Battle for Libya!

[LUCASWILLEN05]

LoL, at least the mystery is solved. I am thinking this tank is a loyalist vehicle, since the man in front of it is wearing something resembling a uniform. We have this AFV in SF so I plan on using it I don't know why but I love soviet armor, guess I feel like it's too easy with an M1A2 to kill everything. Kind of like a Sherman and a Tiger with a T-72M vs M1A2, one on one you will be lucky to get a kill, lucky!!!

The other week I had a T-62 immobilize an M1A2 at a range of about 5 meters. The T-62 failed to survive. What happened was the T-62 had fired on my tanks and disappeared behind a crest. Igot too aggressive and decided to go in for the kill rather than waiting until it re-appeared. Unfortunately the T-62 happened to be hiding in a reverse slope position at exactly the point my M1A2 came over the crest line. About 5 meters behind the crest line.

With cunning tactics or a stupid tactical decision like the above a kill or immobilize result is possible.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

*shrug* Since the NYT caption writers aren't knowledgeable about weaponry (and neither are most of their readers), an RPG being used as artillery in effect is a mortar. Not that most of their readers even know what a mortar is in the first place.

But I hear ya — the prevalent ignorance about weaponry and tactics among "war correspondents" irks me. And then there's the phenomenon of possibly-lacking-scruples-to-a-certain-extent individuals making assertions about particular weapons and their terminal effects and the way in which they're used tactically so as to shape public opinion about certain incidents.

Yeah, I have heard them call an IFV a tank. Anyone who knows anything at all about these things knows that a BMP, despite the fact that it does have a small gun is an IFV, not a tank. For most journalists anything that has tracks and a gun of any sort is a "tank" Perhaps a copy of Janes should be a standard issue for all journalists reporting from a war zone so they can learn to tell the difference

[Blackladder]

For most journalists anything that has tracks and a gun of any sort is a "tank"

I've seen so many people in various sims make the assumption turret=tank and use them as such.

It was particularly funny one time when playing a first-person sim the mission commander (and some of the crewmen) could not believe how our LAV-25s were taken out so easily by some concealed KORDs (yes, the plan was to send the LAV charging toward the enemy with the infantry following ).

[Dietrich]

To be fair, there was a time when anything that had tracks and a gun was a tank. But that was, y'know, 1924 or so.

[LongLeftFlank]

As late as 1941 I'd venture to say that infantry would feel equally menaced by a Panzer I, II, 38t or III and wouldn't see much difference among them (although that 37mm KwK is handier for bunker busting).

[Boche]

Oh world... God have mercy on thy uneducated masses!

[LJFHutch]

The worst one is the "any AK variant or anything that looks even remotely like an AK is instantly an AK-47". Or it's assumed the AK-47 is the greatest weapon on the planet, much like how the Katana is viewed as a weapon forged by the gods themselves that can cut through a tank ...

I can't wait for this scenario, looks great, I just hope I have someone to play with, jump on xfire and steam yall!

[LongLeftFlank]

You raise an interesting point: whether (a) the atomic bomb or ( the Kalashnikov automatic rifle has had a net greater influence on warfare and the course of human civilization since 1945.

(a) has arguably deterred the major industrial nations from coming into direct conflict, allowing 2 generations in the developed world to mostly avoid serving/sending their children to serve in the military or fight wars for their survival (a minority does so, of course).

( has furnished a single sufficiently motivated Stone Age goatherd or 11 year old villager with enough reliable firepower to theoretically kill/maim up to 7(?) armed soldiers or police (up to 3 with modern body armour) in a single burst of fire from ambush. This "democratization of firepower" has greatly increased the ability of small groups and individuals to resist the authority of governments and to coerce/extort their own neighbors.

[zhengwei0]

There is SO much programming talent in East Europe and Russia. You guys are astounding.

Have you fellows ever thought about reviving the Combat Missions project that would revive the CM1 series?

All we've ever wanted was a system to create an operational/strategic "shell" for the tactical CM1 games that would act as a scenario generator.

Sadly, the original developers got waaaay over their heads in attempting to produce a standalone operational game with its own AI etc - it was a much too ambitious effort and collapsed under its own weight.tytuyi

[LongLeftFlank]

And here I was thinking for a moment we finally had a genuine live Chinese CMSF player.

I guess they don't have time for games though (unless it involves selling gold and relics to WoW players); they're too busy spamming people and pushing counterfeit couture. And then plowing the proceeds back into shoddily built real estate. Kind of admirable in a way.

[astano]

You raise an interesting point: whether (a) the atomic bomb or ( the Kalashnikov automatic rifle has had a net greater influence on warfare and the course of human civilization since 1945.

(a) has arguably deterred the major industrial nations from coming into direct conflict, allowing 2 generations in the developed world to mostly avoid serving/sending their children to serve in the military or fight wars for their survival (a minority does so, of course).

