Vanir Ausf B

With all due respect to Mr. Kaiser, I am sceptical. His position is that the intent of the user determines if the weapon is banned. User intent is not listed anywhere in the treaty that I can see. Under Kaiser's definition JDS's oily rags would indeed be chemical weapons if he ever threw them at Sergei.

The deliberate use of just about any weapon against civilians is prohibited under the Geneva Conventions. Incidental civilian casualties are a differerent matter. If the US deliberately targeted civilians, or was perhaps indifferent to their danger, they would be in violation of the GC regardless of whether they used white phosphorus or pointy sticks. If US forces took reasonable precautions but some civilians were killed anyway this would not be a violation even if WP were used. People should just forget about Protocol III. It's irrelevant. You guys are getting all caught up in the "chemical weapons!" hysteria.

I think it is initial design. Restricted weapons are described as those that are "primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons". As for the exempt munitions "illuminants, tracers, smoke or signalling systems" is pretty much what WP is, except for tracers. What else could they have been refering to? It doesn't matter. As I pointed out earlier Protocol III doesn't actually ban anything. Even under Sergie's interpretation use in Falluja would not have been a violation.

I'm guessing that anyone hit by a US munition is not going to be happy about it regardless if it's WP or a bullet. WP is not classified as a chemical weapon. Just because an Italian newspaper decides to start calling them that doesn't change that fact. If the New York Times started calling 2000lb JDAMs "Weapons of Mass Destruction" would the US have stop using them? Of course not. This has already happened, and I suspect it is not possible to change those perceptions. I agree that world opinion does matter, but you can't make yourself a slave to it. WP isn't going to change anybody's mind. It may reinforce opinions already held. I agree that the morality of WP use is subjective. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with it. In my opinion I have not seen any good arguements to convince me it is immoral. Therefore in my opinion anyone condemning the US for its use is doing so out of ignorance and I don't have a lot of patience for ignorant people. But that's just me. Oh BTW, I was against the invasion of Iraq and still think it was a bad idea.

I think you meant "more"? Otherwise, good points all around.

It is perhaps worth noting that even with respect to incendiary weapons such as flame throwers, Protocol III does not ban them, but mearly limits their use in certain circumstances. From my reading I think that even if the US were party to Protocol III, and if we did not exclude WP as it clearly is, I do not think use of it in Falluja would have been a violation of Protocol III. Unless you consider a city 90% evacuated to be a "concentration of civilians".

That is true. But I don't see anyone expecting the Arabs to fight fair. I'm sure it is very painfull. But it is not actually very usefull for killing people. The large majority of people hit with WP don't die. It's the fear factor that makes it a usefull tool at times. Read what the US captain in Falluja had to say about its use: "White Phosphorous. WP proved to be an effective and versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes when we could not get effects on them with HE. We fired “shake and bake” missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out." As you can see, they did not use the WP to kill. HE was used for that.

I don't think I do. You are arguing that perception is reality, which can be true at times in some circumstance. But 1000 years ago most people thought the Earth was flat. They were all wrong. WP is a nasty weapon, but there are no nice weapons being used in Iraq. From the point of view of the grunt on the ground, war is about killing the enemy before he can kill you. PR is for politicians and generals to worry about. Pictures of people killed by explosives and cannons are as horrid as any other. Note that under this view of what constitutes a fair fight, it would be nearly impossible for the US military to fight fair in Iraq, unless they were to engage in some really stupid and absurd antics, like the pistols at 20 paces example. This has nothing to do with the use of WP. The US cannot be expected to conform to some people's fantasy idea of warfare. There are a lot of ignorant people in the world. The fact that there are a lot of them doesn't mean they're any less ignorant.

If that is true, then the problem is that the average Italian has no freakin' clue about what war is, or especially how the war in Iraq is being fought. The US would like nothing better for the insurgents to come out and "fight fair" (whatever that means; pistols at 20 paces?). It would be to the US advantage for them to do so, as anyone on this forum should realize. It is the insurgents who hide and snipe, and disguise themselves as civilians, and the US soldiers who are out patroling in full view of everyone, wearing military uniforms. For anyone to think it the other way around is one of the most blinkered notions I've seen in a long time.

Dear John, you are wrong, as you would know if you had read the text.</font>

What is really strange to me is that WP is now suddenly considered a chemical weapon. Prior to this story I had never heard of it refered to as such, and I think putting it in the same category as VX nerve gas has been done here to be inflammatory (no pun intended).

Another source on the XM-8: OICW-1 Canceled, Door Closes on XM-8 For Now

Good point. I think this thread should be stickied.

Same here. One key feature of the RT mode in XCOM Apoc was the ability to adjust the speed of the game. A failing of some other pausible RT games such as the Balder's Gate RPGs is that even though you could pause any time, while the game was running everything was happening too fast to keep track of . I always ran the Apoc battle in slow motion. Even then they resolved in far less time than in turn-based mode. I think this is an important consideration if there is no rewind in RT.

When the guy says he won't play it because he doesn't like the subject matter there doesn't seem to be much to discuss. And the particular guy I assume you're refering to gave the impression he wasn't going to stick around to discuss it anyway. No big deal, IMO.

But the question we're asking is could a woman be an NFL quarterback. I say YES!

Probably true over the greater course human history (and prehistory too), which may very well be the reason that women were seldom involved in military activities (aside from being raped and enslaved if they were on the losing side).</font>

Meh, it's hard to imagine the US losing all it's ME bases, even the ones in NATO ally Turkey. Carrier battle groups and Marines make bases a luxury for force projection, not a requirement.

I think this is the most relevant point. Most of the missions involving female soldiers discussed here seem to be outside the scope of CMSF, as I understand it.

Yes, that would be nice. Very nice. I can't agree there. The US has military bases in at least half a dozen ME countries. Israel isn't one of them.

We're "appeasing" North Korea. Have been for decades. Would it be smarter to invade?

If there are MP units and supply truck and whatever else type of units women are assigned to in the game, then I'd be fine with having them there. But it would be unrealistic for them to show up in tank crews and front line combat squads AFAIK.

Oh, and make the random maps more natural and varied like they were in CMBO, instead of homogenous like in CMBB. Please.

Meh. Iran and Israel do not border each other, so any war between them is very unlikely to involve conventional forces. Not much of a game there, I think.

2007: China invades Afghanistan. Russia invades Turkey (through Georgia) Great fun!