ralphwiggum

Not necessarily. Rule of thumb is that 5.56 is loaded hotter than .223. Also, rifles chambered for 5.56 can shoot .223, but the other way around would be a bad idea.

Before this thread degenerates into talk of The Patriot act, I'd like to remind people that this thread is about Osama Bin Laden.

Why don't you stay away from this thread? That way people can actually talk about the event without engaging in politics? Think about WHY I did it.

This is a thread for discussion of Osama bin Laden's death, NOT US's policy.

Let's not turn this in to political discussion.

I'd have preferred him sentenced in an international court(roughly speaking), but this outcome is no worse. He can be a martyr in the eyes of AQ, but it is also a reminder to them that sooner or later, you will face the day.

If you are trolling, I suggest you don't.

Actually they are Obama haters. They have consistently opposed what Obama suggested, and the reason why they hate Bush is because he is not as extreme as they are. You had no problem making bias statement such as "The "lunatic" fringe comes from the far left. Not the far right. and it always has. " which just goes to show that you are no less biased than others, if not more.

San Francisco PD dealing with grenade found in a home. Skip to 2:30 uf you can't wait.

http://www.majordickwinters.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=113&t=4612 http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/01/dick_winters_of_band_of_brothe.html

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110105/ts_yblog_thelookout/mysterious-bird-deaths-caused-by-fireworks I'm locking this thread as it has very little scientific talk and is more of a chit-chat session

Western? Western Europe or western world? No matter how you try to hide it you have a history of supporting former communist states, and this thread is another extention of that. In this case, the evidence is clear that it was North Korea who attacked South Korea without a doubt. Is that too much for you? You seem to hang on to a very limited thing and enlarge it as if it is a big representation of the incident, but it isn't. Criminals always claim they are innocent, even though they aren't. You may listen to them but listening to them and trying to dilute the whole incident by siding with them are two different things. It seems like you are one of NK sympathisers. It is beyond reasonable doubt that NK fired first and you seem to have no problem dredging up non-related things to grasp on to. So you managed to admit that you are a biased person, while previously, you were trying to portray yourself as an objective person. History may have some bias, but in the incident we are talking about, notice that there is very little room for bias. When one side gets shelled and has to fire back I don't think that is called an aggression. NK's action speak louder than their words. No matter what they claim, their actions of past and current have shown mroe than enough. Are you denying that North Korea fired artillery? Their records don't show it, right? Try to say another thing, but you've shown yourself to be the inteelectual wannabe. I, as well as others, repeatedly showed how wrong your claims were, yet you are still clinging on to the notion of being neutral observer. Maybe you realize you can't make an argument and try to take on the higher road, but you even fail at it. So you are admitting that you don't have to justify yourself, which sounds like to me you are more interested in starting things up under the disguise of being neutral. Furthermore, you called me a liar, despite the fact that during our conversation, I managed to provide tons of proof that showed why you were wrong. Condsider this your last warning. Don't troll.

