Garcia

That was mainly because of religion in the past, and nowdays it's either religion or just "tradition". But yes, even though some people wouldn't mind their bones being used for that kinds of things, their relatives probably wouldn't. I wouldn't mind too much people playing with my bones, but I sure as hell would have minded if someone did that to my grandmothers bones...

dont join the army? Indeed. And if you live in a country where you have to (Norway, Sweden, Finland...Denmark too? (guess you know that )) I think you get to choose if you want to go abroad or not. At least I could. yeah denmark too, although its not quite as simple as 'you're over 18, time to serve' its a bit of a lottery, literally, and even then you can abstain by becoming a conscientious objector, which means you end up doing community service Yeah, sounds very alike the norwegian system. My brother got binned because they felt he didn't see good enough, while I wasn't and have to go serve in January, even though my eyes are worse...so quite a stupid system when it comes to picking new recruits I don't think I would like to see people playing around with animalbones either, but I wouldn't make a fuzz about it though And yes, in general, humans care about human remains, but not about animal remains...guess people just don't see playing with their grandmothers bones as the same as playing with their dogs bones.

Maybe your sarcastic, my bad in that case, but otherwise, here's my comment: Sure, the US wins everywhere, cause the system of the whole country is probably created out from the needs of the military. Why do you think people join the army? Not for the pride, the feeling of being able to change the world. They do it cause they want/need the money. (And of course also cause of the fact that every woman on earth thinks a man in uniform is hot ) So, US kids comming on to university. Oh noes, law school, that costs 50 000 dollars. Hmm.. I know, I'll join the army. And, voila, you have recruits! So, therefore US wins, cause they have so many troops. But lets face it. 1 on 1, the iraqi would win with ease. And why's that? Well, he doesn't do it cause of the money, the uniform or anything else. He does it to protect his country, his family, his friends, the thing he belives in. They're real patriots, though, they don't have sites about themselves, so the western world just see them as crazy terrorists shouting "Bakka-lakka-dakka!!! Muhammed Jihad!!!1!ONE!!1!!ELEVEN!1!!"* and 'spraying' with their AKs. Atleast, that's what I think. Well I wasn't talking about amount of troops or fighting morale, I was talking about technology and equipment. a US soldier 1 on 1 against a Iraqi soldier with the same equipment on both sides could probably go Iraqis way most of the time, but seeing that the US army got much better equipment, they had a easy time. Just like the US army would have a easy time taking out the IDF. IDF would probably cause more casualties because they've got a better equiped army, but USA wouldn't have a too hard time taking them out. Besides, if USA stopped funding IDF they would have serious problems keeping their strenght up. Yes and Israel was stuffed with technology from USA and probably many other western countries. But which one who had the upper hand equipmentwise will be a matter of opinion. Another matter is the fact that the people who fought that time is getting a bit old now. Which means you have to rely on a younger generation. I mean, Finland managed to hold Soviet and not lose that much land during WWII, but that doesn't mean the finns still kicks ass to this day.

oh how nice. Try being a bit less mature, shall you? You disgust me. You could have deserved going through what a lot of people went through during WWII. You misuse the pain and suffering your people went through during WWII for your own gain, and that is really disgusting. So you're allowed to think you know about the Iraqi army because you've seen/read reports about it? The Iraqi army met the strongest army in the world, do you think you would hold for more than a week or two against the US army? I doubt it...

dont join the army? Indeed. And if you live in a country where you have to (Norway, Sweden, Finland...Denmark too? (guess you know that )) I think you get to choose if you want to go abroad or not. At least I could. I have to agree that the media is making a bit of a fuzz about it, but then again, I find it rather disgusting playing around with bones. I'm not religious and I wouldn't care too much if someone played around with my bones sometime in the future, but I would rather not that someone did, and I think it's decent behaviour to have some respect for human remains...those soldiers are apparently too immature and irresponsible to be sent abroad. But that's just my opinion.

As Baff said, I don't see Israel trying to avoid civilian casualties. If they're actually trying, I feel sorry for Israel, as they must have a pile of complete dumbasses in their army if that was the case. So you you what? Try to keep your soldier secure? Tell me, what makes your soldiers so much more secure when you're playing around with Germany? How does pissing off Germany make your soldiers safer? Nemesis said it... Yes because poor little Israel is so innocent and the big ugly Europe is all bad They might not be that much stronger than Israel, but I'm quite sure they are stronger. And I think if Israel and Germany would end up in a war, Israel would have problems finding any friends...except USA, which would also have problems supporting Israel totally. And Israel would have probably have much more problems finding the money for a war against Germany. After all, much of the money for their army already comes from USAs pocket. lol you are quite foolish sometimes. Did anyone ever compare you to the Iraqi army? Actually, for every day you seem more paranoid.

