Panzer76

How do you link the US to the recent assasination in lebanon? </font>

Indeed it is, and I would just like for people to recognise it for what it is instead of spouting off some ideological crap.

How about just trying to be fair? That would be a good start.

And on what grounds should one take military action, or indeed invade Syria? If the basis is the suspected link to the assasination in Lebanon, then USA and most larger powers in the world should have been invaded many times over.

Steve, it sounds like you are preaching that a Striker Company makes Tank companies obsolete. Now, I dont really think thats what you are saying, but it might seem like it. Also, seems like the Tank company in your scenario lives in a vacume, which I dont think it would do. My scanrio could be: Stryker Company on advance, runs into tank ambush = one dead Stryker Company. These scenarios do not tell much about te eabililties of the units as they are fictional and would seldom, if ever happen IRL.

This is getting very political, and farther and farther away from the game..

Panzer76, "could you do us all a favour and not quote the WHOLE post your are replying to just to add a sentance? It quickly fills the threads and are not nessacery. Thank you." Sound familiar???? </font>

Yes I suppose you are right there. I just have a feeling that the trial will do more harm than good for our cause. </font>

Sad.

Is that the red or the blue pill? Nevermind, I'll just follow that nice rabbit down the .. err. spider hole?

Well, you would be amazed what they call WMD these days. Like a 20 yr old Arty shell with traces of chemical gas on it. But I think chemical weapons, along with nuclear and biological weapons are classified as WMD.

Bah, while I doubt US has the manpower to put boots in sufficent numbers on the ground in Syria now, it would not matter if they had. Why? Because with GWB falling and record low approval rates in the US, I don't think the US voters would be too keen on sending their boys to yet another quicksand deployment.

So, can we post links to videos of US personell/vehicles being blasted to pieces by IEDs etc? I mean, it would show how a Stryker would hold up vs a IED for example, or a Black Hawk vs a AA rocket. But I guess it would upset many of you. Conversly, perhaps ANY videos of battles in Iraq/Afgan would be upsetting and should not be posted here?

Tom, could you do us all a favour and not quote the WHOLE post your are replying to just to add a sentance? It quickly fills the threads and are not nessacery. Thank you.

Wrong. U.S. leg coalition, was in accordance with UN resolutions, but was not a UN action. Gulf War II was also in accordance with UN resolutions, but was not a UN action - it was predominately a US/UK operation. Big difference: U.S. led = Objectives met; UN led = objectives discussed and discussed and discussed... </font>

Does this mean that we will retain the "feature" from CM1 where a tank in motion could be hit while it was out of LOS because it was in LOS when the "hit" was calculated?

You mean since it aint in Iraq it HAS to be in Syria? I mean, it gotta to be somewhere, right?! Oh uh, I feel a political chill down my neck..

Double post

Which is why I said you could likewise include gun cam

*Walks over to the penalty box* :mad: :mad:

Because YOU are NOT the crew, you are the commander.

Well, I think it is as realistic to ask for that as the rest of your suggestions

I think, albeit realistic, it would be too much of an annoyance for the player.

As some have mentioned, CMx2 will perhaps not cover WWII, and will surely move to other timeframes later on atleast. So, can we all agre that smoke is being activly used ny inf in more modern ages? Should not then inf smoke be modeled?

You just found that out?