Actually it is a very good idea. After attack on Cheonan ship, there were reports of North Korean propaganda trying to portray it as a victory led by the protege. Funny you see it that way. A few days ago South Korea had another artillery excercise on Yeonpyong island, the same island North Korea attacked. What did North Korea do? They promised to retaliate, but when the South actually held their excercise, North Korea shut up and did NOTHING. That does not sound like someone who saved their face,but rather lost it. This pretty much shows that you are biased and quite ignorant about the situation. I already thoroughly discounted your theory about how it's US that is pulling the string, and yet you are mired in your own bias, detached from reality, to see that it is not the case. So you admit that you are biased? Yet you try to argue that you are interested in getting a balanced picture. What you are claiming doesn't make sense. It's always the crooks that claim innocence in courtroom. "I didn't steal the car." or "I did not mean to kill her." They all claim that even when the evidence clearly shows that they did it AND bragged about it too. All you are doing is committing perversion of intellectual honesty. In a layman's term, you are saying that even with overwhelming evidence, for the sake of pretending you are objective, you try to argue for the other side. There are times when it is waranted, but not in this case. Nice to admit that you are one of those who just sit back and watch and have little interest in getting done. In other words, you are sitting at the sidelines, making snide comments, but when the time comes, you will have very little to show for. Translation: I don't care about justice, but I like to act like I'm a decider. When one person wrongs the other, the person who committed such deed should be punished. That is as obvious as it can be. Yet here you are, claiming such concept is a 'playground concept'. Does a war look like a playground fight to you? You claim that you want to end it but you don't seem to care about ending it right. How about the fact that their actions are all recorded? I guess attempted assassination of South Korean president is NOT a recorded history, attacking soldiers is NOT a recorded history. Your attempt to discredit other side falls flat and you don't seem to realize what you have done. First, you already betrayed your own idea of 'balanced view'. No matter what the source says, you claim that you will listen to it. BUT here you are discreditting everything South Koreans say. Not that surprising as you gave a praise to RT a few pages ago, but have no problem discreditting other sources. Your last sentence in the above quote pretty much shows that you have little understanding of issue, and furthermore has no problem showing your bias. Yet you used RT youtube account and other internet sources. North Korea actually has more than Twitter to convey their stuff, as well as their followers putting things up. But you don't know it. Why? because your understanding of Korean peninsula and it's history, conflicts is no better than seasonal talking heads who read from their teleprompters. Actually the good ones do have idea of what NK is doing, but it's the pseudo-experts like you who have no problem making things up. Here's a noble thing you can do. Don't act like you know things. Maybe you are trying to save your internet face, but your arguments failed just about every time it showed up. You are one of those who have tendency to act all intellectual, but in fact have very little to contribute. Just because you think it is right doesn't mean it is. Look at what happened, see reality. Just because you aregue 1+3=5 doesn't mean it's true.

Knock it off, guys

So you don't care who starts incident? That's a pretty noble concept except that in any society those who commit misconducts face the punishment. Perhaps you think being "neutral" will be getting things done, but it seldom does it. http://news.hankooki.com/lpage/politics/201011/h2010112322223321080.htm This is a Korean newspaper, and the article was written about 7 hours after the attack. This is the time the article was written and it is in their time. It states on the top that Which roughly translates to, "President Lee said on 23rd, 'I think we need to retaliate heavily so there won't be anymore provocation.'" That's pretty strong message and that was made official BEFORE USS George Washington was decided to be deployed to the Yellow sea. The news that arrives to foreign press tends to be a bit shortened and needs time to translate, so it is understandable that you have no clue when things happened. However, that doesn't excuse the fact that you were dead wrong on your argument. I don't know which country you are from, but a lot of NATO countries have their own military forces too. Does that mean they are hiding behind NATO? Nope. That means that in case they need to have help they have means to do so. It does not mean that they are hiding. For example, when Falklands conflict started, I don't think British were taking orders from NATO. They had their own force, they did what they did without hiding behind US. And if you forgot, South Korea has compulsary service. So there is a difference between what you perceive and how it actually is. It's even more important that North Korea recognized the line and did not give a thing about the line up until last few years. Same thing goes for North Korea. whatever they think may not be what South Korea think. Maybe they should respect that? Both Koreas had some respect between both up until recently, but the current even made it even worse between the two. Really? http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1795747&postcount=40 Sarcasm too much? You are trying to shift the blame, or at least dilute it with your sarcasm then came http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1796736&postcount=53 You posted link to Russia Times which did not really do a good job of explaining the difference between firing AWAY from North Korea for training excercise and attacking North Korea. Furthermore it still doesn't believe that North Korea attacked South Korea ship Cheonan. And look. What a surprise http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1797181&postcount=59 Here you are talking about alternative source, and calling Russia Times a great source. IIRC you had no problem defending Russia in the past while the alternative of Russian press was largely ignored. And here you are backtracking http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1797189&postcount=61 In essence you are trying to be 'objective' but it falls short, when with all the information we have it is clear that North Korea was the one who provoked the incident. Just looking at how China and Russia is behaving should give you a hint that South Korea was not the agitator. and you certainly seem to have some bias against americans http://forums.bistudio.com/showpost.php?p=1798832&postcount=126 It is based on fact. You can try to argue that it is political bias, but when there is enough proof beyond the reasonable doubt, then you need to check your argument. In this case you clearly do not do so. You had no problem linking to Russia Times video Interstingly South Korea has heck of a lot more freedom of press than North Korea which allows facts to be unearthed. There is no grey area in this incident. The only thing that is grey is the mind of people who are so dark that even with the light they can only see grey. Look at the amount of works that are available online. You may not like it because it disproves your point, but you might want to read them without your bias. A lot of things North Korea is recorded and there are no conspiracies. They bomed a civilian jetliner before 1988 Seoul Olympics, shot down another one before that, made numerous attacks along DMZ, not to mention sending their commandos to assasinate South Korean president. You called American youth indoctrinated above, you consistently run away from facts. When things are so obvious anti-establishment supporters(or conspiracists) or supporters of those who provoked such things try to dilute it, but the best they can come up with is "objectiveness" This wasn't directed at me but is worth mentioning as it shows your ignorance and bias on this matter This is exactly in line with North Korea's policy. They want to keep US away from South Korea so they can attack SK. If the NK truly wants to have peace they should talk about peace treaty with SK, not US. And this just shows that you are biased towards NK, and have no real objectiveness in the situation.

