Emp_Palpatine

That's exagerated. Allowing private possession of arms and make the self defense law less stricter is not the same thing as allowing the possession of war weapons. By the way, as far as I can tell, not everybody wander around in switzerland with the war rifle almost everyone do have. And the country is not in constant bloodshed too. I'm sure US fellow can also assert that they don't often see some people with hand grenade in streets. The fact is that today I'm defensless in the streets and at home and that in my own country, the Police is unable to fulfill its duties. Why should I rely on the state for everything? Giving it all the responsability for my security is a step toward serfdom. The question is not to solve crime or whatever, the question is in my eyes the capability for myself to defend my ass. If the bad guy in the subway or in the street think I may bear an arm, he might have second thought before risking his skin for my money or my MP3. Plus, I do agree with the US constitution. Having the right to bear arms is a protection against any oppression. We are today totally unarmed against statism -and its failure- today in Europe.

While having great fun with Falkland 1982, I suddendly remembered that a lots of years ago, I've read something (and I do remember that something was in english) about some modern Falkland war, that is Kfir-standart Mirage and Finger, lots of exocet, etc... Now that there are such things as amazon, I could figure a mean to get that stuff. The problem is that I haven't the slightiest idea what the title of the novel can be, or if it was some documentary or whatever. Does this ring a bell for someone?

Might be indeed! It dates back on my first years on the net, so back in 1998-1999. Will have a look and tell you. Thanks! :)

The matter is: can and should the state ban us to bear arms whereas the state itself isn't able to protect you. In a word: giving your liverty to defend yourself in exchange of a false protection, whereas bad guys would have arms, control or not.

I've read (or see in some documentary, don't remember) that those space vehicles took much benefits from MBT technology in Soviet Union. But did not know that they were only recently outclassed.

You are a British fellow? That's not gonna happen in France...

Rogue states can reach US allies in Eastern Europe. States that can retaliate by themselves the same way US, France, UK or Russia can. Russia does hold Europe by the balls with the gaz tube things, cut them, and it's gonna be quite cold in most of the continent, especially where sissies ecologists made countries stick off the nuclear. What does the Kremlin wants more? I repeat my self: Russia is more threatened by what might happen in Middle East, central Asia or eastern Asia than by the Western World. Come on, that's not NATO that is supporting insurgents in Chechenya or that is staring with greedy eyes Siberian natural ressources.

Indeed, WTF?! Just can't undertand Russian ideas. Little revenge because of the defensive missiles in Europe? Hell, it's high time for Russia to understand that the West is not a threat, unlike what Moscow are showing now. Threat for Russia lies in Middle east and Red China. They will regret sailing away from the West the day China will start to claim the now largely han-colonized Vladivostock or the weak central-asian republics.

You blame the thing on not enough money spent on talks with those people, not enough prevention. At least what's happening in France: they are burning schools, cars, bus? Poor little guys are just wanting to talk! Let's give them money and blah blah blah "marshall plan for the subburbs". Hell, billions had been wasted there... Force them? No way, that's fascist/american/unacceptable methods. Welcome in Europe, where you can go to jail because you wounded the guy that was just pillaging your house (recently happened) and he got nothing. So depressing.

A french blogger recently made a great post on this issue, how a poll showing a Mc Cain advantage was re-arranged in favor of Obama. It was a futile thing about pet-owner and the election, something like 60% of the owners favored Mc Cain. A couple of hours later, it was "40% of pet owners ready for Obama". And I won't even speak about US election coverage in France, whose left-media (almost everyones) are in love with Obama. During the recent presidential election in France, the socialist candidate was always showed in a very favourable way in terms of pics. Well, the lady isn't disgusting to watch, true... But Sarkozy, supposed to be on her right and to be conservative, was every time showed with some rictus or looking ugly/evil. Basic propaganda.

All right, that was my guess but wanted to be sure I would be able to fly at tree-top level in a Tornado.

It's more than 12 000 a year in France. Most of them would have been useless if older ones were correctly enforced. Guess from where most other are coming? That's right, EU. So, you got the point: west-Europeans are not only used to a lot of government oversight, but they do want it! Or at least it seems so, as I can't see much hostile reactions against new regulation and State interventionnism. The fact is the EU is an aggravating mean. Those people in that thing just love to regulate, edict and ordain lots of regulations, laws, etc: from the size of potatoes to your absolute non-right to raise your children how you feel. (Their new idea is to forbid punishment on children... Parents will be suppose to have talks with them. So west European! No use of force! Have talks! Sissies...) So, should a problem arise somewhere, a new law will be passed. An older one exists yet? So what? Let's make a new one and don't try to enforce the existing ones. And the fact that normal people do still respect the laws whereas bad guys don't give a damn about them does not cross their minds. People like me will so wander around without any means of defense whereas those immigrants gangs, burlars or whatever do bear knifes and fire arms. I'm supposed to rely on the Police... the same one that is prosecuted when it uses its own means of defense. The same one that have orders from the State not to act in order not to cause stirs among the problematic population... The same one that when I lived in the hottest quarter of my town (3 years ) I saw only one time! In 3 years... That's all the european tragedy: the old european-style convenant between peoples and state is no longer accurate: one is supposed to abdicate some of its freedom in exchange of state protections against the bad guys. Nowadays, you are supposed to abdicate almost all your liberties, all, without concrete compensations. And here comes the knife thing: another attempt by a west european state to controll a situation it has lost controll over years ago. It will be a failure, as only honnest citizens will comply and other won't be prosecuted. The bigger the State, the less it's efficient.

