agusto

Geopolitical foresight isnt that difficult if you have sufficient information. I recently read a great book about the systematic of warfare by Fritz B. Simon called 'Tödliche Konflikte -Zur Selbstorganisation privater und öffentlicher Kriege' (Deadly Conflicts - How private and public wars organise themselves). You can get quite accurate results on predicting certain geopolitical events by analysing the economical situation, the organisation of the government, the behaviour and rethorics of political leaders and the media inside of a country.

So basically you would happily watch everybody die in anguish who, in your opinion, does not have you superior intelligence, morals, sense of proportion, seriousness, etc? What does that tell us about you? Nevermind. And by the way, your third sentence kinda ridicules your first, doesnt it?

Hopefully the dont decide to drop the Crimea back story because of the events currently taking place in Ukraine.

It was a serious question. I regularly read your blog.

Am i really the only person who enjoyed the discussion in this thread? IMO a discussion is less about beeing right than understanding other peoples points of view. Addtionally it is, at least for me, always also something that makes think about topics, to question others views but also my own.

Were any Extraterrestrials/Extradimensionals or Vampires involved in covertly transporting the polish division into Ukraine?

EDIT: Oops, wrong forum.

lol...playing a flight sim with mouse and keyboard instead of a joystick is almost blasphemy .

You are right, this doesnt work always. I am often using ionfantry smoke grenades and in my experience the procedure i described above only works if the waypoint where you issue the smoke to be thrown is the last waypoint of a chain.

You are - kinda - missing something. Units will pop smoke approx. 20 m infront of the direction they are facing. You can though control the place where the smoke lands by first issueing a 'face' command at the waypoint where the smoke is to be popped and then issueing a 'pop smoke' command. Orders are followed in the order you give them. If you order the 'face' command after the the 'pop smoke' command, they will first throw the smoke and then look in the direction you ordered them to.

LockOn is a great game. Another modern air combat game i ve been looking at since a year or os is DCS A-10. Maybe i ll get it some day.

Ukraine quite near actually. I wouldnt be too happy about a major war at the EUs borders.

And, if the only door to a building is within range of enemy weapons, dont forget that tank guns are great for creating new entry points.

Unintentionally killing civillians in a war does not necessarily equal commiting warcrimes. Ashez, the grim reality of modern warfare is that it simply not possible to have a war without civillian casualties. IMO the thread shouldnt be closed. The title clearly states that is not directly related to CMRT, everbodys behaviour is within acceptable borders and we did have some interesting discussions.

I think you would have been better off by explicitly stating your intention instead of hoping that people interpret your post the way you want them to. Obviously that didnt work. Now that i know your first posts intent, i have to say that this was a tactically bad decision. Several historical analysists, like Joachim Fest, have stated that, the further temporary away a difficult historical past is, the easier it is for people to objectively discuss the events. This also matches my own experiences. By drawing a contemporary, emotionally and geographically close side into the discussion, you made sure that nobody even tried to think about 'the futility of such categorization in a wargame' and instead triggered a foreseeable discussion about said contemporary events. The O/T in the threads title was probably not placed there to encourage derailing attempts. Instead it is probably there to show that the discussion is not releated to the CMRT factions but instead to their real historical counterparts.

Here is your first post in this thread: The original intent was to discuss the USSRs and Nazi Germanys behaviour during WW2 and compare them with each other. You started to shift the topic away from the original discussion from the very first moment you started to post in this thread. Everybody else who driffted away after your first post in this thread did so as an indirect consequence of your posts or in a direct reply to one of your posts. The same pattern as always. Dodging, attacking, ignoring, strawman.

And again you are dodging, attacking, ignoring and trying to errect a strawman.

You are quite an extremist, Ashez. You assume your opinion is the only truth, you attack everyone who disagrees, you continously dodge all attempts of seriously discussing your points, either by errecting strawmen, straightly changing topics or simply ignoring what others say. EDIT: And BTW: actually i do agree with you on several things you wrote. I dont want to support your cause in this discussion though because you are so agressive and close-minded.

Lets look at a situation where you look at a fruit bowl and you see that there are only two apples lieing in said fruit bowl. But are there really only two apples inside the fruit bowl? It may be that, from your perspective, the two apples are alligned in a way so that a possible third apple is hidden behind the two apples lieing in front of it. You can help yourself by looking at the fruit bowl from a different angle and you may or may not find a third apple. But is it certain now that there are only two apples in the fruit bowl? There could be a plum below the two apples. Again, you could take actions to aquire more information about the situation and you could continue playing that game for an infinite amount of time. But if you do that, you are never going actually eat of the apples, so if you are trying to aquire information about the content of the fruitbowl in order to figure out if it can be used as food source, you will have to stop gathering information at some point and simply start eating. The conclusion that can be drawn from that metaphor is that, in order to to be able to act in any given situation, one must at some point stop analysing the situation, accept the uncertainety and make do with the information available.

The truth, by the meaning of statements about reality, can never be determined with absolute certainety. Every person lives within his or her own reality, constructed by the mind, based on the things a person perceived in life. And we all have lived our own, unique lives and we all have perceived our own, unique experiences. The best thing we can do to figure out whats most propably real and what is most propably not is to find a compromise between our own and other peoples perceptions and to avoid logically incorrect conclusions. Logic though, per definition, doesnt make statements about wich statements about reality are true and wich are not. It only makes statments about the correctness of conclusions, independet of the truth of the premisses. So, after all, we will always have to live with a certain degree of uncertainness. Nothing can be done about it.

Interesting, isnt it? How people who grew up in different cultures see the same events in completely different colours. Didnt he have any doubts that what he saw was 'propaganda' or something similar? After all, he grew up during the Cold War in a country where the US were the demonized enemy.

Recently i played a galactic scale sci-fi grand strategy game and when one time a world inhabited by intelligent amphibious aliens refused to be assimilated into my glorious empire of cybernetic organisms, i sent a fleet to poison their atmosphere, burn their forrests, set ablaze their citys, melt their polar ice caps and then vaporize their oceans. And as the last of their kind died in anguish on the worthless piece of rubble once called 'home' by someone, i had my cruisers radioactively contaminate the world so that no living beeing may exists there for the next billion years.

That doesnt have anything to do with my post. I wasnt talking about politics. I was talking about one large armed force overwhelming another large armed force within a compareably densily populated country.

I thought about the matter again i dont think that it would be possible for any army to sucessfully wage a war on the scale of the war in iraq without producing significant collateral damage. I also think that it would be impossible for any armed force in such a large conflict to completely avoid that some of its members commit classical war crimes. I agree. He had some good arguements.

This thread is nearing the end of its life cycle i guess. May it rest in peace, i will miss the discussions i had in here.