( has furnished a single sufficiently motivated Stone Age goatherd or 11 year old villager with enough reliable firepower to theoretically kill/maim up to 7(?) armed soldiers or police (up to 3 with modern body armour) in a single burst of fire from ambush. This "democratization of firepower" has greatly increased the ability of small groups and individuals to resist the authority of governments and to coerce/extort their own neighbors.

Not to stray too far from the topic, but have you read C.J. Chivers' book? I haven't had a chance to myself, but I believe he makes that exact argument.

[LongLeftFlank]

Interesting -- I shall look into it. James Dale Davidson and William Rees-Mogg formulate a similar hypothesis in their books, although (as with much of their other analysis) they take it too far, e.g. crediting the success of labour and womens suffrage movements to the widespread availability of revolvers which made assassinations easier and thereby intimidated the politicians of the day into accommodation.

They call this phenomenon "diminishing return to violence" and generally view it as a good thing socio-economically as it diminishes the coercive power of the state relative to the sturdy Jeffersonian yeoman. The only problem with this notion is: what if the sturdy yeoman is more of a bandit? But yes, we are indeed digressing into a swamp of libertarian politics (to which I do not subscribe) here....

[Magpie_Oz]

"a good thing socio-economically as it diminishes the coercive power of the state relative to the sturdy Jeffersonian yeoman."

Is it only me who finds it unsettling that the are those who advocate that a system of checks and balances in a democratic society should also include a provision for armed rebellion or to put it another way enshrining civil war as a fundamental principal of society ?

[LongLeftFlank]

Is that a reference to the Second Amendment of the American Constitution? For the Founding Fathers of America, the right to self-rule was inherently entwined with the right to self-defense. The Indians were still relatively close by, and hostile. The French and Spaniards were not far away. And then there was, of course, the English Crown.

(in contrast, we Canucks stuck with the Crown since in the 1770s we were still badly outnumbered by Indians and recently pacified Frenchmen, and got bloody good value out of those redcoats)

Moreover, the Founding Fathers were big admirers of the Athenian demos, which was itself essentially a corps of free landowners who could afford the armour of a hoplite and the time to drill in it.

Are such notions obsolete in our era of long established representative government and professional and generally non-corrupt military and police forces? We can all answer that for ourselves, I think. I don't intend to argue politics here. I'm a history guy.

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed sheep contesting the vote.

[Magpie_Oz]

No I was merely stating that I find it hard to accept if one does not agree with something you should have the right to take up arms to get your point across.

Liberty is not the sheep contesting the vote because he is well armed but being able to contest the vote without fear because of the society he lives in.

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Unfortunately, that society doesn't exist.

[Magpie_Oz]

Australia seems to manage

[mjkerner]

If I'm the sheep, I would still feel better being well-armed.

[Magpie_Oz]

I'd rather be mates with the wolves.

But hey this has been debated back and forth numerous times on the 'net I am sure and no real resolution ever reached so probably best to leave it at that.

[Alan8325]

Yeah, I have heard them call an IFV a tank. Anyone who knows anything at all about these things knows that a BMP, despite the fact that it does have a small gun is an IFV, not a tank. For most journalists anything that has tracks and a gun of any sort is a "tank" Perhaps a copy of Janes should be a standard issue for all journalists reporting from a war zone so they can learn to tell the difference

Like this?

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Libyan-rebel-drives-tank-front-line-Ajdabiya-Libyan-leader-Moamer/photo//110314/photos_wl_me_afp/7f0b188862e047d91b42843a26e26419//s:/afp/20110314/wl_mideast_afp/libyabritainpoliticsunrestmideastanalyst_20110314210116#photoViewer=/110314/photos_wl_me_afp/7f0b188862e047d91b42843a26e26419

[Magpie_Oz]

Maybe there is a job opportunity there for one of us?

Would the title be: Proof Reader or Pointer Outer of the Bloody Obvious ?

[Boche]

It funny now, after playing so much CMSF, cant avoid remembering it while watching BMPs rolling around lybia on TV.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Like this?

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Libyan-rebel-drives-tank-front-line-Ajdabiya-Libyan-leader-Moamer/photo//110314/photos_wl_me_afp/7f0b188862e047d91b42843a26e26419//s:/afp/20110314/wl_mideast_afp/libyabritainpoliticsunrestmideastanalyst_20110314210116#photoViewer=/110314/photos_wl_me_afp/7f0b188862e047d91b42843a26e26419

Like that. Yes.

Someone please inform "Scoop" that this is a BMP1 he is looking at and that it is an IFV, not a tank

Luke

[Magpie_Oz]

I guess when I see these errors and assumptions I always wonder what else they are getting wrong that I do not have the knowledge to realise they are getting wrong.