Hakko Ichiu

Spiral binding is nice and cheap and, if done properly (thick, heavy covers), lasts a good long time. Plus, it lies flat better than other bindings. Ethan. ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

How about a special factory that produces tanks, infantry and vehicles, as long as my Erntepanzern keep bringing in the Tiberium? Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

The absolute turning point of the war came on Dec. 8th, when Hitler declared war on the United States. Upon hearing the news, Churchill said, "So, we've won after all." Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Captain Foobar: I have heard the control of the Panama Canal mentioned several times, and I just dont understand how this could become a military threat. They could use the Panama Canal to annoy us, and in some political leverage, but I don't think that they could control it with force.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No, but they could blow it up, mine it, scuttle ships in it, use smuggled anti-ship missles to ambush a reinforcement fleet as it made it's way through, etc. This could severely degrade our ability to reinforce the Pacific Fleet and be a major pain in the arse. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

Is it just me, or does the driver of the Mk IVH look just like George Washington? Great pics, btw. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Black Sabot: I don't get it, what did he do wrong?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> He didn't have a separate internet line for ordering pizza. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

One topic that I haven't seen discussed yet in this thread -- if it was buried amidst some of the algorithms running around, MEGO apologies -- is the issue of double-blind/single-blind/played-the-heck-out-of-it-like-CE scenarios. Clearly, in the first and last categories, neither side has the advantage. Is there any way to account for the middle case, where one player has seen the scenario at most a time or two, while the other can recite the map coordinates in his sleep? I don't know if there is, short of having a separate tournament ladder -- which I think would be a good thing, btw, were someone willing to devote the time and energy to administrate it. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

http://www.avault.com/news/displaynews.asp?story=3102000-134215 'Nuff said. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hundminen: Excuse my ignorance, but the IS whizzes (geeks) at my company have loaded all our computers with GOP (whatever the heck that is), and I am unable to load most (but not all) games whether by CD or off internet. I usually get a dialog saying I need administrator password. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I knew those Right-wing Religious Conservatives would find a way to ban violent computer games. ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kurtz: Couldn´t calling in arty on a empty hill or keeping your limited AFV resorces back be considered somewhat "gamey" ? Especially with the limited resources the German has.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes and no. I know that part of US doctrine for attacking towns was to put a smoke screen "behind" the area under attack. This both blinded units in overwatch and made targets more visible against the white smoke background. I don't know this was common in the Wehrmacht or not. Experts on German tactics, please enlighten us. Just don't blow smoke up our arses Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: Griffincheng: Doesn't EMP require a nuclear detonation to generate? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> My understanding of EMP is that it can be generated with a low-yield, 'clean' warhead that would not create widespread civilian casualties, especially when detonated in the upper atmosphere. I welcome any elucidation from any nuke specialists out there. AFAIK, China is already eschewing a 'no first use' policy in its stated intention to launch nuclear strikes against the US mainland in case of American intervention over Taiwan, so an EMP strike is hardly out of the question. Strategically, it probably makes sense. What would the US do to retaliate, especially under the current C-i-C? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Von Rom: This is significant especially since Communist China has effectively taken control of the Panama Canal through its Hong Kong based Hutchinson Whampoa conglomerate. Apparently, the Panama Gov't sold two prime U.S.-built port facilities to this company (which many observers say is a front for the Chinese Communist Party). This Company effectively controls both the entry and exit sites to the Canal. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But the Clinton administration assures us that Hutchison is entirely benign and Chinese activities in the PCZ represent no threat to US interests. If you can't trust the government, who can you trust? Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

