Combatintman

I heartily agree with astano, sburke, SLIM and Sequoia on this one - the time snapshot and Middle East setting is just right - you can do Iraq and Afghanistan, as I have done with my released scenarios:
 
Op GLACIER 1 - Afghanistan
Op GLACIER 2 - Afghanistan
OP GLACIER 4 - Afghanistan
CIMIC House - Iraq
Habibollah Kalay - Afghanistan
Into the Green - Afghanistan
Zumbelay Withdrawal - Afghanistan
Fallujah Hospital - Iraq
 
If I ever finish it I have a campaign based on 3 Cdo Bde RM on Op TELIC which does the warfighting bit as well - Syrian Army TO&E is not that radically different from the Iraqi Army that you would notice the difference.
 
Current and recent red on red conflicts such as Syria and Libya can also be done in CMSF and I have seen at least one historical mission released set in Syria and (from memory) a fictional/semi historical mission or even mini campaign based on Libya - some new Gucci setting for CMSF 2 takes all of this flexibility away and would be a mistake. As I have said before on this and other threads - the ability to do rivers and bridges and the Special Editor Overlay feature would bring new life into CMSF and would allow time poor people like me to knock out real terrain maps and missions at a much quicker rate.

I seem to recall from basic training (1984) - the reaction to effective enemy fire drill was dash - down - crawl - observe - sights - fire.

Really skinfaxi, you gave me a negative point for simply stating the current reality, dang dude. Get a grip

Reference can Javelin track human targets, there used to be a video showing this engagement on Youtube which I  can't find however Michael Yon's prose and images are almost as good:
 
https://www.michaelyon-online.com/rattlesnake.htm

Play Real Time mode.

Agreed and as you point out - this stuff can be done already - it just requires the player to have the self-discipline to, in the words of the OP to 'NO SAVE & NO LOAD'.

Nope - I prefer choice - you want to play that way you can do already don't impose it on others.

Sorry ... can we not write the Brits off on the basis of one BBC documentary about Afghanistan. The simple facts of the matter are:

The Brits are members of the UNSC.
The Brits hold many key appointments within the NATO Command Structure.
The Brits deployed a battlegroup to Poland in October:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defence-secretary-visits-troops-deploying-on-training-exercise.

The Brits still spend more than most of NATO on defence.

NATO Defence Expenditure 2013:

Albania 182
Belgium 5257
Bulgaria 749
Canada 18428
Croatia 848
Czech 2148
Denmark 4547
Estonia 479
France 52250
Germany 48718
Greece 5669
Hungary 1210
Italy 25173
Latvia 291
Lithuania 354
Lux 248
NLD 10313
Norway 7398
Poland 9077
Portugal 3316
Romania 2602
Slovak 997
Slovenia 518
Spain 12746
Turkey 14365
UK 60283
US 735154

Source:

http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_topics/20140224_140224-PR2014-028-Defence-exp.pdf

Denuded they may be but the Brits remain capable of deploying a minimum Bde-sized armoured/mechanised ground force which I'm sure in the fictional World of CMBS would be a very much appreciated contribution to the CMBS International Coalition.