twilight2000-digest Thursday, July 29 1999 Volume 1999 : Number 055 The following topics are covered in this digest: Re: China Anyone? Re: China Anyone? Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] co-GM/player for TW2k pbem wanted Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Fwd: [2300ad] Traveller [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: T2K Warfare Re: China Anyone? [Long] Re: China Anyone? [Long] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 01:12:26 -0400 From: "Dwight Looney" Subject: Re: China Anyone? Subject: Re: China Anyone? > Sooner or later, our luck will run out and there will be > actual measurable casualties -- all our high tech toys > notwithstanding. Not to pick at scabs, but does anybody remember what just > one Iraqi Exocet did to the Stark? How about the Rangers in > Somalia? Those SEALs at the airfield in Panama? Grenada? > > I freely admit I can't speak intelligently about current US naval > preparedness other than what I read in "Proceedings," and lately that's not > much Well I'm here to tell you that the morale in the good ole USN sucks, and equipment is breaking left and right you've got 6 times the missions these days with half the people. I wish like those guys in "Proceedings" that they'd give us every gadget the guys at John Hopkins can dream up. But as near as I can tell there isn't an arms race going on and our stuff and that of our closest friends rules. Plus all your quoting is the bad stuff, cause CNN doesn't report how many times these guys came out to meet us screaming and threatening to engage. Then when told politely to stand down they left and went home. A game I can tell ya the Brits and the French are very good at playing, we aren't as good as them but we have done it also with success. I'm not belittling the Chinese or any of those screamers either but facts is facts. We're better trained, even if it is self study, we have better gear even if it isn't 100% up, we just don't have allot of it. Keep the Faith Loonz *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 21:06:37 +1000 From: "Peter" Subject: Re: China Anyone? Check out this 1999 Report on the Taiwan Straits Security Situation: http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/2815/twstrait_02261999.html The threats to Taiwan are 1. Blockade 2. Missiles strikes 3. Invasion, unlikely but would include airborne and airmobile operations. Peter Grining *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 08:40:37 EDT From: Zek101@aol.com Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] plus rember north korea is ready to invade south at a moments notices if china goes so does north korea with chinese reforcements to boot *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 08:52:03 EDT From: Zek101@aol.com Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] UPDATE! The Latest news from JVIM! *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 08:52:20 EDT From: Zek101@aol.com Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] The National Guard's new Y2K RAID team *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 08:52:39 EDT From: Zek101@aol.com Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] But will guardsmen be Y2K-ready? *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 08:52:51 EDT From: Zek101@aol.com Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] The plan for massive military mobilization *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 08:53:13 EDT From: Zek101@aol.com Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] What the Guard is preparing for *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 17:40:24 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] At 08:40 AM 7/27/99 EDT, Zek101@aol.com wrote: >plus rember north korea is ready to invade south at a moments notices if >china goes so does north korea with chinese reforcements to boot I think Chinese reinforcements for North Korea are unlikely. As for North Korea's readniness, remember that they've had problems just getting fuel, and that they're people are _literally_ starving--yes, the army gets what's available first, but it's still not thought to be in great shape. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 19:57:55 EDT From: OrrinLadd@aol.com Subject: co-GM/player for TW2k pbem wanted yo listen up, I’m considering restarting my TW2k pbem. But what I’m looking for before I start is someone willing to share some GM responsibilities, namely, organizing the other players, coordinating SOP and inventory, and in general just being a bad-ass. This player must be willing to take a leadership role and be able to post several times a week. Most importantly, must not flake out. I’ll handle the story telling aspect and make all GM decisions. If interested, inquire within... orrinladd@aol.