Dean F.

Holy Crap! There's a 1.08 patch ?!? Uh, I gotta go...

Holy Crap! There's a 1.08 patch ?!? Uh, I gotta go...

Holy Crap! There's a 1.08 patch ?!? Uh, I gotta go...

Holy crap! Were you in the Blackhorse? I note that you said "mech infantry" and not "cavalry..." I ask because I was, from 1991-1993. 511th MI Co. Я изучил в военным институте иностранных языков, но это много лет тому назад. We called our instructors мучитель instead of учитель, as did Russian students everywhere. Haven't really used it since, though. As an example, though I understand every word of your cyrillic I don't really understand the reference... It seems like it must be a joke, and I laughed just because it involved God and beer. I'd send my joke about the Kamchatka boy in spelling class, but I'd REALLY have to look up the correct spelling on a lot of the words, myself... [ March 30, 2008, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: Dean F. ]

Ok, maybe I'm showing my age, but I don't get the "YMMV" thing. All the rest (ROFL, ROFLMAO, IIRC, IMHO, OTOH, etc.) I've pretty much picked up on, though I don't use them, but YMMV stumps me. I find emoticons useful, though, since humor is so hard to pick up on in text. Yeah, I saw Kiev in your profile, but why Kiev? If you were an intelligence officer did you go to DLI or something, learn Russian or Ukrainian, and then that led you to Kiev? Speaking of problems with a free press, are things in the Ukraine as bad as in Russia? Увидимся

Brother, if there is one thing we agree on, it is this. There is a reason, in my opinion, that the First Amendment is the FIRST Amendment. If you closely examine almost any repressive cesspool on this planet you will almost invariably find a constrained press. We need a free press to keep the government accountable. If forced I would give up any other Amendment before the First. Again, concurrence, but with a mitigator... I find that many of the Americans nowadays who are so critical of the US are not doing so out of love of country. For the past few decades, at least among liberal academia including journalists, it has become fashionable to bash the US at every opportunity. I'm not sure why, but it does seem to be the knee-jerk response to anything. I really don't have a problem with this. I say, keep the politicians on their toes. I haven't met an honest one yet. If they were honest they'd have real jobs. But I don't kid myself about the motives of these critics, either. Are there patriots among them? Sure! But I would go far enough to say that the majority (i.e. somewhere >50.1%) are just selling newspapers... And, of course, as a soldier I have a healthy dislike of having the little buggers in my immediate vicinity. You can't trust them- they make stuff up and twist words or broadcast them out of context, and they do it ON PURPOSE. (Nothing personal...) Of course, making things sound contentious or asinine, again, sells more papers. But the whole "if it bleeds it leads" mindset is a side-effect of a free commercialized press, and I'll take that over a government-controlled press any day. Nonetheless, I try to fight this "the US is always wrong" attitude wherever I can. Valid criticisms I will accept. Still, I thought it was HILARIOUS when CNN stepped over the line and got cut off during Desert Storm, but then I have a vindictive streak like that. This is why I haven't (I think) jumped all over you on this issue. I just said that I understood what a prior poster meant when he said "winning militarily." Does this mean "victory"? No, of course not. The US "won militarily" in Vietnam, too, but lost the war. Witness the Tet Offensive, which even Walter Kronkite cited as a military disaster for the US: The Viet Cong had exactly one significant though temporary victory, Hue City, and then was essentially combat ineffective on anything but small scales for the rest of the war. The NVA took over the struggle. Yet we lost. In a big way. Vietnam War history isn't my strong point, though, so if I've got this wrong, lemme know. I'd like an expert opinion. I will not defend the Shah, as he was yet another tin-pot dictator with a hideous human-rights record who was propped up by the US during the cold war because the alternative was thought to be worse, at the time. But again I think you're bringing up things that no-one will argue with. I'm not sure how they support your position on how the US is losing militarily in Afghanistan and Iraq, but it does look pretty on the screen, doesn't it? ( I know, I know, you were reacting to other posts. HUMOR. Poor humor, maybe, but humor...) Seriously, though, you come across as if you just want to use this forum to post all the things you want to criticize the US about. In fact, you seem to like to post lists of them... Anyway, I'll still stand behind the US making extreme efforts to limit civilian casualties and, in fact, taking casualties themselves because of it. I patch those guys up every day. Funny how all cynics claim they "grew up." All of them. That's rather like saying "Come on, think about it!" over and over during a debate. It impugns everyone else by implying that they haven't "grown up" or aren't "thinking." I've been a civilian, then military, then civilian, then military again, and I'm probably in the top 1% of educated people on this planet. Please don't say that to me. Even if you are one of that 1%, too. It is very difficult to know who you are talking with on the internet, and I've gotten more and more careful about things like this as time goes on. I was once expounding upon the carbon cycle in opposition, it turns out, to a ecologist. I still say he was wrong, for several reasons, not least of which he obviously had an agenda long before going to school. By the way, what are you doing in Kiev? I've always wanted to take a tour of St Petersburg, Moscow, and Kiev. I may get to do a Baltic Sea cruise next year that stops in St. Petersburg, at least. [ March 30, 2008, 04:55 AM: Message edited by: Dean F. ]

*Chuckle* Posts like that are unreadable, I know. I used to refuse to even read them, let alone respond to them. But occasionally the guy writing it is having difficulty because English is not his native language, so I'm more tolerant now. When it's just some l33t speaking warez d00dz it is annoying as heck, though. One of my standard ripostes is this link: Chicago Manual of Style [ March 29, 2008, 06:23 AM: Message edited by: Dean F. ]

