Jump to content

FAI

Members
  • Posts

    320
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by FAI

  1. Originally posted by Other Means:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox:

    With that being said, what was the budget for CMSF? The game doesn't present itself as low-budget, and it makes me curious.

    You mustn't read the same board I do. "We would do that if we had the resources" is going to be inscribed on Steve's headstone. </font>
  2. Originally posted by Splinty:

    After 3 tours in Iraq, I have yet to personally have seen or heard about Coalition Forces torture or deliberately try to harm anyone who wasn't trying to kill them. THAT's the difference between us and the terrorists/insurgents. If you can't figure that out Lethaface, KHunt etc., maybe you need to rethink your ethics.

    You, with all the firepower and gizmos, can afford to abide by your own military standard of conduct most of the time. The other side who fight for what they believe don't have such luxury. For them if killing, maiming and torturing their enemies (be it foreigners or fellow countrymen) gave them leverage in the fight, so be it. It's the basic of asymmetrical warfare. They don't fight the way you want them to. They fight the way they see best how to fight you.
  3. Originally posted by skelley:

    quote:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MD82:

    So how about we cut our use of oil and let all those bastards drink it?

    I'd actually be in favor of this one..I was so pi$$ed off at the implication from Iran and Venezuela that somehow the US is hurting those countries by purchasing oil..I would love them to be left holding something of limited value while the world moves past the need for their black mud..unfortunately, seems likely to happen only in the future.

    Absolutely, Its pretty hard to wage Jihad with no funds. </font>
  4. Originally posted by abneo3sierra:

    Hey Bigduke

    As to the last point, I know who wrote the article he referred to. I know the man may not have been "stoned" when he actually wrote it, but it is a better than 50/50 bet.

    Saddams country was providing a place for people who, indeed, were planning to attack the US, without going into retyping things, read my post about the things found there.

    The rest..as I said to you in my post, if a person THINKS, themself, and comes to a conclusion, fine. I respect yours..

    FAI..his whole case came to putting what someone else thought, up..that was his entire post, and as I said to you, such intellectual dishonesty, flips a switch in me, sorry FAI

    edit

    In all honesty, I am unsure what gives "Fred" the right to dismiss many hundreds of thousands of other war veterans, who were older than him, and participated in a tougher war than he did, as well.

    Hey, they guy put it in words better than me. I happen to agree with his opinion. And if that one flipped you, the rest of his other articles could give you a heart attack :rolleyes:
  5. Originally posted by abneo3sierra:

    The CYA reports that came out later..missed them, we were too busy chasing tangos, and uncovering the mass graves in Iraq..

    What makes you think they were'nt also covering their collective posteriors when they produced the Powerpoint slides pointing to the "damning" evidence of doomsday weapons in the middle of a desert, or somewhere else?
  6. Originally posted by abneo3sierra:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by FAI:

    Demographical data vs. intelligence pertaining to waging a war... Whoa, let me fetch popcorn first.

    And no, the intel agencies did not provide the primary reasons for the invasion. The subsequent political handlers did.

    All four intel agencies named above, declared Iraq to have WMD, which was the primary reasoning behind the urgency of the war, at least, if not the actual war itself. </font>
  7. Originally posted by abneo3sierra:

    There are some plausible scenarios. Many of our allies in the region use US/western weapons systems. Most of those allies could have very plausible scenarios where the government fell and more radical elements took over..Saudi Arabia one huge example there.

    It does make for an interesting tactical game when both sides have essentially the same equipment and you cannot depend on your opponents equipment being inferior or having weaknesses

    But the Saudi's hardware are (mostly) nerfed export version of the real thing.
  8. Originally posted by Bastables:

    Germany and Japan used it as well "BREN" or ZB derivatives.

    As did Chinese forces deployed against the UN in Korea.

    Taliban is apparenttly using them to. But then again it's Afghanistan. There's proabbly some marks man with a Ottoman musket running around shooting at people there.

    But Germany quickly ditched the ZB in favor of MG42. For the Japanese, they later found out that their ZB variant was more versatile in jungle environment.

    In Afghanistan, maybe not Ottoman musket, but the Enfield was quite popular there.

×
×
  • Create New...