Early october 1914: German resistance appears in Prussia! An ill-decided advance toward Bromberg is heavily chastised by still-advancing Russian troops. German GHQ sure thought Russian weren't yet in Bromberg. Further South, Germany had, in these first days of October, its first defensive success on that front. A welcomed success in Berlin! 150 000 Russian soldiers failed to push 50 000 germans them back from the eastern bank of the Vistule River. A vaillant victory indeed for Germany indeed. Furthermore, the German saillant here can be a future rearbase for any counter-attack. In Galicia, other success are coming for the Central Powers. The Austria-Hungary advance goes on there. Posen is now in Russian hands, but Lublin, a great and symbolic Russian Poland city is taken by the Imperial and Royal Army. The end of October 1914 is more quiet. Both camps are starting to show their respective overstretchness. Still, the battle for Liège goes on as the Germans are stubbornly attacking the Belgian martyr city. Belgrade is now an hellish landscape too. Austria-Hungary still try there to seize the Serbian capital. Little Serbie still holds. Unfortunately, the casualties are growing in Serbian ranks, and few reinforcements are even possible. The Habsburg might well, finally, take the city in months to come thanks to combat attrition... In Prussia, the Russian advance start to bog down, except on the coast. Köslin is now another hated defeat name for the German Army. With the coming of november, the first winter of a war supposed to end by Christmas is approaching.

Thanks a lot! Guns of August is not an "hard core" game. A couple of hours is enough to understand correctly the game mechanics. Of course, strategies, choices (research, etc) come with experience. Will you choose gas? Aircrafts? A "peripheric" strategy with landings in the Balkan or the Baltic? Etc... For me, the game is very good because it's IMHO the only one dealing with WW1 and it does emulate it very well. Offensives in the first two months, then bloody position war, attempted breaktrough, attempted new fronts...

Military operations, of course, are going on, following the trends of August. But things began to slow down... Germany hadn't given up its hope of advance in the West and resumes the battle for Liège. Despite heavy losses, notably from the German siege artillery, the franco-belgian stand firm. Austria-Hungary Imperial and Royal Army do show much bravery too in the on-going battle of Belgrade, to no avail. Serbian forces are well entrenched in the ruined city and make them pay much for nothing. In Prussia, Russian forces are still marching toward Posen and the Warthe and Oder rivers. But in the late september days, the surpise comes from Galicia: the Habsburgs army launch an offensive! Probably in order to relieve Germany's ordeal in Prussia. The thin troop curtain is easily pushed back by the Austrian. Things are still really moving in the East in those late september days.

A little insight of what is going on on the strategic level. Diplomatically speaking, news are not very good. The Great Duchy of Luxemburg has to accept its integration by force into the German Empire. The true colors of Germany are now revealled. Hopefully, neutral countries will now understand where liberty and rights stand. Without surprise, it's not the case of the Ottoman Empire, or at least what is now the Ottoman Empire, almost a rump State in comparison with the Great power it was a couple centuries before. Even its former satellites and possession, in Europe, had made it bite the dust two years ago. The Sultan, and even more the nationalist officers that now hold most of the power in the Empire, might have think that Germany can help them to reclaim some of the Empire's former glory. Presently, British forces in Egypt and Russian ones in Caucasus will be enough to hold the Ottoman army at bey. Taking into account Turkish defeat in the 1911 war against Italy and in 1912 against the small balkan states, there is not much to fear from them. In Rome, Italy's sympathy for the Central Power is confirmed. Fortunately, they seems not ready to enter the war now. But Italy has to be monitored by the Entente in the Spring. Maybe some diplomatic lobbying can prevent them to join the war or, at least, delay them. In the Balkan, Tzar Ferdinand's Bulgaria seems quite interested too in Germany promises. Joining the Central Powers would be, for Bulgaria, an occasion to avenge their 1913 defeat against Serbia, Greece and Romania. Sofia had to be monitored too, if Bulgaria joins the war it may prove disastrous for Serbia... On the seas, German high sea fleet manages to patrol into the North Sea, as an overconfidant Royal Navy did not provide enough units there to assume total control of the North Sea. But the Atlantic is still firmly controlled by the Royal Navy. Consequently, British troops are now embarquing for the Continent. In most eyes, despite Russian progresses, the war won't be over in few weeks and some planning has to start. The first research efforts are done in artillery: the Entente lacks the heavy guns, the very same that are bringing ruin in Liege. Those are the strategical prospects for the Entente in the Fall of 1914.

