送交者: aliastwo 于 2007-02-24, 14:22:13:

回答: 阁下无知，好意思说别人？ 由 借红灯 于 2007-02-24, 14:02:47:

• 不知道。 - aliastwo (140 bytes) 2007-02-24, 14:36:53 (127250)
  • 你说的没错 - 借红灯 (367 bytes) 2007-02-24, 14:40:29 (127252)
• 具体的战斗过程如下 - 借红灯 (812 bytes) 2007-02-24, 14:26:37 (127244)
  • this could very well be inaccurate. You believed this not because - steven (87 bytes) 2007-02-24, 14:38:15 (127251)
    • 那么请问阁下，你觉得应该是怎么样的呢？ - 借红灯 (48 bytes) 2007-02-24, 14:41:40 (127254)
      • that is what you appear to be. - steven (389 bytes) 2007-02-24, 14:48:43 (127256)
        • 换个方向来看 - 借红灯 (261 bytes) 2007-02-24, 15:28:37 (127264)
        • 带着有色眼镜看问题就没劲了 - 借红灯 (373 bytes) 2007-02-24, 15:22:09 (127262)
          • It is not the American's more accurate about Chinese casualties, - steven (65 bytes) 2007-02-24, 16:08:53 (127277)
            • 而且参战部队番号总不至于搞错 - 借红灯 (106 bytes) 2007-02-24, 17:05:36 (127286)
            • 中国做不到那样的精细 - 借红灯 (575 bytes) 2007-02-24, 17:01:30 (127285)
            • Americans takes very seriously about their soldiers, people don't - steven (378 bytes) 2007-02-24, 16:47:29 (127283)
            • 而且中国军队战史总不至于连哪些部队参战都搞不清楚吧 - 借红灯 (58 bytes) 2007-02-24, 16:14:30 (127279)
            • 那美军的伤亡统计又如何验证？ - 借红灯 (52 bytes) 2007-02-24, 16:11:15 (127278)
• 那你说是几个连队？ - 借红灯 (85 bytes) 2007-02-24, 14:24:41 (127243)

加跟贴