Paratrooper

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ Sep. 07 2002,02:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 06 2002,17:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 07 2002,02:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 07 2002,02:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It bothers me that you don't seem to read my posts as written but rather assume I am being jingoistic. I like most Britons I do not support an EU superstate, this is not part of a grand delusion of Britain's place in the world. Britain does and always has supported a high quality functioning navy, we would not have real control over an EU one; hence the benefit escapes me.<span id='postcolor'> I am not assuming you are being jingoistic. Â I am assuming that you're willing to spend at least 4.5 billion dollars to produce a carrier. Â How many programs will have to be cut and how many taxes will have to be raised to do that. Â And is the shipbuilding industry as it stands in the UK capable of producing one? (I am not being flippant, I honestly dont know)<span id='postcolor'> Then I'll tell you, The UK is a rich nation that can afford it, the carriers are under production as we speak. This isn't something I made up, the MoD has started it. <span id='postcolor'> They definately have. Â I wonder what they're going to choose for a carrier borne airplane. Â I've heard that they're considering the F-35 SVOTL, the conventional F-35 that the U.S. Navy is going to use, or the Typhoon. Â Personally I think the conventional F-35 would be the best choice since it is a generation newer then the Tranche-3 Typhoon and would be cheaper to maintain then the SVOTL F-35 variant. Â Not to mention it has a higher payload.<span id='postcolor'> The S/VTOL JSF and a Eurofighter variant are being considered amoung others.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 07 2002,02:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 07 2002,02:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It bothers me that you don't seem to read my posts as written but rather assume I am being jingoistic. I like most Britons I do not support an EU superstate, this is not part of a grand delusion of Britain's place in the world. Britain does and always has supported a high quality functioning navy, we would not have real control over an EU one; hence the benefit escapes me.<span id='postcolor'> I am not assuming you are being jingoistic. Â I am assuming that you're willing to spend at least 4.5 billion dollars to produce a carrier. Â How many programs will have to be cut and how many taxes will have to be raised to do that. Â And is the shipbuilding industry as it stands in the UK capable of producing one? (I am not being flippant, I honestly dont know)<span id='postcolor'> Then I'll tell you, The UK is a rich nation that can afford it, the carriers are under production as we speak. This isn't something I made up, the MoD has started it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Rhubarbman @ Sep. 07 2002,02:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There is no chance the international community would allow the US to Bomb Bagdad to pits as its a civi population, but when the troops arrive to take it, every single iraqi civie is gonna be a potential enemy.<span id='postcolor'> I doubt it, they aren't going to fight to the death for Saddam.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Othin @ Sep. 07 2002,02:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I cannot see how it would be anything other then a logistical nightmare to embark country A's airplanes on country B's aircraft carrier. It's not like you fly a squadron onto an aircraft carrier and that's it. Â 20 aircraft and 20 pilots. Â You have 20 aircraft, white and yellow gear to support 20 aircraft, and the technicians and tools to work on those 20 aircraft. Â Then you have the admin, ops, medical, intel, computer (ADP), ordinance, and various other people to support those technicians and pilots. Â The ship staff and squadron staff have to closely integrate and unless European countries start sending their military men and woman to the same boot camps and service schools that just will not work very well. Then you get into who pays for the airplane fuel? Â Who does UNREPS (underway replenishments) and VERTREPS (airborne replenishments). What about hardware? Â France is a large producer of electronic equipment, but the UK is more fond of their own or US equipment. Â How will a French Carrier data link with a Royal Navy Destroyer? Â Would they even want to share sensitive information like that with each other? Also, as was mentioned before, what about the CBG (Carrier Battle Group)? Â It is all well and good to form a multinational Navy, but what happens if Country L can't send their frigates to protect the carrier because of a recent cut in defense spending. Â Or if Country F can't send their attack sub because it's laid up in the yards, and their Cruiser is off on a mission for the countries own interests? Â It would be a tasking nightmare right from the get go. I know logistics are a nightmare here in the US Navy, nevermind trying to float a Navy made up of so many different countries and platforms. Â To me the whole idea seems a little altruistic. Â Multi-national ground troops are a proven effort. Â Even air forces can be somewhat aligned, but when you get to talking about ships and carriers you need to be alot more integrated then you all are now.<span id='postcolor'> Co-operation in a mission of shared importance is one thing, but neglecting to maintain a full navy because you are 'part of a bigger one' can only harm the nation's defence; or worse force the nation into dependancy with another country it has no influence over.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 07 2002,02:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 07 2002,02:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That's it is it, argument dried up?<span id='postcolor'> There is no arguement. You are stuck in a 19th century vision of your nation. There is nothing wrong with being proud of your country. Â Heck, I love Canada a great deal. Â But I accept that Canada will never be as strong militarily as our neighbours. Â I still have pride in my nations past acheivements, but I am not on some alfired bandwagon to put us back to where we were during WWII. Â I realize that politcal and economic expediency are more important than the size of ones armed forces.<span id='postcolor'> It bothers me that you don't seem to read my posts as written but rather assume I am being jingoistic. I like most Britons I do not support an EU superstate, this is not part of a grand delusion of Britain's place in the world. Britain does and always has supported a high quality functioning navy, we would not have real control over an EU one; hence the benefit escapes me.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 07 2002,02:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 07 2002,02:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm ignorant? Don't give me that. Nothing you could possibly say will make a case for scrapping Royal Navy develpoment in favor of some sort of Euro Navy. Why is stating that Britain is a viable nation arrogant? I am part of a large majority of Britons who think the same way. Maybe Sweden will benefit from Euro integration but please allow me to have a differing view on my own country without insulting me.<span id='postcolor'> Main Entry: hu·bris Pronunciation: 'hyü-br&s Function: noun Etymology: Greek hybris Date: 1884 : exaggerated pride or self-confidence - hu·bris·tic  /hyü-'bris-tik/ adjective<span id='postcolor'> That's it is it, argument dried up?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 07 2002,02:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No one is implying that Britain should lose control of her armed forces. Â What we are saying is that you can spend billions of dollars needed elsewhere for an aircraft carrier, or you can make an alliance that will let you have the same extension of power without those expenditures.<span id='postcolor'> Well if you honestly think that the British government could have control over French carriers at request then you are ignoring reality. We have small carriers, we are going to have large ones too, The British government has done it, not me. </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And before you start beaking off that the UK is more of a world power than Canada... take a look at reality. <span id='postcolor'> Please, are you really saying it isn't?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 07 2002,02:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I keep forgetting that you are still just a kid. I suppose that I was as arrogant when I was your age. I can't be bothered with to explain for you how ignorant and arrogant your statements are. I guess you will grow up and realise it for yourself one day.