-Snafu-

It would good to have the SLA and RACS radio voices to be replaced by Spanish ones, given that they are supposed to speak something similar. I know the 'Malvinas Mod' put in Spanish voices but I never tried the mod myself. Maybe if somebody could get permission from them.

Thanks for pointing that out. Interesting stuff. My town was just 40 odd miles out of the area of defence the Polish were responsible for. You can still see old fortifications at my beach and if your lucky, find some rifle rounds. On the note of tanks. I would say that the T-34 was the best all round tank. Not the best but the best all round tank. Quite hard to argue what the best tank would be. In my opinion I would say the Panther. Germany had quite a technological advantage that they squandered. They might have just been better off mass producing MkIV's mixed with some heavy tanks.

finland is not a scandinavian country, they are Finno-Ugric. they have not had odin as god. you can see that wikipedia is not accurate all the time   Loki's just been playing tricks with him. Looks like there has been further developments in South America. Nicaragua cuts ties with Columbia.

Assuming the war went as was expected and the Red Horde was travelling rapidly towards the Rhine, Royal's primary role would have been to insert into Scandinavia, get behind the forward line and attack the logistic elements. If all went well there could well have been an additional role of entering deeper behind Soviet lines for strategic attacks on military infrastrucure. A similar attack from the south, travelling through the Balkan states was also a possibility. Under no circumstances would Royal be used in a conventional role against such an enemy, 3 Cdo Bde isn't constructed with that intention. A small unit with no armour against a mass line of rapidly advancing armoured infantry would be suicide, that was BAOR's job. Thank you for the information. I just got Amongst the Marines by Steven Preece and since that dealt with the social aspect, I was wondering about their military role at that time. What about the Parachute Regiment?

Maybe this thread should be stickied as an equivalent to this?

In response to otk-members comment in the Intl. Politics Thread. Only responding to this comment since the rest has been dealt with by other people. Yes I know the codebreakers probably knew about it. But how do you know the US was not told? Or that the US knew themselves? They are not stupid you know. The power of the Navy, the carriers, were not in port and so were safe and sound. I'm not saying the US would let such a thing happen. But getting attacked is a good way to get public support, especially when just days before they were isolationist. Although I'm not much of a conspiracy fan. Anyway I have a question regarding HM Forces. The Royal Marines specifically. What would have been their role if the 'Cold War went hot'? Would they have been deployed to Europe? Or sent on raids behind the enemy lines?

What is 'My Own OFP'?

"Baldrick, what starts with Get here and ends with Ow?" "What?" "Get here" *punch* "ow!" Blackadder Goes Forth. Ya can't beat it!

What has the size of their army go to with the fact they took Berlin? It would have been utterly pointless for the Allies to attack a city that would be in the Soviet sphere of influence after the war. If you want to continue discussion on this I have created a thread here for the purpose of discussing Military History. Anyway... Back On Topic What is the opinion here of this latest crisis? Link

Agree. Stalingrad is an excellent film. Way better than any Enemy at the Gates. My top few has to be: - Platoon. An excellent film. Never found a film to top it. - A Bridge Too Far. Damn good film that finally does not just involve the USA. - Brotherhood or taegukgi. Touching film about two brothers in the Korean War. Saving Private Ryan eat your heart out. You will not regret viewing this. - All Quiet On the Western Front. I could watch it time and time again and never get 'bored of it'. - Band of Brothers. Not a film but an excellent series. Allows you to follow the experiences of these men and how they change. - Red Dawn. For the kickass Wolverines. - Saving Private Ryan. Excellent combat scenes. - Apocalypse Now. Legendary film. - Full Metal Jacket. One of Kubrick's best. - Blackadder Goes Forth. Not a war film strictly. It's comedy TV series about a group of (British) soldiers in WW1. A funny series despite being set in a horrible time. I urge you to see this and watch it all the way through. Once you get to the last scene you will understand. That scene will long live in my mind.

