations of the collected factual information. From the facts, you derived opinions. You listed the paragraph numbers of the findings of fact that led you to those “opinions.” This also allowed the reviewers with an understanding of how you arrived at these opinions. From the above facts, then opinions are formed:

1) Seaman Smotz was aware of the planned movement of USS NEVERSAIL on March 15th, 2005, to include the reporting aboard time that day. (FOF 1-4)

You couldn’t prove he paid attention to the reading of the Plan of the Day, which was read and the essential written orders for reporting time were delineated. By forming the opinion that his presence provided ample opportunity to hear the information allows an opinion of his understanding, but you can take it no further.

You got to add some of your “feelings” in the conclusions and recommendations.

Not that opinions need to be left to the experts, but that, as more facts are gained, that an opinion will either be solidified into a fact, or it will have to change, when the facts show the presently held opinion no longer fits the conditions.

It’s great to have opinions, but when someone presents a personal testimony, not their opinion, and the response is: “Well, it’s just my opinion” seems to be the mantra of these days, which seems to translate into: “I don’t care what you say, I’m hanging onto my opinion.”

A few days ago, I pontificated at the world’s upside-down logic. Today, we have something that makes sense.

If there was a country, that had a violently subversive element within its borders, and they were preparing an attack on a country outside of the one it was it, what would the right reaction be?

Well, as one sage leader of mine said: “Everyone can be used for something, even if it is a bad example.”

Bad Example: Lebanon – lets the submersive element perform their attack and avert your eyes.

Good Example: England – collar the miscreants, and save the many innocent lives that would have been effective, because you care about being a member of the world community.

Today is a time when comon sense and decency has stepped onto center stage. Amazingly, some have already tried to characterize this as a president trying to scare people.

Part II

I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but it seems something is very wrong in the world of international relations….

Summary of my confussion:

Hezbollah (translated “The Party of Allah”), a military on a shoestring style organization, dedicated to the extermination of those humans of Jewish descent, has conducted cross international boundry incursions to kidnap citizens of another country and susbequently has been launching unguided rockets from Lebanon (a soverign nation, with defined borders), into Israel (a soverign nation, with defined borders – sorry for the repetition, but I want to make sure my assumptions and quandry are understood). Israel, as a recognized nation by United Nations mandate in 1948, responds in an act of self defense to recover the kidnapped citizen (soldiers) and to cause the cessation of the offensive actions of Hezbollah, and thereby keep the rest of their citizen safe from harm.

I understood, maybe falsely, from my education in Civics/Government over the many years, that the purpose of a government was, at the top level, to defend their citizens, where every they may be, and to control those lines in the sand, earth and water, called borders.

The majority of the world leaders chastise the attacked country and tell them to stop protecting their citizens.

The nation from where the attacks eminate from first claims impotence, then (today), says they will send their Army in to assure the peace, if the attackee ceases and desists. The really important answer I need is whether the Lebanese Army is inept, incapable, impotent (in the most derogatory of meanings) or up to the task of taking on an entrenched organization, that has managed to obtain and transport into a soverign nation, heavy military anti-aircraft and -tank and rocket type artillery pieces, as well as standard light infantry rifles and crew served weapons….

The world is upside down and the precedent here is the same situation could now happen across any borders and we will then have a model of how the world is to respond: Praise the attacker (who, via massive media campaigns, claims they have been wronged since time long passed, in this case in point, thousands of years), and pressure the defender to stop defending themselves.

Read the rest of this entry »

Welcome LGF Lizards!….

While you’re here, feel free to browse my attempts at writing and please visit some of the excellent MilBlogs listed to the right!

——————————————-

Evil use of Photoshop:

First noticed on LIttle Green Footballs August 5th. It has sent ripples across the world, with Reuters trying to back-pedal from the photog that seems to have a penchant for “modifying the truth” via digital software. Not a good thing at all, and there are plenty of people, more plugged in and more capable thatn I to comment. Stroll over to LGF (the main page via the link under the picture) and you’ll get a few more than a few eyefulls of the discussion, among many other blogs/news reports.

Good use of Photoshop:

<

If you’re a submariner, then this would also be considered a good use of photo editing software:

Then again, you can appreciate if you’re from the VP-, HS-, HSL-, VS- or surface community, too. Just a Mk 46 would be a smaller “ride.”

Thanks to Little Green Footballs for the Open Thread!

