Junkers Ju-87

[dutchking]

Pfft.
Explain to me, how some guy with a gun in Iraq is defending my freedom of speech. That "piece of paper" is the foundation of this nation. I have plenty of military history in my family, dating back to the Revolution. I don't hate the military. Your claim that I would not have freedom of speech without the military is absurd. Don't make me unsubscribe to my own thread.

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

Wolfshanze@ They can be blind and dumb both at times ("massive destruction weapons" ) , and they costs billions that are not all justified. Your love for military is so scarying, you know.

 

[asioasioasio]

The Military defends the rights stated in the constitution... a piece of paper doesn't garauntee your freedom, nor does it take a bullet to protect freedom.

Thanks for your support of the military and what they do for you every day. Your lack of appreciation for the military is well documented.

Just sayin

USA spends 400 billions $ for producing weapons and maintaining biggest army in the world. Thanks for your constitution and free speach that this didn't end with WW3. This new arms race that was started by Bush goes nowhere. And it's potentially very very dangerous - the balance of power kept world free from mayor conflict in more than 60 years - now theres no balance and agressive politics of republicans doesn't solve the problem - the war with "terror" didn't solved anything.

I can think of pleanty of uses for the Spirit of St Louis - as a special culture unit, in an event, or as a wonder. Looks good to!

Let the man make what he wants to, and stop with the whole 'there's no use for it' or 'we already have X number of that same unit.' Comments like THAT do no good for anyone.

Amen

It won't be political correct once again but history knows the usage of passenger planes (wich they don't have potentially military usage) in combat you don't need to have new machine full of missiles, invisible for radars etc - to hit hard. So how the machine will be used is creativity of modder (i know there were ideas to make flavour unit for africa small childrens with ak-47, so why don't attack with spirit of st louis - no matter how stupid the idea will be).
I like the idea of making this as a wonder.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

It never ceases to amaze me how something so ridiculous as a discussion on the validity of the Spirit of St. Louis unit can turn into a broad polemic on the War on Terror (which, despite what many may have you believe, is actually a war) and the value of the sacrifice of many a fighting man over 200 years of American history. But I shall leave the argument alone, citing only the words of one of our founders:

"Posterity! You will never know how much it has cost the present generation to preserve your freedom! I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent it in heaven that I ever took half the pains to preserve it."

-- John Adams, to his wife Abigail

If America has made a mistake, it has been that we have valued the rights of even the lowliest degenerates of our own nation, and those of the inhabitants of distant and unfriendly peoples, far too highly.

 

[asioasioasio]

Attacking other nations can't be called valueing of rights of other distant and unfriendly peoples. It's mostly why USA get into trouble with terrorism and partisan warfare (afghanistan) - the only one effective solution against invincible army. Probably the problem wouldn't appear when the USA would not make such agrresive politics.

I don't say that's bad (I just say that spending 400 bln $ on military isn't best solution of solving problems) - many times USA helped other countries and helped to spread democracy and freedom. Sometimes freedom loose with profit (wich is also understandable), but it doesn't make good opinion in the world when this happens - example last two wars (against will of UN wich didn't wanted to use force).

Poland also fights in this two wars - and this was what i was against from the begining. I supposed couple of years ago that afghanistan will be huge problem (like it was for Great Britain and Soviet Union) and supposed that Saddam Hussain doesn't have any WMD. USA started two unnecessary wars, and i'm afraid when real help will be needed to maintain somwhere peace the US Government' won't afford starting new war because the people or the congress won't support another war.

EDIT

The simple tactics that Bush used - bad ones / good ones and action-reaction doesn't work - it just complicate things wich are already enough complicated. But i think you know this already - because Bush has worst rating as a president in USA history.

 

[Xenomorph]

If America has made a mistake, it has been that we have valued the rights of even the lowliest degenerates of our own nation, and those of the inhabitants of distant and unfriendly peoples, far too highly.

That must be why we deny those people the same basic rights we enjoy today (Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay anyone? How about Ahmed Khadr?). Or at least used to enjoy, the Patriot Act helps take some of those away.

 

[mamba]

It never ceases to amaze me how something so ridiculous as a discussion on the validity of the Spirit of St. Louis unit can turn into a broad polemic on the War on Terror (which, despite what many may have you believe, is actually a war)

It is a war because it was turned into one. You cannot fight terrorists with a war though, you can only fight nations with one, so that is what was done instead.

So they attacked the right guy for all the wrong reasons.

If America has made a mistake, it has been that we have valued the rights of even the lowliest degenerates of our own nation, and those of the inhabitants of distant and unfriendly peoples, far too highly.

Wow, this is the most wrong statement I ever heard / read.

You do not value the rights of those people high enough, you treat them like .... Both the ones in your country and the ones abroad. Bush and his regime stand for everything the US used to not stand for, oppression, blatant lies, anti-democratic and even unconstitutional behaviour (again both abroad and in the US). I sure hope the next president is either black or female and cleans up that mess

 

[asioasioasio]

Yeah this Patriot Act doesn't work for Freedom of people - another good example of Bush's failure of Action/Reaction politics.

I'm much liberal and prodemocratic - and all those developing of military and police, spying e-mails, anti-imigrant politics (in country wich was built by imigrants!) doesn't sound well. I don't want to offened anyone but it reminds a little bit fascism - this putting state in the first place .

 

[dutchking]

AMEN ASIO!!!
I'm a liberal as well, and I see everything the way you have said it.

Bet I'm getting a phone tap tonight!

 

[Xenomorph]

It is a war because it was turned into one. You cannot fight terrorists with a war though, you can only fight nations with one, so that is what was done instead.

So they attacked the right guy for all the wrong reasons.

I dunno. Kim Jong-Il seems like more a "right" guy than Hussein. I mean, Kim actually has nukes and an ICBM program to deliver them, but Saddam only dreamed of them. Sure, we prevented him from ever getting them, but does that mean we're going to attack every two-bit dictator that has dreams of nuclear power? Besides, the War on Terror (why does everything in America have to be a "War" on something?) simply cannot be won by arms alone. One of the lessons we can take from Vietnam is that if the people have a greater resolve to win at any cost than you, nothing short of complete and total destruction will defeat them by force of arms. They were defending their homes and their own freedom from us. Sure, their current government doesn't allow for much personal freedom, but they are free from other countries (as much as any country is these day).

 

[dutchking]

I don't think there is any "right" guy. Its not our duty as Americans to invade sovereign nations and remove regimes. Lets just mind our own fregging business, WWII was a different story. We have our own problems here, we don't need to create more in different countries. There are ways to improve the world that don't involve violence.

 

[mamba]

I dunno. Kim Jong-Il seems like more a "right" guy than Hussein. I mean, Kim actually has nukes and an ICBM program to deliver them, but Saddam only dreamed of them.

Agreed, there are others who aren't that much better (if any). One thing every dictator learned from the attack on Iraq is that you gotta have atomic weapons these days if you do not want to be invaded.

Yep, that war sure made the world a safer place.

Besides, the War on Terror (why does everything in America have to be a "War" on something?)

Because the US knows how to handle a war ?

simply cannot be won by arms alone. One of the lessons we can take from Vietnam is that if the people have a greater resolve to win at any cost than you, nothing short of complete and total destruction will defeat them by force of arms.

Not only can it not be won that way, it cannot even be fought that way. Do you intend to invade Oklahoma the next time someone from there decides to blow up a building ? If this doesn't work for Oklahoma, why should it work for Iraq ?

 

[Wolfshanze]

Wolfshanze@ They can be blind and dumb both at times ("massive destruction weapons" ) , and they costs billions that are not all justified. Your love for military is so scarying, you know.

I spent 20 years of my life in the military, including serving in several wars, and having friends killed... it's always nice to come home and have everyone hating their own military and saying they don't do anything for them, while they enjoy the freedoms that my friends and I have spilt blood over. Nice.

Sometimes this forum feels like hanging out on Berkeley campus. Or maybe everybody on this forum is from Berkeley?

It never ceases to amaze me how something so ridiculous as a discussion on the validity of the Spirit of St. Louis unit can turn into a broad polemic on the War on Terror

It's a DK thread.

Just Sayin'

 

[dutchking]

I spent 20 years of my life in the military, including serving in several wars, and having friends killed... it's always nice to come home and have everyone hating their own military and saying they don't do anything for them, while they enjoy the freedoms that my friends and I have spilt blood over. Nice.

First of all, I don't see how I have any responsibility to thank you for your friend dying in a war created by the government. I have sympathies for you but beyond that its really none of my concern or business. I never said I hated the military, and I don't see why I should thank the military for my freedoms.

 

[mamba]

I spent 20 years of my life in the military, including serving in several wars, and having friends killed... it's always nice to come home and have everyone hating their own military and saying they don't do anything for them, while they enjoy the freedoms that my friends and I have spilt blood over. Nice.

Nothing wrong with you spending your life in the military. I agree that unfortunately military is needed to defend our freedoms. I do see this more as a passive role however, *defend our freedoms* not invade other countries.

Like all those atomic bombs, mutually assured destruction, so noone attacks.

I wish upholding human rights of opponents would also be high on the priority list though. Something which clearly is not the case.

However, just because something is supposedly done for my benefit, does not mean I have to appreciate the fact that it was done.

For the most part I blame our current crop of politicians (yours and ours) for not upholding them. In fact imo we have more to fear from them than from terrorists. Sure, terrorists can kill people, but so can cars. In fact, cars kill more people. Yet everyone just accepts the fact that there cannot be 100% security for cars and does not even attempt to improve it via drastic laws and regulations.

The same however is true for terrorism as well, you cannot achieve 100% security and right now I feel that by striving for it, we loose more in liberties and rights than we gain in security. imo the laws passed since 9/11 have taken away more rights and liberties than any terrorist could ever hope to achieve, and there still is no sign of them stopping.

I agree with Benjamin Franklin who once said "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

 

[Wolfshanze]

Nothing wrong with you spending your life in the military. I agree that unfortunately military is needed to defend our freedoms. I do see this more as a passive role however, *defend our freedoms* not invade other countries.

Pre 9/11 we weren't engaged in any foreign conflicts... bored terrorists with nothing to do at home come to America and kill American civilians.

Post 9/11 the military is in their countries... terrorists occupied fighting the US military on foreign soil... ZERO ATTACKS ON US CIVILIANS IN AMERICA POST 9/11.

Fighting US military over there... not bombing US civilians over here.

You can argue policy and politics all you want... the terrorists are pre-occupied with US troops on foreign soil, as opposed to blowing up civilians on our soil.

Anyways... so how's that Spirit of St Louis coming along? That Stuka is kinda nice.

 

[Wolfshanze]

I agree with Benjamin Franklin who once said "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

Oh oh... invoking Benjamin Franklin!

You know... there was once a similar conversation (that was written-down for posterity) in the Continental Congress when the Colonies were arguing whether or not they should go to war with England... it may hold relevance to what we are discussing today... I wonder what Benjamin Franklin would have thought of it all....

Adams: We must go to war!

Dickinson: But what about the violence?! The lives lost?! If we found a country, it should be founded on peace and diplomacy.

Congressman 1: England will only understand one thing: Force.

Congressman 2: [rises] I must state again for the record that South Carolina, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Georgia are against war! [pounds the table with his fist]

Congressman 3: Yeah, because you don't care about the fate of the Colonies like we do! You're all unpatriotic! And if you don't like the Colonies, then you can git out!

Dickinson: Don't you call us unpatriotic! We're protesting this war because we care so deeply for the fate of our Colonies! You are all unpatriotic for leading the Colonies into a war that half of them don't want! [the various Congressmen begin squabblig with each other]

Dickinson: We cannot found a country based on war!

