MikeyD

I really wish they wouldn't do that. The only one that needs to be informed is Syrskyi. Let the Russians find out the hard way. I understand "public right to know", but there's no need to get into specifics. FFS stuff from WWII was kept secret for 50 years in the US, long after it was obsolete and of no intelligence value.

When we talk about X weapon vs drone lets remember that X weapon would likely be immune to ECM. You can't jam a sniper, jam a mg, or jam a mortar round. Artillery? Well, as long as they're not using radar proximity fuses you can't jam an incoming artillery round, either. Drones may be the most cost-effective option, up until someone flips a switch and they fall out of the sky.

This is a bad take my friend.  I don't really want to go 'there', but the simple fact is that the open US border is a feature not a bug and the Senate version of border security had several poison pills in it that would make things worse.  The issue I have is that House demands for border security is an exercise in tilting at windmills.  It doesn't matter how many 'extra' border patrol agents you have if all you are doing is catching and releasing people into the US after they swim over the Rio Grande.  It doesn't matter how many laws are on the books if the enforcement agency chooses to look the other way.
Oh, but why would the current administration want an open border you might ask?  That's tinfoil hat wingnut stuff right there.  ASL is gong completely off the rails.  Let's just count the reasons.
1. The number of seats in the House is determined by population.  Guess what?  It's not determined by population of US citizens because citizenship is not determined by the census.  Therefore if someone from China crosses the border between California and Mexico that Chinese citizen counts towards the population of California in terms of Congressional apportionment.  As of the 2020 census, there are 761,169 people per congressional district.  If you let 10 million 'migrants' into the US that's approximately 13 seats in congress.  Guess where the 'migrants' tend to go?  Sanctuary cities.  Guess where the sanctuary cities are?  Democratic strongholds.
2. Why just stop at counting non citizens in the census?  Why not just let them vote even if they aren't citizens?  In California non citizens are issued driver's licenses.  Various local Democratic strongholds have passed laws allowing non citizens to vote.  The example in the video from DC below is just one example, but there are others.  Oh, but those are just for local elections - yeah, and guess what else is on the ballot when the local elections are being held.  One would think that the citizens of Washington DC wouldn't want the Russian ambassador voting who becomes the mayor, but here we are.
3. If you can't pass a law allowing non citizens to vote though - how about just making it difficult to sort out who is a citizen and who isn't a citizen?  Use voter registration laws that don't require full social security numbers (some states only require the last four digits or they decide not to verify a social security number) and use the US attorney general's office to sue states trying to pass voter ID laws.  Who is the least likely person to have an ID in the United States?  A non citizen of course.
4. If you are someone who is of a mind to swim the Rio Grande and you know which political party is handing you cash then who are you going to vote for in the next election (even though you shouldn't be able to vote, but if you are a non citizen and you want to vote in an election where the democratic party is in control - well we should be welcoming to our 'migrant' friends).  New York City is giving every 'migrant' a government debit card with a 1000 bucks a month on it, along with other benefits totaling somewhere around 2400 bucks a month I think - I'm going from memory here.

5. I'm posting against my better judgement because I know how this forum tilts.  How someone reacts to this post will probably be determined by whether or not you like Republicans.  However, if a political party in your country - wherever you may be from - is willing to try and cement a permanent hold on political power through the use of non citizens I think most would object to that if you were on the receiving end of that political strategy.  Even traditional Democrat voting blocks are starting to shift.
 

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Remember when Tucker Carlson was interviewing Putin who recited his boilerplate spiel about invading Ukraine to 'de-nazify' it, and Tucker looked personally offended by the remark.

Remember when Tucker Carlson was interviewing Putin who recited his boilerplate spiel about invading Ukraine to 'de-nazify' it, and Tucker looked personally offended by the remark.

Remember when Tucker Carlson was interviewing Putin who recited his boilerplate spiel about invading Ukraine to 'de-nazify' it, and Tucker looked personally offended by the remark.

what a goddamn useless sham, 2 months of waiting for literally the same version as the Senate bill.

"How reliable was the swingfire and striker?"
Swingfire, if I recall correctly, had a quite long minimum range. It was fired upward then had  to be gathered into the LOS. So a Swingfire missile could be halfway down a standard CM map before the gunner got proper control of the missile. Wiki says minimum distance is 150m. That would be arming distance, it could be 700m or more downrange before the gunner got the missile in the crosshairs.

There's a CM saying. When playing Russians send a platoon where you'd normally sent a squad, send a company where you'd normally sent a platoon, and send a battalion where you'd normally send  a company. That advice applies more generally, as well. Brit and German mech infantry both have smallish squads/sections. Individually they're not very flexible. Flexibility comes from using multiple squads in a coordinated manner. Two panzergrenadier squads equal sixteen men with four lmg Considerably more useful than a single squad. I'm reminded of those robust 13 man Marine squads in CMSF2 that nobody can stand up against.

The first scenario played was Exploitation. Nice map and some novelties with the Wasp and the Kangaroo but rather difficult.
This ended in tactical defeat. In this type of scenario the effectiveness of the artillery is decisive and mine was not very precise despite a veteran advanced observer with +2 in leadership (the incovenients of the Iron level).
I appreciated the firepower of the Kangaroo in which the machine gun is well protected.
A bad surprise was the long-range accuracy of the Panzerschreck which seems much more effective than in 1944 (the shooters were regular).

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

Unjustified? Like the assassination of an Iranian general?

The Ukraine war has rather vindicated the bogging model, actually. At certain times of the year you just don't want go on a drive through the countryside. In the game go to the menu and look at 'Conditions'. If terrain is labeled as 'muddy' you're in for a hard time. If its labeled 'wet' you're in for a slightly less hard time. I've learned to aim for safer patches of ground - hopping from hard ground tiles to rocky ground tiles. I made a flooded 'muddy' ground map for CMFB module. But the flooded road has gravel tiles beneath it so bogging is rare if you stick to the road.

"Will" rather reminds me of those teenage girls in the UK who thought it would be a good idea to travel to Syria and present themselves as child brides to ISIS. Its impossible for a sane person to even guess what they were thinking at the time.

"Will" rather reminds me of those teenage girls in the UK who thought it would be a good idea to travel to Syria and present themselves as child brides to ISIS. Its impossible for a sane person to even guess what they were thinking at the time.