A few days ago, I blogged out loud about the muddled assumptions. One comment I made was I didn’t think we had faced a situation where we had had a populace with a significant number of citzens who held an allegiance to something above the nation itself. I wrote that before the shooting in Seattle at the Jewish Federation Building, but the behavior of the man who entered the building, using a hostage to get in the door is exactly the mindset that is so troubling:

Amy Wasser-Simpson, the federation’s vice president, told the Seattle Times that Haq got past security at the building and shouted, “I’m a Muslim American; I’m angry at Israel,” before he began shooting.

I’ve rethought the issue, and we have had a situation like this before. It began on Dec 7th, 1941, but the outcome is not the same. Back then, the response from the Japanese-American community, was to send forth the 442nd Regimental Combat Team:

On December 7, 1941, the United States naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii was attacked by Japan. This act thrust the United States into World War II. All men who were eligible for military duty were called upon to fight, except Japanese Americans. Shortly after Pearl Harbor, Japanese American men were catagorized 4C, non-draftable. Moreover, they and their families were placed into concetration camps by the United States Government. However, on February 1, 1943, the government reversed its decision on Japanese Americans serving in the armed forces and announced the formation of the 442nd Infantry Regimental Combat Team.
The 442nd initially consisted of Japanese American volunteers from the mainland United States and the Hawaiian Islands. There were many different reasons why these young men volunteered. Despite the rampant racism towards Japanese Americans during this period, many volunteers felt that if there was to be any future for Japanese in the United States, they had to demonstrate their loyalty by fighting for their country.

The majority of volunteers from Hawaii and the mainland were sent to Camp Shelby in Mississippi. Initially, tension existed between the Hawaiians and the mainlanders. The mainlanders often degraded the Hawaiians for their poor speech and “barbaric” aggressive manners, thus causing them to feel inferior. Due to the excessive fighting and dissension among the troops, the commanding officers were ready to terminate the training. However, a suggestion was made to have the Hawaiians and mainlanders visit relocation camps. After Hawaiian Japanese Americans visited some of the camps, they realized the hardships mainlanders had gone through and a new sense of respect developed for each other. One Japanese American remembers, “the regiment was not formed when we volunteered, nor when we arrived in Camp Shelpby, but rather, it was formed after this (relocation camp) visit” (Matsuo, Boyhood to War. 73)

When this unified unit arrived in Europe, they still had to prove their competence, as well as their loyalty to white soldiers and commanding officers. However, after liberating the small town of Bruyeres in Southern France and rescuing the “Lost Battalion” (141st), Japanese American soldiers gained the respect of their fellow soldiers, the townspeople of Bruyeres, and particularily the members of the “Lost Battalion.” For their performance, the 442nd has been recognized as the most decorated unit in United States history. 18,000 total awards were bestowed upon the 442nd, including 9,500 Purple Hearts, 52 Distinguished Service Crosses, Seven Distinguished Unit Citations, but only one Congressional Medal of Honor (Crost, Honor by Fire. 179). Although their impeccable service earned the 442nd the respect of their fellow soldiers, they were not perceived in the same way by American society when they returned to the West Coast.

Immediately following their return, the 442nd realized that the attitudes of many Americans had not changed. World War II veterans of Japanese ancestry were welcomed home by signs that read, “No Japs Allowed,” and “No Japs Wanted.” In many cases, veterans were denied service in local shops and restaurants, and their homes and property were often vandalized or set on fire.

Joe Byrne
Kyle Higuchi
Jason Opdyke
Mario Sani

Notice the mentality shift. In 1941, those oj Japanese descent felt they owned it to their new nation, and the rest of the citizens, to demonstrated in a courageous manner, their loyalty. Their nickname: “Go For Broke.” we know what that means and that’s how they fought, becoming the most decorated regiment in the US Army.

Get a load of this:

The 442nd Regimental Combat Team was the most decorated unit for its size and length of service, in the entire history of the U.S. Military. The 4,000 men who initially came in April 1943 had to be replaced nearly 3.5 times. In total, about 14,000 men served, ultimately earning 9,486 Purple Hearts , 21 Medals of Honor and an unprecedented eight Presidential Unit Citations.

Anyone who questions service like that has lived in a hole their entire lives. They, like the units comprised of African-Americans, such as the USS MASON (DE-529) and the 761st Tank Battalion, were accepted at the front lines as fighting men, equal to the challenge of combat.