Adams: We cannot found a country that is afraid to fight!

Congressmen: Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble! [the doors open and in walks an august figure. The boisterous voices become hushed] Oh my, it's Benjamin Franklin. It's Benjamin Franklin. It's Benjamin Franklin. [they keep murmuring this as Franklin walks towards the main desk]

Hancock: Mr. Franklin, where do you stand on the war issue?

Franklin: I believe that if we are to form a new country, we cannot be a country that appears war-hungry and violent to the rest of the world. However, we also cannot be a country that appears weak and unwilling to fight to the rest of the world. So, what if we form a country that appears to want both?

Jefferson: Yes. Yes of course. We go to war, and protest going to war at the same time.

Dickinson: Right. If the people of our new country are allowed to do whatever they wish, then some will support the war and some will protest it.

Franklin: And that means that as a nation, we could go to war with whomever we wished, but at the same time, act like we didn't want to. If we allow the people to protest what the government does, then the country will be forever blameless.

Adams: [holding a slice of chocolate cake] It's like having your cake, and eating it, too.

Congressman 2: Think of it: an entire nation founded on saying one thing and doing another.

Hancock: And we will call that country the United States of America.

 

[dutchking]

Post 9/11 the military is in their countries... terrorists occupied fighting the US military on foreign soil... ZERO ATTACKS ON US CIVILIANS IN AMERICA POST 9/11.

Actually, if it were their countries we'd be in Saudi Arabia right now.

Anyways... so how's that Spirit of St Louis coming along? That Stuka is kinda nice.

Well, I've had some trouble getting the texture to stick to the model. (nifskope "can't read texture data") So its postponed for a bit, but fear not, I have some 6 planes in my hangar half ready for take off.

 

[Wolfshanze]

Actually, if it were their countries we'd be in Saudi Arabia right now.

So please tell me mr expert on the war, exactly how much time have you spent physically in Saudi Arabia or Iraq and tell me from your 1st hand knowledge exactly what you know of what's going on over there.

Or did you learn everything you know about the war from TV?

I've spent considerable time in both countries. I can brief you on what's really going on over there if you'd like to open your mind and learn from something other then the boob tube.

 

[bernie14]

i hate to sound like an "arrogant american" but as a first generation immigrant form a country who's thinking was "can't get worse than Batista" (and it certainly did) i have to shake my head in great dissapointment when i see or hear folks calling US "fascist" or saying that the military does not defend our freedoms....words are NOTHING unfortunatly, unless u can back them up...the pen is only stronger than the sword when they are backed up by MORE swords.....thats just human nature....throughout history...it has NEVER, EVER mattered who had the prettiest words, the rulers were the ones with the biggest CLUBS....we are not going to change that in this, or unfortunately many coming generations....social darwinism is hardwired into our genes (survival-we are already on top of the food chain and we just have ourselves to compete against) and only a REAL good education or brainwashing (what IS the difference????; TRUTH....ACCORDING TO WHO?) is going to counter it...and with that in mind, what the heck is so wrong about "gettin into the beezwax" of these THUGS and BULLIES running thier countries as if it is their personal properties with NO regard for their citizens....i'ts like if u had a neighbor who BEAT the snot out of their kids and u did NOTHING about it cuz, "that's their house and i'm not going to butt into their business"....comparisons between us and nazis??? HOLY of HOLIES.... it's all relative right?....i mean kim or castro or saddam starve and torture their people, but that's just boyz being boys, we expect it, hey, don't mess with them...it's THEIR house, but OOOUUUUU, tap international calls coming from suspected terrorists and your a FASCIST!!!

u know what, it is because of our freedoms that we can type ALL this CRAPE*..THANKS TO OUR TROOPS, PAST AND PRESENT


i will begin to worry when they take away our guns and shaun penn and susan sarandon are arrested for voicing their opinions