Hiding behind America? Seems like you got enough bias to not see the fact that the US military presence is due to the fact that it is UN related reasons and 20-30k US military is usually considered a "trip wire" in case of war. But yeah, ignore the fact and call it 'hiding behind':rolleyes: Notice that in most of skirmishes, North Korean ships managed to 1. cross the line 2.South Korea gave out warnings 3. Warnings were ignored 4. then other means such as ramming the boat was deployed, 5. then use of deadly force was executed. If a foreign hostile military moved in to your nation and your first response is to wait around and try to talk, something is a bit too restrictive. The skirmishes that I mentioned were Yoenpyung skirmishes going back to early 2000s. Perhaps you should read something about it. Maybe you are blinded by your bias, but there is no doubt that North Korea provoked the incident by firing at the island. In fact, a lot of skirmishes and conflicts in the Yellow sea is provoked by North Korea. If you were referring to me, you just lost your bet. Actually, it is a good assumption AND has very little bias. If there is any bias, it is you who is displaying supposed objectiveness while ignoring the reality. North Korea has been provoking incidents since the ceasefire in 1953 and yet you still refuse to believe that the most recent conflict was indeed North Korea's aggression. You probably won't even entertain the thought that a few months ago a South Korean ship was torpedoed. You are one of those people who think being anti-establishment is being objective, but being anti-establishment has its own bias, namely ignoring reality and doubting everything when it is beyond the reasonable doubt.

Here's another view, but it shows that the counter-attack seems to hit where it was supposed to hit http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/gallery/view.html?b_bbs_id=10044&pn=1&num=144595 As for the ROK's military, while they may not have had combat experience, the records are far better than DPRK's. The problem with current situation is that ROK doesn't proactively engage DPRK, but rather only throw reactions after DPRK's provocation. So it limits what they can do. Their ROE sucks, and in this incident, they only had 2-4 K9s available. They were not prepared for this sudden attack but managed to fire 80 rounds back and it probably scared the DPRK just enough. If someone suddenly decides to beat the lights out of you out of nowhere, then the chances are you will be receiving some injuries. In the past, around the area, ROK Navy had skirmishes and came out better off. So to say ROK military is weak is not true.

Good job! Looking forward to it :)

RIP :( My condolences to his family. Thank you very much for your work, Planck.

closing. You've been here long enough to know that topics like these are not related.

You can use North American release thread http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=72883

I don't think that's what this thread is for.;)

It is made for Shack Tac, but at the same time, there are things that can be applied to anyone playing Arma2. So Marek's comment is a compliment of that nature, not about it being the official ARMA guide. Take what you can use, and leave what you don't need/use. Is your server having an organization problem? Then the part about communication can be put aside. Focus on playing it safe for yourself. If possible, provide help for other teammates. Don't try to have everyone else follow the guide, lead with example. Here are somethings you can do. 1. You see a friendly trying to check around the corner. Instead of moving to different position, provide overwatch for a sector he is not able to cover. 2. Friendly tries to enter an area ad you know is infested with enemies. Warn them, and if that doesn't work, provide covering fire if needed. You can't make others follow 100% don't get caught up with it. as for MOUT/CQB tactics This pretty much covers the situation with ARMA. I find that there are a lot of CQB tactics not feasible to employ in ARMA that I can do in real life, and there are somethings that I can do in ARMA that I cannot do in real life. The basic of MOUT and CQB is covered, it's upto each player to know how to apply it.

Yup. Got pushed back. Went to nearest Gamestop to learn that. I prefer to have hard copies myself, so I'll wait..........or crack and get it via Steam...

I think this is not the correct forum to discuss this. Please use the thread in Offtopic section.