Missles

El_Vikingo · Post by **El_Vikingo** » 2007-03-09 16:40

Combatcontrol88 wrote:wow...your a dumbass please tell me you just didnt make that post. If you are serious then I really have no respect for you at all with that comment. Your the kind of person I cant stand. Next Hotel that we hit with a JDAM you should go inside of it and video tape our dishonorable actions and our evil ways then get back to me on that one.

....Please don't "directly" insult other members of teh forum, or I will insult you.

Removed for flaming by other members of hte forum.

Determined · Post by **Determined** » 2007-03-09 16:54

El_Vikingo wrote:....Please don't "directly" insult other members of teh forum, or I will insult you.

Death is not a nice thing. Nobody deserves to die, no americans., nor someone PROTECTING their country. Just imagine their lives before the US invasion, now it's hell.. Soldiers raping and murdering civilians, calling them bad people.

Wouldn't you shoot at someone invading your country, raping your family and murdering them?

I'm not protecting anyone, but this is a game forum where people talk about games.

Sir I am not sure where you are from, but I would ask you to refraim from your gratuitous bashing and unfound accusations. Raping? Are you serious? This is outright slander. The insurgents are not people who are "protecting their country" as you put it. Quite a few are not even from Iraq. Also since you want to glorify these insurgent "defenders" tell me why they use suicide bombs to KILL INNOCENT IRAQI CIVILIANS? Is that a natural response to being attacked? Kill your own? Are you from Bizzaro world? Please take your bashing somewhere else.

JuniperM40 · Post by **JuniperM40** » 2007-03-09 17:01

Randleman5102 wrote:I wish we could call in airstrikes, like have a squad channel that links you directly to pilots and you can direct their fire. Or maybe a class that has a "radio" that can contact airplanes.

A good commander will relay an attack marker position placed by the ground troops to the CAS group. It's actually quite easy to do, and I encourage my squads to do so.

i.e. they place an 'attack' or 'destruct' marker, they VoIP me for "Squad 4 - air strike on my marker pls sir, okthxgbye".

I then find their marker, select my CAS squad(s), and place a marker for them at the same position. I inform the CAS squad "airstrike needed - on the marker, north to south, enemies in the open, fire for effect".

Then it's "Squad 4 - Be advised, Your marker - Airstrike incoming - Get down!" =)

It works well when the squads and the commander co-ordinate properly... and it's devastating to the enemy.

- JM40.

General_J0k3r · Post by **General_J0k3r** » 2007-03-09 17:54

Determined wrote:Sir I am not sure where you are from, but I would ask you to refraim from your gratuitous bashing and unfound accusations. Raping? Are you serious? This is outright slander. The insurgents are not people who are "protecting their country" as you put it. Quite a few are not even from Iraq. Also since you want to glorify these insurgent "defenders" tell me why they use suicide bombs to KILL INNOCENT IRAQI CIVILIANS? Is that a natural response to being attacked? Kill your own? Are you from Bizzaro world? Please take your bashing somewhere else.

isn't it a fact, that there were a shitload of incidents with american and british troops torturing innocent people (though, i have to admit, in the case of the prisons one has to take a closer look on blackwater), raping young women and then KILLING THEIR WHOLE FUCKING FAMILY AND U TELL ME THAT IS ALL SLANDER? WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN? THOSE GUYS HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF THIS! AND THE PICTURES FROM ABU GHRAIB ARE FAKE? YEAH? THAT WHAT YOU THINK? AND THAT SHALL MAKE THE IRAQI PEOPLE LOVE AMERICA? THEY DID B E F O R E THE WAR RATHER THAN NOW.

sry for screaming. just couldnt hold it. seriously. there have been incidents. there have been mistakes in bombing. thats a natural thing in war. i would blame individuals only to a certain extent for that. the politicians are the culprits imho. still, i don't think iraq has been invaded for other reasons than oil/global hegemony.

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-03-09 18:13

dont foget the "biological weapons"

Determined · Post by **Determined** » 2007-03-09 18:22

General_J0k3r wrote:isn't it a fact, that there were a shitload of incidents with american and british troops torturing innocent people (though, i have to admit, in the case of the prisons one has to take a closer look on blackwater), raping young women and then KILLING THEIR WHOLE FUCKING FAMILY AND U TELL ME THAT IS ALL SLANDER? WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN? THOSE GUYS HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF THIS! AND THE PICTURES FROM ABU GHRAIB ARE FAKE? YEAH? THAT WHAT YOU THINK? AND THAT SHALL MAKE THE IRAQI PEOPLE LOVE AMERICA? THEY DID B E F O R E THE WAR RATHER THAN NOW.

sry for screaming. just couldnt hold it. seriously. there have been incidents. there have been mistakes in bombing. thats a natural thing in war. i would blame individuals only to a certain extent for that. the politicians are the culprits imho. still, i don't think iraq has been invaded for other reasons than oil/global hegemony.

