ralista Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 I agree with the post saying CM is a sanitized and sophisticated game of chess. I always find it funny when the hardcore grognards whine about "gamey" tactics. If you could use "gamey" tactics to win a war in real life, you would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gremlin: ...I wonder how vets of WWII would feel about us making a little hobby out of recreating battles in which their friends suffered and died horribly...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Just to answer this, I have a WWII vet coming to visit with us this weekend. He has seen the game and thought it was pretty neat. I expect he'll sit with me while I play this weekend as well. He just doesn't like it when I play as the Germans. In a larger sense, I'd like to point out that man kind is warlike by nature. We had to learn to be "civilized." Those of you who believe that your base tendency is peace rather than war have just learned the lesson of society better than the rest, I suppose. The history of the world is a history and a legacy of war and conquering, and it is true that the victors write that history. War will continue, and the sad truth of it is that we will most likely all see another prolonged war in our lifetimes. I for one would rather see it sooner than later, so that I can do the dirty work and hope that my children will not have to. I believe that is the crux of what drives many men to fight in the insanity of war. Not only is it kill or be killed, but it is also kill or maybe your family is killed. Men will suffer all sorts of inhumanity themselves, but no man can stomach the thought of that inhumanity being visited upon his family, and for that reason we fight and kill with savage ferocity. And as for Strat's comment about the movie being unrealistic: If men who stood on that beach think it is realistic, then it is. No one else's opinion matters after that. Sorry for the monologue...this topic kind of got me thinking. ------------------ WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! - THIS SIG FILE BELONGS TO A COMPLETE FOO. MR T WOULDN'T BE SO KIND AS TO WRINKLE AN EYEBROW AT THIS UNFORTUNATE BEING. PLEASE OFFER HIS PARENTS AND COHABITANTS ALL SYMPATHY POSSIBLE. MAY BE CONTAGIOUS. CONTAINS ARTIFICIAL SWEETNER, INTELLIGENCE AND WIT. STAND WELL CLEAR AND LIGHT WICK. BY ORDER PETERNZ Damn Croda. That is one funny sig!!! must suck to be you - Hiram Sedai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterNZer Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 It's appropriate that my comments come after Croda's, since he's mY MONKEY By0tcH !! SPR. Well. I was stunned for the first 30-40 minutes. The whole cinema audience kinda 'stopped'. It really got to me i guess. Why? Because it was so.. arbitrary. I think everyone thought, 'what could you do?'. In the end, it didn't matter if you were a hero or a coward, if you were unlucky, MGs cut you down and you died. If you were lucky, you lived. No logic or reason at all. But after the landing. *sigh*.. it was disapointing. So many cliches. The religous sniper, the quiet, stoic leader, everyone dying to orders, the silly english new guy, the tank dying to the mustang at the end, all that silly stuff. To me, it just lost that horror the rest of the film had, o well! PeterNZ ------------------ "I can be quite pleasant, you know" - Andreas "WHERE'S THE MOAT?!" - Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Croda, point taken, but some would argue the opposite: that man has been socially inculcated and indoctrinated with violence and killing as appropriate and even desirable ways to solve problems (war, capital punishment, popular entertainment's depictions of it, etc.), and that our emotions of rage, fear, and self-preservation that might lead to violent acts don't define or limit us any more than our desire for peace and capacity for love. And even if war and violence have been historically prevalent, that needn't at all mean they should be condoned, supported, encouraged, rationalized, or accepted. While history and society have obvious impacts on our thinking and actions, I firmly believe the ultimate responsibilty lies with each individual, however hard it might be to go against the grain of upbringing or socialization. Further, I wouldn't say that "The history of the world is a history and a legacy of war and conquering," as you contend. While human history is undeniably filled with those things, the history of the world also includes arts, sciences, philosophy, religion, technology--all often linked to war, though ------------------ I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity. --Eisenhower [This message has been edited by Gremlin (edited 01-19-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodyBucket Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 My father, who fought as a BAR gunner in France and Belgium, will not watch SPR. He says, "Why would I want to relive that?" At the same time, he gets a kick out of watching CM, although he gets creeped out by the artillery graphics and the sounds. He thinks of it as an historically based amusement, although he thinks computer games are a waste of time. He harbors no ill will toward the Germans he fought at all, even though he had terrible experiences in combat and as a POW. He thinks they were "stuck in the storm" just as he was. As to the morality of wargaming, I think it is only wrong if you fall into the trap of thinking that the game equals the experience of war. A game like CM can be realistic to a great extent tactically, but it of course leaves out the misery, anguish and pain of war. Same with a movie, book or play, although any of these simulations may tap into one's empathy to make one more thoughtful about the horror of war. One of the tragedies of war to me is that the sort of people whom we admire for their courage, leadership and imagination are the ones who tend to become physical and emotional casualties. If it were truly random, that would be awful enough, but the reality is worse. As to needing to actually be a combat vet to understand war, I think to some extent that is true, yet veteran status is not a guarantor of empathy or wisdom. Just look at Hitler. ------------------ "Roll on" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 I venture to guess by your namesake, BoodyBucket, that your father was a veteran of the 28th Infantry Division. Is that the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