<span id='postcolor'> I'm ignorant? Don't give me that. Nothing you could possibly say will make a case for scrapping Royal Navy develpoment in favor of some sort of Euro Navy. Why is stating that Britain is a viable nation arrogant? I am part of a large majority of Britons who think the same way. Maybe Sweden will benefit from Euro integration but please allow me to have a differing view on my own country without insulting me.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 07 2002,01:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 07 2002,00<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We have already started. I don't think having the means to defend ourselves is arrogant nationalism, lets face it France hardly ever embarks on missions with Britain.<span id='postcolor'> Well, listening to you it sounds like arrogant nationalism is the only way you have to defend yourself. UK and France always embark on mission together. Have you heard of that little thing called NATO?<span id='postcolor'> Fawklands, Sierra Leone, Afgainstan, etc. Why should Britain be compromised for the sake of union with Europe? Why should Britain lose control of it's armed forces?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 07 2002,01:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">8--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 07 2002,008)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We have already started. I don't think having the means to defend ourselves is arrogant nationalism, lets face it France hardly ever embarks on missions with Britain.<span id='postcolor'> Well, listening to you it sounds like arrogant nationalism is the only way you have to defend yourself.<span id='postcolor'> I have just explained my reasoning. You may not live in a country which inspires patriotism but I do.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Sep. 07 2002,01:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Sep. 07 2002,01:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My great uncle actualy met Rommel. He was a captain in the NZ Transport Corp. He and his column of trucks were captured by the Afrika Korps, Rommel just happened to be there too! Enough family history from me <span id='postcolor'> so did he also get autograph from Rommel? Â Einstein would be great to meet too <span id='postcolor'> Yes Einstein would make for an interesting evening.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Sep. 07 2002,01:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (SirLoins @ Sep. 07 2002,00:53)</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">Quote (denoir @ Sep. 06 2002,017) I give the operation a 50/50 chance of being executed. It all now depends what Bush's pet dog Blair does. Reminds me of the new video of George Michael. You should watch it once! It is made like a comic and there you also see how Bush throws a piece of wood and Blair catches it like a dog...but that is not all, the video is really really awesome!<span id='postcolor'> I can't believe you would give a rats ass about someone arrested in California for exposing himself to a police officer in a public bathroom. Â Why would you give any weight to any musician, movie star, athlete, or any other celebrity opinion, simply based on their celebrity status? Their political statements, whether on an MTV interview, or in the lyrics of their music are simply trying to cash in on what they think is popular thought on a particular subject. Â You don't think it's all about the money? Â HA!<span id='postcolor'> Well you can lean back and relax. I only watched the Video and didnt copy the images into the last empty pages of my bible. Â Lets look at a different aspect of the upcoming war. If Bush realy wants to get rid of Saddam then he has to take Bagdad. Bagdad is the terminal from where the authoritative military system is organised. But to take Bagdad the US would need to send paratroops (around 40'000 at least) plus a huge amount of groundtroups that would be ready if those 40'000 would get trapped. Once Bagdad+Saddam+military command would be taken then the head of the hydra would be cut. This authoritative organisation of the iraqi military would fall apart once head of the command would be liquidated. Forget about air-war, forget about tanks in the desert, this war must be fought in a city with ground troops. Now that is a damn hell risky thing, especially since the iraqi civillians will support and help the iraqi troops. Ask the israeli how tough it is to seperate terrorist from civillian inside a city without causing unnecessary deaths (well the Israeli often fail). This war will be old fashioned style and that means heavy losses! (and dont forget about Biological and chemical warfare)<span id='postcolor'> To be honest I don't think the Iraquis will fight to the death for Saddam, once the end is in sight they will pack him in, even the Republican Guard I think, they serve him as long as they are looked after.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 07 2002,01:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">9--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 07 2002,019)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">George Michael is just trying to be clever by making a video of newspaper cartoons. Hardly fine satire.<span id='postcolor'> [sarcasm] Wow guys, there's someone here that knows George personally! Maybe he can get us an autograph![/sarcasm] How do you know this? Â Or are you just assuming?<span id='postcolor'> It is rather obvious, clearly hoping to sell some records.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 07 2002,01:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (SirLoins @ Sep. 07 2002,00:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I can't believe you would give a rats ass about someone arrested in California for exposing himself to a police officer in a public bathroom. Â Why would you give any weight to any musician, movie star, athlete, or any other celebrity opinion, simply based on their celebrity status? Their political statements, whether on an MTV interview, or in the lyrics of their music are simply trying to cash in on what they think is popular thought on a particular subject. Â You don't think it's all about the money? Â HA!<span id='postcolor'> Hum. *cough*Jim Baker*cough* There are a lot of people out there that do bad things, but that doesnt stop them from having valid political opinions. If we are to listen to you, anyone famous automatically loses their right to express an opinion and be taken seriously. Â Doesnt sound very fair to me. Â How do you know that Mr Michael doesnt hold his opinions very dearly? Â The answer is that you dont. Â You are just dismissing them because of his fame and his notoriety.<span id='postcolor'> George Michael is just trying to be clever by making a video of newspaper cartoons. Hardly fine satire.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 07 2002,00:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">8--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 07 2002,008)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We have already started. I don't think having the means to defend ourselves is arrogant nationalism, lets face it France hardly ever embarks on missions with Britain.<span id='postcolor'> Isnt the whole point of the EU to enhance economic and national security amongst the European nations? Â Having a joint naval force would likely be of benefit to the whole of Europe while not costing each nation an arm and a leg developing the same weapon systems. And ignoring that possibility IS overwhelmingly prideful.<span id='postcolor'> The EU isn't a nation, Britain and France have very different military needs. Who would control this "EU Fleet"? What if Britain wanted to do something that France/rest of the EU didn't want to with the EU force? I don't want a share in an armed force we can't control, what use would it be?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ Sep. 07 2002,00:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 06 2002,23:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Sep. 06 2002,23:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">no , we need YOUR surface ships for OUR AC taskforces that's europe friend  <span id='postcolor'> We have our own Navy thank you.  <span id='postcolor'> Ah..yet again the specter of arrogant nationalism comes in the way of efficient use of resources. As galling as it might be, Paratrooper, it would make far more sense for France and the UK to work together building a practical CV task force than it would be for the UK to start building carriers.<span id='postcolor'> We have already started. I don't think having the means to defend ourselves is arrogant nationalism, lets face it France hardly ever embarks on missions with Britain.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ran @ Sep. 06 2002,23:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">no , we need YOUR surface ships for OUR AC taskforces that's europe friend  <span id='postcolor'> We have our own Navy thank you.