The pictures from Abu Ghraib were not of rape or of innocent families killed. Please keep your rantings seperate. That was a matter of poor judgement amongst frustrated troops. They humiliated those men. Whether they deserved that treatment or not is not the point. We as Americans need to set a better example. I think most of the time we do. We treat POWs millions of times better then most countries have according to history. Sometimes people do things out of frustration or anger that are not in line with our values. Out of the sheer number of prisoners I find it appauling to pass judgement because of the actions of a few misguided soldiers.

Raping and killing who's family? What soldiers? Your making general remarks. The tone in which both you and viking made your comments insinuate that it is commonplace. I am a US soldier and your remarks are slanderous and insulting. If you want to insult the individual soldiers, then do so by name. Don't lump the very few bad in with the rest of us. Thank you.

I would like to appologize for being off topic, but I will not allow such slanderous remarks to be made with out retort.

Combatcontrol88 · Post by **Combatcontrol88** » 2007-03-09 20:44

General_J0k3r wrote:isn't it a fact, that there were a shitload of incidents with american and british troops torturing innocent people (though, i have to admit, in the case of the prisons one has to take a closer look on blackwater), raping young women and then KILLING THEIR WHOLE FUCKING FAMILY AND U TELL ME THAT IS ALL SLANDER? WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN? THOSE GUYS HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF THIS! AND THE PICTURES FROM ABU GHRAIB ARE FAKE? YEAH? THAT WHAT YOU THINK? AND THAT SHALL MAKE THE IRAQI PEOPLE LOVE AMERICA? THEY DID B E F O R E THE WAR RATHER THAN NOW.

sry for screaming. just couldnt hold it. seriously. there have been incidents. there have been mistakes in bombing. thats a natural thing in war. i would blame individuals only to a certain extent for that. the politicians are the culprits imho. still, i don't think iraq has been invaded for other reasons than oil/global hegemony.

Yea I mean look there is your proof right there. Look at that evil guy....people are blinded by the liberal media.

Mr.Whitlow · Post by **Mr.Whitlow** » 2007-03-09 20:53

lol, off topic much? We went from a video of a hotel being bombed by a 2,000lbs JDAM to accusations of rape and family-murderings by American and British soldiers... Hmm... Lol.

On topic: I would like it very much if we had JDAMs rather than artillery. Not sure if it'll happen though

Determined · Post by **Determined** » 2007-03-09 20:57

Mr.Whitlow wrote:lol, off topic much? We went from a video of a hotel being bombed by a 2,000lbs JDAM to accusations of rape and family-murderings by American and British soldiers... Hmm... Lol.

On topic: I would like it very much if we had JDAMs rather than artillery. Not sure if it'll happen though

I think it would be an interesting addition. I'm guessing we will see this once the SOFLAM becomes operable. Bombers would no longer have to go on dive bombing runs. THough I think there should be a strong limit on these bombs due to how effective they are. I mean nothing on the ground would last long if you had a huge supply of them.

Animalmother · Post by **Animalmother** » 2007-03-09 21:04

Isolated incidents=/=Common incidents

Those who commit the crimes are being charged, so you can't say soldiers freely rape whoever they want whenever they want. That is slander.

soraflair · Post by **soraflair** » 2007-03-09 21:52

We need a lock on this thread, it's going to get out of hand soon.

Determined · Post by **Determined** » 2007-03-09 21:55

Fair enough. Seems people can't keep their anti American thoughts to themselves and feel the need to inject their political agendas in every post.

superdj · Post by **superdj** » 2007-03-09 22:36

"Fair enough. Seems people can't keep their anti American thoughts to themselves and feel the need to inject their political agendas in every post."

Please don't instigate. Don't try and have the last word, just drop it. Can we get back on topic?

Aren't there enough bombs in-game already (you destructive freaks!!)

gandhicakes · Post by **gandhicakes** » 2007-03-09 23:15

superdj wrote:"Fair enough. Seems people can't keep their anti American thoughts to themselves and feel the need to inject their political agendas in every post."

Please don't instigate. Don't try and have the last word, just drop it. Can we get back on topic?

Aren't there enough bombs in-game already (you destructive freaks!!)

More bombs never hurt anybody

Ugly Duck · Post by **Ugly Duck** » 2007-03-09 23:55

gandhicakes wrote:More bombs never hurt anybody

Actualy. . . .