One thing that hasn't been mentioned in this thread is the political nature of the PRC/RoC conflict. While I yield to Ned's superior knowledge of Chinese forces, I think an attempt, successful or otherwise, may happen in the near future depending on the struggles within the Communist Party. There are several opposed camps w/in the CPC and if the military camp feels its position threatened, it may very well attempt to escalate the Taiwan situation. Were that to happen, I think Taiwan would face attack from not only conventional forces, but also NBC units -- especially if an initial conventional attack started to go badly for the PLA. It should be remembered that struggles within the CPC have led to pretty stupid actions in the past, e.g., the Cultural Revolution. In the PLA White Paper on Taiwan, the PLA express their belief that the power of any US naval assets in the Taiwan straits could be neutralized by anti-ship missles, of which the Chinese have quite a lot in the area. They also believe that once established in Taiwan they would be difficult to dislodge because of their willingness to accept massive casualties for every square inch of territory. Fionn: What was the PBEM Taiwan invasion game you were playing? Sounds fascinating. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn: Ethan, YOU assumed motivations and feelings on my part AGAIN without conducting research . I feel the shootings were EMINENTLY justifiable (stupid but legal ). In future if you're going to question my viewpoint on matters I advise you to first ELICIT my viewpoint precisely ( emphasis on the precisely ) before making some incorrect assumptions and blabbing them around the forum ok? Kinda makes me wonder at your motivations. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> A couple of things: 1) I'm not sure about the "again" bit. Where have I done so previously? Perhaps you have me confused w/someone else? 2) I based my presumption of outrage on the liberal use of ALLCAPS in your two posts on the execution. Since, as you know, in UseNet parlance this is considered shouting, I figured you were pretty exercised about the whole thing. Since you say that was not the case, I apologize forthwith. That having been said, when I am replying to something you wrote, that is really all I have to go on. We could have spent several days going back and forth via e-mail trying to pin down our exact standpoints on the issue, but it's much easier for all concerned for me simply to respond to what you wrote and then have you rebut me. As to my motivations, I was simply pointing out what I thought to be an interesting case of perceptual bias. Nothing more, nothing less. We all have them: I get far more upset over the massacre at Malmedy then I do, say, about the St. Bartholemew's Day Massacre of the Huguenots. For you to impute motivations to me beyond that does you no credit. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe [This message has been edited by Hakko Ichiu (edited 03-19-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn: Michael Collins didn't sign the declaration. What I stated is PURE HISTORICAL FACT. Men in wheelchairs and women WERE shot by the British for signing that declaration. The ONLY survivor of those signatories in 1940 WAS the Taoiseach and I FIRMLY believe that one reason he denied the British access to irish ports was his rememberance of the DEATH SENTENCE a British court passed on him and his friends and from which only he was spared by virtue of his American citizenship. If you don't believe the execution of 15 or 20 friends could harden your attitudes towards the country executing them then you are naive. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Fionn, I will admit up front that I do not know the historical details regarding this incident. It seem to me, however, that if those executed were sentenced to death by a court, then they had been found guilty of some crime -- presumably treason as they were HM's subjects -- the penalty for which was death. It is interesting to compare your outrage at this incident with your view of the summary executions of innocent civilians by the SS at Outremont. I know you did not approve of it, but you did say it was a justifiable action in time of war. Surely then, the British were at least equally justified in executing traitors. Conversely, they could not hang the Taoiseach (I presume that was De Valera) as a traitor because he was an American citizen at the time. The British did the same thing during the American Revolution (e.g., Nathan Hale), and would have gladly strung Messrs. Washington, Jefferson, Madison et al. from the nearest Liberty Tree. And they would have been equally justified, as all the above were HM's subjects until they took up arms against him. I don't say this was a morally right course of action, anymore than you are approve of Outrement, but it was certainly justified under the rule of law. And as you rightly note, such executions mostly self-defeating, as all they result in is martyrs to the Cause. I realize that a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, but it seems as though your attitude to such things rather depends on whether it's your ox being gored. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

The information originally in this post was incorrect. The persons responsible for putting together this information have been shot. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe [This message has been edited by Hakko Ichiu (edited 03-17-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn: If Spider can find some (any) evidence for the "the all famous german "deathmaster 2000" 93.4 caliber pistol with the kung-fu action handle grip! " can we hack into code that any Bn HQ under my command gets it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I once knew a girl with kung-fu action handle grip. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Goanna: *spew mode off*<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Looks like Goanna just met her. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe [This message has been edited by Hakko Ichiu (edited 03-15-2000).]