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 08:47:57 EDT From: Zek101@aol.com Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] its to china's gain to renforce north korea the higher usa ground casulties the quicker the american public will scream for peace and the quicker we will fold."AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE STOMACH FOR AN ALL OUT GROUND WAR IN ASIA!" *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 19:29:59 -0400 From: "Dwight Looney" Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE STOMACH FOR AN ALL OUT GROUND WAR IN ASIA!" Come on now, that would depend on who asked them, if they could be convinced it was in our interests ie. "If we don't go save South Korea, America is in Jeopardy" of course at the same time someone was trying to convince the US to go you would have the separatists, pacifists, and then your subversives telling everyone why we shouldn't. AMERICA WILL DO WHAT IT THINKS IS RIGHT :-) Geez just cuz bubba's gettin hummers from interns doesn't mean the whole countries crap, geez mellow dude. :-) Loonz *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 22:43:04 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] At 08:47 AM 7/28/99 EDT, Zek101@aol.com wrote: >its to china's gain to renforce north korea the higher usa ground casulties >the quicker the american public will scream for peace and the quicker we will > fold."AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE THE STOMACH FOR AN ALL OUT GROUND WAR IN ASIA!" It's to China's gain to join a war it wasn't involved in already? I don't think so. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:44:31 -0700 From: Snake Eyes Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] - --=====================_40259577==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 07:29 PM 7/28/99 -0400, Loonz wrote: >Come on now, that would depend on who asked them, if they could be convinced >it was in our interests ie. "If we don't go save South Korea, America is in >Jeopardy" of course at the same time someone was trying to convince the US >to go you would have the separatists, pacifists, and then your subversives >telling everyone why we shouldn't. > >AMERICA WILL DO WHAT IT THINKS IS RIGHT :-) > >Geez just cuz bubba's gettin hummers from interns doesn't mean the whole >countries crap, geez mellow dude. :-) I dunno, Loonz. I'm inclined to back Zek101 on this one. Don't get me wrong, I'm no pacifist or subversive -- if all out war erupts with China or N. Korea, I'll be the first in line down at the recruiting depot. But I really don't think the US public in general, or our elected officials specifically, have the stomach to endure another D-Day or Inchon. We as a people had a different national character and concept of duty back then, and I'm not sure there is support now for that kind of protracted, widespread sacrifice. I know that our "bloated jackal(TM)" of a President does not reflect on the quality or dedication of our troops, but sadly it is he (and his cabal of fools and idiots) that will ultimately call the shots that tie their hands. One only has to look as far as the decision-making process that allowed the current administration to send US Rangers to their slaughter against Aideed in Somalia (while the State department simultaneously negotiated terms of his surrender) to realize that we have no business serving as policeman to the world. I sure as hell don't put that kind of trust in our current administration. It was hard enough for them to marshal support for the half-ass way they went about prosecuting the Kosovo campaign. They must know they can't fight a war in Korea the same way. I think the fact that Clinton was actually getting blown during a telephone conversation with a Senator regarding possible US troop deployments to Bosnia speaks loads about exactly the esteem in which he holds our servicemen and their role in world affairs. And if, as the rumors say, the Pentagon really is getting political pressure to rotate Clark out of his NATO post early for being *too aggressive* in his pursuit of the recent Balkans episode, then I don't want us having anything to do with a (potential) meat-grinder like Korea until we have elected ourselves a leader with the spine, character and scrote to make the tough choices. ~ Snake Eyes - --=====================_40259577==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" At 07:29 PM 7/28/99 -0400, Loonz wrote: Come on now, that would depend on who asked them, if they could be convinced it was in our interests ie. "If we don't go save South Korea, America is in Jeopardy" of course at the same time someone was trying to convince the US to go you would have the separatists, pacifists, and then your subversives telling everyone why we shouldn't. AMERICA WILL DO WHAT IT THINKS IS RIGHT :-) Geez just cuz bubba's gettin hummers from interns doesn't mean the whole countries crap, geez mellow dude. :-) I dunno, Loonz. I'm inclined to back Zek101 on this one. Don't get me wrong, I'm no pacifist or subversive -- if all out war erupts with China or N. Korea, I'll be the first in line down at the recruiting depot. But I really don't think the US public in general, or our elected officials specifically, have the stomach to endure another D-Day or Inchon. We