Wow. I go away for a week and THIS happens... Nine pages?!? I don't think anyone denies that the US supported the Baath government against Iraq. Everyone always comments upon it as a classic example of unforeseen consequences. Thus, I'm not sure what your intent was in mentioning it. It's almost like you try to hide your contentious statements within a fog of obviously true ones. Whoa, whoa, whoa! Cheer?!? Where did you get that one? The chemical weapon use was pretty much condemned by everyone in the international community, including the US (even if not so loudly). Maybe you can produce a comment from some extremist official, but the US government and certainly the US media were critical of Iraq's chemical weapons use. I'd really like to see a source on that one- one that isn't just someone's opinion, please. No you can't. Heartfelt concurrence on my part. Iran is a complex issue. And truth be told, many of the problems in the Middle East can be laid squarely at the feet of the British, much more so than the Americans, though they have some blame too. But... Unworkable... probably. Dumb? I don't think so, unless you mean "dumb" in that it is probably unworkable. If you mean it is "dumb" in concept to try to influence Iran to change it's policies (even if that requires force or threats of force) I disagree. The truth is that there are many bad people in the world who do not play well with others, and most of them only respond to threats of one kind or another. (Recall the recent discussion on appeasement.) And if I may (mis)quote Edmund Burke, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

abneo3sierra, "Bigduke" from the Ukraine is getting more and more rude. It has become painfully obvious that he is not interested in your opinion. He will not even say "Your opinion is valid, though I disagree with it." His sole goal is to annoy you. Stop feeding the troll.

Not to degenerate into a flame war (but I was provoked): Yeah. Those Serbians were sure dark-skinned. The truth is, in general, Europe and North America are not trouble-spots, so, yes, few Caucasians have come down on NATO's or the American's bad side. And let's discuss Dutch colonialism some time... No-one's hands are clean. And collectively the US military has a hell of a lot more respect for human life than anyone they've fought since WWI. They take casualties, invariably, because they are trying so hard NOT to kill the people whom the combatants are cowering behind. I really hate these discussions. I just want to play my little game, but the trolls keep provoking me... [ March 22, 2008, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: Dean F. ]

Would you like, perchance, to expand on the first sentence? As to the second, don't worry, Elmar is equal-opportunity with his insults. Of course, he usually knows what he's talking about. So I'm always interested when some one is able to contradict him. To keep things simple, I would be fascinated to hear how the "war" is being "militarily won" in Afghanistan. And I am quite sure Elmar will be contrite, once he is put in his place. </font>

I had heard about this simulator (or another very like it) while I was in residency, but I never knew it's name. I had even heard that the British Army was using it. (The facial expressions are impressive.) I've never used it, though. I'd be surprised if it was affordable for an individual to purchase. I assume that it is mostly a simulation of what happens in an ER trauma bay, rather than what happens in an OR. Thus, my interest is limited. I'm the guy that the first responders are trying to get the casualty to, with all those stopgap maneuvers, like the Foley catheter placed through the bleeding chest wound maneuver as seen in the demo clip on the website. (Subclavian vessel injuries ARE a bitch to control, by the way. I've never seen the Foley trick work.) You don't need an engine this good for camp. Use something like the Warcraft engine. No matter how you tweak things it is still orcs and elves and guys with chainsaws and force swords and gimmicks like mole mortars, not to mention glorified M113s as the basic APC (i.e. no really visionary technology, so you may as well just make it WWII). The whole good-vs-evil motif may be very well done, but it is space opera, plain and simple. Thus it also does not need an engine this good. Use the Warcraft engine and stick to units with "health bars." Again, though, I vote for sticking to historical settings. WWII is pretty much perfect for such a game-- all sides have approximately equal technology and skill, or at least they have complimentary advantages, and it is an excellent mix of all arms (infantry, armor, artillery, etc) that operate at reasonable ranges. About the only problem with a WWII setting is that it has been done to death. [ March 21, 2008, 07:47 AM: Message edited by: Dean F. ]

Woops, sorry, that's a little confusing. I'm American, in the military, stationed in Kaiserslautern. Also, sorry to revive the post so late, but I wanted to answer.

Per capita, Poland lost more of its population killed than any other country. The losses were devastating, made all the more sad, if that is possible, by the fact many of those losses were cold blooded murder - mass shootings (by both the Russians and the Germans) and concentration camps in the main. The total according to Wikipedia was 16% of the 1939 population. One in six people alive in Poland in 1939 were dead six years later.</font>

I have to say that I am no motorcycle fanboy, but I gotta have horse cavalry! (And not just because I'm a Blackhorse veteran...) The SS fielded entire divisions of cavalry even late in the war, and the Soviets had cavalry CORPS. (I know, I know, the whole corps wasn't horse-mounted, so don't go there.) Where they are important is in antipartisan scenarios. Wehrmacht used them thus extensively. On the other hand there were Soviet partisan cavalry units, too. I get what you're saying about how they'd usually dismount off-map, but given the Polish history and the anti-partisan uses I think leaving them out would be an oversight. What would be really cool is if 1-in-4 men were left behind as horse-holders when they dismounted, too, so in dismounting you sort of lose 25% of your manpower. Perhaps a later mod, at least? Please? If I have to grovel I'll do it. Wow. Gotta agree on the basements and fortified buildings, if its possible. That would rock. I love those East Front urban nightmares.