The goal of terrorists isn't to kill innocents, it's their method to get to their goal that is killing terrorists. Of course you want. I would much rather see the enemy run away than fight them. That way I don't have to kill anyone and the risk of me getting killed is less too. Yes they get criticized for killing civilians, but they've never (or at least almost never) been called terrorists for it, unlike when muslims kill Israeli civilians.

Come on...customize uniform would have to be so restricted that it would be useful...I mean, if it was set to be somewhat like the custom face, I could just imagine people running around in naked-skins and such...

I don't know what about you, but I would rather drop a 500kg bomb on a house and kill 1 terrorist and 3 civillians, rather then to let him terrorist blow up in TA and killing 20 people. I do ? Â I guess each person have his own defenition of a terrorist. I presume you would rather call HAMAS's & Hizbullah's people "rebels" or "freedom fighters" I presume ? Well . .If they'd have stop targeting civillians in my country, maybe I'd call them like this too, since they continue to run around with AK's in the streets and take shots on civillian cars in the terretoris, sucide-bomb in Tel-Aviv and Shoot Quasams on Sderot and Ashqelon [which is my city btw], I'd prefer calling them terrorist, If you won't mind. The problem is that you would rather drop a 500 kg bomb on a house killing 0 terrorists and 60 civilians than have the terrorist walk around in his own country. You labeled people in civilian clothing as terrorists during the war in Lebanon because they shot at Israeli forces. You seem to support any IDF actions that may kill a terrorist, and since you seem to label everyone who oppose Israeli forces or attack Israel in any way as terrorists, you kind of support targeting "terrorists" who would probably not attack Israel, and you would still support it when dozens of civilians died and no real terrorists got killed. I just saw a interview with a swedish author, and he had written a novel about the Palestine - Israel conflict, and he had a rather good question. Israeli forces can kill as many civilians as they want without being labeled as terrorists by any western goverment, while anyone on the other side who doesn't wear a fancy uniform who kills a Israeli civilian is labeled as a terrorist right away. Now what's the difference? If your whole family got killed by someone in a uniform, what makes it so much better? It's the same thing. This apparently had a central role in the book, since it was about a palestinian group getting hold of a russian high-tech sub and pulling on nice blue uniforms...and then the western world suddenly have problems on wether or not they shall label them as terrorists or not. Why? Because now they're in uniform. They're doing exactly the same thing, just in uniform, and if they label them as terrorists, they would label their own acts as terrorism too, since they do the same.

Yes and USA is giving Israel such a hard time now every time they do something bad And what a suprise Soviet didn't say squat about holocaust...I mean, Stalin was such a peach... And when I say USA I of course mean the US goverment, not the people of USA.

Oh well, I thought I'd just bring up the "myth" since you brought up the holocaust "myth"... Do you really think that people in general knew about holocaust?

May that have something to do with the fact that during WWII people didn't know much about Holocaust? It's generally quite hard to say something about things you don't know about...

Doesn't this belong in the Squad & Fanpage section?

It was just a figure of speech

Using your logic you shouldn't say anything. After all, using your logic you're resposible for the Muhammed-"crisis" (and if you wonder what your logic is, it is that if you're living in the same country as someone who does something bad, then your guilty too...). That we live in peaceful areas doesn't mean we all would behave like that if we found ourselves in a warzone. Besides, the germans that did behave somewhat like that (though posing with a headskull isn't as bad as chilling out next to a pile of bodies) will probably be punished for doing it.

Version 1.2 BETA, MP Compatible (to a certain degree) I've always been a big fan of General Barrons hand signal mod for OFP. However, I usually play multiplayer only, so I wanted to look into the possibility to use the hand signals in multiplayer. I started making a mission which would use the hand signals, but after some time I turned to edit the addon so it would be multiplayer compatible. I managed to get it working fairly good in multiplayer, but then I started at a university, and since then I haven't had much time to edit this anymore. And since ArmA is close to being released, I'll just release this as it is. I hope to get the time to edit it after ArmA is released, and then there's hopefully some new script commands that will come in handy. The addon is working, to my knowledge, as good as 1.1 in singleplayer, but in multiplayer there are some problems with units following some of your commands. The addon also now needs CoC NS 2.0 to work in multiplayer, but not in singleplayer (can be found here: I honestly didn't find a link :\, and unfortunatly it's not compatible with missions made for 1.0 and 1.1. ---------------------Missions--------------------------- I've added 2 templates, one for singleplayer missions, and one for multiplayer missions. I'll just explain a bit of what the different things do. The only file you really have to care about it the init.sqs. The others doesn't need to be altered any, except if you want to change something yourself. Singleplayer missions: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">hs_cmd_que_pass = [] hs_rto_array = [] These two are just arrays needed to pass information over the net using CoC NS. Though they are needed when playing in singleplayer too, but then CoC NS isn't used at all. These two arrays should be added to the start of the init.sqs, and have to be empty. <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">hs_lang_array = ["English"] This is an array of languages available for the shouting part. At the moment there's only english available, but this is added to make it easy for people to add new languages. <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">hs_pth = "\GENB_HS_core\" This sets the path of the core file. This is was previously in the hs_init.sqs, but I needed it to be declared before that, so I moved it. This is added so the user can alter the content of the core file and add the new changed files in the mission folder. It should be set to "\GENB_HS_core\" if you want to use the core file. <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">[[groups],[Unit names],[medics],[vehicles],MP?,language,leader] exec "hs_init.sqs" This is the important thing. This is to start the handsignal system for a squad. It needs to be run once for every squad using it, though in singleplayer you obviously just need to have it once, since the AI won't use it. [Groups]: an array of the fireteams in your group. Should be 4 groups, all named before this line runs, and the last group should contain only one unit, the RTO guy. Example: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">[hs_grp1, hs_grp2, hs_grp3, hs_RTOgrp] [unit names]: an array of names of your units displayed when you rally. The array should hold 3 other arrays and one string. So it should look like this [[Fireteam 1],[Fireteam 2],[Fireteam 3], String]], where Fireteam x is replaced by strings for that fireteam, and String is the name of the RTO unit (which should be alone in his group). If left empty the name of the units should be displayed. Example: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">[["Team Leader","AT Unit","Soldier"],["Team Leader2","AA Unit"],["Good day","Cya"],"RTO"] [medics]: array of the medics available in your squad. Medics should be named before this line runs. Example: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">[medic1, medic2] [vehicles]: Array of vehicles that the players squad is allowed to enter. Can be changed during the mission. Example: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">[vehicle1, vehicle2] MP?: Boolean value (true or false). Should be true if it's multiplayer, false if it's singleplayer. language: numeric value that decides what language to use for this squad. Used to select a element from the hs_lang_array array. Note that it do not start at 0. If you want the first element in the array, you put 1 here, NOT 0!! leader: Name of leader of the group. Must be a human player, since the AI won't do anything anyway. Exampleof the full line: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">[[hs_grp1,hs_grp2,hs_grp3,hs_grpRTO],[["Team1 Leader"],["Team2 Leader"],["Team3 Leader"],"RTO"],[medic1],[],false,1,hs_lead] exec "hs_init.sqs" <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">[] exec (hs_pth+"hs\func_init.sqs") <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">[] exec (hs_pth+"hs\command\signalqueue.sqs") Simply just executing some new scripts I had to add. These are executed here to make sure all computers run the scripts. Multiplayer missions: For multiplayer missions, you have to do some changes. In the start of the init.sqs, you have to put this line too: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">CoC_PublicArrays = ["hs_cmd_que_pass", "hs_rto_array"] So it should look like this: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">hs_cmd_que_pass = [] hs_rto_array = [] CoC_PublicArrays = ["hs_cmd_que_pass", "hs_rto_array"] This is needed for CoC NS to work. And also, in from of every initializationline for groups you have to add this: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">? (leader != ObjNull) : so it should look like this: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">? (leader != ObjNull) : [[groups],[Unit names],[medics],[vehicles],MP?,language,leader] exec "hs_init.sqs" And obviously leader is the name of the squads leader. This is so this line doesn't run if the leader isn't present. If the line runs and the leader doesn't exist (is disabled) then it can mess up the whole system. That was about it. That should be enough explaining. To see what you need to have placed in the editor, just have a quick peek at the templated --------------CHANGES FROM V1.1 to v1.2-------------- Except for the change that you can use this in multiplayer now, there's not really much changes that you need to know ----------------------BUGS--------------------------- There are some known bugs that I'll list here. These bugs are from memory, so I won't say 100% that I got them all here. Besides, I don't know if I know about all the bugs. -Some problems getting units to enter vehicles. Both MP and SP (this was present in 1.1 too I think) -When you order a rush/retreat there seems to be a problem getting the unit to fall back into formation (mainly MP, but possibly SP too) -Sometimes units don't move when you issue a move order. However, you should just have to issue it again and they'll move. (MP bug) -Units sometime messes up the rally. (MP bug) -Probably some more that I don't remember. ----------------------FEEDBACK--------------------------- If anyone finds any bugs (I would be suprised if you didn't) then send me PM at OFPEC, OFPTF or BI Forum, or send me a mail to silama@start.no (however I don't check this mail often) or write a reply in this thread. They will probably not be fixed in the near future, but it's better to report them than to keep them for youself ----------------------SPECIAL THANKS TO------------------ HawkinsDaFin - for beta testing and letting me use his server for testing General Barron - Obviously for making the handsignal command system in the first place, and for helping me a lot with all my problems and stupid questions. I even used his readme... :P CoC team and mainly Killswitch - for helping me a lot in understanding CoC NS, which is vital for getting this to run in MP. Probably some more that I don't remember :\ Download link: OFPTF General Barron will be updating the first post once he sees this. Though he's on vacation for the next week.

