FSPilot

I wouldn't put too much stock in what nostradomus said. Â He was wrong about the end of the world, and the deal about him predicting the 09/11 attacks turned out to be a fraud(http://www.tafkac.org/ulz/nostradamus.html).

I love the one where they shoot off that vulcan. How do people get their hands on this type of firepower? I want some too. lol Are those .30 cals those guys are shooting in that last video?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MrMilli @ Dec. 21 2002,05:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As for "Ingesting Pebbles and other engine destroying debris" For one of the Original tests (before Animal rights I think ) the Engineers shot a chicken directly into the intakes without significant damage to the engine.<span id='postcolor'> This is still done today. The chickens are dead of course, and they take really cool gory videos of it as well. The force of a goose hitting an airplane at takeoff speed is the same as a 1000 pound weight dropped from a few feet off the ground, if I remember correctly. Anyway, the problem with harriers is that they recquire a mix of both types of pilots. They can't use only helicopter pilots because, although they're good with the VTOL and hovering, they suck at high speeds at low alts and fighter tactics. They can't use only fighter pilots because, although they're good with high speeds and fighter tactics, they suck with VTOL and hovering. So, if you ask me, there should be special harrier training BEFORE and instead of any other UPT (basic pilot training). I also think, after watching the video on that crash, they should make parachutes steerable. In all seriousness that had to of been horrible for the pilot.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ Dec. 21 2002,02:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh yeah? If Iraq cannot import medicines or equipment to treat cancer victims, who will suffer from that? Saddam or the sick people?<span id='postcolor'> Since when can't Iraq import medicines or equipment?

I'm an airsoft veteran, does that count?

*slaps forehead* "nobody" was an overstatement. Â I trust my govt. for the most part, a lot of other people do to, but not everybody. *goes back to playing video games*

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Dec. 21 2002,00:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Dec. 20 2002,19:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Dec. 20 2002,23:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Land of the free, home of crazy fat guys with machine guns! <span id='postcolor'> Oh say can you see... *sniff* <span id='postcolor'> No.. that fat guy is in the way. Â <span id='postcolor'> LOLOL

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ Dec. 21 2002,01:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">See, in this case, the guy with the gun is in his own house, and you are the guy who is forcing his way in. If I were to follow the average americans logic, then the guy with the knife should, at this point, get the shotgun out to deal with the home intruder.<span id='postcolor'> But see, this is after this guy took his neighbors hostage for a few weeks, so we had to come in and rescue the hostages and put him back in his house. And is now planning on blowing up the whole neighbor hood. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thing is, it is not the place of the US to go in and kick him out. And no amount of blustering about him being a threat will justify current US foreign policy.<span id='postcolor'> I don't think this is because he's a tyrant, our president, his cabinet, and the majority of our senate believe he's developing WMDs. And yes, I do think we need to change our current foreign policy. Not because I think it's wrong, but because I think the world will react badly. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes, and the US sanctions make sure none can challenge him. They also make sure the people get NOTHING, while Saddam can take everything. The only ones suffering and negatively effected by the sanctions are the civilians. Can't you see that?<span id='postcolor'> The U.S. sanctions don't control who gets what, only what can get into Iraq. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And this was my point. The hypocracy comes from ignorance. The ignorance comes from placing to much trust and belief in the government and the current "system".<span id='postcolor'> But nobody trusts or believes our current system.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Dec. 20 2002,23:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">if i remeber correctly, in that suit, denoir was chased by a dog while jogging along with his friend.(not related to picture). he and his friend shot a 30 rounds to the dog, and all of them missed. since they were so colse to their friend's garrison, it took off some alarm, and they were reprimanded for being horrible shooters.<span id='postcolor'> hahahahahahaha

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Dec. 20 2002,23:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Land of the free, home of crazy fat guys with machine guns! <span id='postcolor'> Oh say can you see... *sniff*

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Dec. 20 2002,23:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dont see any proof FS. Or are US statements on Iraq known as being objective and neutral?<span id='postcolor'> I'm not sure what you mean. They moved weapons in place to shoot down American airplanes. They've shot at American airplanes before, so we destroyed them first. If a man keeps coming at you with a knife, and each time you knock the knife out of his hand he goes back and gets a new one. Wouldn't you eventually just knock the knife out before he attacks you? </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you are allowed to elect yes. If you are not old enough to do so I would understand some things coming of your direction better <span id='postcolor'> I am old enough to, but wasn't during the clinton era. 18 to be exact. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hm how ? I dont know of any case of US or Brit planes pinpointing a convoi or shipment for embargo reasons. Do you ?<span id='postcolor'> Maybe they haven't had the opportunity to do so yet, doesn't mean they can't patrol. What difference does it make though why we have a no-fly zone over Iraq.