as a people had a different national character and concept of duty back then, and I'm not sure there is support now for that kind of protracted, widespread sacrifice. I know that our "bloated jackal(TM)" of a President does not reflect on the quality or dedication of our troops, but sadly it is he (and his cabal of fools and idiots) that will ultimately call the shots that tie their hands. One only has to look as far as the decision-making process that allowed the current administration to send US Rangers to their slaughter against Aideed in Somalia (while the State department simultaneously negotiated terms of his surrender) to realize that we have no business serving as policeman to the world. I sure as hell don't put that kind of trust in our current administration. It was hard enough for them to marshal support for the half-ass way they went about prosecuting the Kosovo campaign. They must know they can't fight a war in Korea the same way. I think the fact that Clinton was actually getting blown during a telephone conversation with a Senator regarding possible US troop deployments to Bosnia speaks loads about exactly the esteem in which he holds our servicemen and their role in world affairs. And if, as the rumors say, the Pentagon really is getting political pressure to rotate Clark out of his NATO post early for being *too aggressive* in his pursuit of the recent Balkans episode, then I don't want us having anything to do with a (potential) meat-grinder like Korea until we have elected ourselves a leader with the spine, character and scrote to make the tough choices. ~ Snake Eyes - --=====================_40259577==_.ALT-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:54:01 -0700 From: Snake Eyes Subject: Fwd: [2300ad] Traveller [Long] This is EXACTLY what should be done with Twilight/Merc 2000. ~ Snake Eyes >From: "GUY LEMIRE & ASSOCIÉS" >To: <2300ad@onelist.com> >Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:00:06 -0400 >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0 >Mailing-List: list 2300ad@onelist.com; contact 2300ad-owner@onelist.com >Delivered-To: mailing list 2300ad@onelist.com >List-Unsubscribe: >Reply-to: 2300ad@onelist.com >Subject: [2300ad] Re: Traveller > >From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?GUY_LEMIRE_&_ASSOCI=C9S?=" > > >Here I got this today I tought it might interest some people on the list . > >Pat > > >Date: 28 juillet, 1999 12:16 >Subject: Traveller > > >Classic Traveller Collectors' Edition > Because of continuing demand for copies of the Classic Traveller Little >Black Books, we are planning on publishing the Classic Traveller Collector’s >Edition: reprints of the books from Classic Traveller assembled in >convenient >reference volumes. > >THE FIRST VOLUME > The first volume in the series will be the Classic Traveller Books: This >272 page perfect bound volume reproduces the books in their entirety with >two >5.5 x 8.5 inch pages on one 11x 8.5 inch page (printed in landscape format). >It includes several pages of annotation, and printing/production numbers. > The book cover retains the classic Traveller appearance… a solid black >cover with the white type and red stripe. > Books (0-8). Includes Introduction To Traveller, Characters and Combat, >Starships, Worlds and Adventures, Mercenary, High Guard, Scouts, Merchant >Prince, Robots. > >FUTURE VOLUMES > We anticipate producing additional volumes in the series until the >entire >Classic Traveller canon has been reprinted. > Supplements (1-13). Includes: 1001 Characters, Animal Encounters, The >Spinward Marches, Citizens of the Imperium, Lightning Class Cruisers >(originally available only in the boxed boardgame Azhanti High Lightning), >76 >Patrons, Traders & Gunboats, Library Data (A-M), Fighting Ships, The >Solomani >Rim, Library Data (N-Z), Forms & Charts, Veterans. > Adventures (1-13). Includes The Kinunir, Research Station Gamma, >Twilight's Peak, Leviathan, Trillion Credit Squadron, Expedition to Zhodane, >Broadsword, Prison Planet, Nomads of the World Ocean, Safari Ship, Murder on >Arcturus Station, Secret of the Ancients, Signal GK. > Double Adventures (1-6) and More. Includes the Double Adventures >Shadows/Annic Nova, Mission on Mithril/Bright Face, Argon Gambit/Death >Station, Marooned/Marooned Alone, Chamax Plague/Horde, Night/Divine >Intervention. Also includes short adventures Memory Alpha, Stranded on >Arden, >and Imperial Fringe (the Introductory Adventure from Deluxe Traveller) and >Special Supplements (1-3) Merchant Prince, Exotic Atmospheres, and Missiles. > Games. Includes full text of games produced for Traveller: Mayday, >Snapshot, Azhanti High Lightning, Fifth Frontier War, > Invasion: Earth. Also includes Striker, Dark Nebula, and Imperium. Game >boards and counter images included. > Journal of the Travellers’ Aid Society (1-12). .Includes Annic Nova, >Victoria, Asteroids, Gazelle, Imperium, Imperial Interstellar Scouts, Champa >Starport, Broadsword, War, Planet-Building, Striker, Merchant Prince >(includes Special Supplement 1). Includes an index