windstarz Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Wargames are intellectually stimulating endeavors escaping the reality of the death and carnage of the real thing. The people that play them generally know way more about history than those who don't. I have asked many teenagers basic questions about history and war history specifically. I have found almost none who can tell you when any war took place within a 100 yrs of the correct dates. If they have even heard of them. The U.S. has a pathetic education system. War has been around a long time. It isn't going away. Playing games that depict war are fun and nobody gets hurt. If you can't deal with that quit playing. There is always more room on the perch for moral high grounders. And as I have said before soldiers are generally gonna fight for the country they are born in. So no matter how much one hates the enemy the main reason he isn't in the enemies shoes is an accident of his birth place. I know war is horrible and to be avoided if at all possible. I learned that by reading and playing war games. I play because it is fun plain and simple. Doesn't make me a war monger. In fact just the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monte99 Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 While agonizing over the morality of playing war games on a computer, we should remember that the movie that sparked this discussion, Saving Private Ryan, was conceived as a profitable venture no less than Combat Mission. It was also conceived as entertainment, and I suppose the vast majority of people who bought tickets to see it did so to be entertained. The fact that good direction and special effects resulted in a fairly realistic portrayal of modern warfare doesn't give the movie any higher moral ground than the game. They both make money by simulating the brutish and bloody business of war. We're probably quite lucky to live in a time when we can gain some small insight into war without having to participate in one. And I don't think it poses any particular moral dilemma that we find the subject so interesting, that we view movies or read books or play computer games centered on warfare. It's a subject of endless fascination for mankind in general. I remember Robert E. Lee's famous quote: "It is well that war is so terrible, or we should get too fond of it." He was talking about real war, of course. I don't think he'd have a problem with a game. ------------------ "War does not determine who is right - only who is left." -Bertrand Russell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog0606 Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bebbetufs: I'm not trying to degrade these questions, I enjoy reading it as well. Just wondering how you people justify for yourselves ordering a squad to certain death....in the game, and actually LIKING it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It reads like your saying anybody who likes playing CM is a bloodthirsty killer. Did I misunderstand what you wrote? The operative word in the above statement is "GAME". It's just a game and not real. I know the difference between what is real and what isn't (I tell that to my invisible friend all the time ). And even though it is a game I do not sacrifice a squad of men to certain death unless it is needed. The only way I will sacrifice a squad of men is if it will help me win. Come to think of it, maybe I am a little deranged. When I was a kid of about 12 I use to place my little green plastic soldiers in a fort I built. I'd walk about 100 feet away, take my 22 rifle with a scope and go to town on those little green men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Regarding the argument that CM (or any wargame) is "just a game," that's precisely the issue. No one would mistake it for a realistic depiction of war, and personally I'm glad it's gamey. I have absolutely no desire to watch little SS troopers murder children and POW's, or to see limbs blown off. The question remains, though: is it morally or ethically appropriate to reduce war, particularly a real one as opposed to a hypothetical one, to an interactive entertainment, while leaving out the "nasty bits" of the experience? (When broadened, this question of course applies somewhat to computer and video gaming in general, with its prediliction for violence.) ------------------ I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity. --Eisenhower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Space Thing Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bebbetufs: I'm not trying to degrade these questions, I enjoy reading it as well. Just wondering how you people justify for yourselves ordering a squad to certain death....in the game, and actually LIKING it? (edited 01-18-2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't order any of my units to cetain "death". That's too gamey for me. I order them to destroy my opponent's units. What I like to do is to put myself (imaginatively) in say -that lightly armored vehicle. Would I really drive up (in open ground) near a King Tiger