As part of my upcoming starring role in CMMC, I wanted to get some TOE info for my command. My first port of call was the BTS Resources page, which rather conveniently has a collection of TOE/OOB links. Unfortunately, they are all completely dead. The Nafziger collection, which used to offer info on every campaign since the Battle of Kadesh has moved without leaving a forwarding address. Does anybody know of a comprehensive site for WW2 TOEs/OOBs? Much obliged, Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JoshK: My god, look at the poor Ukrainians. They actually did, to a large degree, welcome Nazi liberation in June, 1941. After Stalin starved 3 million Kulaks, Hitler could have very conceivably had armed Ukrainian support. However, to adopt the necessary policies would have meant that he wouldn't have been Hitler, and therefore would not have invaded the USSR in the first place. The internal justification for the invasion was to eradicate the Jews, and for living space free of Slavic sub-humans. It is hard to accomplish those two tasks without devastating the occupied population. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It should be remembered that the Ukrainian populace was not all that "devastated" by the implementation of the Final Solution in the Ukraine. On the contrary, there were many enthusiastic supporters of it, e.g., Ivan the Terrible. Ukrainians also volunteered in fairly large numbers to fight in Wehrmacht/SS units. Analagous events happened throughout the Pale of Settlement after 1941 and in France. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe [This message has been edited by Hakko Ichiu (edited 03-15-2000).]

As an MBA, former management consultant, and author of a book on management, this is actually a topic on which I can comment with some measure of authority. I doubt PC gaming is doomed, for reasons that have been amply expressed by others in the thread. What is to me -- and I will guess to others on this board -- more important is the change in the environment for PC wargames. I don't foresee any future shortage of FPS, RTS, RPG and PC Dress Up Barbie titles. These things sell by the truckload at Circuit City. Wargames are another matter entirely. They appeal to a much smaller and far more critical and demanding audience (but one that is older and therefore wealthier). They are much more difficult to get "right" -- just ask S&C. They appeal to a much smaller audience. They require not just coding, but meticulous research. Oh, and did I mention that the potential audience is a lot smaller. Once upon a time, this didn't matter so much, because the total market for computer games was much smaller and wargamers -- technophiles and early adopters that we are -- made up a goodly chunk of that market, and a goodly chunk of the programmers and designers. But the overall market is much bigger now, while the number of wargamers is more or less static. Since big companies have discovered that they can sell a 100,000 copies of an FPS at a development cost of $10 million, they are highly unlikely to want to spent $5 million to sell 10,000 copies of Napoleon at Waterloo. This means, at the big gaming houses, wargames (and wargamers) will always end up sucking hind-tit compared to FPSers, RTSers and Barbie Dresser-uppers. They are motorists and we are carriage-drivers. This does not, however, mean that PC wargames will disappear, anymore than horse-drawn carriages have entirely vanished. But, like saddlers and buggy-whip makers, the makers of real wargames will retreat to the status of artisans and handicrafters. This is not at all bad, by the way. There are a lot more wargamers than there are carriage-drivers, and we're easier to reach. And, as S & C can tell you, being freed from the strictures of the "suits" is a great thing for a creative talent. BTS is at the forefront of this evolution in wargaming; that's one of the reasons I became interested in CM. The fact that the game kicks major posterior doesn't hurt either. When they are satisfied with their product, they will release it, and I trust them to know when that point is. I also trust them to know not to let the best be the enemy of the good. It's a rather different relationship than I would have with, say, Electronic Arts, and I think that's a good thing. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>originally posted by Major H: I doubt that you are very good at it judging by the tone and drift of the comments that you posted here. I don't recall ever attending a single marketing class where telling people to ignore a product was a suggested approach nor where insulting the engineering department was suggested as being particularly productive.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Major, you haven't spent too much time in marketing meetings, have you? Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe [This message has been edited by Hakko Ichiu (edited 03-15-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TOBRUK: Well, would just look at that! There must be, what ? ten or twelve people in NZ, and 2 of them are right here on this board. wow! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That'll send all the sheep into hiding right enough. Ethan

