NavyEEL

i just hope radar, AA targeting, etc is implemented more effectively. no more hitting tab as many times as you can until you find a target and then pulling the trigger. most attack helicopters are designed to attack from a hover, meaning they hide behind the concealment of a mountain, etc, then pop out to engage their targets. in the current OFP, hovering means you are dead since every ground unit will immediately fire stingers and strelas at you. also, a more realistic flight model would be nice--rolls, etc, or at least a more effective rudder and turning system.

crazy Maximus!

He did not give specifics as far as what would be done in reference to cultural training or the religious aspects of our current engagements. He does, however, understand the broader issues and the need for new tactics to be implemented, particularly against the kinds of enemies we are facing today, which involve largely urban areas and a large portion of the civilian population. Like I said, this was more a "state of the Army and where we are headed as a whole" briefing as opposed to a briefing on the situation in Iraq or Afghanistan. I, personally, am looking forward to the changes that Gen. Schoomaker has in store for us. He is really modernizing our Army, eliminating the "cold war" mindset and preparing us for the more unconventional types of wars we will be fighting in the future. PS Thank you mods for getting rid of JP226!!!

"Once an Eagle" by Anton Myrer. Best book I've ever read, and a must-read for anyone interested in military service.

If there is one thing the U.S. Army has taught me, it is that officers often make VERY VERY foolish decisions. Â The higher the rank the bigger their foolishness. Â I can tell you a hundred stories of utter stupidity I have seen concerning decisions made by officers of all ranks including generals. The higher your rank in the military also the more isolated you are from reality as you are not on the ground risking your life on a daily basis and you are generally not in contact daily with regular Iraqi citizens unless you are a general with a major pair of cajones. Â Generals operate within their framework of knowledge. Â If they are operating on a cold war based framework (which most of them are) then they are operating on a faulty framework. Â Â ... So I'm sorry, but unless a general is one of these front-line type commanders who's willing to risk his life working closely on the ground with his troops and he's open minded to new concepts in warfare, he's going to have a very very skewed analysis of the war in Iraq by operating on principles of maximum firepower rather then on a cultural/political/religious based framework of operation. Chris G. aka-Miles Teg<GD> Actually, Miles-Teg, Gen Schoomaker IS a general who is "in the know," so to speak. Given his vast experiences in combat and special operations units, to include Delta Force and being in command of US SOCOM, he is aware of the fact that conventional forces aren't as effective as they used to be given our current situations. In fact, he is currently revamping the US Army in a huge way, modifying the way our divisions are organized and the way our units act as a whole. Everything from training, organization, exercises, deployments, and rotations is being modified to fit the needs of current world situations. The first unit to be modified I believe is the 3ID, who will be rotating out again in the latter half of this year. While I agree that generals have a tendency to become more isolated from warfare at the tactical level, I do not believe Gen. Schoomaker suffers from any such problem. Oh, and JP226... damn your posts are hilarious! You ridicule people yet post nothing but thoughts of your own, or random quotes from sources. I don't even know what kind of sources... just random sources. And if you know Gen. Schoomaker, that's great. In fact, he gave a briefing here not too long ago on the state of the Army and the changes it is undergoing. But please, if you are going to use him as a source of information, whether you know him personally or not, do it respectfully. Don't just say "our chief of staff knows all blah blah blah." Just because he's the CSA doesn't mean he knows everything. And unless you know, preferably through experience, how what he says relates to current world situations, then please don't use him as a source. Thanks!

Wow I had almost forgotten that this was the Iraq thread... things were so off-topic for the past few pages!

1) Who knows? 2) Who knows? I certainly don't consider 9 days to be "fulfilling one's military service requirements." At the same time though, serving 9 days is certainly not grounds for criticism. It's better to help a little than not at all.

Holy cow, after watching that video, all i can say is... Spit it out already! Geez getting an answer from that McClellan dude is like pulling teeth. Just give an answer--that 45min briefing could have been finished in about 10min if he just said up front what the deal was. That was ridiculous! Anyway, I do not know about W's official military service record (I doubt if anyone does...), but I do not think it matters as far as qualifications for President. And if he did serve, be it 9 days or 35 years, serving is serving. Serving for 9 days is still serving one's country, and that's more than most people do. At the same time, i think that if you are going to be Commander in Chief of the most powerful military in the world, it certainly doesn't hurt to have some military experience... after all, that's a lot of power you are going to be in control of--you should at least know, first-hand, how it works.

