CE_Mikemonster

There should be two versions of this quiz, the Mastermind version and the Easy, Ego Boosting version. I would post in the latter.. lol

Oh, yeah, just noticed. I did read from page one but didn't notice. I still don't understand what you are trying to convey in your last couple of posts. At best you've just re-iterated what I said in my first post, but not as clearly. I'd already said it's not a case of good and bad, but instead shades of grey in terms of the civilians involved. So had a few others. Jpm, CrazySunDog and RedTiger have all been absolute about their belief that Coalition Forces are blameless. People are arguing that the civilians deserved to die. If people want to say that the Taliban forced the Coalition to bomb civilians by taking the trucks into a village, then they're still saying civilians deserved to get bombed. If Coalition doctrine is to destroy any peice of lost equipment regardless of what the civilian deathtoll is, then they sure as hell aren't representing taxpayer's and voter's [uneducated] attitudes. If a terrorist ran into a housing block in Manchester and we cordened it off and burned it to the ground, killing everyone inside, would that be justified? It's the same damn principle, and only slightly more extreme. Where do you draw the line?

Ok, they 'strongly reminded' you. You're making a comparison and insinuating that the American soldiers feel the same towards the war as the Russian soldiers did in the 1980's. Based on what? Have you talked to the American soldiers? Like I already said, that's a romantic thought, but where are the similarities?

Do you have a higher res photo Boberro?

I'm saying it is wrong to compare, and using my examples as demonstrations of how comparing is inaccurate (and misleading). I presume that you were originally comparing to the Russians, back in the '80s? Please justify this by explaining the similarities. There are people from my country who I personally met that are dying out there as we speak, and I find it slightly naiive to compare them to a defeated army in a completely different situation (I have already mentioned I am no historian, you see what i'm getting at though). As mentioned I have personally met veterans (when I was in basic training with the Infantry), and see that as a better source of information than that presented selectively in news reports on the TV. With regards to 'some people there see no good in how and where this war is going' please re-read my previous post: Edit: btw, For what it's worth I see your point. Why has it taken nearly a decade to get apparently nowhere? Not a topic for this thread though really.

But there is your contradiction. You say they had a choice, and made the choice (broke the law), and therefore deserved to die (if you believe the bombing was justified then you agree they deserved to die). Also did you consider that the elders lied to the press in order to retain their dignity and status amongst other elders in the region? Hypothetically, if your son had burns all over his body, and was in agony, would you have gone to the trucks to buy fuel to sell for a profit in order to get him to a hospital? And do you believe it was justified to kill these people? (That was the impression I got). I'm not trying to personally insult you, and i'm glad you're explaining (and therefore justifying) your perspective. I just have a problem with the very unsympathetic (and apparently very right wing) attitude shown here in terms of law and order - we are talking about the Ultimate punishment.

It's got a helluva prescence hasn't it mate. Beautiful plane.

'They put themselves in danger, and therefore deserved to die' That's exactly what you're arguing. You're saying that they and therefore put themselves in danger willfully. You didn't answer my point about them not having a choice. If you needed the fuel to sell in your village in order to take your dying son to hospital would you? I damn well would. That doesn't justify using a bomb to kill me. The deterrent obviously doesn't work because people still went. How many Afghans do you think get by without ever buying off the black market? I'd say 1% or less. And they are ruling the rest. Therefore using your reasoning, we should shoot the 99%. It would deter any of the 1% from becoming looters when times got tough. It's a very simple statement that hides the complexity of the situation. Why do people loot? because they are bad, yes, but also because they need to. The world is not made of good and bad, unfortunately. I fail to see how bombing looters without warning constitutes a viable Law and Order strategy in a third world country. in Black Hawk Down (at the start) the Somalians machine gunned civilians who were rushing to get Food Aid from a truck. What is the difference here? (fundamentally?) The Somalians were 'keeping the status quo' in order that nobody challenged their authority. The strategy of incredibly tough punishments was used under the Taliban (and worked AFAIK). Therefore we should use it?

Perigrine falcon to the rescue :)

The future's bright.. The future's Orange.. lol. Thanks for the link, interesting stuff. Can imagine these are a PIA to shoot down (and you'd reveal your position even before you did). Is this possible to use as a weapon at section level? 450Grams.. Btw, I wonder if birds of prey will be used again? This time it's not messenger pigeons they need to catch, but quite close.. (oh and as a practising pervert - will these be sold to the public??)

If you're saying that the intention behind this vid was to educate us on the intricacy of choice of guidance methods in built up areas then fair enough.. 5 Armed Insurgents Meet 3 Hellfire Missiles. Sounds educational. Obviously any video of killing can give some information. I'd be very interested if somebody could give a narration of the different sequences of the attack, including the actions of the crew. I think we have an AH-64 pilot in the forums, and that would be educational.

Price doesn't come into it Hajduk, you've already said so yourself So we can stop all this about the US economy, none of us are economists (I think ;)), so we don't understand it well enough to debate, even if you do. Either way it's OT and unrelated based on the above statement. Anyway if they weren't going to use hellfires they'd have had to use something bigger. Psyops might be why these videos are released, but that's nothing to do with justifying posting them here. Unless someone who flies DCS and LOMAC was considering meeting Uncle Taliban in Afghanistan for a few pints and discussing the current 'jihad'. Suppose you never know. Clever tactics by the DoD ;) They are posted here either for tactics insights or entertainment, and I don't see any tactics insight here.. (actually can we not have a forum rule that reflects that? 'Videos posted showing death must be posted solely for the reasons of illustrating the tactics used' Can't get fairer than that. Videos of dismembered bodies are allowed, yet swearing is not..?)

