OxPecker

I have to agree with Placebo here. I would much prefer the post he just posted to a general "hey, there's something new on our site, go check it out".

Maybe both of their textures are taken from the same original source photo?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IceFire @ Mar. 23 2003,02:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Well I am. Now how about that DireectX 9?<span id='postcolor'> I d/l DirectX 9, and installed it no probs (I run Win 98). A friend who runs Win XP installed it and totally screwed his PC. Had to do a total OS reinstall.

I know the unit you mean, I think it was called "mistress" or something like that. Unfortunately I can't find it at the regular download sites.

Yes, I certainly hope modding tools for OFP2 come out sooner than OFP1 did. Anyway, good to see a site open for OFP2.

Yes, I certainly hope modding tools for OFP2 come out sooner than OFP1 did. Anyway, good to see a site open for OFP2.

Not being a wiseass, but what is the extra A in AAA? I notice a lot of people call it this. I always thought it just just AA for Anti Aircraft. Again I stress this isn't being sarcastic, I just want to know.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (mr. Duck @ Mar. 21 2003,02:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">2--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Mar. 21 2003,022)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Can't have a proper working Mk-19 on Hummer due to engine restrictions.<span id='postcolor'> Hows that? I thought only missiles couldn't  <span id='postcolor'> Either can grenades. I believe Quakergamer(?) made one, but had to make the Mk-19 fire like a 25mm cannon instead of lobbing grenades like GFX707's Mk-19 GL.

Is anyone ever going to make a UAZ with a mounted machinegun, and/or a BRDM with a machingun turret?

Operation Iraqi freedom? I feel nauteous. Bush, you slimey SOB, you are NOT sending troops to Iraq to free the Iraqi people (even if this happens as a side effect of US action). You are going there to find/remove these alleged WMD and to assassinate a leader who is counter to the US agenda. It is NOT about freeing Iraqi civilians, but admittedly this will probably happen as a side effect of killing/ousting Saddam. It really makes my blood boil the Bush is selling his illegal war as a humantarian effort, and that so many people are lapping this line of BS up.

Can't have a proper working Mk-19 on Hummer due to engine restrictions.

Same as the beta?

This looks like an excellent vehicle pack. I hope an armed hummer gets included, because AFAIK the only armed Hummer addons available at the moment are desert cammo.

A ghood question is: how likely will it be that Saddam gets caught or killed? He has fortified bunkers, doubles, and all sorts of paranoid schemes in place to protect himself. Does anyone give the coalition much chance of getting him, or might he rear his ugly head once the dust has settled. The other question is assuming Saddma is taken out (or at the very least driven into exile/hiding) who is the most likely to be the new leader of Iraq, and how will he be elected/put in place?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Mar. 20 2003,04:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Mar. 20 2003,04:13)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 20 2003,04<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">White House confirms that they were cruise missile attacks against targets of opportunity- notably Iraqi leaders. That makes a little more sense, and is probably about the most effective alarm clock ever used.<span id='postcolor'> Um, Isn't targetting leaders (specific individuals) usually frowned on by the conventions of war? I could be wrong, but I thought there was an international (unwritten?) law that you are not supposed to target leaders. Of course this could just be some BS that I picked up somewhere.<span id='postcolor'> that's in peace time. Â Once they do something like that as an overt act of war..it's just that. War.<span id='postcolor'> OK, that seems to make sense. Thanks.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Mar. 20 2003,04:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">White House confirms that they were cruise missile attacks against targets of opportunity- notably Iraqi leaders. That makes a little more sense, and is probably about the most effective alarm clock ever used.<span id='postcolor'> Um, Isn't targetting leaders (specific individuals) usually frowned on by the conventions of war? I could be wrong, but I thought there was an international (unwritten?) law that you are not supposed to target leaders. Of course this could just be some BS that I picked up somewhere.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Koolkid101 @ Mar. 19 2003,21:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Are you sure there not man boobs?<span id='postcolor'> Like Batman's vest.

I always get a laugh from Star Trek, how in the future, humans don't have internal wars or worry about money any more. I can't see that happening in the next 5,000 years, let alone 500.

No, theyre more like potatoe chips, sorta - Theyre a bit like Cheetos?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ExtracTioN @ Mar. 20 2003,01:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The maker and the team of the new Afganistan map has changed their minds they only release a little mini island with 1 mounten and 1 small village and release that to public and release the full map in September 2003 with a campaign that sucks <span id='postcolor'> Very bad news indeed. I can understand their reasoning, but everyone was really looking forward to this island. Maybe someone else needs to pick up the ball and release something similar.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (blackdog~ @ Mar. 19 2003,05:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">*cough* <span id='postcolor'> Wow, very nice. CS import? If so, the model may need to be flipped, the writing is backwards.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Mar. 20 2003,00:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Mar. 20 2003,00:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Impossible to hide or not, they still did it.<span id='postcolor'> Yes, I know. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Mar. 20 2003,00:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Planting WMD evidence in Iraq might be "impossible to hide", but who's to say they still won't try it?<span id='postcolor'> Again, you are entitled to your opinion. Â My opinion, and I suspect the opinion of many service members, is that planting fake evidence would be stupid, pointless, and ultimately would be discovered. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ Mar. 20 2003,00:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Or is lying and espionage acceptable if there is a good chance you will be caught out after the fact?<span id='postcolor'> Actually, as has been said about twenty times already, "a good chance you will be caught out after the fact" is a good argument against these types of activities. Semper Fi<span id='postcolor'> I think you're missing my point. My point is if this type of falsified facts have been manufactured in the past (despite being "stupid, pointless, and ultimately to be discovered"), why not now?

I don't like pretzels much, I prefer cashews, or CCs with salsa dip. Do you guys have Burger Rings in your country, or are they an Australian thing?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Winters @ Mar. 19 2003,22:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">so then its "feel free to bash the US but dont dare bash anyone else or i will lock the topic"<span id='postcolor'> Can I have some of what you're smoking please? Get that gigantic chip of your shoulder sweetheart, Europe, France etc. etc. have been bashed in this (and other) threads, not to mention almost every non allied country in the middle east. Maybe you should build a biridge, and get over it

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Mar. 19 2003,21:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 19 2003,2109)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As for the capabilities of hiding some nasty things from the public, I have two words for you: My Lai.<span id='postcolor'> Once again, this points out the impossibility of keeping stuff like that hidden. Â BTW, who blew the whistle about Mai Lai? Â U.S. Army Warrant Officer Hugh Thompson. And re. small teams of SF or CIA planting the WMD's, I hope they make two trips, 'cause carrying 10,000 gallons of anthrax at one time can hurt your back. Â Remember, bend at the knees! Â Semper Fi<span id='postcolor'> Impossible to hide or not, they still did it. Planting WMD evidence in Iraq might be "impossible to hide", but who's to say they still won't try it? Or is lying and espionage acceptable if there is a good chance you will be caught out after the fact?