Pete

i got 50...but some answers could have been multiple choices...and some lacked choises. its kinda cool to check these things, even tho they mean nothing at all...

in sweden a law was proposed, but i am not sure if it was accepted, it was that if you see someone get raped for example, and dont interfere to defend the victim, then you can be charged for being part of the crime. to defend others is common sence, to defend your self is also..but if it goes to a court, its the best liar who wins..its not automatically who hit first who looses in court. they have the court pretty much to see if it was right or wrong to do what you did...if it was that simple that he who hit first looses we would never see anyone charged for those things. about pulling a gun to someones face....if he is a nut and ignores the threat, would you shooot him?...if you wont, he might take the gun from you, if you do...many different things might happen, none of them good. a phone and a quick call to the police, or the threat of doing so will solve the problem and nobody will get hurt.

everything is possible....to kill own citizens to justify a war is nothing new. but, to do that to the wtc and put 50000+ people at risk???...the same with pentagon? no way. as with russia, i also thought of the idea....but i doubt that it was done by russians....there was a incident chechens took a hospital as a hostage...so i am sure a separate group of people (checnyans) may well have done it. as for wtc.....did al-queda do it?..someone did, but it was kinda fitting that al-queda who happily has a base in a place that is of intrest for oil companies and such... possibly the blame had to be put on someone, and to put it on usa's enemy number one and when he is also living in afganistan seemed as a perfect choice, but how true? not saying al-queda didnt do it.....just thoughts, theories....

nordin did the exactly right thing, really...no argument about that, nobody got hurt and the problem was solved. however, i been in such situations many times, and pretty much always was the one who hit first after it got to the point where there was no avoiding the fight (or seemed as there was no avoiding of the fight) i have a short fuse, or used to have atleast...and in such a situation my instinct says to hurt the other guy, even tho i might feel scared for different reasons i wouldnt be able to back off. but, someday when i wont back off (the fights have been alot lesser the last few years, so no big risk) i might end up fighing for my life with a madman, someone prepared to kill, someone armed with a knife.....i know that, and thats what scares me, just to get hurt a little in a fight, few bruises...no problem, i can take it and it does look kinda macho and you can brag to you friends (lie) aobut how great figther you were however....you never do know what kind of man your opponent is, or what he is prepared to do. some 2 years ago i did, for the first time in my life, walk away from a fight after my ex begged me to...it was a drunk man (what a suprise) who threatened my ex and me, and some others...but we walked away and it really didnt feel embarrassing at all as i would have thought it would feel like. i quess my fighthing days, and the agressive behavior i had once, are slowly dissapearing...i hope i can some day act as cool as nordin, and to think before acting, it might save a life (my life).

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Mar. 07 2002,20:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What rule did they break ? One ? two ? your acting like we are beating the shit outta of them,sticking pipes up their ass to see how many times they say ALLAH.<span id='postcolor'> only the rules they (usa) saw fit to break..they didnt give them POW status so that they could interogate and possibly get some information of them i quess.....who here thinks usa dont see them as POWs becouse they dont have proper set of uniforms, or that afganistan doesnt have a legal goverment? lol in that case the NA is just as illegal, if not more so...there never was a legal goverment in afganistan i think... geneva convention...the thing is, once you sign the treaty...you are supposed to do the best you can to follow them. but...usa does as usa does, treaties are there to be broken when needed i quess......why we have laws at all? what was the topic now?..chopper down, aaah...i bet that there will be more casualties in afganistan...sooner or later those caves has to be entered, and perhaps when everything has settled down, the bombings have lessened and all, perhaps then we get a occasional sniper shooting at un/us soldiers?..bombs in cars/camels parked near bases or something? well, personally i think threre will alsways be a danger left...even tho the major organiced army is crushed.

followed?....sure, NOW..after a long time of ignoring it. name, rank and id number?..wasnt it something like that?....while use didnt follow the convention i quess more questions were asked, and now when they were done with that they start to follow the rules..... kinda funny....break them when it suits you, follow them when international protests are too high and you dont profit anymore by breaking the rules..... perhaps we all should do that.....rob a bank and when you got the money from it you start living a normal life again.....untill your out of money again....nothing wrong done?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (rpc007 @ Mar. 07 2002,19:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">they said it was in accordance with the geneva convention and to quit bitching<span id='postcolor'> did they say that?....would it matter?..usa doesnt see them as pows anyways, so geneva convention is not appliable, according to usa. either way...the geneva convention is a treaty usa DID sign on, same as my country..and most countries in the world, that means that the goverment and its leaders should do there best to make sure the treaty is followed, if individual soldiers do something wrong its a crime of war...and they should be punished. but when a goverment (pres bush) ignores the geneva convention that he is supposed to follow.....it kinda makes the treaty completely useless, doesnt it? speaking of hipcrazy...it goes many ways here, i have some of it...but so do those who think that alquadans who shot (or didnt) the fallen seal break the convention....and then support there nation when it breaks the convention also. if you call al-quedans illegal combatans...then they dont have to give shit to follow any rules, to fly a jet into a building or to park a car with explosives near a disco is not to break geneva convention.....nor is to kill a wounded seal. they arent forced to fight by any rules at all....chem weapons, nukes..what ever... in the end its just a peace of paper, rules with no value in real life. mmmm.....but as someone said, we hope the best from usa, the best kind of behavior....from lesser nations as afganistan where few can even read, we dont expect anything at all.