I want the British Super Carriers! When oh when will we have them!? Grrrr...

I assume non divine figures only so: Sir Thomas Moore. Writer, philosopher and martyr.

The thing is; religion is just one of the differences betwene the two sides, not a reason for the conflict: You slap my face and I'll slap yours. The thing is no-one can remember who slapped who first.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ Sep. 06 2002,21:54)</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">What rank are you Can? I wouldn't accept that from a Corp!<span id='postcolor'> I'm a private. Besides, I was on course at the time, and he wasn't a Corporal, he was a Master Corporal.<span id='postcolor'> I see. What do you do? If you don't mind my asking.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ Sep. 06 2002,17:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'd give up computer games, i don't play them much at all, i don't like them that much and i'd have no problem living without them....<span id='postcolor'> You're making OFP an exeption I assume, or do you just come here for the conversation?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Sep. 06 2002,14:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Sep. 06 2002,01)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I give the operation a 50/50 chance of being executed. It all now depends what Bush's pet dog Blair does.<span id='postcolor'> <!--emo& Reminds me of the new video of George Michael. You should watch it once! It is made like a comic and there you also see how Bush throws a piece of wood and Blair catches it like a dog...but that is not all, the video is really really awesome! I havent really made up my mind yet. On the one hand this war could bring an end to the sanctions, on the other you risk a lot. This is also the opinion of the kurds living in Iraq<span id='postcolor'> The video is pretty naff as the joke is old, the music is also terrible!

I can't say I'd go crazy but I wouldn't like to be without games, its the one I'd give up out of those though.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Sep. 06 2002,10:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (LauryThorn @ Sep. 06 2002,16:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would like to ask all of you this little simple question: What are you ready to die for? Is it your country, your family, etc.. If you are ready to die for your country, what kind of circumstances is that? Would you like to die across the ocean in desert, fighting for The Right Thingâ„¢? Or would be you rather let someone take over your country than die for it?<span id='postcolor'> I would be rather happy to die for the freedom of people who deserved freedom. And as always, death before dishonour.<span id='postcolor'> Good man.