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Babra: Why do they ask lots of questions? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK, how did my three-year old get a hold of Babra's PC? Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Howitzer: Hakku: First, I agree the organization is tainted, but organizations are made up of people. It is just not possible to stick the a label on the SS and for all time ignore the fact the many of the men and indeed UNITS in the fighting arm of the SS served with valor and honor; not for a philosophy, but for their country.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I respectfully disagree. Sure organizations are made up of people, but they are by definition[\i] more than the simple aggregation of their members. They have doctrines, policies, systems, myths, shared values, etc., etc. It is entirely possible and entirely appropriate to label the SS as, as the Germans would say, das Ding an sich. And that thing is, as you say, tainted. Lets take another, less contentious, example. Imagine IBM in the early 70s. It was a bureaucratic, hierarchical, inflexible institution. Does the fact that several, even many, of the people working for IBM at the time were in fact entrepreneurial and dynamic change the nature of IBM at all -- especially in the way IBM was perceived by the outside world? As for the nature of individual members of the SS, that is practically beside the point. Furthermore, if they wanted to fight, as you say, "not for a philosophy, but for their country", what was to prevent any would be soldier from joining the Wehrmacht? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>People join organizations for many reasons. Some join because they agree with the organization's philosophy, some join to be on the "winning" side at the time, some join because they feel it is their civic duty to serve in their country's "elite" or best fighting force, some join because their friends did, etc, etc. When it comes to organizations (as opposed to individuals) you CANNOT apply an all encompassing label. You can try, but it will fall off eventually.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I would submit that anyone who joined the SS had to subscribe to its organizational philosophy, because that philosophy, based as it was on Nazi conceptions of race, blood, and pseudo-pagan theology , was so beyond the bounds of the generally held Christian beliefs of most Germans. The SS was a quasi-religious army like the Ottoman Janissaries or the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Sure, some joined the SS to facilitate their rise in the Nazi party ranks; but I wouldn't expect too much from a close examination of such persons' moral character. And some joined because their buddies did, but that just reminds me of the old saw about jumping off the Empire State Building because Jimmy Jones did it -- someone who is so easily led into something like the SS lacks moral fiber. Again, anyone wanting to fight for his country and qualified to join an elite unit could have found plenty in the Wehrmacht without all the pseudo-religious baggage of the SS. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>[bTW, regarding the goverment's "right" to censor license plates...the government is US. They have no rights we do not permit through law.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry, but the right to a vanity license plate is not enumerated in the Constitution. A driver's license was, is, and always will be a privilege (like serving in the armed forces), rather than a right (like the right to bear arms). It can be given and taken away at the discretion of government which, however much it may be representative, must operate day to day as an independent body governed by rules and procedures -- otherwise, there would have to be a referendum for every license plate issued. Furthermore, government has the long established and supported duty to uphold community standards, whatever they may be. You have no more right to an "offensive" vanity plate than the Unabomber has a right to have his manifesto published as a Chamber of Commerce pamphlet. Actually, your last sentence is quite inaccurate. The rights and powers accorded to the government are determined by the Constitution, not by some ephemeral opinion of a majority of voters. We, the people, can change the Constitution, but it takes a long time and a super-majority. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aacooper: 2) Where did the French soldiers come from (colonial troops, evacuated troops, etc...)? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I've recently finished the section on the Battle of France in Keegan's "Second World War". He mentions that the colonial troops fought far better and more bravely than most of the French nationals. He describes the general populace of France as rather decadent and demoralized. Not a great conscription pool. Ethan ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mikeman: Does Falcon Northwest have a website? I'd like to check out the Cadillac of PCs. I've typed in several things, but none of the obvious ones work. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://www.falcon-nw.com They are very good, but pricey. I would have bought one of their systems, but I couldn't handle the 4 week lead time. My poor PC is on its last legs. Bits of it are falling off as we speak. Soon I'll have to put a slug through it's hard drive to put it out of its misery. Ended up getting another Gateway. Sigh. ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sgt.Morgue: As a war veteran , i know war is man at his worst. And all sides of a war have men on them.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Undoubtedly true. Ever since man has made war, however, there have been, for want of a better term, "rules of war". These have varied across space and time, and as with all rules, they have been sometimes observed and sometimes ignored by different cultures at various points. In modern times, attempts have been made to codify them especially WRT treatment of civilians and treatment of POWs. In the ETO, these codifications were broadly observed by all sides*, including the Wehrmacht, excepting the SS. Yes, war crimes occured on all sides in the ETO, but I defy anyone to prove that they were widespread among the Allied forces or, for that matter, the Wehrmacht and the Italian Army. In the SS, they were commonplace. Furthermore, SS conduct in the war was encouraged from the top, starting w/Himmler and going through Heydrich et al. Such was definitely not the case with the Allies. Saying everyone did it so the SS are no different is simply incorrect because everyone did not do it. Ethan *I should note that I don't know about the Red Army in this regard. That's unimportant in this discussion, however, as no one seems to be giving a pass to the Red Army. ------------------ Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe