Project Reality Forums

The Chechens are just Arabs living in Russia, and they want out.

Excavus wrote:The Chechens are just Arabs living in Russia, and they want out.

They're not arabs, lol. They're caucauses people. Just like Georgians, Azerbajnis, Armenians and so on. They want out because of their religion, which is islam. They were conquered by Russia as a result of wars between Russian empire(christian) and Ottoman empire(muslim) during 1700s-1800s. While under ottomans, they were converted to islam. But their caucauses culture and traditions are really close to that of Georgia. But georgians are mostly christians. Thats how it is

alec89 wrote:I would be disgraced and insulted to have chechens on our side, they have nothing in common with us. They're just our colony And they hate our guts.

EDIT: Sorry for double post! Havent visited the forums lately.

Don't worry, in my story line you're not on the same side. Chechens are a stand-alone group. I mean they're not a country so they can't really make pacts or agreements or alliances or anything.

And excuse me but I think MOST people label the U.S. as the 'good guys' during the cold war. SO HA!

But jokes aside you can't have certain things. I can tie some things together, even the ridiculous notion of war between Israel and Russia. But things like Canada v. U.S.? Sorry my political creativity just explodes on that one. Though for an interesting new one, China could fight insurgency maps v. Taliban. China does have problems with Islamic extreamists in western China. Food for thought!

snooggums wrote:Look what the Dev said!

But seriously, I also enjoy the fact that each map is situational in a vague world conflict kind of way while following psuedo realistic limitations like how Canada wouldn't invade the US on an official map. I do miss the fluff text that used to be on maps, explaining the reason for the conflict a la vBF2 like we used to have.

you know we should totaly have a Canada V US map...only there will be no deviation,we get the lazor rifles back (literally this time though), and instead of dieing you get repsawned at the main with a message saying "you've been hit, return to the staging area for PT"

it will be perfect XD

There needs to be a Taliban vs Militia map. That would be so boss. Two unconventional factions duking it out over some mountains in the Middle East.

And a reenactment of the Revolutionary War, UK vs US Army.

Climate Wars by Gwynne Dyer has some interesting scenarios regarding future wars over resources.

One scenario was around 2023, where India builds a dam that cuts off glacial fresh water supplies to Pakistan, resulting in drought, famine, etc. In retaliation, Pakistani bombers blow up the dam, etc

Another was an island threatened by rising sea levels that decides to unilatterally introduce harmful particles into the atmosphere to counteract global warming by reflecting sunlight away from the surface. This type of climate engineering might not be appreciated by neighbor countries, who decide to take action, etc

It's a cool book because it focuses on how military planners regard climate change and how they typically seem to plan for the worst case scenarios where politicians are able to sugarcoat everything. Although it's not really relevant to PR today, these scenarios sort of fit with the spirit of the thread.

"Aliens" style: "We need to liberate these Muttrah goats from their virginity!"

Smash wrote:Climate Wars by Gwynne Dyer has some interesting scenarios regarding future wars over resources.

One scenario was around 2023, where India builds a dam that cuts off glacial fresh water supplies to Pakistan, resulting in drought, famine, etc. In retaliation, Pakistani bombers blow up the dam, etc

Another was an island threatened by rising sea levels that decides to unilatterally introduce harmful particles into the atmosphere to counteract global warming by reflecting sunlight away from the surface. This type of climate engineering might not be appreciated by neighbor countries, who decide to take action, etc

It's a cool book because it focuses on how military planners regard climate change and how they typically seem to plan for the worst case scenarios where politicians are able to sugarcoat everything. Although it's not really relevant to PR today, these scenarios sort of fit with the spirit of the thread.

"Aliens" style: "We need to liberate these Muttrah goats from their virginity!"

The first one isn't that far-fetched at all. Pakistan and India both share the vast majority of their drinkable water via rivers. The Punjab province actually means land of five rivers. It's the most fetile land in both countries and is shared between the two.

Oh and the whole muslim-hindu thing doesn't help either =P

Why people here are stating that "israel should fight iran", are they forgotting that little iraq in between?

Vege wrote:Why people here are stating that "israel should fight iran", are they forgotting that little iraq in between?

That didn't stop Germany from invading France through Belgium. "We're a country, not a highway."

archerfenris wrote:That didn't stop Germany from invading France through Belgium. "We're a country, not a highway."

hahaha, well played sir, well played.

archerfenris wrote:That didn't stop Germany from invading France through Belgium. "We're a country, not a highway."

A British TV presenter by the name of Clarkson once said "The only reason Belgium exists, is so Britain and Germany have somewhere to sort out their differences"

Harsh i know, but it made me lol

I don't know if I should laugh or shrug. A lot of people here are quite misinformed I believe, or just have bloody yet childish war-driven wet dreams.

/nitpick ON

Excavus wrote:The Chechens are just Arabs living in Russia, and they want out.

They're not arabs. They're predominantly sunni muslims.
They're also not ALL armed rebels, nor are the 950 000 (+/-) chechens in Russia and Chechnya combined all zealotous extremists and terrorists. Those that fight are actually a minority.
They have not always been predominantly muslim either, go look it up.
They dont want out, they want their land out. If they wanted out they'd have left long ago. What they seek is independence from Russia like most countries of the Caucasus want.

archerfenris wrote:Though for an interesting new one, China could fight insurgency maps v. Taliban. China does have problems with Islamic extreamists in western China. Food for thought!

FYI, China «SAYS» it has problems with them but I'd like to see consistent, non-sided proof of this threat being as major as the PRC claims it is.

They're Uyghurs, Kyrghiz and Kazakhs mainly. Yes, they're indeed muslim for the most part. Yes, it would be fun for a PR map. But the truth is that their freedom is threatened. With that, China prevents most if not all foreign sources of media from finding any solid proof of its claims and just keeps shouting they're all Islamic extremists.
Personaly, I doubt the ''insurgency'' there is as serious as the one in Iraq today.

archerfenris wrote:That didn't stop Germany from invading France through Belgium. "We're a country, not a highway."

Contexts are not the same. Germany was driven by an autoritarian monopartisan nationalist government that used force to gain and keep power. Israel is far from any of those concepts while Iran is aware there's no gain in striking Israel, nor can they do so with conventional means anyway.

archerfenris wrote:Oh and the whole muslim-hindu thing doesn't help either =P

It's more because of Kashmir and poor relations since the start of the Kashmiri conflict. Not so much a religion thing. China also has a minor role to play in that conflict, go look it up.
It's interesting you mention Punjab, since the Punjabi tried to reach independence but failed under strict military repression from the Indian government. Operation Blue Star ended the insurection quite bloody-brutaly from what I recall.

[...]it's bad taste and totally cliche.[...]It implies the Western powers are capitalist pigs causing conflict for their own good.[...]

Bad taste and cliche?
WWIII is bad taste and cliche. To count many billions of casualties for a fight for petty morals and forced stereotypes, when still many of the worst crimes against huamnity have been forgotten and shrugged off, is bad taste.
Fighting for oil is bad taste and totally cliche? Have you forgot that most wars in this world were lead to take & keep control of material or human ressources? Or are you implying there are GOOD modern wars that were driven not for military deeds, survival instinct, misconceptions or avidity but solely by a will to HELP FELLOW HUMANS? Iraq? Viet Nam? Korea?
I doubt.

/sarcasm
Sure, the western powers aren't capitalist pigs causing conflict for their own good. They never did anything wrong, never commited any crime, never tried to instill dominance on anyone, never fell to greed... It's not their fault if the evil commies from the eastern powers want to destroy the world and enslave the poor little innocent, pure, pious, clean, good willed, generous people of the west.
Yeah, it's those evil arabs. Those murderous russians and mad chechens. Did you know that Somalis were demons from hell? They're not like you, they don't have families, all they want is your monnies and your blood. Oh and beware of the evil Iranians, they eat babies for breakfast. Every muslim man is a terrorist, and every east-european person is a commie.
(Though personally I prefer chicks drowned in alcohol and cereals.)
/sarcasm off

I'll be entertained when I see a ''story'' that doesn't depict yet another clone of the ''evil commies VS west'' cold-war scenario. I'd rather believe MW2's story, it feels in its place with hollywood stereotypes.
Far-fetched war is far-fetched, hollywood stuff should be kept away from anything advocating reality like PR and so should politics.

/nitpick OFF


Sorry, guess I had too much time on my hands.
Let's just laugh.. Politics + PR = recurrent fail. It's been like that for every PR-Geopolitics thread, and it will always be. I'd rather see PR as a game where we can simulate fights between any factions rather than a story driven war game that would make less sense than MW2.... Yeesh.

It's like explaining magic. Seriously, who gives a..
Plus, it would limit mappers to a single setting. It's much better to leave it open, and remember that PR is not always in the same timeline. Insurgency maps don't necessarily take place during the *cough* invasion of china *cough*.

Tannhauser wrote:
/sarcasm
Yeah, it's those evil arabs. Those murderous russians and mad chechens. Did you know that Somalis were demons from hell? They're not like you, they don't have families, all they want is your monnies and your blood. Oh and beware of the evil Iranians, they eat babies for breakfast. Every muslim man is a terrorist, and every east-european person is a commie.

/sarcasm off

U.S. military recruitment xD sorry I had to.

politics arent needed in PR its a game just for fun and awesomeness
but we could have a Russia/China invades Canada or Alaska scenario that be fun

I'm still bemused as to why Isreal are fighting Russia, they are like super friends IRL.

Good post Tannhouser, informative.

HardCandy wrote:I'm still bemused as to why Isreal are fighting Russia, they are like super friends IRL.

Ehhh.......lukewarm I'd say.

Just to throw in my worthless two cents; but I think the devs are right. There's no way to link all these combatants into a simple x vs. y, so in my opinion why bother? I'm not even sure you can really get the Russians and Chinese definitely on the same side; too many conflicting interests between the two of them alone.

Lets just call it, Project Reality Royal Rumble

Why does everyone assume that israel is gonna be part of the "good guys" faction?

I'd think russia is going to side with NATO against china and iran, etc.

On the other hand, I think the west is gonna get tired of Israels constant warmongering and cut off relationships with them, making them pretty much their own standalone faction.

@Tannhauser

You misquoted my post, altering it to fit your...rant? Disagreement? The post involved more than that and doesn't make me look as stupid or ignorant of world history as you make me sound.

Also to Tannhauser, since China doesn't have as big of a threat of an insurgency, what do you suggest can make an Insurgency mode for China? Tibetan Buddhist terrorists? Nah.

Though arguably with the use of fan fiction, since China somehow wants to attack the US and British in vanilla BF2 and PR, there could be some Coup d'état of some radical faction that takes over the wishy-washy not-so-Communist government and decides to go full out on it's opponents, and thus an asymmetrical revolution starts against this faction. Though, this still is the "West vs. Commies" formula.

As for who MEC should fight, it should be easy to figure out. In fact, it might be able to simulate the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, because their equipment is similar to what the Soviets used in the 1980's. Although the G3 battle rifles is a lot different, though.