An elephant gun then?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Dec. 20 2002,22:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Shouldnt be to hard to do, you only need a little initiative. We have a map of Irak at work and we are updating the map with the bombings as soon as we get a report on bombings. <span id='postcolor'> Oh ok, it's just that this thread is 50-some pages long. And where exactly do you work? </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I waited for that moment quite long. Show me proof . If you check the bombed targets you will see that even civillian installations like the civil airport is bombed. Do you think they shot at the US and Brit planes ? How ? With catering food ?<span id='postcolor'> Exactly. Like I quoted before (show some initiative, check the thread )... </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">from http://www.iraqfoundation.org/news/2002/joct/9_sites.html Iraq considers the patrols a violation of its sovereignty and frequently shoots at the planes. In response, coalition pilots try to bomb Iraqi air defenses.<span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">How old are you?<span id='postcolor'> What difference does it make? My opinion is as valid as the next mans! *attempts to take bone out of hair* </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What ? You tell an objective attitude towards an upcoming war WITHOUT any proof is "something cooked up" ? Sorry man but this time you are out of tune.<span id='postcolor'> An objective attitude towards war is perfectly fine, but we have proof, and we have a good excuse to not tell the general public our proof. And how am I out of tune when they're cooking up downright stupid schemes about Bush. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The embargo fits on ground movements and shippings but certainly not on air deliveries.<span id='postcolor'> What makes you think the patrols aren't being used to stop ground movements and shippings?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Lazarus_Long @ Dec. 20 2002,11:01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">this guy kinda makes the MP5 look like a kids toy guy with MP5<span id='postcolor'> That's hilarious. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Speaking of Recoil, Have you seen these? It's hillarious. Shotgun Movie I Shotgun Movie II <span id='postcolor'> Anybody know what kind of shotgun that is? I didn't think any shotgun had THAT much recoil.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You keep repeating about how America is defending itself and its interests. Don't you think that having your own planes over your own territory is of national interest? They are only protecting what is theirs.<span id='postcolor'> I'm not saying they cant protect what is theirs. But we're enforcing a no-fly zone, set up by a coalition. And they're shooting at us, so we're returning fire. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Yes, but you are not questioning a single thing. Which is very scary, you are swallowing it all with hook, line and sinker. I can't believe people think its actually right and just to let the citizens of Iraq die slowly and miserably. You however are supporting just that.<span id='postcolor'> Well no, I'm not. I spent 8 years under Clinton and disagreed with lots of things that he did and said. Now that someone I like is in office, I'm supporting him. Just because I don't disagree with everything possible doesn't make me gullible. And how are we letting them die slowly and miserably? Saddams the one sitting in giant palaces while his country is starving. Now, as for the reasons behind this war. I really just don't think that the entire U.S. government would lie about something. Maybe one person, maybe one party, but not the entire government. IMO, this is just something cooked up by people who hate Bush for whatever reason that spread to europe, or vice-versa.

Eh, just because it's declining doesn't mean nobody's searching for OFP anymore. Or maybe everyone has the pages they want bookmarked and don't need to search google anymore.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ Dec. 20 2002,16:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">it's a no-fly zone, right? Not a no-military-hardware-that-has-a-gun-that-traverses-skyward zone.<span id='postcolor'> I think it's a NO-fly zone, meaning nobody flies, not civie airliners, not Iraqi paper airplanes. Then again I don't know much about it, this is off the top of my head. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">you are an idiot to think you won't be shot at.<span id='postcolor'> Who said we thought we wouldn't be shot at? </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">To try and present anti aircraft fire as a violation of terms of surrender is kind of stretching things.<span id='postcolor'> So they can still shoot at us after they surrender? </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't think the Iraq conflict has anything at all to do with WMD's. If it had, and if Iraq was such a big threat, it would have been dealt with long ago. The US wouldnt take any chances with WMD's.<span id='postcolor'> Politics. Our hands are tied. Even if we're the U.S. we cant just up and bomb the crap out of some country on a whim. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No it wasn´t in the terms of surrender. It was set up afterwards by US, Brits and France without Iraq ´s agreement.<span id='postcolor'> Isn't it there to enforce their terms of surrender? The embargo specifically. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you check the map on the "No fly zone" and the bombed targets in Iraq you will see that they dont match. If US and Brits only moved within their No fly Zone they wouldnt be able to bomb the targets they already bombed. See the gap ?<span id='postcolor'> Can you show me this map? I'm just curious. I don't think there's anything wrong with the Americans or the Brits bombing out of the no-fly zone. They're either attriting Iraqi forces on their way to the no-fly zone, or getting ready for a war. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It is not a very popular thing in America to question the government, something you see done constantly in many European states.<span id='postcolor'> Well that's a bunch of bull. We constantly have people questioning the government. We've got bunches of watchdog groups keeping an eye on things. Not only that, but everyone who voted democrat in the last 2 years is questioning every single thing Bush does right now.

Exactly. If we were pursuing NK as much as we were Iraq people would be whining about us attacking too many countries. Then they'd pick the one natural resource NK has to offer, if any, and say this war was all about it.