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-03-10 00:22

I WANT A NUKE

and cluster

DaedalusAI1 · Post by **DaedalusAI1** » 2007-03-10 04:58

ClaudioPolez wrote:It also seems logical to me and it very much seems tactically sound to eliminate the hotel in this scenario. However, my point is, is it strategically sound? Is the best way to fight an insurgency to have these incidents escalate this way. It just seems entirely reactive, insurgents on the streets, troops go in, they clash, blah, blah, blah, kill everyone. End point...Everyone hates the coalition. Maybe it's too late and this is the way it is going to be. Maybe there is a way to avoid this stare-off by working better with local security forces, I dunno, thankfully it's not my job.

In answer to your question I have absolutely noooooooooo military experience, but that doesn't make anybodies political opinions less valid in my view.

If you were one of the Marines down in the street. I'm pretty sure you would be more than pleased to see the hotel blow up as apposed to having to go in to clear it out. Lets think about it..... Bunch of people that are trying to end your life are in a building.

Would you
A) want to blow it up and reduce the chance of you and your men getting killed/critically wounded.
B) go in and clear out the building greatly increasing casualties or risk of casualties of your people.

In point, your opinion is a political one and therefore is not thinking about the fact that your decision to not bomb the building affects the chance that the people who are doing the fighting get to go home and see their families someday. It is easy to say they shouldn't have bombed the building when your life isn't the one at risk. If innocents died, which may have happened, if I was one of the innocent people in that building then I'm pretty sure getting blown up would be pretty shitty, but that's life. Everyone dies and as humans we do what we can to make sure our selves and the ones we care about aren't harmed.

General_J0k3r · Post by **General_J0k3r** » 2007-03-10 12:46

i don't attack the american troops. read my post. i said its all a logical consequence. i have quite some friends among us soldiers that were stationed in heidelberg as well as karlsruhe and north hessen near gießen in germany. i know they aren't all bad men. i would not like to go to a fucked up situation as i imagine it is for american troops in iraq and i think that one can really take some weird action for lack of a better term. but please, don't accuse me of a biased opinion while you yourself shut out facts (i understand you tried to say this didn't take place):
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/22/ussold ... index.html

check it out man. ok, CNN maybe communist propaganda lol.

to repeat it: I DON'T HAVE AN ANTI-AMERICAN SENTIMENT. that i have, is a HUGE sentiment against your president and a great part of the congress who fails to do his job. or what would YOU call the profit plus contracts of halliburton and co? i hope i made my point clearer and we can come back to a mature discussion and i apologize again for screaming in my last post.

edit: and to the devastation point: i would also rather bomb em instead of going in taking em out one by one, watching out for booby traps, ambushes and stuff in an area that im new to and they know excellently...

ClaudioPolez · Post by **ClaudioPolez** » 2007-03-11 01:20

DaedalusAI1 wrote: In point, your opinion is a political one and therefore is not thinking about the fact that your decision to not bomb the building affects the chance that the people who are doing the fighting get to go home and see their families someday. It is easy to say they shouldn't have bombed the building when your life isn't the one at risk. If innocents died, which may have happened, if I was one of the innocent people in that building then I'm pretty sure getting blown up would be pretty shitty, but that's life. Everyone dies and as humans we do what we can to make sure our selves and the ones we care about aren't harmed.

Exactly, my point was a political/strategic one. I know this sounds flippant and is indeed very easy for me to say cos I'm not there, no members of my family are there, but the "people who are doing the fighting" are professional soldiers. They are doing their job, that they have been trained for and they are enforcing the will of their political masters. It is therefore, for better or for worse, these 'higher ups' who make the final decisions and not the man on the ground. At the end of the day what is the coalition's primary objective? Is it to defeat the insurgency or is it force protection?

The tactics appear to be aimed at clearing areas of insurgents and capturing or killing them. This head on approach obviously invites and indeed encourages head on conflict and the amount of firepower required to protect your troops causes higher and higher civilian, insurgent and coalition casualties.
I believe that history has proven you cannot defeat an indigenous (inc imported jihadis) terrorist/resistance force mearly by killing as many of them as you can. This inflexible straight military approach has failed before, notably for France in Indochina and Algeria, the Russians in Afghanistan and Chechnya and the US in Vietnam compared with the success of the 'hearts and minds' syle campaign effected by the British in Malaya in the 50's.
It's very possible that tactics are evolving to a more political approach but as Determined said "these things take time", Malaya took 10 years for example and I do worry that in this day and age of 24 hour news channels and shallowness in western politics the resolve just isn't there.

Lastly to quote Daedalus "Everyone dies and as humans we do what we can to make sure our selves and the ones we care about aren't harmed". You've hit the nail on the head mate, if this sentence in anyway reflects policy, then how are we ever going to win. If the everyday Iraqi feels that we truly do not give a toss about them, and that we feel 1 of our soldiers is worth 10 of their civilians we might as well just pull out now. We MUST care about them, the troops on the ground must respect and care about them because the population is the ultimate prize in this war. Without the support of the population the insurgency withers and dies.

Territory doesn't matter, Bodycounts don't matter, the population matters.