Posted: 2007-08-30 23:56
what about milita vs. US or milita vs. UK?
As I've said, that just isn't as plausible.pasfreak wrote:what about milita vs. US or milita vs. UK?
The timeline of PR is very much dynamic, from my point of view. If the British and US were facing off against the MEC doesn't it seem a bit odd to you that theres also British troops still stationed in Iraq, at Basra no less?JP*wasteland.soldier wrote:As I've said, that just isn't as plausible.
In the PR scenario, major combat operations are ongoing. The situation is very dynamic. It's unlikely that the invading powers would fight any ground battle against a regional paramilitary force like the militia. The militia does not pose an immediate threat to their interests, unless they were holding a valuable strategic asset such as a major city. The insurgents are different from the militia in that the insurgents have an ideological goal, not an immediately regional one. Furthermore, having PR insurgents fighting US and GB (and later Canadian) troops has a separate intrinsic value because of the contemporary relevance of this scenario.
The militia, meanwhile, as a Chechen nationalist (I believe) organization, would have every reason to use this opportunity to attempt to gain more territory from Russia.
Now, I quote from the actual map description:The militia, meanwhile, as a Chechen nationalist (I believe) organization, would have every reason to use this opportunity to attempt to gain more territory from Russia.
So lets look at a map, shall we?British Forces have been tasked by the remaining NATO nations to disrupt blackmarket arms flow from the Balkan region of Mestia. Malitia forces have dug in to defend their facilities and destroy the British intruders!