No coalition aircrafts?

Ebb and flow in Belgium and Eastern France. Lanzerac launch a bold offensive in the last of August against the German forces on the Meuse. Exhausted by their casualties and their recent advances, the German units finally retreat on the eastern bank of the Meuse. The ennemy advance in Belgium is restrained for the time being. In eastern France, a German counter-attack is launched and the french units in Germany are harschly defeated. That will end there any French attempt to attack on that front for the time being. Is the western front on the way to stabilization? In Serbia, the heroic defense of Belgrade goes on, as the Austrian army does not halt its efforts to seize Serbian capital city. On the Prussian front, the Russian army carries on its advance, toward Posen now. If that town fall into Russian hands, other agricultural ressources would lack in Germany as the precious farming areas of Prussia would be in Russian hands. The sun set on August, the first month of the war...

Thanks for all gentle comments! :yes: Here's third week of August report: The battles in the Ardennes forest had opened a gap between the Franco-belgian in Liege and the ones in Lorraine. Several corps are ordered to march in order to contain the German Breaktrough and hold the banks of the Meuse. Sadly, they are not fast enough and are welcomed by German units that have already crossed the river. The Germans secures their holding of the Meuse with severe losses for the Allies. Further North, the German siege artillery began to take care of the heavily fortified Liege. Those are sure big guns. And deadly ones. In Alsace-Lorraine, German Army counter-attack against the French units. They failed. But the second part of the XVII offensives are painfull failures too. It seems that the front will soon stabilize there. In one offensive, the Frenche lost there almost 50% of their offensive might in the East! Machine guns, trenches and terrain are awfull adversary for any attacking unit. In Serbia, Austria-Hungary bid to conquer Serbia went on. Belgrade's defenders hold them at bay one more time. In Eastern Prussia, Russian armies take the undefended Koenigsberg. Had the formidable fortifications of the town be manned, it wouldn't have been a piece of cake to oust any defenders... This defeat is dangerous on a longer term for Germany: East-Prussia food ressources are now into Russian hands, and other, near Posen, are now threatened. As Germany is not self-sufficient and as she can't trade on the seas because of the Royal Navy, they will have to do something or face starvation in the near future. Newest casualties and moral report:

That's what I understand too. So I don't miss anything, I guess. :yes:

That's how I understand your sentence. You know how english is: you can sometime use words in a strange manner for us, non native speakers. If you say: "I'll beam them", I undestand you are getting a radar lock on them, so the contrary is true.

No need to apologize, ever. Yeah, there were, above (read: in government circles) strange links between France and Irak, but shhhh! Don't talk about it! That plus politician and strategical plans: if the coalition acts, without France and outside UN, it will just unveil a little more the reality: despite arrogant stances, France is unable to act in the world and the much lauded UN is nothing but an empty shell. That, plus widespread believe that international law, UN, and diplomacy are the only way to achieve peace and collaboration, that war is an horror that must be avoided at all cost. But whatever the reasons and beliefs, I agree, a word summarize them: bull****.

Anti war is a question of ignorance and prejugés, mostly. In the past month and weeks, I've come across lots of french scholars in International relations and military affairs, and they all keep talking about the US defeat in Irak. Period. No arguments, just declarations of faith. When I tried to speak about the surge, the success, they dug in their dishonnesty. It's not a rationnal reaction, that's a faith. Whatever: the US are wrong, war shall be avoided at all costs, pull out of there, etc. The most honnest one, actually my current boss, a defense affairs scholar eventually reluctantly agreed on the betterment of the situation since a year, thanks the surge etc. But sadly, he appearred quite eager to find something wrong...

Indeed, but in french, the substantive "a militant" can be used, and is used, to also describe members of associations, of parties, in a word non-violent things. The idea is one of political involvement, not really of violence. I must confess I understand the english term in this way. But it does really piss me off when I read in French press: "a palestinian militant explodes itself in a bus" or things like that about Iraq or Afghanistan. Words do have meanings. I'm quite sure the troops know who and what they are fightings. But words are indeed very important in the home front. Remember Vietnam war (or Algeria here) was lost not because of any military defeat, but because of defeatism and the loss of support for the war. And such understatements or euphemism could lead to such results: "that's not terrorists, that's militants we are fighting", and blah blah blah. Obfuscate the war of terror would be a terrible error: words do mean something: those people are insurgents and actually I can't think of any of the known groups fighting US, Afghan, Coalition or Iraqi forces that are not terrorists, because of the methods they are all using.

I hate these anti-war pacifist journalistic euphemism. Militants?! They are terrorists or insurgents! Not gentle militants, by jove!