Hahaha Ash that's the funniest!!!! I love it!

Ever seen the movie "Anger Management" with Adam Sandler and Jack Nicholson? Great scene when he's on the airplane in the beginning. So true too--everyone always freaking out over airport security.

JP226... it's hard enough for me to argue against all of these people. If you are going to try and be supportive, at least post some coherent thoughts using complete sentences and adequate punctuation please. Thank you!

Things often get worse before they get better... changing an entire nation into a democracy is quite a difficult task. Despite many peoples' desire for instant gratification, wishing Iraq was already peaceful and successful, you must realize that it will be beneficial in the end. Just give it time.

It's called remaining positive and optimistic. It's something you must do in war if you want to accomplish your objectives. If you don't think you can do something, then it won't happen. Don't start trying to put the blame on US soldiers.

Walker First of all let me say that I enjoy your posts. Although we have different views, you are always respectful and state your side in a clear, coherent, and mature manner. That makes this whole thing much more enjoyable. Now, as for my last post... I certainly did not intend to give the impression that the intelligence community had failed for any reason. Far from it. Those guys out there are working their asses off. Sure they aren't perfect, and have made some mistakes, but who in the world hasn't? Their mistakes were not responsible for the 9/11 attacks, nor the fact that bin Laden has not been captured yet. Obviously intelligence could always be better, but we must look at the situation realistically and realize that we can't know everything that is going on. As far as catching bin Laden goes... Clinton could have easily made that happen, and probably should have. However, I won't dwell on what could have or should have been done, since it's over now and we have to make due with what we have got. The fact that we have not captured him yet is surprising, but at the same time it isn't. Consider how large the globe is, and how small one person is. Also consider how proficient bin Laden is at masking his identity. Though he may be an international terrorist, wanted across the globe, that does not mean he is stupid. We will find him eventually though, believe me. I do not believe that the Operation: Iraqi Freedom was initiated to further Bush's reelection campaign. I will admit that catching Saddam Hussein and freeing a nation from his clutches won't hurt Bush's campaign at all, but I do not think that was his motive for starting the war. There is plenty of evidence (that can be found somewhere in the hundreds of pages of this topic... ) showing that Bush had plans prior to 9/11 to oust Saddam from power. And the War on Terrorism has not taken a back seat to the war in Iraq. We are still putting up quite a fight in Afghanistan in search of bin Laden, and we will continue to be in that fight for the long run... it just doesn't receive as much press as the War in Iraq, which is good for us. It allows us to do our job without the press releasing tons of information on our operations, and at the same time gives Al Qaeda a false sense of security, leading them to think that we have devoted our efforts entirely to Iraq, which is not the case. (Sneaky huh? ) Anyway, it is almost time for evening duties, so I had better go. I'm sure there will be plenty more posts for me to read and reply to whenever I get back... Peace out!

What do US soldiers dying in Iraq have to do with finding bin Laden? And oh by the way, it's not Bush who is out looking for bin Laden--it is the intelligence community and our military. Bush gave the order, he doesn't carry out the mission. Coalition casualties and even civilian casualties are to be expected in war, particularly in a war where it is often unknown whether someone is hostile or friendly until it is too late. The deaths in this war are still far less than any previous action and are quite acceptable, considering the amount of land that was covered in the process.

"My bad" Maybe it's just the way many people word their posts... incessantly criticizing our president... criticizing our government... our foreign policy... our economy... our judicial system... our military... and our population for "tolerating" all of the above, so to speak. Â Call me crazy, but from this end it's very easy to get the impression that there is quite a bit of Anti-US sentiment in here. PS I am not trying to "inflame" anything

Bit of a silence from the 'other side' as it were... can't they think of a reply? Maybe just tired of the monotony? The America haters will continue to hate America, regardless, as will the people with anti-Bush sentiments. Regardless of what is said, it is clear that nobody will change their opinions or consider the other point of view, so why bother? There are better ways to spend one's time.

i think the appearance of objects in different resolutions depends on the resolution of the textures when they are made. for example, if someone makes an addon with 512x512 textures, then that's the highest they will show up with, regardless of whether you set the textures at 512x512 or 1024x1024. i could be wrong though...