The situation of the day, vs the time of the reloaction camps of the 1940’s are opposite in how communities of non-native Americans handled the decision of loyalty.

I also think, having found the very consise history of the 442nd I quoted above, that is it interesting to observe how the rest of the population reacted. Once again, it is from oppostie ends of the spectrum: At the end of the war, the Japanese-Americans (and African-Americans) who stepped up to the plate and shed their blood for “the Man,” suffered cruelty and assaults from those who they had defended. In this day, while the Muslim-Americans don’t stand and proclaim their alliegance to the nation that affords them freedom, and, most notable, does not relocate them into camps, which conficating their money, personal property and businesses to divide between the Americans in their communities, we also go out of our way to make sure no one is offended by the words in print or on TV, nor any action taken by law enforcement that might be looked upon as “profiling.”

One group showed us they were with us, while the military members from the land of their ancestors, pilaged, raped and murdered their way across China and the Pacific Islands and Rim before cannibalizing our aviators at Chi Chi Jima.

Today, those who have come to us from the Islamic countries openly condem us when we discuss taking action to secure the freedom of all of our citizens, to include them. It’s a world upside down.

To the men of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, I salute you and the legacy you gave your new nation. To the Islamic-Americans, I challenge you to read their history and decide your response.

Update 8/01/2006: CDR Salamander has a post regarding this topic…

H/T to Chapomatic again. He links to Tigerhawks’ blog, where the entire speech made by Senator Santorum (R-PA) lays out what this war is all about.

Like most Americans we are more concerned about the future of our country. Now most of you would expect me to now launch into my often written about rants about the culture, the family, and children. Not today. No today the biggest issue facing our children’s future is a war. Not, as so many describe it, the War on Terror. Not the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. But the world war, which at its heart is just like the previous three global struggles.

In those wars we fought against European tyrants and their allies, from the Kaiser to Hitler to Lenin, Stalin, and their heirs. We fought them because we knew that our survival was at stake. The tyrants would never stop attacking us until they had defeated us, or we had defeated them. Our only choices – choices imposed on us, not chosen by us – were either winning or losing, because there was no way out.

We are in the same kind of conflict today. We are not fighting a War on Terror anymore than we fought a war on blitzkrieg in World War II. Terror like blitzkrieg is a tactic used by our enemy, not the enemy itself. We are fighting against Islamic fascists. They attacked us on September 11th because we are the greatest obstacle to their openly declared mission of subjecting the entire world to their fanatical rule. I believe that the threat of Islamic fascism is just as menacing as the threat from German Nazism and Soviet Communism. Now, as then, we face fanatics who will stop at nothing to dominate us. Now, as then, there is no way out; we will either win or lose.

It’s a long read, but it brings clarity to the situation, and in fact, the last week, I have been mulling over the fact that the war being waged against the western world is garbed in a religious wrapping, yet, if a nation and it’s allies would say “We’re going to conquer you!” there would be little ambuiguity in our thoughts as to what that meant to our national survival. In fact, we didn’t have any problem seeing the Communist threat for what it was. Some of my beginnings on this thought process are here.

I’m sure Mohammed didn’t forsee the freedom of religious expression right being written into our Constitution a millenium beyond his life, but, it now causes many to stop and wonder just how can we judge this “religion.” I submit it is not a religion, but more a poitical power, with religious leadership, and unlike anything we have encountered.

Yes, we have seen guerilla warfare and began our own history with it, but the allegiance to the nation came quickly. It isn’t uncommon for Muslim-Americans calling radio talk shows, when questioned as to what they would do in the event of a fatwa declared to bring down the US, for them to either respond with a question back to the host (such as one did Friday afternoon to Michael Meved) as to where their loyalties would be…The Muslims seem to either refuse to answer the question, or they hesitate and never repond in a manner that you would understand a definite postition on their part. I take from their response, they would not take the approach to defend the US.

As Senator Santorum points out, it is many nations, all claiming a state religion of Islam, who all have publically stated they are out for our defeat. This is just like the Axis powers, but the added factor is not just small bands of guerillas conducting sabotage, as did Nazis landed from submarines, but western nations with massive populations of Muslims, who regularly demonstrate against the country of their citizenship. France has about 3M Muslims, as one example. England has many. Each nation, as with ours, have Imams who openly speak about destruction of the very nations they inhabit. During the riots when hundreds of cars were burned, imagine the internal strife if those same people had been supplied with arms and told to rise up against their adopted homelands?