Yes, Social Science. How could you not see a contradiction? You said that nobody really knows about socialism or communism. Then you said there are hundreds of millions of you. Which is a massive number given that you said nobody really knows about them. But you have corrected yourself in the above post. You see? Anyway this is not an argument about who did killed the most Germans in WW2. Body counts alone don't win wars. What I was arguing against was the attitude that the Western Allies sat about and did nothing till the USSR had the Nazi's on the run. This is obviously ridiculous. Let us get to the main point here. The Western Allies were already fighting the Germans before the USSR. Normandy took such a long time because of several key reasons. - Britain lost a lot of hardware at Dunkirk. - America was wholly unprepared for a major war. Let alone one that spanned the globe. (For the Western Allies) - Britain and the Commonwealth were unprepared for a major war. - Germany was already being engaged in North Africa and then Italy before Normandy. Both encompassed invasions by the sea. - Western Allies had to fight big Naval Wars. - The Western Allies were at war with Japan in the pacific over a massive area. - Thus it would take time to build up an invasion force for France. Men and equipment were already being sent to different parts of the world for fighting. There has to be careful monitoring between stockpiling and sending units and equipment to the different theatres of war. - These men and material have to be sent over huge oceans. Landed at a port. These soldiers and material then need to be transported over land to their respective units. - The logistics needed for this were huge. Very impressive that the Western Allies could fight against two enemies at different parts of the world and keep these units supplied. - Moreover the Normandy invasion was no easy feat either. It took years to organise, supplies and equipment needed to be stockpiled. (Remember that the Axis are already being fought at this time in two separate parts of the globe.) These invasion plans needed to be kept secret so there is a huge effort for decieving the Germans. However I am not disregarding the USSR effort. It was massive and an absolutely key factor in defeating Hitler. The war in the USSR was especially brutal and the bravery of the Soviet, soldier, tanker, airman and seaman is inspiring. But don't think the Western Allies sat about and did nothing! If you go to Russia you will see books, films etc. promoting their role in the war. Same with the USA. Same with any nation that was involved. In the West it's more about the USSR not getting the recogniton for it's role in the war. The media, films etc. don't deny it. The 'person on the street' just does not really have an intimate knowledge of the war. Anyone who has looked into WW2 will know how important USSR involvement was. I had family members involved in WW2. One was captured by the Japanese and starved in a POW camp. I will absolutely not let anybody say that their role was worthless. Not just because I had family involved. But because it isn't true.

otk-member No-One has doubted the USSR's contribution to World War 2. And the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland was still the world power by the beginning of WW2. It was not until then end of WW2 that the century belonged to America/USSR. You are also rather pathetic mocking the contributions of the Western Allies in the defeat of Nazi Germany. You guys made a pact with Hitler, so don't take the moral stance here. Britain had been fighting the Axis longer than the USSR. Britain even warned Stalin about Op. Barbarossa but it was fobbed off. Your comment that the Western Allies sat back and let you guys do all the hard work and that Normandy was worthless is ignorance. The Western Allies were fighting across the globe. From North Africa to Italy. The skies over London. The Atlantic to the Pacific. The fields of France to the jungles of Asia. The USSR didn't join against Japan until the last stages. Another reason not to take the moral stance. The USSR never had to island hop across the Pacific. It never had to fork out all that money for Naval Forces to do that. America also joined not help our tiny (but powerful) island. Pearl Harbour not spring to mind? It was the RAF that smashed Hitler's hopes of invading Britain. Britain also had the RN to defend the invasion routes. His attack on the USSR sealed the deal when he had to move a lot of his resources to the East. Before you start telling people to learn history how about you learn it yourself. You claim that MehMan to be victim of propaganda. You can be as well. If the USSR was so friendly why didn't it let Poland, Czechoslovakia etc. receive Marshall Aid? The USA even offered the USSR aid but they refused. This is the start of the Cold War. Then we have the Berlin Airlift. An incredibly ignorant move which could have sparked WW3. Moreover how can you say Churchill sparked the Cold War when he was not even PM after the war? (I'm assuming you mean the 'Iron Curtain' speech?) Apologies for dragging thread offtopic.

What Spokesperson doesn't undertsand is that Stalin is popular because he is a symbol of Russian power. Iron will against the invader. Blah blah blah. The people in Russia today won't understand what it was like to live under him. They won't really understand that. But it's ok for them as he is long dead and not a threat to their safety anymore. Exactly like Jacobitism in Scotland. Once the chance for the Stuarts to get back in power was long gone it was ok to 'flirt' with it. Like loyal toasts, for example. Spokesperson won't tell you where he is from. But he has left enough comments to give you some idea. I seem to recall him saying his country had a monarchy. He has also used the word 'kindergarten' a number of times. Commonwealth country? Dutch? Maybe. Anyway I'm just OT now.

Marxism is a theory. It is not fact. Not a science. Don't see many Universities offering joint Marxism and Chemistry degrees. It's a social science. Studying people's behaviour. People are not logical (generally). Maths and science are logical. You think you know everything in the world. Here's a fun fact: you don't. I try and go into everything with an open mind. You don't. You have already made up your mind. You are non-sensical. You are ridiculous. You contradict yourself all the time. Oh and now you say there are hundreds of millions of you. Big fcuking LOL. Wait you must be right because Communist and Socialist parties are winning elections everywhere. Oh wait, you said that people do not know about these theories. Â You see how stupid you look? See how you contradict yourself? Not to mention you rarely produce any evidence for your facts. Or is it all from your Crystal ball? Or that little voice inside your head?

Nah, not really. The last time I tried playing on saturday there was two people so... I guess it was a bit too late to have public WGL games, as it appeals to a small proportion of a small community. However, if you want to play sometime, just post on this thread or catch me on msn, icq or whatever and I'll be there if I can. I also got some people on msn etc who might be interested to play. There's a few missions that are a lot of fun with just a couple of players. Operation Snafuski for example, gotta finish that one some day. I also have Finmod on the server with players on every now and then. The server-side AI related config values are adjusted so that you can get those awesome WGL-esque firefights with them. The things that some might consider downsides are that you have to reinvent your co-op playing style to not get shot all the time and that some missions become almost impossible. I also recommend Hawkins' Jungle Fever nam mod played on HawkNam server . You're welcome to use my TS server if you play there. That's a damn shame. I never played a coop before (or MP really) so I was looking forward to getting my teeth cut so to speak. But I'll contact you for a game.