and get smoked by it just so my tanker friends behind me somewhere can get a shot or two off at the distracted KT? HELL NO! I'm not gonna throw away my life! Would you? Likewise, I apply the same logic to the units in CM (as I put myself in "their boots"). CM helps to reinforce the value of life for me. I like to win (of course), but I also prefer low casualties when I do win -and that I hope is realistic. This a great conversation topic. "Space Things are better than a sexy novel and a........ on a quiet evening." DR. RUTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gremlin: Croda, point taken, but some would argue the opposite: that man has been socially inculcated and indoctrinated with violence and killing as appropriate and even desirable ways to solve problems (war, capital punishment, popular entertainment's depictions of it, etc.), and that our emotions of rage, fear, and self-preservation that might lead to violent acts don't define or limit us any more than our desire for peace and capacity for love. And even if war and violence have been historically prevalent, that needn't at all mean they should be condoned, supported, encouraged, rationalized, or accepted. While history and society have obvious impacts on our thinking and actions, I firmly believe the ultimate responsibilty lies with each individual, however hard it might be to go against the grain of upbringing or socialization. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Points certainly well taken. I happen to be of the school that humans are animals that got smart. The ability to think and to rationalize has not only allowed us to create more comforting and entertaining lives for ourselves, but also allowed us to feel elevated above the rest of the animal kingdom, and as such to impose higher standards on ourselves simply out of our own self-perceived notions of being "special." My point behing that long-winded run-on is that we have reached a point where we deny our base tendencies and urges because the society we have created shuns them. One of these tendencies is to make war. When somone crosses us, our initial instinct is to cross them back; to hurt them. And such is war. When societies are crossed, they exercise their instinct to harm the crosser with armies instead of their own fists. So I guess my point is that we have made war and we will continue to make war because that is what we do and who we are. Movies like SPR serve to remind the generations that didn't have the "benefit" of seeing the horrors and depravities of a war firsthand. Western Society despises war, but knows of no better way to resolve its differences when reasoning fails. Movies like SPR help keep those memories real for generations who live without war. I hope that made my point clear. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Further, I wouldn't say that "The history of the world is a history and a legacy of war and conquering," as you contend. While human history is undeniably filled with those things, the history of the world also includes arts, sciences, philosophy, religion, technology--all often linked to war, though <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Quite right. Most often linked to war, especially in the realm of technology. But then this spurs the "Does Art mimic life" debate. I would dare say that war shapes history, the things you mention above just color it in. ------------------ WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! - THIS SIG FILE BELONGS TO A COMPLETE FOO. MR T WOULDN'T BE SO KIND AS TO WRINKLE AN EYEBROW AT THIS UNFORTUNATE BEING. PLEASE OFFER HIS PARENTS AND COHABITANTS ALL SYMPATHY POSSIBLE. MAY BE CONTAGIOUS. CONTAINS ARTIFICIAL SWEETNER, INTELLIGENCE AND WIT. STAND WELL CLEAR AND LIGHT WICK. BY ORDER PETERNZ Damn Croda. That is one funny sig!!! must suck to be you - Hiram Sedai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodyBucket Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spook: I venture to guess by your namesake, BoodyBucket, that your father was a veteran of the 28th Infantry Division. Is that the case?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Quite right, 110th Rgt, Company "E" ------------------ "Roll on" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ralista: I agree with the post saying CM is a sanitized and sophisticated game of chess. I always find it funny when the hardcore grognards whine about "gamey" tactics. If you could use "gamey" tactics to win a war in real life, you would. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> In which case the tactics would not be gamey, by definition. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog0606 Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gremlin: The question remains, though: is it morally or ethically appropriate to reduce war, particularly a real one as opposed to a hypothetical one, to an interactive entertainment, while leaving out the "nasty bits" of the experience? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I hate it when you people make me think! It hurts my head! Hopefully my writings will make sense. I don't like forcing what I consider moral and ethical on other people (what they do or how they do things). What I consider ethical and moral someone else might think is downright dispicable. I would perfer that a wargame (based on a hypothetical or real war) be as close to real has possible (all the blood, guts and burning flesh). This has nothing to do with morality or ethics on my part, but how I prefer my games to be dipicted (as real as you can get). In a way, how most wargames are depicted on a computer (no blood, guts, burning flesh) makes it easier for a lot of people to play them. More then likely if a little guy in a squad got hit in the gut by a machine gun bullet, had his guts start comming out and his yelling and screaming comming out of a computers speakers it MIGHT just turn someone off on game. I've NEVER experienced real combat. I DON'T WANT to experience real combat. I have NO idea how I would react in that situation. I might have a different opinion if I had ever experienced combat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tss Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 My maternal grandfather was first a squad leader in a sapper company, then he was transferred to infantry where he served again as a squad leader and later as an assistant platoon leader. He never talked about his experiences. He received two medals, VM I and II ("Freedom's Medal"), but I don't know what for since the citations have been lost and even the official archive doesn't have them. The only thing that I know of those is that one of his war-mates once spoke, while drunken, to my grandmother explaining that "Jussi was always the point man". He certainly went through very difficult places, since during Winter War he was in Kirvesmäki sector of Taipaleenjoki, one of the worst spots. (Though, he was a sapper that time and he didn't have to fight infantry battles. According to the war diary of his company, they manned the frontline twice but Soviets didn't attack on those days). In the Continuation War he was at Rajajoki when Soviets started their major offensive there. The attack was preceded by an artillery barrage that was (in terms of shells fired but not in terms of HE/area) the second heaviest barrage to the day (the heaviest happened during the Kursk battle), and there weren't many heavier even after that. - Tommi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bebbetufs Posted January 19, 2001 Author Share Posted January 19, 2001 Thanks to everyone who answered my post. Keep 'em interesting thoughts coming. ------------------ Visit http://home.c2i.net/bebenum for som tips on(flight)sim immersion hardware Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terence Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bebbetufs: Thanks to everyone who answered my post. Keep 'em interesting thoughts coming. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Great posts. It is an interesting question, and I've thought about it a great deal. Personally I came to terms with the issue by drawing a parallel between the game and some of the music I listen to. I'm a big Misfits fan. For those of you who don't know anything about the Misfits, they are one of the first great punk bands and produced -in my opinion- some really excellent music. Now, one of their songs is called "Last Caress" For those of you who don't know it (Metallica covers it extremely well) its has pretty horrifying lyrics. I'll quote a brief section just to illustrate my point: I got something to say I killed your baby today And it doesn't matter much to me As long as its dead. It goes on for about 2 minutes like that and there is stuff in there about raping mothers as well. Its horrible, offensive and pretty much awful any way you slice it. But if youve ever actually heard it, well, it ROCKS. It's my number one workout song and I find myself humming it all the time. If I actually knew of a baby killing mother raping person in custody, I'd say "Shoot him. Today." But, and this is the point, by abstracting the agression, by putting it into the context of a (really excellent) punk song, it becomes something different --not the same thing as actually doing the crimes. Especially when you consider that when the Misfits started writing music, the entire country was listening to the BeeGees and Peter Frampton and other saccharine CRAP and really desperately needed some of the dark, loud comic-book-and-horror-movie inspired stuff that the Misfits were turning out. "Last Caress" can be looked at as yin to the yang of Elton John, for example. Somthing calculated to shock and horrify after the insidious terror of Frampton Comes Alive. So attacking and solving a tactical/military problem which is fascinating because it has a constantly evolving solution set is not the same as actually blowing people up. And winning a battle by carefully evaluation and solving a tactical problem -- which is what we do in CM, Chess, and any other wargame you care to mention is often no easy thing to do. And its not the same as war. Oh and PS. We're a fairly aggressive bunch and like to win and stuff too.l Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BloodyBucket: Quite right, 110th Rgt, Company "E" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Please give my regards to your father, BloodyBucket. I don't know as to what time he became a POW, but between the losses of the Hurtgen and the stand of the 110th at Clervaux, he and his comrades paid above & beyond their share of dues. Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urban Shocker Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 I have wrestled with this question myself. I am anti-war because I think they are mainly started by people who get there ego's hurt or by people who foolishly create situations they then lose control of like Noriega and Hussein. Anyway, CM is good because... (1) it's fun! (2) it's cheap, on a per hour basis (3) it allows one to hone their critical thinking skills (skill in short supply, see above) (4) it's not real CM could be bad because... (1) it could cause people to forget or miss things/events/happenings that are more important in the long run. (2) it could lead people to think that war is intellectually or otherwise fun! (3) it contributes to global warmimg unless you're running on solar power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever Babra Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Urban Shocker: CM could be bad because... (1) it could cause people to forget or miss things/events/happenings that are more important in the long run. (2) it could lead people to think that war is intellectually or otherwise fun! (3) it contributes to global warmimg unless you're running on solar power.