MEC Thought?

[DeltaFart]

Yeah I realize this has been discussed to death but wouldn't the MEC forces include Iran? Its like this, The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I doubt that all the Nato countries at first were exactly on the best terms with each other, but they joined that group because of a more immediate threat. These are the countries I figure in the Middle East that aren't in the MEC
-Saudi Arabia (they are an ally of us, we are dependent on their fuel, but we've provided a lot of support for them)
-Kuwait (we pulled them out of the grave Iraq threw them in)
-Iraq (We pretty much liberated them, they wouldn't want to join this group if it was to fight the US after our help)
-Afghanistan (We helped them the way we did Iraq)is this still considered in Middle East? Not sure where the boundary of Middle East is at
-Israel (need I say more?)
-Egypt (They are more of a because of the equipment they use that require our spare parts and help to maintain ally, Abrams)
-Turkey (not sure their politics now, but Im thinking its the enemy of enemy principle again)
-Pakistan (Friendly to us)

Now that eliminates eight countries in that area that wouldn't be part of the MEC, but all things considered, Iran by itself would be a bloody handful, and you still have the nut job countries there that will never be at peace with the West. Not to say that I eliminated all people friendly to us, or I might have misconception on a country mentioned, but I'm at school right now thinking off top of my head

[DeltaFart]

I realize the different parts of Islam, but this is a Middle East Coalition, not the Sunni or Arab Coalition. This is an alliance of similar situations and problems not religious ideals

[Jaymz]

The question you should be asking us Deltafart, is if we would be willing to revamp the MEC voices to be Persian....

Truth is, it would be unnecessary and would cause a political shit storm.

[snotmaster0]

I don't really see the point? What would change that would be worth changing?

Plus much of your reasoning for countries that would and wouldn't join is American Propaganda BS. Iraq would have a s**tload of people who would fight in this hypothetical MEC, they DEFINITELY don't see us as liberators. Just because the government is a straw man for the US doesn't mean that it wouldn't stop it's citizens from joining the MEC. Very few of the countries you listed wouldn't jump at the chance to purge the Middle East of Western influences (even if they don't do it openly).

Sorry for the rant.

[Bob_Marley]

And this adds what to gameplay?

There are many things the extensive resources this would consume could be better spent on.

[gclark03]

Generally, from a Western perspective (and the majority of us are undoubtedly living in the West), the MEC = OPFOR.

To clarify, the MEC is simply our current war target - the Middle East, specifically Iraq and Afghanistan - expanded and improved to make a worthy challenge for the BLUFOR.

Whether these OPFOR are Persians, Arabs, Shiites, Sunni, or Kurdish hardly matters; they are simply OPFOR. For the sake of contrast, Great Britain consists of more than Anglo-Saxons; whether this is reflected in-game is rather irrelevant.

[DeltaFart]

This is in no way trying to change the game, or the voices anytihng its just a question on who would the MEC be
snotmaster, hold your tongue and try to be less rude, Im referring to the militaries not the civilians, the civilians can go to hell in this argument, I'm talking about the governments that would join the coalition, since its a multi national force, of military style not a multinational force of civilian style, whihc the insurgent faction is

[BroCop]

First of all Iraq sure as hell would be in....if the "democracy" ever steps up then the civies will choose someone they want to be the president and then your pro-west goverment could go to hell (for this argument that is)...Pakistan and Saudi Arabia could also join the coalition as they aint depedant of the US nor are their Allies or something IIRC