of all 24 JTAS issues. > Journal of the Travellers’ Aid Society (13-24). Includes Hivers, Laws >and >Lawbreakers, Azun, Susag, Atmospheres (includes Special Supplement 2), >Travelling without Jumping, Skyport Authority, Ways of Kuzu, Vargr (includes >Special Supplement 3), Port to Port Jumping, Zhodani Philosophies, Religion >of the 2000 Worlds. Includes an index of all 24 JTAS issues. > Journal of the Travellers’ Aid Society (25-36). Includes Classic >Traveller content originally in Challenge Magazine after it absorbed JTAS. >Includes an index of Traveller articles in Challenge. > Modules (1-5). Includes the five modules titled Tarsus (originally >boxed), Beltstrike (originally boxed), Spinward Marches Campaign, Alien >Realms, and Atlas of the Imperium. The original Atlas was maps without most >of the star data. Since original publication that data has been created and >it is included. > Alien Modules (1-8). Includes all eight Alien Modules Aslan, K'kree, >Vargr, Zhodani, Droyne, Solomani, Hivers, Darrians. Also includes the Alien >Handout. > >ORDER BY MAIL > Order these books by mail from Far Future Enterprises. > In The US. Add $4 per order for Priority Mail postage. > Outside The US. Allow 3 pounds per book ordered. > To Europe: $10 per book. > To Asia and Australia: $10 per book. Or choose the postage rate you >want from http://ircalc.usps.gov (allow 3 pounds per book ordered). > Content, pricing and page counts subject to change. > >CLASSIC TRAVELLER COLLECTORS' EDITION > FFE 001 Traveller Collectors' Edition: The Books (0-8) L ISBN >1-55878-200-1 $28. Nov 99 > FFE 002 Traveller Collectors' Edition: The Adventures (1-13) L ISBN >1-55878-201-X > FFE 003 Traveller Collectors' Edition: The Supplements (1-13) L ISBN >1-55878-202-8 > FFE 004 Traveller Collectors' Edition: The Short Adventures (1-6) L >ISBN 1-55878-203-6 > FFE 005 Traveller Collectors' Edition: The Games L ISBN >1-55878-204-4 > FFE 006 Traveller Collectors' Edition: Journal of the Travellers' Aid >Society ( 1-12) L ISBN 1-55878-205-2 > FFE 007 Traveller Collectors' Edition: Journal of the Travellers' Aid >Society (13-24) L ISBN 1-55878-206-0 > FFE 008 Traveller Collectors' Edition: Journal of the Travellers' Aid >Society (25-36) P ISBN 1-55878-207-9 > FFE 009 Traveller Collectors' Edition: The Modules P ISBN >1-55878-208-7 > FFE 010 Traveller Collectors' Edition: The Alien Modules (1-8) P ISBN >1-55878-209-5 >L= Landscape format. P= Portrait format. > > >Far Future Enterprises >FarFuture@AOL.com > > >--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- > >ATTN ONELIST USERS: stay current on the latest activities, >programs, & features at ONElist by joining our member newsletter at > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 01:43:04 -0400 From: "Dwight Looney" Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] At 07:29 PM 7/28/99 -0400, Loonz wrote AMERICA WILL DO WHAT IT THINKS IS RIGHT :-) Geez just cuz bubba's gettin hummers from interns doesn't mean the whole countries crap, geez mellow dude. :-) I know that our "bloated jackal(TM)" of a President does not reflect on the quality or dedication of our troops, but sadly it is he (and his cabal of fools and idiots) that will ultimately call the shots that tie their hands. One only has to look as far as the decision-making process that allowed the current administration to send US Rangers to their slaughter against Aideed in Somalia (while the State department simultaneously negotiated terms of his surrender) to realize that we have no business serving as policeman to the world. I think the fact that Clinton was actually getting blown during a telephone conversation with a Senator regarding possible US troop deployments to Bosnia speaks loads about exactly the esteem in which he holds our servicemen and their role in world affairs. And if, as the rumors say, the Pentagon really is getting political pressure to rotate Clark out of his NATO post early for being *too aggressive* in his pursuit of the recent Balkans episode, then I don't want us having anything to do with a (potential) meat-grinder like Korea until we have elected ourselves a leader with the spine, character and scrote to make the tough choices. I'm not going to consider a US under any administration that will allow an allie get gobbled up by the End All Be All bad guy. (Commie to boot). I don't see it. Loonz *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 22:54:33 -0700 (PDT) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Michael=20Cook?= Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] - --- Snake Eyes wrote: > we have no business > serving as policeman to the world. You've got the most powerful armed forces in the world, you're the most industrialized and wealthiest country, but you're able to just turn your back on innocent people dying somewhere else because they aren't American? What the FUCK is wrong with you? An Albanian is no less important than an American. We are all humans and you should be willing to look out for the less fortunate people who need protecting. I believe that the action taken by NATO in Kosovo was morally right. It's unfortunate that the American government decided to use it as little more than a publicity statement. The hypocrisy of intervening in Kosovo but not in Rwanda is mind-boggling and still shows the racism prevalant in your country. At least there were Canadian troops in Rwanda at the time of the genocide there, though because the U.S. and other countries were unwilling to contribute peacekeepers as well, our troops were powerless to stop the massacres. But hell, they were just black africans, right? nothing compared to you white christian americans. it ain't worth the deaths of at the most maybe a few hundred good ole american boys to save a million people, is it? And I love how you're just so willing to blame the government for all your problems. Your government is not the root of them, not by any stretch. It's your damn corporations, who have succeeded in subverting your government and populace and are now attempting to do the same to the rest of the world. But you're unwilling to see that. You're happy to blame ole Billy for all your problems, call him names because he got caught having a bit of an affair (and a pretty pathetic one at that) while in office. Ignoring the fact that the same is suspected of 'great leaders' like Kennedy. This list is about Twilight2000, so can you please keep your misguided right-wing ideologies out of the discussions from now on. They have nothing to do with any of the topics and only serve to distract from anything of value that you actually might be attempting to contribute. thank you, Michael Cook _____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Free instant messaging and more at http://messenger.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 16:27:05 +1000 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: T2K Warfare - -----Original Message----- From: Scott David Orr To: twilight2000@mpgn.com Date: Wednesday, 26 May 1999 3:41 Subject: Re: T2K Warfare >I'm not exactly sure what you mean by the term, I can't see trench warfare >of the type from WWI as being possible in the T2K world: the reason is >that one important cause of trench warfare was having a very large number >of men packed into a very small front; in places where the fronts were much >larger, in the East, with the same doctrine and technology, the warfare was >mobile; this can really be seen in the Polish-Soviet War of 1919-21, in >which front lines practically ceased to exist at times. (And this mobile >warfare happened mostly with infantry, plus a little cavalry and a >smattering of armored vehicles, including trains.) > >I'm sure cantons will be fortified, but otherwise, unless you have enough >troups to maintain a continuous frontline, there's no point to the >fortifications, because the enemy can walk around your trenches and cut you >off from behind. > >Scott Orr Just been reviewing my archives, Scott, have you got any reading material you could put me onto about this conlict ? I've been looking around and I'm yet to find anything that covers it in any detail apart from the Battle Of Warsaw in 1920. I still think I could be right. : ) Jim. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 01:48:07 -0700 From: "DAve" Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] > You've got the most powerful armed forces in the world, you're the most > industrialized and wealthiest country, but you're able to just turn > your back on innocent people dying somewhere else because they aren't > American? What the FUCK is wrong with you? An Albanian is no less > important than an American. We are all humans and you should be willing > to look out for the less fortunate people who need protecting. > I believe that the action taken by NATO in Kosovo was morally right. > It's unfortunate that the American government decided to use it as > little more than a publicity statement. The hypocrisy of intervening in > Kosovo but not in Rwanda is mind-boggling and still shows the racism > prevalant in your country.At least there were Canadian troops in > Rwanda at the time of the genocide there, though because the U.S. and > other countries were unwilling to contribute peacekeepers as well, our > troops were powerless to stop the massacres. But hell, they were just > black africans, right? nothing compared to you white christian > americans. it ain't worth the deaths of at the most maybe a few hundred > good ole american boys to save a million people, is it? > > And I love how you're just so willing to blame the government for all > your problems. Your government is not the root of them, not by any > stretch. It's your damn corporations, who have succeeded in subverting > your government and populace and are now attempting to do the same to > the rest of the world. But you're unwilling to see that. You're happy > to blame ole Billy for all your problems, call him names because he got > caught having a bit of an affair (and a pretty pathetic one at that) > while in office. Ignoring the fact that the same is suspected of 