Gunrunner

CTD seems to be correlated to memory occupation (as in, the more memory used, the more chances of a CTD). Since I'm used to having Paint.net, Inkscape and a few Chrome sessions opened while playing, it's not surprising I CTD when using "unlimited" details. However, when playing "clean" or with lower settings I hardly ever encountered a CTD yet.

Stratos, Musketeer would be a logical next step, but we have about 2/3 of the material as 3rd party available (unfortunately most don't measure up to the new standard set but are still pretty good). On another note, am I the only one CTDing at mission's end ?

Well, under the Talibans Afghanistan produced (and exported) very little opium (compared to pre-Talibani levels, both as global market proportion and absolute numbers). The western intervention in Afghanistan put opium back as the primary agricultural product in Afghanistan as local warlords were back to production, the Talibans themselves got involved in order to get funding and increased instability meant that in some regions only high revenue crops were worth the risks. So far programs to fight poppy culture in Afghanistan have proved unable to really reverse the trend, but the present situation makes things difficult. On the other hand, in South America, programs encouraging alternative cultures by protecting farmers and guaranteeing minimum prices have proved successful in reducing coca production, which gives hope for that particular product in this region and for opium should the same steps be initiated. Now we are left with cannabis (and to a lesser extent other natural products), which unfortunately is far easier to grow and transform than coca and opium poppy, making a solution far more difficult to engineer. In the best case scenario you may end up eliminating large scale production, but you probably won't get rid of personal/local/boutique production. Fortunately such an outcome would make little place for organized crime (the profit opportunity being too low) and would severely limit distribution. If the goal is to control the quality of the product for public safety reason, to avoid organized crime to profit by it, to lower criminality by eliminating traffic, then legalization and government control may be the best way to procede (the Netherlands experience is not a perfect reference, as the lack of direct government involvement doesn't get rid of most problems). If, however, this is done on moral/policy grounds, then I fear that particular fight is hopeless. Next are synthetic products and these are and will be the most difficult to get rid of. Also, keep in mind that you won't get rid of the problem, at all, but mostly report it on other substances, especially those you can't get rid of because of their medicinal use, you run the risk of seeing an increase on violence against hospitals, stock management errors in hospital pharmacies or at plants. You can't get rid of the need for drugs in part of the population, cutting production will only mean there is an unsatisfied need, and someone WILL find a way to satisfy this need and get filthy rich in the process. The war on drugs is hopeless, however you could manipulate things so you can vaguely control which ones are produced, who produces them and how they are distributed, it is a choice of settling on the lesser evils, or just losing the war.

C5, on the other hand, the Canadian border is secure, even SF writers get beaten up so they don't contaminate the US with their unamerican ideas... ah, hyperboles and exaggerations... What's so surprising is that with a border being such a sieve you don't have more problems than that... Anyway, we agree on the basic problem, especially since it's not only a US problem (in Europe we also have a large (il)legal immigration problem, especially since some EU members are laxer than others), I'm just not sure the "solution" is an efficient one and fixes the real problem.

C5, because warning against PLA soldiers disguising themselves as mexican workers to invade the US doesn't rate as "stupid sh*t" ?

Fubar, it won't eliminate it; it will severely limit it, that is a certainty, but it also means that the few crossing will be either the utterly desperate or the criminal elements, meaning the only result will be filtering out the less threatening elements of illegal immigration while helping fund the criminal elements by making the recourse to border-crossing networks unavoidable. And you still won't be able to arrest any mexican-looking people on sight without resistance, as quite a few of them will still be legal immigrants anyway. Also keep in mind that if landborne traffic becomes impossible, waterborne traffic will rise. Illegal immigration in the States doesn't weigh as much on public finances as it does in Europe, it doesn't really take away many jobs (most immigrants take jobs and salaries no one else would take, helping some parts of the economy find manpower and lower their costs; the salary and work condition dumping it creates on low wages job is more a problem for legal immigrants than US citizens; however most studies conclude on a beneficial economic impact (none factor the cost of criminality and few factor loss of taxes though)). The most real "risks" are criminality, but by definition, since the money and the consumers are in the US, it will always be a problem as the rewards justify the increased risk and costs, and cultural assimilation, as there is a far lower chance of "americanization" of illegal immigrants than legal ones (even though the melting-pot assimilation model of the US tolerates this more easily than most European models based on "true" cultural assimilation). The fence seems like a very expensive solution to get rid of the few benefits of illegal immigration while keeping the worse parts, but hey, it's your tax money... WhiteKnight, so, you have a business, you have the choice between an illegal immigrant, who will cost you less in taxes and wages, will show up reliably, will work his ass off with little complaints, or a teen who will take any excuse to slack off, won't show on time or at all half the time and cost twice as much; does it really take that long to chose ?

Continuing my French RF-84F series with ER 3/33 "Moselle"

Date & Time : May 16, 1963, 1130 Theater : Central Europe Unit : French Armée de l'Air, ER 2/33 "Savoie" Formation : 1 RF-84F Mission : Low altitude photographic reconnaissance over Peenemünde The ingress was going fine, I was gently cruising at treetop when suddenly a flash in my rear-view mirror told me I wasn't alone anymore. A quick glance over my shoulder told me I had indeed acquired an "escort". I was too close to the objective now to try and shake it, so I decide to ignore them and complete the mission anyway, the target was in view, I awaited the last moment to gain altitude and take my pictures. Say "cheese" ! Now we have confirmation (beside the two tailing me) the Soviets have Fishpots in Peenemünde (however, if they are as efficient as those on my back, we have nothing to fear). Dodging bullets and doing my best to avoid making an easy target for Alkalis, I got back down as quick as I can. My escort however was not gone... As it happens they trailed me nearly all the way to front, often flying in front of me, but they had no gun and couldn't get a lock.