We’re in for a long haul, and education will be a weapon that will serve the world well….

I picked up this link to Mahmood’s Den blog from Chapomatic, who’s broad reach provides many interesting links, and his own excellent commentary and analysis, when he (Chap) gets rolling.

Here is the point, from near the end of Mahmood’s post that I think is particularly notable:

Regarding the deafening Arab silence in condemning Israel, I think it demonstrates several important factors:

[…]

5. Nothing, absolutely nothing demonstrates the tribalism of Arabs more than wars and conflicts, even on a micro level, let alone this “huge” conflict we have on our hands now. These events crystalizes positions – unfortunately – without much thought beyond the family, tribe, sect, country. The brain ceases to function beyond those things, and of course logic has left the building quite a while ago, and if – and that’s a big if – one declares a position slightly out of those drawn and accepted lines, then that person is immediately vilified, attacked verbally and possibly physically, labeled a traitor and a sell-out, and ostracized. A lot of these people who do question accepted norms more often than not answer with their lives.

Violence, you see, is something that is built into our psyche as Arabs, if the situation does not yet demand the use of fists, then at least the floor belongs to that person who shouts loudest. [CSA emphasis added] Most definitely not to that person who is trying to reason and look at alternate points of view to arrive at a conclusive solution.

It is this trait, I think, more than any other that has succeeded for centuries in cowing us, in forcing us to happily accept tyrants, and has allowed us to regress rather than progress. And we really have only ourselves to blame.

One of my friend Mohammed’s conclusions is that this situation will breed more terrorists. Mohammed I agree with you; this will most certainly rub some passions raw and someone will take it upon themselves to “avenge” the Arab honour. After all, Hizballah’s birth was another Israeli incursion into Lebanon, Al-Qa’idah’s birth was the mountains of Afghanistan in response to Soviet intervention, Zarqawi et al is the result of the American insurrection in Iraq, so it is safe to assume that this conflict too will give birth to some more “freedom fighters” who will continue to perpetuate and wreak havoc in the world.

By the same token, and in the continued absence of proper educational systems in the Arab and Muslim worlds [CSA emphasis], one that values critical thinking rather than learning by rote, there is no doubt in my mind, that someone, somewhere, out of 250 millions of my Arab brothers and sisters, and the more than 1.3 billion Muslims around the world, will have read part of this post and have already decided that I too, should be ostracized for my views… Simply for asking the “wrong” questions.

So…what does Plato have to do with this?

“Man, as we say, is a tame and civilized animal; nevertheless, he requires proper instruction and a fortunate nature, and then of all animals he becomes the most divine and most civilized; but if he be insufficiently or ill educated he is the most savage of earthly creature.” – Plato

I do believe there may be a connection between studying a single set of writings as the sum total of wisdom and the outcome discussed above by Mahmood.

I don’t turn the TV on much, but last night late, I clicked on over to the Military Channel and they had a show on the Coast Guard in Combat in Vietnam. Good story, describing the development of their deployments and duites, early in the Me Cong Delta area, then later in the Rung Sat Special Zone.

How timely a bit of knowledge, given the NYT feels compelled to disclose another National Security program that is being used to keep their city from being attacked again. I maybe watch 20 minutes of TV a week, and there this story was when I fired up the tube….

One side light was about a LORAN-C Navigation System being put in place well from shore. The Chief Petty Officer who set it up was told it was to help with search and rescue efforts. The reality the Air Force had it put in so the bombers could more accurately bomb (stated as 50 YD error system). The project was named “Operation Tight Reign”.

In 1965, a New York Times reported visited the site, and later published an article saying the base was put in with the navigational system to support strategic bombing. The Chief’s boss called to chew him out, but the Chief never had a clue that’s what it was used for. It turns out someone in the Air Force, I believe at the Pentagon, leaked the information.

I think it’s time for a new marketing slogan for the NYT:

The New York Times: Contributing to the loss of America lives for over 40 years!

Interesting side note from the Tight Reign history document (link above): The C-123 began it’s life as a haevy assault glider. The engines were added later, but the design had no room for fuel tanks in the wings. All fuel was carried in external drop tanks…talk about re-use of engineering work!

Cross posted at:
Black Five
LIttle Green Footballs
The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns
MacBros Friday Night Flip Off
123Beta
Right Wing Nation Weekend Company Free Thread
Blue Star Chronicles
Linkfest Haven
Outside the Beltway