danfrodo

So maybe the marshy area around Carentan?

Wars are like parachutes. Easy to jump into a war. But turns out one can't use the parachute to jump back into a passing plane. And Putin is smart enough to know how, even w significantly more powerful military forces, things can go wrong in a hurry and can escalate badly and how one can get stuck (ask LBJ). But Putin wanted to achieve something here. Was it a test of NATO unity? Well, he get an answer it looks like. Now I think it's important to have discussions that allow Putin to have some face-saving 'victory' while at the same time not actually rewarding him with anything significant for this war-extortion racket he is running. And we need to make sure he understands this kind of action will always be counterproductive for Russia. Putin is playing the nationalist hero card and he can't afford to lose face. Wounded bears get angry and don't forget.

I am guessing Scheldte estuary somewhere? Or maybe west side of the Rhine where the Brits had that big, muddy operation early in 1945?

What I am most concerned about is the Ukrainians pairing up with other uber-aggressive entities to coordinate their attacks. I heard from my totally real friend Q that Ukraine was coordinating an invasion of russia w a Belgian attack on France and an Austrian attack on Germany. When this happens remember you heard it here first.

None of us know how this whole thing is going to shake out. But one thing is for sure: Putin is saying to Europe, Ukraine, & the US "I am a military threat and I cannot be trusted in business dealings". Does this is make it more or less likely that NATO countries will increase military spending? That Ukraine will get advanced AT & AA weap;ons from NATO? If Putin wants to feel more secure, he might start by actually being a good trading partner and nieghbor.

DBSAPP: Yes, Ukraine, backed by NATO, is going to attack Russia. Do you even hear yourself? I've been avoiding this but that is so F-ing stupid it's unbelievable. How can there be 'discussion' when someone lives in a fantasy world? Are you so brainwashed that you think Ukraine is going to attack Russia -- it's suicide! How can that make sense to anyone? What other fun, totally ridiculous conspiracy nonsense do you have? This one has gotten kinda stale and I am looking for some entertainment.

(oops, was referring to the Scottish star trek above)

I couldn't understand a word o that. And the youtube close captioning couldn't either.

Like Vacillator says, just look at the link he shared. Steve said we'd be getting CW update (Feb), BS update (Q1), and BN (March/April) to steam + update + some new content centered around early DDay. He made it clear what to expect in the near term, why so much reading of tea leaves & chicken entrails? Of course, I won't be satisfied until I have Dutch 1980s so I can order Aragorn around in dangerous battlefield situations.

CaptMiller, your superior spotting is clearly due to your pre-battle speeches extolling the superior eyesight of the clear-seeing communist party and the well indoctrinated proletariat of soviet soldiery

Though I must say that 'oxfordian' speech is rather good for audiobook narration, gives the material a sense of credibility. Aussie accent conveys a sense of "wish this would be over so I could drink some Fosters in peace"

English?? we don't speak no english. We speak american. And it comes in lots of nice flavors. I for one do not appreciate how those folks over on that little island have distorted my native language with all their funny talk. I gotta use subtitles just to see what they are saying on the telly.

Oh, I've paid some dues in my 1979 battles. Now I want payback but I don't think I've had any battles w M48s, that does sound like a real challenge. and I sure hope for some more CW content soon.

I use M60s keyholed & in ambush. Like mentioned above, M60s have a tough time slugging it out w T64s. Learned that the hard way. But in 1982 one sometimes gets Abrams in the mix, and it time to party! I hope they go forward a bit more in time in some updates/DLCs so I can have more bradleys also. M113s are nice as a taxi but dang they are useless against soviets. Maybe by mid to late 80s the balance swings too far in favor of NATO. But I am cool w that, I never play as the soviets.

I played it while working so only was able to half-listen. What are the hints that y'all heard?

Loved that movie back in the day. A few years ago I heard that Eisenhower came out of retired seclusion to excoriate it as utterly ridiculous and an insult to those that fought in the campaign. I especially liked the ending scene, shot in some Belgian desert that surprisingly looked a lot like SW USA.

But that doesn't diminish his charm & charisma in the least, nor his devilish good looks. That is his photo, correct?