human rights are for all....seals (not the animals) and al-quedas...both sides (us and bin ladens gang) break human rights...as for those who say the "pows" are treated nice...i quess you never did bother to check how they were living there.... alone in a box, under the strong sun...when they get "fresh air" at a yard they have glasses painted over so they cant see anything, they have masks so they cant "spit on the guards"...they are handcuffed, they have ear-protection so they cant hear anything at all... humane?...i wouldnt treat a dog like that. about al-queda....we cant really expect them to follow any rules of war, i am sorry for the family of the dead seal(s), but the seal himself must have known that it was not expected that he would be given any medical care by anyone.... longinus did have a good point, but most missed the point...."we" cant expect THEM to follow the rules when we dont either. (of course, they still would not follow the rules..do they even know them, did they even sign the geneva convention? ((i think not)))

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Erex @ Mar. 05 2002,22:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">4Pete:No i have meaned MTA its a acronym for Military Training Area<span id='postcolor'> yup, i know...just thought that it would fit well into the "german tourist" camouflage heheh anyways, if you do get to take some pictures, posting some on this forum would be very nice, we are all intrested in that im sure when i was in the army i remember 1 jet flying just abowe us at highspeed (tree top level) followed by 2 other jets in close formation...it looked so cool and i really hoped i had a camera back then, i saw the trees wave and leafs drop cos of the exhaust of the jets.....they were that low, and really really fast i wish you good luck with getting to the nato exercise.

i say....dress like a german tourist, that way if you get caught you can say you were looking for elks (mooses?) and got lost in the mta (which you of course thought meant "mountain") another thing to do...call the army or the police and ask for advice, they will for sure help you. ps, tell them that you are a part of the famous BIS and that you need some photos for the game, and you need to see the things work in real life to feel the atmoshpere they provide etc etc......just some small lies.

how about having all the israelis on one side of the place, palestinians on the other, and then at a set time have them all run and claim the territory, kinda like a reset button heheh no, really.....the least that could be put there would be un observators, israel (and palestinians, of course) would have to be FORCED to obey the set rules.....they cant make peace by themselfs, we seen that a long time ago, they know it also... its just revenge after revenge...its not only the palestinians + arabs who deserve the name "fanatics"....israelis and its supporter(s) are no better. stoneage mentality....kinda funny that nobody ever tries a creative solution, only destructive ones.....however, saudi's came with a plan tho...hopefully sharon and arafat will listen to them (but propably not) and create a peace...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Nobby @ Mar. 03 2002,13:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I added them all to my harem <span id='postcolor'> i quess the french will soon read about your adventures in there newspapers......... *there is a spy in your harem*

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RedStorm @ Mar. 03 2002,09:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">3d person is not a cheat, everyone can do it.<span id='postcolor'> its a glitch then...in df2 for examply you could get into walls of buildings, or into trees..you would be totally invisible and if you are in a wall, bulletproof. you would have a clear view on everything and be able to kill anyone outside. anyone can do it, but doing it gives you a unfair advantage, you are able to see without anyone to be able to see you, even if they would know exactly your location. call it a cheat or not...it ruins a big part of the gameplay and kills realism. should never been implemented in the game imho.... btw, if host disables 3dview, then all the clients will have that setting also...its already there...but most hosts will not disable it.

i got 1. h&k pdw 2. imi uzi 3. fn p90

16 % gay.....what went wrong?, what did i say that was gay'ish?