'great > leaders' like Kennedy. > > This list is about Twilight2000, so can you please keep your misguided > right-wing ideologies out of the discussions from now on. Now that you have had your say, I see. They have > nothing to do with any of the topics and only serve to distract from > anything of value that you actually might be attempting to contribute. Unlike your ramblings above? sheesh. Although I agree all of this needs to be elsewhere. I only subscribe to this for the excellent info on T2K. Dave *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 01:35:46 -0700 From: Snake Eyes Subject: Re: China Anyone? [Long] - --=====================_54141475==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Well, I see that this has now somehow degenerated into a rambling series of personal attacks based on some misconceptions regarding my personal politics. I'd like to know where you get off judging me, my entire belief system, and that of my countrymen based solely on (mis)assumption and extrapolation from a couple posts to a mailing list? So, please permit me to reply in kind and then I shall proceed to set the record straight: Eat a bag of shit, Michael. Comments inline (if anyone is still reading): At 10:54 PM 7/28/99 -0700, Michael Cook wrote: >You've got the most powerful armed forces in the world, you're the most >industrialized and wealthiest country, but you're able to just turn >your back on innocent people dying somewhere else because they aren't >American? What the FUCK is wrong with you? An Albanian is no less >important than an American. We are all humans and you should be willing >to look out for the less fortunate people who need protecting. First, the fact we are the biggest, baddest kid on the block does not necessarily make us morally or militarily responsible for the resolving the rest of the planet's internal strife and regional squabbles. Second, if you are the Commander-in-Chief of US forces or one of his advisors, then I'm sorry, but the life of one American is yes indeed more important than the life of one Albanian (or any other-ian); the decision to sacrifice American lives for a political goal or military objective is not to be entered into lightly and all options must be weighed heavily -- certainly not just because somebody else out there *thinks* their oppression somehow entitles them to the spoils of America's industrial, economic and military might. >I believe that the action taken by NATO in Kosovo was morally right. >It's unfortunate that the American government decided to use it as >little more than a publicity statement. The hypocrisy of intervening in >Kosovo but not in Rwanda is mind-boggling and still shows the racism >prevalant in your country. At least there were Canadian troops in >Rwanda at the time of the genocide there, though because the U.S. and >other countries were unwilling to contribute peacekeepers as well, our >troops were powerless to stop the massacres. But hell, they were just >black africans, right? nothing compared to you white christian >americans. it ain't worth the deaths of at the most maybe a few hundred >good ole american boys to save a million people, is it? OK, I seriously have no idea where the fuck you dredged this up. I never made any qualitative statement regarding the morality of intervention in Kosovo. In fact, I was (and remain) 100% behind it. I do, however, think that NATO got obscenely lucky in it's effort to wage war by remote control. I'm absolutely amazed that NATO was able to achieve it's goal through airpower alone, and from what I've read there's not a military analyst anywhere who really thought the allies would succeed in driving the Serbs out of Kosovo without committing large numbers of ground troops. I'm amazed that we lost nothing more than an F-117, two Apaches and most of our cruise missile inventory. As far as Rwanda: Genocide is genocide. Period. I find it reprehensible that the US didn't take a stronger role in preventing and/or stopping it, and that should be a black mark on our record. Touche. But it also begs the question -- what would our presence in Rwanda have accomplished that yours didn't? A bunch of foreign blue-beret peacekeepers, no matter whose, are not going to resolve centuries of African tribal hostilities. The same goes for the Balkans and even the Middle East. I really have a problem with you playing the race card on that one; I generally hold that tactic to be the last ditch effort of a weak mind. Unfortunately, I can't speak for the motives of the Clinton administration, but I honestly (and hopefully) suspect it had more to do with logistics and strategic planning than with skin color. And don't even presume to classify me or anyone else here as white or Christian, pinhead. >And I love how you're just so willing to blame the government for all >your problems. Your government is not the root of them, not by any >stretch. It's your damn corporations, who have succeeded in subverting >your government and populace and are now attempting to do the same to >the rest of the world. But you're unwilling to see that. You're happy >to blame ole Billy for all your problems, call him names because he got >caught having a bit of an affair (and a pretty pathetic one at that) >while in office. Ignoring the fact that the same is suspected of 'great >leaders' like Kennedy. First, get off the anti-capitalist kick; it's the most stable, just and moral economic system ever practiced anywhere, period. The "damn corporations" wouldn't be able to get away with half of what they do if government regulations didn't let them. So, second, the government *is* the problem; I don't think there's many folks out there who don't think our system (while still the best form of government anywhere) could use an overhaul. Gore certainly thinks so; he spent his whole first term trying to re-engineer the Executive Branch. Tort reform, term limits, tax code revision, campaign finance reform, welfare reform ... these would all be great places to start. Third, as far as Clinton is concerned -- he inherited a broken system, so nobody can blame him for everything and I certainly don't (and have never presumed to). I could care less about the whole Lewinsky thing -- although I'm not quite as cosmopolitan as some when it comes to marital infidelity, that is the least of his offenses in my book. His total abdication of character sure isn't helping things. Fourth, I don't know who here called JFK a 'great leader' but it sure as Hell wasn't me, and (again) I could care less about his alleged infidelities. >This list is about Twilight2000, so can you please keep your misguided >right-wing ideologies out of the discussions from now on. They have >nothing to do with any of the topics and only serve to distract from >anything of value that you actually might be attempting to contribute. Right back at ya, Mike. Yeah, I'd really be more than happy to do my part to keep geopolitical ranting and baseless personal sniping off the list ... I'll stop when everyone else does. If only someone could start a thread around here regarding the basic rules or game background and not have it devolve into a name-calling, chest-thumping, technical & tactical knowledge pissing match. As far as my ideology -- I really wouldn't classify myself as "right-wing." I'm more of a Libertarian, and I can see where that would truly upset and scare somebody living in a Socialist welfare nanny-state. If you really have a problem with the expression of personal freedom and economic self-determination then you probably shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the Internet. >thank you, > >Michael Cook It's been my pleasure. ~ Snake Eyes - --=====================_54141475==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well, I see that this has now somehow degenerated into a rambling series of personal attacks based on some misconceptions regarding my personal politics. I'd like to know where you get off judging me, my entire belief system, and that of my countrymen based solely on (mis)assumption and extrapolation from a couple posts to a mailing list? So, please permit me to reply in kind and then I shall proceed to set the record straight: Eat a bag of shit, Michael. Comments inline (if anyone is still reading): At 10:54 PM 7/28/99 -0700, Michael Cook wrote: You've got the most powerful armed forces in the world, you're the most industrialized and wealthiest country, but you're able to just turn your back on innocent people dying somewhere else because they aren't American? What the FUCK is wrong with you? An Albanian is no less important than an American. We are all humans and you should be willing to look out for the less fortunate people who need protecting. First, the fact we are the biggest, baddest kid on the block does not necessarily make us morally or militarily responsible for the resolving the rest of the planet's internal strife and regional squabbles. Second, if you are the Commander-in-Chief of US forces or one of his advisors, then I'm sorry, but the life of one American is yes indeed more important than the life of one Albanian (or any other-ian); the decision to sacrifice American lives for a political goal or military objective is not to be entered into lightly and all options must be weighed heavily -- certainly not just because somebody else out there *thinks* their oppression somehow entitles them to the spoils of America's industrial, economic and military might. I believe that the action taken by NATO in Kosovo was morally right. It's unfortunate that the American government decided to use it as little more than a publicity statement. The hypocrisy of intervening in Kosovo but not in Rwanda is mind-boggling and still shows the=20 racism prevalant in your country. At least there were Canadian troops in Rwanda at the time of the genocide there, though because the U.S. and other countries were unwilling to contribute peacekeepers as well, our troops were powerless to stop the massacres. But hell, they were just black africans, right? nothing compared to you white christian americans. it ain't worth the deaths of at