Quoted for emphasis.

Gurkha's are recruited from Nepal and are some of the most formidable soldiers in the world. Check this for an overview http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigade_of_Gurkhas Better to buy a book on them for a more detailed account.

Well I'm on right now if you want a game.

So true. How about 1st RMTR (Royal Mail Tank Regiment)?

Is this still going on? It says there is a game on at 7 on Saturdays but there is nobody there. Was looking forward to trying out a coop.

How nice of you. Must have a been a real morale boost for him. Where were you when they were handing out common sense? Anyway, hats off to Prince Harry for wanting to go and going.

I drug dealer kills someone because they screwed him on a deal. A soldier kills a man because thats his job, to kill the enemy A cop kills someone....... Cops are here to protect the people and enforce the law, emphasis on the word protect the day that a man whos main job is to protect people, ends up killing people who cause no threat, its a big deal. Just as its a big deal if a Soldier, who has been trained to kill the enemy, ends up killing his own men. I wouldn't dare run away in America, cause I'm pretty sure the law is enforced at the end of 9mm Glock, and if killing me means the law is upheld, im pretty sure they wouldn't mind. Get your head out the Guardian. You seem to think all Police officers just kill people. Police officers are people remember. They are not Robocop. They can mistakes in the heat of the moment. Sometimes armed police are needed to protect the people. Sometimes shooting a criminal is needed. Has a police officer wronged you in some way? You seem to have appeared out of nowhere and started this whole anti-police rant. You shouldn't run away from the police anyway. Unless if you have something to hide...

Where did you prove me wrong? It's possible I wasn't precise enough. Sure you can get elected, without having much funds, like on a local level, where your personal presence can be noticed, like knocking doors, speaking in some park, that reaches a fair amount of the voters. Or in a chess club for instance. That has no effect on society. And what I mean by saying "get elected" (if I did) was on a national level where your politics affect the principles of society. When I wrote about kindergartens, which you surely have somewhere, it was an example. Litter ordinances, schools or anything like that would work too. It has no impact on the argumentation. You don't have to be rich to be an MP. But the party you work for has to have huge resources in order to win. If a party is against capitalism it has no chance to win, because the whole system will do everything to stop it. The exploitation and earning by owning-system will be threatened and capitalists will do everything to maintain it and block change. That party won't have as much money to play around with as the pro-capitalism parties, because it won't be funded by the rich. Small anti-capitalist parties have no ability to reach out to the masses. Without reaching out you have no chance to get any votes. Furthermore, everything you know about communism and socialism is what you've heard from enemies of those systems, in the press or in movies for instance, so you can help them maintain their standard of living by arguing against socialists. Class is very easy to define. There are two of them, mainly. Owners and those who work for them. Employers and employees. It's all about power. Middle class on the other hand is no own class but a measurement of the standard of living, which is hard to define. Modern science has shown that there is no free will. I think it's common sense. Our actions are based on everything that's happened before, chemically. If you throw a dice the same way twice it will show the same result. Same with people. That doesn't mean we are computers. We are much more complex. Input is enormous. But, the same input will give the same output, as with computers. Criminals are not criminals because of their biology, same with housewifes. It's all about society. You said you need millions to participate in the democratic process. I proved you wrong by my example. I'll prove you wrong again. Just look at Gordon Brown, a working class lad from Govan, now PM. Yes the party has to have money. But you were arguing that the individual needed to have millions. I have shown you otherwise. Communist and socialist parties have little chance of winning in the west because people do not want such a system. The system does nothing to stop it. This is why a lot of the parties have similar policies. Centre right policies are the most popular among voters in Britain. Thus a socialist party has no chance. That is why parties have similar ideas. They are all chasing after the same vote. Once left wing policies are popular in Britain then most political parties will reflect this. I have learned nothing of socialism or communism from popular culture. Back in school I had a down to earth politics teacher. He had working class views. He would teach us the strengths and weaknesses of all the ideologies. All kids in Scotland learned this. Stop assuming things Spokesperson. It doesn't make your arguments any stronger. Furthermore I did have an interest in socialism but your radical, stupid and nonsensical ramblings have pushed me away from it forever. Class is easy to define in Marxist theory. The reality is more complex. There is a free will. Biological determinations do not have a great impact. Of course our actions are based on previous events but what that hollow head of yours forgets is that people can make a conscious decision on what to do. Dice are not the same as people. We have minds. We can do things differently than dice. They are inanimate objects. We have emotions. We can think for ourselves. We can make informed decisions. We can create society. We can create culture. Which brings me on to another point. If people are driven biologically as you claim (but have provided no evidence) then why do people in different societies react differently to the same things? It's not all about society (although a lot of it is). We can make our own choices. But societies effect on us is more than biology. You can't argue half and half as that makes no fcuking sense.

Ditto. Project '85 looks better by the day.

Lol. I was way too far up north to feel anything. England seems to have had quite a few stuff thrown at recently. Secret weapon deployed by the Cornish National Liberation Army perhaps?