i dont....actually pretty much ALL american wars usa has acted as the agressor....not defending there own country, but attacking others.....this you all accept without complaints. yea like WW2? and the Gulf war.. would the US have had to go if Saddam had not invaded? no. gulf war was a NATO action, not US, the UN unanimousley(sp) told Saddam to get out of Kuate.. they gave him a dedline.. it passed and NATO went in.. sure the US wasnt attacked.. but it didnt start it either.. Korea... same thing. North Korea invades south... UN throws a fit.. NATO goes in.. also South Korea was a US allie.. is the US just supposed to sit back and let its allie get overran? no.. so, with your reasoning Japan did not attack usa or behave as a agressor, it merely supported its allie germany? did i understand your reasoning correctly or did you mean that only usa can use that logic? the thing is, you did not have to fight most of your wars..panama?, vietnam?..korea?....un war, nato war..does it matter? when your nations survival is not threatened, when you are not attacked..and you still end in a war its pretty much 100% of the cases you are attacking someone else.....but sure, defending others countries is a reason tho that can be accepted, but not always (like japan attacking usa...u understand my point?). in some ways i quess most really do believe that usa "wants the best for the world"....its kinda sad. name another country that has EVER come close to wanting that.. all nations are the same, the protect their interests.. the US is no different.. neither is GB.. neither is Finland.. dont try to demonize the US for looking out for its interests.. every country in the word does it... and many do it in a far more sinister way than the US does... exactly my point. usa wants saddam removed they say..becouse he is a "bad" ruler?......nope,. its cos your nation has intrests there...that was what i meant, same as with every other nation, but usa wants always to make it sound as they are on a crusade doing only good things..and many many seems to believe it. of course not only usa does this. i dont support a war vs saddam and his iraq on an international stage.. you stand pretty much alone. do you think so?...i quess you are wrong my friend. kinda funny how nobody wanted to stop the war between eritrea and etiopia, why not?.....they killed more than saddam ever done....more examples can be found. well in the case of the US.. nobody asked.. those places are not allies to the US, we share no trade or anything else.. if the UN had stepped in and said something NATO and the US would have gone.. but since the US is totally detached and shares no link with those places.. and nobody said anything.. the US didnt do antyhing.. is there a problem with this? no problem at all....just adds to my point with usa only going for its intrest...to remove saddam is a excuse, to get the oil is a more true reason...you know it, i know it..but us govt says differently, they say they are out doing good as the world police, while in reality they are just another band of thiefs leading a nation into a war they justify with "moral" reasons. but no....as wobble said, they will make demands that they know will lead to war....and as wobble said "its saddams fault", but its a kinda narrow view on the whole. those "demands" are the CONDITIONS of the cease fire signed by saddam that ended the gulf war.. which was to allow UN inspectors go travel freely within Iraq to look at whatever they chose looking for chemical and bio weapons and weapons facilities.. but what did saddam do? he threatened the inspectors and then kicked them out... so he did not comply with the "demands" he himself previousley agreed to.. so in all fairness there is no reason that NATO should not flatten him.. when you sign terms and dont follow up on the you void the effect of the contract.. why arent the investigators allowed in?.....actually, if im not all wrong only the american ones were thrown out at first...for spying for israel first all inspectors were allowed.. but they were only allowed to go escorted to places that Saddam specified.. which is complete and utter shit... then when NATO started getting angry at him he said "well no US then" NATO (not the US) said.. "no.. its a UN inspection and the US is going, you signed the documents and now you will abide by them" after that he threw EVERYONE out. he did propose a idea of letting "neutral" investigators in...its better than nothing, and it surely is better than a war, dont you think? and of course, then blame saddam for bringing the war upon him....... well.. when your history involves using chemical weapons against your own people, hostile invasion of a neighbor country.. murder of your own children.. steal most of your countries revenue to pamper yourself and build palaces for yourself and let them starve...etc etc.. there isnt really much "blame" that needs to be placed... pretty much the same in most nations history, not that i in any way defend saddam...but if you want him off, just shoot him, why start a war that will lead to huge amounts of deads..civilian and military. to see cool explosions at cnn and to get more power to usa at the expence of innocent lifes? what is happening there?....why dont the americans react against the constant flow of new wars, why you keep letting them start?.... what war has the US started? afganistan? we were attacked first, Korea? our allie was attacked first... WW2? we were attacked first and declared war on? desert storm? that was a NATO action, not a US war... again...japan fits in well...you decide what is to attack and what is to defend. korea..you ally gets a beating and you enter the war....not attacking as you say, only defending... germany, japans ally gets a beating and they enter the war...not attacking?..pearl harbour? sorry.....please tell me what is to be purely defensive and to avoid wars untill necessary, and what is to attack other nations? the only war (sort of war)you can really say the US wstarted was VIetnam.. and in the end the people DID get all pissed and it was ended.. if you say so.. the wars you loose are the wars you attack in?.....kinda follows the "winners write the history" logic. the constant new dangers in the world we have thanks to usa.....more hatred, more powerty, more deaths...and all in the name of "good". more dangers? like.. what? 9-11....more coming, for sure...instability in the world...india pakistan nearly started a war using the reasons usa used against afganistan..and they have nukes, more dangers?....yes, like what wobble...?...DOH! more hatred? from whom? afghanistan? north korea? Iran? fuck them. more like the rest of the world....im not really talking about any nation attacking usa, would be a silly thought.....im thinking more of a situation where we get a global israel-palestina kind of a conflict, more intense and dangerous than it ever was in the mid east...more hatred = more potential terrorists, more willing supporters for that too... More deaths? before afghanistan was invaded over 100,000 people died a year there due to starvation because the taleban would take what little money the country got and refused to let aid worker inter.. thata 100,000 PER YEAR... they murdered women and men and children for crimes such as going to school, showing your face in public.. teaching.. yea abviousley the US is cause of much death. iraq and santions...id blame those death there on usa and uk, the only ones who wants to keep the sanctions now. yes, usa is the cause of much EXTRA death....i mean, come on....do you still think that nobody starves to death now, after usa "beated" the evil talitubbie regime, dont forget the thousands of civilian deaths usa added to it. its like.....many people get hit by cars and die....so, does it really matter if i hit someone with my car also?....possibly not, since he was propably going to be killed by someone else some day anyways... atleast we could try to help without killing when helping, the war in afganistan was not to help anyone, the civilian deaths and possibly (most likely not) end of starvation were sideeffects......like what happens when you let a drunk driver on the road..someone risks dying while he is headed towards his goal. but to justify that death?...silly. I like this.. i mean nothing bad against the americans ... ... i say "fuck you usa" wow.. arnt we Jeckel and Hide. wow.. did we go to school and learn to read? americans = people living in usa. usa = united states of america. usa is for me the goverment, politics, the flag..and the nation. i have nothing against all americans, but some...some with power, and some who blindly follows them...fuck them. but you read and see what you want to see.... did you get Silencer to write this post for you? who did you use to read it for you?