Hmm, a bit too young to of been in real combat myself, but once we get that film developed I'll scan and post that picture of me posing with that AK47 I rented for airsoft.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Iraq has never attacked the US. Not once.<span id='postcolor'> They're firing on our planes all the time. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">from "]http://www.iraqfoundation.org/news/2002/joct/9_sites.html Iraq considers the patrols a violation of its sovereignty and frequently shoots at the planes. In response, coalition pilots try to bomb Iraqi air defenses.<span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The US has arbitrarily decided where Iraq can and cannot fly aircraft over its OWN territory.<span id='postcolor'> Yes, and? It was part of their terms of surrender wasn't it? </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Saddam is as much a threat to the US as I am.<span id='postcolor'> You're working on WMDs? </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It all comes down to the US wanting to dictate their own brand of what is right and what is wrong to the world. <span id='postcolor'> This boils down to the U.S. wanting to defend itself. There isn't some twisted covert reason behind this. If there were we would of done it before 09/11. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> When Saddam was killing the 'right' people, he was your friend.<span id='postcolor'> This isn't about the war with Iran, or Saddam being a tyrant. It's about Saddam working on WMDs and being a threat to the U.S. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The simple fact is that the US government knows that Iraq will be a less costly example to the world than Korea would be. And so Saddam is the sacrificial lamb, in spite of the fact that NK has basically challenged the US to stop them.<span id='postcolor'> I've already been over this. We're going after Iraq more tenaciously because diplomacy simply doesn't work with him. We're trying diplomacy with NK because they have actually cooperated with it before.

Ugh, I winced when I saw the title to this one http://1919a4.com/gca/leona-wayne-m16.mpg </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">MGChris breaking in Wayne's new M16 DIAS with a beta at night and someone lighting a cigarette on it<span id='postcolor'> It's not what it seems though, thank God. edit - and i'm watching this one of the guy with the M-60 set up on a bipod, on a spool. i dont think that'd have much recoil in the first place. it's supported by a fat man, with a bipod, and on a spool, and it's still pushing him back some. oh well i really dont know, never shot anything faster than a semi-auto pistol.

Good gravy! What kind of shotgun is that!? Looks more like an elephant gun if you ask me. What are they shooting 6 inch slugs!! WOW! And that M-60 stuff is confusing. But a better question is, where did they get that?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Blowing the hell out of the country for more than a decade = Diplomacy<span id='postcolor'> 1) defending ourselves for more than a decade 2) hmm, maybe i shouldnt of said that about Iraq, seeing as how he's either surprise-invaded a country forcing us to respond, or fired at our aircraft, forcing us to respond. But my point still stands. We're trying diplomacy first with NK because they aren't likely to do anything rash, like Iraq is. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">How easy they forget that Saddam was as much a creation of the US as all the other petty dictators the US props up in the name of national interests.<span id='postcolor'> What difference does it make how he was brought into power? He's a threat and he needs to be dealt with. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And yet your NATO allies don't think he has nuclear weapons, and the IAEA said that the evidence was pure BS.<span id='postcolor'> Where they shown the evidence that the senators were? </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It is quite amusing how you are willing to go and invade Iraq for the probability of it doing something that North Korea already has done.<span id='postcolor'> Iraq has a greater probability of engaging in a military action than NK, that's why wer're trying democracy with them first. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Even if Iraq was developing nuclear weapons - that's no excuse for invading it, or by the same standards the US should be invaded for having WMDs.<span id='postcolor'> No, it is, it violates their terms of surrender from the gulf war. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Setting a list of demands can hardly be called diplomacy. You have been as diplomatic with Iraq as AQ has been with the US.<span id='postcolor'> once again I probably shouldn't of said that, as they're two seperate cases. Iraq is much more likely to use military force, while NK isn't. This is why we're trying diplomacy with NK. at least IMO

I tried it, it crashes constantly. Not the best way to sell a game if you ask me.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Badgerboy @ Dec. 20 2002,06:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No no. You wont find any parts of weapons sold to Iraq from germany.<span id='postcolor'> What about that kidney machine that could be used as a detonator for nuclear devices? It may not necessarilly be a weapon on it's own, but it could be changed to one. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We couldnt even sell that stuff, as we have 1. no research on nuclear weapons 2. no right to have nuclear weapons 3. even forced the US Pershings completely out of our country.<span id='postcolor'> I was just using that as an example. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Strangly enough, with evidence of 2 of the 'Axis of Evil' countries admitting, or with solid proof of nuclear weapons programs, why are the US seemingly commited to blowing apart a country which has so far been proven not to posses any nuclear devices.<span id='postcolor'> 1) Iraq has been proven to be working on nuclear weapons, just not to you. Just because you don't see it on CNN doesn't mean it isn't true. The president presented his case to the senate, the senate voted and said they thought Saddam was working on WMDs. 2) Just as with Iraq, the U.S. is trying diplomacy first with NK. Yes, the U.S. did try diplomacy with Iraq, it hasn't worked.