Every day Bush is in charge is another day for him to fuck up something. The sooner he is out, the better. I wouldn't be too suprised if the one taking his spot will be a bad one too, but every US president in the future will have to work their arse off to be worse than mr. Bush And if all the detainees there was legal detainees, why would USA have to break human rights and loads of the values they claim to stand for and defend to take care of them? If they actually had anything on the people there, why go through all the trouble? Or do Bush & Co just love trouble and breaking laws?

Calling the anti-Coalition forces "troops" is at best deception. The insurgents/foreign fighters are not uniformed and are not serving any governmental body. They're not under any formal command structure and many live amongst the civilian population. The only "Iraqi troops" that the US encounters are soldiers serving in the Iraqi armed forces. Whether the men fighting the Coalition are justified in their actions is irrelevant when it comes to deciding whether they are lawful combatants. From Wikipedia, here's the definition of a lawful combatant: The parts I've placed in boldface are the parts that are usually, if not always violated by insurgents and foreign fighters. American soldiers have also violated these at times, but that's why we have military courts. Not to mention, when American soldiers' misconduct is reported, we get a scandal, not a popular series of poorly filmed videos of Americans killing Iraqis while a preacher chants "Praise Jesus! Praise Jesus!" Either we aren't carrying out the same actions, or I've missed the Monday Night Football Pre-Game Beheadings. So if USA decides to invade Norway I am an unlawful combatant if I pick up a gun and fight the US troops on my own when they've occupied the area I live in (and I don't carry the gun openly)? Now that's just total bullshit...

Yes, but there's so many things that can happen to USA too which will bump them down from the superpower position... It's not a fact, it's a lie. (notice that the period doesn't make neither mine nor your statement true ). Yes, that might be a part of war, but how about murder and rape? You gonna just brush that away with the "oh war is hell" phrase? You seem to fail to realize that the point isn't wether or not people have acted like this for ages, it's wether or not the acts can be justified. So you mean USAs war in Iraq is all good and nice because the Spanish went on a killing rampage quite some time ago? Does that mean that Hitler was spot on in WWII, just because the pope sent out a crusade or two some hundred years ago? Damn, you must have a easy time justifying things if you actually feel you can just say "Hey, they did it before me!". Does that mean I should be able to kill you without getting punished? I've not said USA dragged anyone in. They never directly forced anyone in (except the alleged "Fuck you pakistan, you're either with us, or we bomb you to hell" ). However, they went in, made a mess and then started to whine about other countries taking responsibility and help stabilize Afghanistan and Iraq. They made a mess, and to avoid a total human distaster and a total anarchy other countries had to move in to help. Do you really think USA wouldn't put any pressure on anyone if nobody wanted to go in and support them?