double post.....also a hidden spam to get my post count a lil higher......

im kinda late with my opinion on this thing, i had not much time and didnt get to reply while the thread still was followiong the topic. but first.. what is usa's next target?..undoubtely iraq, but come on....do you guys REALLY accept a war, resulting in THOUSANDS (tens of thousands, hundreds of...?) civilian deaths to remove ONE man? just send a single assasin, sniper, tomahawk missile....problem solved....but we all know that usa will want to use its of so cool warmachinery to crush and totally destroy the army well before they even consider saddams death...and after its all over they will insert a us puppet goverment that gives us all kinds of advantages..... who is the next target?.....i quess we all are so used to see usa in a war all the time, anyone remember a day when usa was at peace? i dont....actually pretty much ALL american wars usa has acted as the agressor....not defending there own country, but attacking others.....this you all accept without complaints. in some ways i quess most really do believe that usa "wants the best for the world"....its kinda sad. i dont support a war vs saddam and his iraq, and i say "fuck you usa" the day the first bombs fall.....you want saddam gone, kill him.....but its not so, you want more....control of the nation (with puppet regime) and the oil.....i call it robbery, but you of course believe most of what they say. kinda funny how nobody wanted to stop the war between eritrea and etiopia, why not?.....they killed more than saddam ever done....more examples can be found. but no....as wobble said, they will make demands that they know will lead to war....and as wobble said "its saddams fault", but its a kinda narrow view on the whole. why arent the investigators allowed in?.....actually, if im not all wrong only the american ones were thrown out at first...for spying for israel (proved to be right, afaik). if saddam says "sure, we will allow investigators, but no americans" it will not be accepted by usa, they are after a war..and nothing will stop it....if they get the investigators (even americans) i am sure usa will sabotage the relation and end in a war anyways.....and of course, then blame saddam for bringing the war upon him....... war is something that should be avoided, and only used as a LAST resort to DEFEND your (or someone else) nation, but USA does (try to disagree) start wars very easily... when bush "declared war on terrorism" he said "our peaceloving nation"....and i was not sure if i should cry or laugh...since usa is all but peaceloving. what is happening there?....why dont the americans react against the constant flow of new wars, why you keep letting them start?....and not only that, why you see it as a good thing? baaaah....im done with my usa-flaming, i am tired and might sound too offensive, but really....ive had it with the constant wars usa makes, the constant new dangers in the world we have thanks to usa.....more hatred, more powerty, more deaths...and all in the name of "good". why are the ones wishing for world peace so few?..or atleast on this forum. ill go to bed, night all...and dont take my rambling too offensively, i mean nothing bad against the americans, but you all already know my opinion of the us govt and the brilliant leadership of pres. Bush.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Feb. 24 2002,12:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Pete @ Feb. 24 2002,12:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">like when a woman says "men..." with THAT voice.<span id='postcolor'> You mean like when a man says "women..." with THAT voice?<span id='postcolor'> exactly, and what makes it worse is that it aint even abreveated as jap, brit, scot and such....

