Florida_Guardsmen

You mean the British? When the Brits took that region in WWI, they didn't have those kind of weapons aside from gas weapons. As for choosing allies: I'm not choosing either side. I believe in justice, and the Kurds should have their own home if they want it. The Turks took that land from the Kurds, so we should give it back to them. (and as for "we" taking Iraq off the Ottomans, I am an American, as my display name should represent. The Americans didn't fight in the Mid-East during The Great War)

And who do you think will help Kurdistan? If they will be fighting terrorists (aside from Turkey) who do you think will jump in? I'm sure an agreement with Turkey will come up, though. They have been having troubles with illegal Iranian immigrants coming into Turkey. So much so that they closed off a mountain. I'm sure they wouldn't mind dumping their problems on the Kurds... as long as they don't encroach on Turkish soil. But the Kurds do encroach on Turkish soil. They are the primary source of terrorism in Turkey. Actually its the other way around. The Ottoman Empire conquered the Kurdish region, and the Kurds want to be independant. The Turkish infringe on KURDISH territory, which was why the PKK engaged the Turkish military back in '99 (and then the Turks began destroying Kurdish villages, and forcing them into refugee camps) and also why the Kurds fought that uprising back in the early 1900s before the Great War.

....No you didn't bro. You merely stated that we supported them, not why. I was responding to you by stating the reason we supported them and defending the CIA (though I do not trust them)

Actually, Al-Qaeda had a CIA sponsored training camp in Arizona or New Mexico. I can't quite remember which, though I'm leaning towards AZ. Anyhow, we supported the Mujahdeen in Afghanistan because they were fighting the Soviet Union, and for no other reason. We don't care the least bit about world freedom or democracy, any of that. Hell, we put Pinochet in power and supported him! We supported Saddam because he was against the Iranians, who had just overran our embassy in Tehran (and embarassed the hell out of the CIA/1st SFOD in their failed attempt to release the prisoners)

From what he quoted, I think Bordoy is commenting more on the fact you want to see the video, rather than the fact he was hanged, and I got to agree with him, International Arsehole or not, you'd have to be pretty screwed up to take pleasure in watching him die. But hey, whatever turns you on. I saw enough horrific death in my time, especially with the execution videos of those American soldiers. I want nothing to do with the Saddam execution videos. 'Nuff said.

I never said anything would happen to him, but he is guilty none the less

Thanks mate, I'm checking it out now.

Ok, I hope next punished-to-death dictator will be George Bush. 60,000 Iraqi civilians dead is a serious guilty for him to be judged by satrapy Hague tribunal. 60,000 mate? Actually, I've heard its more like 200,000 dead. But regardless, he actually has committed warcrimes. According to the Geneva Convention, and what laws were stated in the Nuremburg War Trials of World War Two, George Bush committed the crime of invading a sovereign nation unprovoked. Believe it or not, its a warcrime. So I'd like to see him sent to the Hague, along with that bitch Rice, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, then all the Congressmen and women who voted for endorsing the Iraq war. They played just as large a role in it as anyone else.

I'd like to add that I am not flame baiting by saying the above, merely stating my opinion. The politicians are not giving our troops what they need to win, and as such, we aren't. If you do not like what I have written, please debate me on it in a civilized manner, no name calling etc (Basically be a cool dude, and lets not let this become a flame war, ok?)

Unfortunately, we are incapable of winning this war. We are fighting not an army, but a people. We aren't trained (extensively) in handling rebuilding and peacekeeping operations. While yeah, the National Training Center does do this to a degree, not everyone goes through the NTC, and many never are in a position which involves handling a local population. That almost exclusively involves the MPs, while few units above the company level ever are set in garrison duty. The rest are off training for conventional war, using MILES and fighting tanks as though they were battling at 73 Eastings again (To those of you who do not know what this is, it was a Armor battle fought between the Americans and the Iraqis in Operation Desert Storm, and the fiercest tank battle since WWII). Another problem in addition to lack of training, is the lack of popular support at home. This may seem minimal, but its impact is infact enourmous. Not necessary to the individual soldier, as we only see things on the neighborhood level when there. But rather the strategic and executive levels of the operation are strained as a result, such as our dear leader's insistance on not sending more troops. Now, it is too late for this, and sending more troops would only make more targets for the insurgents, but had our leadership not been absolute morons and trying to fight the war cheaply, we might have accomplished something and not had 3000 dead boys coming home on those C-130s and C-17s wrapped up in plastic bags. No, had we not had a bloody buisness man trying to engage in matters of war, and had we taken the advice of people such as Tony Zinni (and not fired him for not being Bush's yes man) or any of the others who stood up (oh how few there were..) we may have actually had an effect other than merely stirring up a hornets nest. 500,000 soldiers couldn't end a war in South Vietnam, which is about the size of half of California, so how in the hell is 125,000 troops going to handle a country larger than California by approximately 11,000 miles! How? Sure, the Iraqi Army itself was not much of a threat, though I gotta hand it to them, they put up a brave and stalwart battle for Al-Basra in the face of those Marines and the British 2nd Armor, but still, they couldn't defeat us. But when the take off their uniforms and blend in with the population, and then the population becomes the enemy, because you never know who you're fighting. Same problem the Russians had in Afghanistan: Fighitng a conventional war against an unconventional force is never going to work, without contributing the proper amount of force, will, political knowlege of the people and ability to work with them, rather than against them, and finally troops skilled in handling this kind of situation. So ultimately, we cannot win: We've already lost. But every soldier is merely buying time with his life waiting for the executive leadership to finally own up and accept that we have on our hands another Vietnam. Perhaps they'll finally learn a lesson, else we're doomed in any of our pursuits throughout the world.

*Begins cheering* Good. One less asshole tinpot dictator in the world....many more left to go.

I am very new to scripting, and am just now starting to figure it out. However, the CoC CE engine is very difficult (to me...) to work out. Could someone here help me? First of all: I've gone through the explaination of it in the documentation, yet for some reason, though I've done exactly what it says, it doesn't work. Here is my userinit.sqs information: When I get into the game, it says "_squad2 = [squad2, "INF', ["Charlie", _blue], 0.5, "marker_squad2", [""], -1, []] Unknown Operator "Charlie" " or something to that effect. Whats up with that? Thank you very much for any help you all offer a poor noob. I appreciate it.