the most maybe a few hundred good ole american boys to save a million people, is=20 it? OK, I seriously have no idea where the fuck you dredged this up. I never made any qualitative statement regarding the morality of intervention in Kosovo. In fact, I was (and remain) 100% behind it. I do, however, think that NATO got obscenely lucky in it's effort to wage war by remote control. I'm absolutely amazed that NATO was able to achieve it's goal through airpower alone, and from what I've read there's not a military analyst anywhere who really thought the allies would succeed in driving the Serbs out of Kosovo without committing large numbers of ground troops. I'm amazed that we lost nothing more than an F-117, two Apaches and most of our cruise missile inventory. As far as Rwanda: Genocide is genocide. Period. I find it reprehensible that the US didn't take a stronger role in preventing and/or stopping it, and that should be a black mark on our record. Touche. But it also begs the question -- what would our presence in Rwanda have accomplished that yours didn't? A bunch of foreign blue-beret peacekeepers, no matter whose, are not going to resolve centuries of African tribal hostilities. The same goes for the Balkans and even the Middle East. I really have a problem with you playing the race card on that one; I generally hold that tactic to be the last ditch effort of a weak mind. Unfortunately, I can't speak for the motives of the Clinton administration, but I honestly (and hopefully) suspect it had more to do with logistics and strategic planning than with skin color. And don't even presume to classify me or anyone else here as white or Christian, pinhead. And I love how you're just so willing to blame the government for all your problems. Your government is not the root of them, not by any stretch. It's your damn corporations, who have succeeded in subverting your government and populace and are now attempting to do the same to the rest of the world. But you're unwilling to see that. You're happy to blame ole Billy for all your problems, call him names because he got caught having a bit of an affair (and a pretty pathetic one at=20 that) while in office. Ignoring the fact that the same is suspected of 'great leaders' like Kennedy. First, get off the anti-capitalist kick; it's the most stable, just and moral economic system ever practiced anywhere, period. The "damn corporations" wouldn't be able to get away with half of what they do if government regulations didn't let them. So, second, the government *is* the problem; I don't think there's many folks out there who don't think our system (while still the best form of government anywhere) could use an overhaul. Gore certainly thinks so; he spent his whole first term trying to re-engineer the Executive Branch. Tort reform, term limits, tax code revision, campaign finance reform, welfare reform ... these would all be great places to start. Third, as far as Clinton is concerned -- he inherited a broken system, so nobody can blame him for everything and I certainly don't (and have never presumed to). I could care less about the whole Lewinsky thing -- although I'm not quite as cosmopolitan as some when it comes to marital infidelity, that is the least of his offenses in my book. His total abdication of character sure isn't helping things. Fourth, I don't know who here called JFK a 'great leader' but it sure as Hell wasn't me, and (again) I could care less about his alleged infidelities. This list is about Twilight2000, so can you please keep your misguided right-wing ideologies out of the discussions from now on. They have nothing to do with any of the topics and only serve to distract=20 from anything of value that you actually might be attempting to contribute. Right back at ya, Mike. Yeah, I'd really be more than happy to do my part to keep geopolitical ranting and baseless personal sniping off the list ... I'll stop when everyone else does. If only someone could start a thread around here regarding the basic rules or game background and not have it devolve into a name-calling, chest-thumping, technical & tactical knowledge pissing match. As far as my ideology -- I really wouldn't classify myself as "right-wing." I'm more of a Libertarian, and I can see where that would truly upset and scare somebody living in a Socialist welfare nanny-state. If you really have a problem with the expression of personal freedom and economic self-determination then you probably shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the Internet. thank you, Michael Cook It's been my pleasure. ~ Snake Eyes - --=====================_54141475==_.ALT-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1999 #55 ************************************ To subscribe to Twilight2000-Digest, send the command: subscribe twilight2000-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-twlight2000": subscribe twlight2000-digest local-twilight2000@your.domain.net A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "twilight2000-digest" in the commands above with "twilight2000".