just out of curiousity....shouldnt americans be called united-staters or something, since america is a continent and includes a lot of nations... also, why is "yank" seen offensive by some usa'ers?...it is not a insult far as i know and doesnt refer to anything negative, but my knowledge of american history is somewhat limited. we here are often called euros...and with the eu bringing us closer and closer it might be a correct term...but that is not the case with usa and america. anyways...i am finnish and have lived in sweden most part of my life, when i am called "finne" by the swedes or someone else, it depends on the tone of the voice or attitude of the speaker whether he sees a smile from me or feels my shoe in his mouth. when you spit out the word "jap" it is offensive, same with jews.....like when a woman says "men..." with THAT voice. personally i only use "racial insults" only towards good friends, and only for them and as a joke, not when speaking about them for others.... so it is not really the word as such, it is how it is used.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Monkey Lib Front @ Feb. 12 2002,03:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I wonder if pete has any funny storys?<span id='postcolor'> sure i do....however i been gone for some time working in norway, ill go back at sunday but ill have internet there from now on, so ill be posting a lot soon again... ok, the story Pete baba and the 40 deers? we had a long 3 week live fire exercise in northern finland, i was there as a mortar soldier and there was also ALL finnish mortar companies, from the whole finland, and a lot of artillery too...and loads of other kinds of troops, mainly artillery and mortars tho,. we were way over 10.000 there for 3 weeks... we prepared to fire at a target some amount of kilometres away and we were to fire a combined volley with 3-4 other companies...but as soon we got the fire order it was followed with a hold fire order, we didnt get to shoot one grenade, but some other (a swedish speaking mortar-unit...) was more trigger happy and got 3 grenades (120 mm) away before they stopped the firing.. we didnt know much of the reason, or that the other company had fired at all...we were all really far from eachother and explosions and detonations were very usual so i didnt pay much attention to the 3 big booms from the distance. what had happened was that the fireleading team (forward observers?..dont know the english terms) aborted the fire-mission when they saw a herd of deers walk into the target area...a total of 200 of them, and the 3 grenades had hit right amongst them and killed 41 of them immeadetly, wounding some 60 of them that had to be shot at the location. the next day the newspaper had a article about it and included a "deer-masskiller-history" in it, we scored second position in it...a train had killed over 80 in one hit wounding even more... when we got back to base we were called "Porohoro" instead of the usual "Korohoro" korohoro = nickname from mortar soldiers...comes from "kranaatinheitin" which is abreviated as "krh"...Poro = the name for "deer" in finland.......very embarrassing for us...the whole incident lol....i have a lot of stories..as do all the people who served in the army, the army is a place for stupidity...and it shows

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Lowjack @ Feb. 10 2002,12:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Haha... you're taking it waaaaaaay back eh? <span id='postcolor'> lol yeah....you didnt pass that stage of ofpn history un-noticed every day i saw a post "WHYYYYY!!!" from you lol btw....it was your post i first replied on back in the ofpn forums...WAY back in time. i seem to remember all kinds of nonsence details.......

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (L24A @ Feb. 10 2002,12:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">dont remember who it was, maybe Sokrates of ancient greece who said "if only people would know how little inteligence the ones ruling our nations posses"<span id='postcolor'> Sounds like Plato to me in book VIII <span id='postcolor'> could very much be him....i remember it was one of those really famous dudes kinda funny (or sad?) that his thoughts are still valid today......

agreed....altough i think that the news i read are somewhat more against israel now, israel is fast loosing its popularity and sharon is being critized not only by us, but also from people in his own party... in my opinion sharon is destroying every hope for peace on purpose, that cant really be said about arafat...a 7 day "no violence" demand...totally impossible, specially when israelis destroy pretty much all arafat had to possibly control the nation..the police stations and such.......they more or less press the situation to be what it is now....they seem to try to make it explode. in my opinion...sharon and arafat should both be removed of power and replaced with people who desires peace. but as for now...arafat is needed in power and as long he is restricted as he is nothing will change to the better... oh..about a impartial view...noone is the one with the most impartial view, he was in israel (not anymore i think) and i very much liked his posts...none of the rest of us can say that we are unbiased or neutral.

lowjack is from the ofpn forum.......famous for being a non-vip person nice to see you again lowjack