Did I mention that we are building educational systems for the Iraqis? And that includes their own military academy so that they will be able to educate their own soldiers for their own protection and welfare. As far as Tovarish's comment about the US having some "divine right" to change a country's government... we never said we had a divine right. However, when a government is as oppressive as Saddam's was, then it is our responsibility to intervene. Just because nobody else wanted to help doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do.

That was never the reason for starting the mess in the first place, a large number of Iraqi's feel they were better off before, and if "freeing people" is what it's all about, why isn't the U.S. "freeing" the North Korean people in the same manner? Hey, they even admit to having WMD's! One task at a time... and sure Iraqis feel they were better off before--a lot of them don't know any better, and don't know what it's like to have real freedom. And as of right now I'm sure they don't feel any better off because the country is in a delicate state--Saddam is out of power yet coalition forces haven't fully settled violence within the civilian population. Once they gain control and the everyday violence ceases, then they will be much better off. Just give us some time.

Could you pls explain that more specific ? Bush doesn´t show up that much in open public since his WMD lies the faked reasons for war etc came up. I can remeber a full mouthfull president when the war was started with all the lies he introduced tothe world and US public. He also din´t hold a speech for the rights of afroamericans in the USA and he preferred to shut up and leave the place as he found out that his PR job at the memorial didn´t really work. There is no better time than now for the US public to stand up and oppose their president. He has willingly betrayed them. Now he has to face consequences of betraying people. Wherever he is, whenever he shows up. A little price if you keep in mind that people DIE for his plans and lies. People are dying for a good cause. Does anyone disagree that freeing the Iraqi people is a good cause? Regardless of whether we find WMD's in iraq or not, helping them is the right thing to do. Sure some of our soldiers die in the process (after all, it IS a war), but are our lives any more important than those of the Iraqi people? Our soldiers are doing what they chose to do. At least when we are finished, the people of Iraq will have that same freedom of choice. As far as being respectful... booing a president when he is paying respect to the deceased is disrespectful. Regardless of one's opinions of him, they should at least have the courtesy to speak at appropriate times.

freedom of speech, i agree. however, there is a little thing called tact, and there is a time and place for everything. people should know when to be respectful and keep their mouths shut, and when to open them to voice their opinions.

Okay, I read your post, Balschoiw, and here are my thoughts on it. First of all, my facts come from briefings, as well as from family members and family-friends who are either deployed or in command positions. In fact, I couldn't help laughing when I read the article you posted from the US Army War College, considering I was there just last month and know most of the people there. But anyway... First of all yes, we see the tractor and pickup truck, and yes the tractor does indeed appear to have been seeding. However, does that mean that they did not have other reasons for being out there as well? Maybe they appear to be just farming, but then again Al Qaeda operatives from 9-11 "appeared" to be ordinary airline passengers, just as suicide bombers and car bombers "appear" to be just ordinary civilians. The video provides a limited view of the situation, and does not provide any of the background information leading up to the mission. ANY picture of someone dying in war will look brutal and inhumane when you aren't presented with the reasons for them being killed. Besides, who plants seeds in the middle of the night? If they have nothing to hide, it would make sense to do their farming in the daytime. As for the IED not being seen... that does not mean it wasn't there. Please don't try to make a correlation between the IED not being there and WMD's not being in Iraq... that is a different discussion altogether These men were setting up an ambush. Whether the IED was in the truck at the time and didn't explode, or if the IED was hidden is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that they were staging an attack on US soldiers and, as a result, they were killed before they could inflict any damage. And as far as the weapons not "exploding" or the explosions not being visible, I do not know what to tell you since I have not seen an Apache destroy weapons firsthand. However, i will tell you that my information was verified by an Apache pilot and a recent head of Army Aviation, with plenty of expertise in the area. I am sure that he has more experience with AH-64's and the effectiveness of their weapons than I do at the moment, and I trust his judgment. If you have any additional questions, let em rip!

I want your answers on all that. I am in military for a really long time, have been to several peacekeeping/enforcing missions. Have seen multiple vehicles go up, people die etc. If you are not interested in what I say tell me. To ignore the things I said is as plain stupid as going to war with Iraq for the WMD reasons. Ignorance does not make intelligent and smart. I will read it!!! I read every post when I am involved in a discussion such as this... how else can you make a valid argument, or understand where other people are coming from? I won't be able to post for a while though, as I have some duties to finish up first. I will post later tonight, once my work is finished, and hopefully I can clear up any issues.

Agreed! I'm sure a SWAT team would love an all-expense paid vacation to Iraq.