I believe he's the official English representative, Blogger Emeritus. And so is OK. He says things only folks from his neighborhood understand and that's fine and harmless and sometimes kinda funny. At least that's my take. I am sure there's something clever in that post, I just don't get it. That's doesn't mean it's not clever. It just means I'm not.

Khalerick, now there is a well-stated, clear and excellent point.

quick clarification: I believe russia could not invade germany IF IF IF germany had not chosen to invade poland. Once germany had done that, then yes, russia was in a more threatening position. But w germany at peace w europe, then russia would've had to invade poland to get to powerful german forces, so no surprise available and a lot of buffer land. And if communist nation attacks westward, there's a good chance france and england actually would've helped germany, at least economically. So just saying germany massively increased threat of soviet invasion by their own behavior. But back to tanks. A panther or tiger was great, and I love them. But they can't cross smaller bridges. There's a reason the T34-85 was kept at ~34 tons (that plus engine/tranny). Not that the T34 was anything compared to the best german tanks, but mobility includes the ability to use any road/bridge available. So I still vote w most of the folks above: less cost, less complexity but higher firepower, better crews, better optics could give shoot first, kill first and give the edge.

Glubokii: "had to do it NOW". I get what you are saying but this all goes back to the choice to make war on the neighbors in the first place. Once one starts a war, one's choices are indeed very limited. And was Russia going to invade germany?? Hitler chose to invade russia for resources and in his head they were an existential threat, but were they actually a threat to germany? Heck no, in my opinion. And by invading Poland, Hitler lost his buffer state to the east, now his troops were on a front with the russians. And was in a big mess, where each choice to try to fix his mess led to greater mess. These were all choices, they didn't have to do any of it.

Great topic, great comments, good fun, Folks. I'll preface my 2 cents by saying that there was no tank decision that would've changed the outcome, but at least they would maybe have been able to actually hold some of their defensive lines and wear down the russians. The only thing that could've really changed things was Hitler putting the pistol in his mouth a lot earlier. But I think the best decision would be the following: Produce a single tank chassis, starting in 1942 (instead of say, tigers): 35 ton for turreted version, same chassis for tank destroyer & mobile arty thus making very simplified spare parts pipeline & maintenence; Simple chassis w sloped thick frontal armor, neglecting side & rear armor; Wide tracks; High velocity 75mm gun -- that gun could destroy anything on the battlefield until the russian heavies appeared; good optics; LOTS of TDs since cheaper & 4 man crew, like mentioned above via Guderian. So basically this is a T34 w better gun & optics and crew fighting ability. Or call it a lighter, simpler, cheaper and more reliable panther. Or call it a sherman 76 that wasn't so tall and had better tracks. Next thing: Don't lose men by the dozens or hundreds of thousands for no reason by constantly refusing to retreat so there's actually crewmen for those tanks (yeah, I'm looking at you, Hitler, you idiot.) Of course, I could've not said anything here and just quoted what SlySniper said above

It's like 335 in shape, but w the unique Vox single coils it's a different sound. Can be really bright, which I don't go that bright by myself, but when doing rhythm w drums bass etc where the mids are already very full I think the bright end will be very nice, which I also notice just playing along w songs via stereo. But just add in the middle or bridge pickups or pull down the tone knob and it can do whatever tone level I want. It's very much based on the 60s design, though modernized. I also like the quality. I played some ~$900 gretsch models while deciding but seemed less quality, at least the made in china ones I played -- though gretsch makes some ridiculously cool looking guitars w huge variety & color schemes. Once I got the guitar I took it for pro setup & he only charged $30 because he said it was so nicely set up right out of factory, just some action adjust. When I played gretsches at a guitar center the action was so high I couldn't even tell how it really played.

Oh, got a Vox bobcat S66, black, a few weeks ago. First guitar purchase for myself in around 10 years. I've got pretty good gear so hadn't really felt compelled enough by GAS til I saw this cool, very retro beastie.

dumb question -- what is G.A.S.? guitar addiction syndrome?? Jazzmaster, very cool, I've always wanted to try one but I have never actually played an offset, I guess I gotta do that. Is it a P90 type sound? Unfortunately I've just spent my guitar money for a while, thought VERY pleased with what I got.