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And it makes me smoke like a Frenchman ------------------ Massada Lo Tipol Shenit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schugger Posted January 19, 2001 Share Posted January 19, 2001 Really a great topic to discuss. bebbetufs wrote: As you see I need help to justify to myself that I can keep playing my favourite game! I have to admit that I have been in the same dilemma occasionally. I haven't ( luckily ) experienced real combat action but have enough heard of it to conclude that it is anything but something to enjoy. So - no matter how you put it - enjoying to send " virtual" soldiers to their certain death in a "game" is morally questionable, IMO ( if this is a cute tactic in CM is another question ). I like this game not because of it's inherent slaughter of virtual soldiers, but because of the challenge of mind it has when you play with a human opponent. Well, there are many other games around which could produce a challenge of mind - like chess for example - but they're to abstract or scientific for me. I often asks myself why are so many people fascinated, many of them with very different backgrounds, by wargames? MadDog0606 wrote: I would perfer that a wargame (based on a hypothetical or real war) be as close to real has possible (all the blood, guts and burning flesh). This has nothing to do with morality or ethics on my part, but how I prefer my games to be dipicted (as real as you can get). Tastes and opinions differ greatly here, I think. For me CM simulates very well how fierce and brutal combat is, when platoons melt away in a matter of seconds when caught in a deadly crossfire, houses were blown apart by large caliber artillery, a squad takes a tank's HE shell right into the face from a tank at pointblank range, a squad stumbles over some routed infantry cowering in a piece of woods and they gut mowed down when they try to escape and refused to raise their arms, etc., I surrendered a PBEM game because of this when I caught myself that I watched the movies with my hands before my eyes and pathetically issuing orders to move another platoon into this meat-grinder. A healthy experience that was. I will never make a quick judgement on any General who has hesitated to send his soldiers into what appeared later as a quick and easy road to victory. Enough ramble for now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holdit Posted January 20, 2001 Share Posted January 20, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus: Actually the war movies and documentaries that I actually shake my head about in disgust are ones prior to the Spanish American War, ie, American Civil War, America's Revolutionary War, Napoleonic Era, where men would line up across from one another and fire volleys of musket fire at one another. I ask myself, "Why don't they just duck as the enemy line starts to take aim?" I know I just wouldn't stand there. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The reason they just lined up in the Napoleonic Wars was that muskets were so inaccurate that using them en masse gave the best results. Standing up meant the process of loading was much faster. If you'd ducked you probably would have been bayonetted on the spot by your NCO. I think it was Frederick the Great who said that a soldier must fear his own officers more than he feared the enemy. Of course you might have been a skirmisher in a light infantry unit, where men were more spread out and good use of cover was encouraged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodyBucket Posted January 20, 2001 Share Posted January 20, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Spook: Please give my regards to your father, BloodyBucket. I don't know as to what time he became a POW, but between the losses of the Hurtgen and the stand of the 110th at Clervaux, he and his comrades paid above & beyond their share of dues. Ed<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thank you for the kind words, and I will pass them along. I should have noted he was with the 2nd Bn, and he became a POW on December 19, 1944. After a little Jack Daniels and 55 years seperation from the events, I got him to tell me about the war on videotape. His great regret is having to have killed other men who were as swept up by events as was he. I showed him "Clervaux Sector" on CMBO, and it brought forth a few stories I hadn't heard before, the most striking being his recollection of two inseperable friends on a bazooka team who were killed together when one refused to leave the other as he lay dying. He could not remember the names, but that vision haunts him to this day. Yes, real combat is vile, but remembering those who fought, even in a game, is a good thing. ------------------ "Roll on" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 20, 2001 Share Posted January 20, 2001 At the risk of posting something non-philosophical (who, me? ), I'm just happy to see another Misfits fan here. One of the greatest hard rock bands ever. Hard, fast, punk gems with brilliant melodies and merrily tasteless lyrics--not to mention their horror show aesthetic, with the skull face paint Their singer, Glenn Danzig has a wonderful voice (unlike so many punk front men) that he can use to great effect. He sounds like a very scary Elvis. Awesome music for anyone interested in classic punk/hardcore. ------------------ I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity. --Eisenhower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts