bbaker

Parabellum -- Thanks for taking the time and effort to post all the great screenshots!

I think it might be a function of when you set your scenario. 14" guns represent shore bombardment from battelships, so they may only be available in June 44.

Please forgive my ignorance; I am new to this board (but a big fan of CM!) but is the "Wild Bill" of this site the Wild Bill from the old Microprose games like the original F15 Strike Eagle? B.

Whatever happened to MAD? Aren't the politicians who are currently pushing the hardest for the deployment of a questionable ABM system the same politicians who were so resolute in supporting a massive nuclear arsenal to keep America safe through deterrence? Or is it that they can use it as an issue to attack Clinton and farm out $60 billion in funding to defense industries in their home districts? I have no idea what a limited ABM shield is supposed to accomplish. It is, by definition, useless against a fullscale attack and what would any nation, no matter how "rogue", hope to gain from chucking a couple nukes at America on the tips of ICBMs? If you really hate America, and really want to blow up a couple of cities, why launch the missile (hey, USA, retaliate here!) when you can sail it into SF Bay and set it off from the boat? Heck, even if you're suicidal, putting it onto a cargo ship and sailing it over has to be at least as reliable as a missile. As we so ably demonstrated last Friday, lots of things can go wrong with such a complicated technology. So if it isn't unreasonable to assume that the most realistic threat we face from nuclear arms in the next few decades is from a "terrorist-style" delivery, probably from real terrorists, why endorse a plan that will only serve to *increase* the number of nuclear weapons at large in the world? If we're worried about the possibility of a weapon falling into the wrong hands, why increase the probability that one will do so by increasing the number of weapons available? The ABM program, in this regard, is worse than useless. IMHO, B.