You can't just say "OK everybody start loving each other after 100+ years of butting heads." USA have lived up to the freedom, justice, tranquility and equality that they claim to have. Honestly, all of those are being so overrated by many americans... China is a force to be reckoned with, BUT they would not have enough money to be engaged in a full-scale war for more than 2 years. They can only tax their people so much. The only reason they are a Global Power is because of their military. Russia... its no more than a make believe government run by the mafia and crooks. If you have looked at the news lately you would see that they are still using the ways of the old Soviet Union. India... is a nation with a good economy... kinda. If you consider a superpower to have mass people digging through trash to get food then OK. China and India both have been predicted to take over the role as the strongest power in the world in the future. That is, the next 100 years... And yet you keep defending it claiming they are so much better off now? YOU'VE GONE TOO FAR! I understand where you are coming from with everything above this. BUT ITS WAR! People get angry! People die! People will change! I'm almost certain you don't understand what war is! For me, studying it just gives me a glimpse of what it its. And it is everything BUT nice! You act like its just the US that loves to kill. LOOK AROUND YOU! I can bring up the Spanish inquisition! the crusades! the 100 years war! the Roman Conquest! Middle Ages! and so much more! That video you shown was nothing more than men cheering as they saw a building blow up with men who probably just got done shooting at them. do you blame them? What the fuck does "What war is" have to do with how Iraq is and how US soldiers behave in Iraq? If you know so bloody well what shit you've brought on the Iraqi people, why do you support it? And all you brought up is quite old. Hey, lets point fingers. Look at bad Germany. Who can like Germany? After all, they gave us WWII...I bet Germany haven't changed their policy since then... You can't bring up examples that's 500-600 years old... That aside, no, USA isn't the only country fighting wars. However, USA is the country from the western world which have lead the western world into the 2 latest wars that's been started, and the latest one of them was started on BS. That's one of my main problem with the Iraqi war. They came up with lots of crap that turned out to not have anything supporting it. They could at least have had the guts to come up with their real reasons for attacking...and if their given reason actually was their real reasons...that just shows that Bush & Co was a tad bit "triggerhappy".

I think you should try to actually read the thread...there is no link, because there is no Halo Wars yet...

God, I hope not :P The ultimate way to cheapen a sacrifice like this is to use it so shamelessly. Hollywood films based on things like this almost always suck... And generally using such things to make money isn't a good thing.

Yes, and you can also bend over and shoot between your legs. Nothing in real life will prevent you (except maybe you officer or something). Anyway, I saw a US SEAL with a M60 say on telly that firing from the hip is...oh, big suprise, just rambo bullshit

So in other words, you can't identify what is hypocritical but will label it anyway? SO you telling me that if you don't know if Papa Ny Guinea is hypocritical in some points, you can't mean that any nation is hypocritical? I don't see any relevance in knowing wether or not North Korea is hypocritical when it comes to viewing USA or any other nation as hypocritical. The USA hypocrisy is in no way tied together with North Korean hypocrisy. North Korea could be the definiton on honesty and good moral, and USA could still be hypocritical... I agree that there are pro-USA people who are hypocritical, that there are anti-USA people who are hypocritical, that there's most likely people in between pro-/anit-USA who's hypocritical and that North Korea probably is hypocritical too in some ways. It would be very strange if you couldn't find one person within such large groups of people who wasn't hypocritical. Because some guy said he didn't understand how people can mean nuclear weapons contribute to world peace in any way. So I gave him my view. And I found it to be pretty clear that it was a answer to him, and not part of the discussion wether or not USA is is hypocritical, since I first quoted his statement and then gave him my view. If you kill a person, who knows what reason you had? If he killed your mom, is it right to label you as a bad nutjob? If you wasn't sane when you did it, is it right to label you as bad? How can people know why it happened? A person being a bad guy isn't a fact, it's a label given after considering the facts. People look different at facts deoending on their background/culture/way of life etc. When the muslim world labels countries and people as bad, do that justify their actions? Was 9/11 ok because the muslim world meant USA was a bad guy and that the US people deserved punishment? And I was speaking in general. And yes, North Korea have deserved it's label as a bad guy. If you were refering to me, then no, I don't know too much about Finland during WWII. What I do know, which was the point, was the Finland was succsessfully invaded by Soviet, i.e the whole country was never taken. I know that North Vietnam didn't conquer South Vietnam. I may have been unclear, so I'll make it more clear. North Vietnam invaded South Vietnam. They then successfully fought off USA, and then when USA had to back out, they had a easy time taking South Vietnam. North Vietnam fought against a much stronger part, economically, technologically and military. USA was pretty far from winning the war. Even though USA wasn't giving it all in the war, it still shows, along with Finland during WWII and Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion, that it happens. Of course, the main difference from these 3 examples to a North Korean attack on South Korea would be all the weak parts in the examples got support from a stronger part, and I don't see where North Korea would get support from. I don't think a pre-emtive strike would be a option if one of US' own nukes went off, if that's what your thinking about. If that happened, USA wouldn't have any way knowing who to pre-emtive strike against. They would just have to blow every probable country then, which wouldn't be a good idea. Though, of course, you can never rule out something like this happening.

those 2 wars?? Hah..we had 42 wars against Russia over the near thousand years it has existed..lost 41, tied 1, won 0. we "tied" the winterwar by getting russia into negotiations where we "gave" them large landareas....we lost territory and soldiers, russia lost only soldiers (more than we, but they had much more to take from...). Russia still didn't manage to invade a much weaker nation. And this topic is drifting off topic... And I'm refering to WWII...not the other 41, which I don't give a shit about