Lars

Plus, it would have made it a bit tough to get the Japs on the train.

Umm, don't you think it should be under some sort of interdict? I mean, it doesn't have to be a Christian God. Any old God would do. But the thing to keep in mind is that Pennsylvania bears close watching. Perhaps Baal Hamon would be a better choice. I really think he'd get the job done. And in style too.

sure did. Of 7000 ss guards at the Auschwitz facilities only 700 were brought to justice. That means that there are probably murderers roaming free right now. Who knows maybe in Idaho or in my hometown in Sweden? </font>

I did not know that you had been touched by His Noodly Appendage! Arrr Matey! </font>

Sleeping well being one of those things that would allow Emrys to sneak up on you with a rock.

Hey! You need a beefy guy in your squad. I'm sure his mates are dang glad to have him. After all, ya gotta push somebody on that grenade.

Cows these days…

I just figured you tacked on a Seanachai post to get it to do a wheelie.

Sssh, it's not nice to point out they're getting older.

Oh I agree. On the scale we're talking about you can come up with just about any rationalization you wish. However, if it turns out armor becomes the premier city defender and corps/armies are running around as maneuver units, then we might have a problem. To early to tell of course, just an observation.

Only because I'm not rubbing it back and forth over your head.

One thing that struck me Blashy was you kept pointing out the importance of putting the tank units in cities and fully entrenching them. While I'm aware that a tank unit is more than just tanks, seems a little odd. Perhaps the infantry defense in a city should be upped a bit, leaving the tanks free to roam the map. Wouldn't want to lose the "blitzkrieg" part of the game.

Oh yeah? That sounds like a challenge maggot! How about something cushy for you that won’t be to tough. You can have the Russian with some heavy tanks in the defense… </font>

Minor quibble. Not until you move.

An 8 foot millipede? </font>

Or option B. Send England $1.5 billion for protection and stick the rest in the bank.

Again, which brings us back to why bother? Look, unless you're planning to invade London, you don't need an army at all. Could get away with just a strong Coast Guard. And you've already stated you're not going anywhere without others, yet you don't support the RN expeditionary policy, and Scotland certainly can't afford C-5's, so your whole rational is rather strange. You're going to build an army that will rot.

And I want to own you, biatch. I'd love you like I love my...oh, never mind, this isn’t going anywhere good...

If anybody wants to see the Rosa Parks thread, and to defend myself against Dave H's rather lame attempt to paint me as some sort of racist, here you go. link Oh, don't forget to have a cookie. In the back of the bus. With Clinton. We now return you to your usual Cesspool programming.

How about the (and I'm quoting you here) "Stupid jungle bunnies"? I wanted to give the everyone here the benefit of the prejudice on display in your "Come Celebrate Rosa Parks - Wanna Cookie?" thread on Gyrene's site. Maybe Marlow and Barrold and dumrox and Dirtweasle and rleete and dfgardner and wbs will join you in the hilarity here, too. </font>

Hey, we got the Siegfried Line! Woot!

Yes, but we want them to go to hell the right way.

There you go. Name her Mary Magdelane. I can't forsee her having any problems in the future from that. </font>

Naming babies is easy. Pick a Disciple or Saint and be done with it.

This too is true. Blashy needs to weigh if giving up Maginot bought him more time than keeping it. We shall see.