It's the classic argument of crime and punishment - you're arguing that the punishment needs to be severe in order to deter people from funding others selling on the black market. In an ideal world, if you thought every time you go near the Taliban/Looters you get bombed, you wouldn't go near them, and that argument holds some weight in terms of 'keeping the peace'. From a potential buyer of black market goods, why risk your life for something trivial like a few gallons cheaper fuel? But on what education do you base your assumption that the people buying the fuel had a choice? Like I said, maybe a tractor needs fuel, or a generator (poor examples, but i'm sure we could all think of genuine and good ones). I've already admitted i'm speculating about the incident. I'm not speculating about the attitudes towards the casualties though - some attitides here are crystal clear: 'They put themselves in danger, and therefore deserved to die' Quite an odd attitude towards a people that we are there to 'save' from a horrific regime. Hypocritical, even. Instead of 'good' and 'bad' like in a Marvell Comic maybe we should think deeper and more realistically. I'm certainly not 'against' hardline options, but i'm not 'for' them either. Whatever tactic works (within the framework of moral 'acceptability' that we ourselves have created as citizens). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I understand that you saw the same, but was this during combat (i.e. their faces during a firefight), or was it at home being interviewed? Obviously all soldiers worldwide will look the same after [and during] combat, or when a close friend dies. This is personal and isn't necessarily a reflection of their political attitudes towards the war. That said though, the soldiers I met and served under did not see the war as particularly winnable (if the same tactics/strategy keep being used). It's wrong to compare them to Russians in Afghanistan though, or Americans in Vietnam (romantic though it is). Both of those armies were conscript based, and did not have 21st century support, medicine and logistics. I'm no historian and might be wrong there, but i'm sure you can see the spirit of what i'm trying to say - each war is different.

Shades of grey really, indeed 'who goes out at 2am for petrol', but then it would be rather undignified to admit that you were so poor you sent your eldest son to buy fuel for the house's generator. We can sit here in air conditioned, centrally heated rooms with our bank cards in our wallets and a hypermarket 10mins drive away. Does that give us the right to judge the lives of someone half a world away, living in a culture alien to us and possibly in abject poverty? If I thought it'd do any good then I would have gone to that tanker to scrounge some fuel. Any of us would, if we had a family to support. Saying: 'They should know better - if we dropped more bombs they'd know not to touch stolen goods' is a ridiculous way of talking bout a population you also claim to be protecting. Yes it is applicable in some circumstances, but even then is a very delicate (and blunt) tool. I'm not judging the soldiers involved, by the way. More those who are quick to pass judgment here in this forum. Who knows? It could be anywhere along the Good-Bad scale in terms of Taliban treachery and Allied misjudgment. Personally i'm shocked and appalled, but then, I know as little as everyone else and am willing to change my mind upon further info. Be careful to compare. I met countless UK veterans of Afghanistan and they saw it as their job, for both better and worse. It was what they had trained to do. How many firemen on the scene of a car accident look like that? But 1yr on.. they still have the job, right?

Both good and bad news I suppose. Best of luck to all involved out there (past, future and present).

I think it was 2x hellfires and 1x LGB (but I didn't have sound). The last explosion seemed huge in comparison, and also seemed to be more of a 'just to make sure' strike. As to posting this sort of thing on ED forums, death is serious, and unless you have a proffessional interest in war (i.e. rather than entertainment) then you shouldn't post war-porn. The title of this thread is a bit cocky and colloquial, and respect should be shown. Possibly more to keep us humanised than to honour the dead. That said though, I watched it (it's late here and I was bored) so yup i'm a hypocrite! Imagine though if everyone posted such links.. Chechen, Russian, Pakistani, Israeli, Iranian.. there would be a lot of friction. PS: such buzzwords as 'collateral damage' are just that, buzzwords. Slang like that isn't there by accident, even if it is popularly used as the 'norm'. Civilian deaths are deaths, not 'collateral'. But then, I am no advertiser!

Took a fair while for my PC to Finnish that download.

Well you could pick absolutely any film with aircraft in! My biggest gripe is the space helicopter that saves them at the end of Titanic. That is just sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo unrealistic. (it wouldn't be able to land on water because it is a spaceship and can't land on water)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFODiInPDyY I didn't get a nickname, people don't even call me Mike! 'CE_Mikemonster'.. ...too formal.

Thanks for posting # big grin # Why aren't they hundreds of dollars/euro/pounds? Edit; ah, I was being hasty (and lazy) and presumed they were Displays.

Anyone know if it's just gonna be ArmA? I hate the way the AI moves, and how crude everything is. I enjoyed the video though, for the first time in a while I had to use my imagination to create a scenario - That's what makes games great. :)

Wouldn't like to think about the IL-2 then eh?

That is a bit of a surprise.. I take it the Iranians passed on that RPG? Where there's on there's many..?

Trollish in many regards though. I'm interested in this subject - I would just like a proper debate that is properly moderated.

Hahaha thanks bud. I am contemplating it. Will it combine with a FFB stick to give you stall warnings etc etc?