twilight2000-digest Wednesday, March 8 2000 Volume 1999 : Number 127 The following topics are covered in this digest: Re: China vs. Taiwan (long) Re: China vs. Taiwan Re: China vs. Taiwan Re: China v. Taiwan Re: China vs. Taiwan Re: Laws of War Re: China v. Taiwan NATO symbols [Urgent!] Re: Conversions Re: Thoughts, ides, what-not Re: Help with Squad, Platoon, and Company personnel and loadouts... Re: NATO symbols [Urgent!] Re: Laws of War RE: Help with Squad, Platoon, and Company personnel and loadouts... Retribution was Laws of War ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 21:43:24 -0800 (PST) From: GRAEBARDE Subject: Re: China vs. Taiwan (long) Scott, I appologize for directing the MEU remark to you, in next post I beleive I said such it was ment for Orrin. Gray matter got jumbled:) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.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: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 00:59:08 EST From: OrrinLadd@aol.com Subject: Re: China vs. Taiwan In a message dated 03/07/2000 8:47:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, graebarde@yahoo.com writes: << ROGER AUSSIE VOLS EXPECT FLAMES FROM THE SOUTH:) EOM OUT >> Two of the aussies on this list are in my pbem. I'm used to it. =) *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 2000 17:22:13 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: China vs. Taiwan ><< ROGER AUSSIE VOLS > EXPECT FLAMES FROM THE SOUTH:) > EOM > OUT >> > >Two of the aussies on this list are in my pbem. I'm used to it. =) What total crap, can't you get anything right! I dunno, if this (ramble) and I didn't get (bitch, moan) how about someone else for a change (complain, rant, flame) . . . Jim (Aussie, Aussie, Oy! Oy!) *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 2000 02:06:14 EST From: Damage169@cs.com Subject: Re: China v. Taiwan In a message dated 3/7/00 7:59:49 PM Central Standard Time, "Ballistix" writes: > Japan is unable to go to war unless it is to defend itself. Something the > Allies had > written into the WW2 surrender documents. > This used to be the case. However, in the years after the Gulf War, the Japanese Diet (their parliamentary body) amended their constitution to allow Japanese armed forces (the various arms of the Japanese Armed Self-Defense Forces) to be involved in overseas missions when requested by the UN or other multinational body, but for peacekeeping missions only. They did this because the US and other Gulf War allied nations got p****d when Japan wouldn't supply any support for the alliance, even after they had made many promises to do so. IIRC they have only paid about $20 million of the several hundred million that they said they would. This amount would only pay for about a dozen of the Tomahawk missiles fired during the Gulf War. Also, to comment on the relationship between Taiwan and the PRC, until Nixon became US president, the US had considered Taiwan to be the legitimate government of all of China, forced into exile on the last unoccupied province of their country. Once Nixon went to the PRC, the way the US responded to Taiwan was that it was a permanently separated province of the nation of China, just as Panama had once been a province of Colombia but was now a separate nation. IIRC, even the UN considers Taiwan to be a generally independent nation, but not quite, as Taiwan has not been given voting nation status. I may be wrong, but I do not believe so. As to whether the PRC has missiles with long enough range to reach the continental US, I believe they do, but not in sufficient numbers or of sufficient reliability to do anything but get the American public blind mad. This has never been a smart thing to do. You can attack American interests, you can kill Americans overseas, you can damage or destroy American military forces overseas, but if anyone does anything on what Americans feel is their home turf, it had better be totally successful in preventing American reprisal, or they will want to see your bloody, broken body pounded deep into the dirt. Once this is done, and you agree that America was right to do so, the US will be your best friend in the world and will help you to get back on your feet again. Just ask Germany and Japan. Of course, I'm an American, so I may be blind to what is blazingly obvious to other nationalities concerning information that refutes this, but these are my opinions, yea or ney. Simon Jester. *************************************************************************** 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, 7 Mar 2000 23:10:57 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: China vs. Taiwan > << Who will the Big > Dragon gobble up next? Korea and Japan would be the next two choices, > before china starts moving down the Indonesian peninsula... > >> > > How about the PRC going after territory taken by Russia during the 1800's or > after WWII? In 1968, both sides almost had a full blown war along the Amur > River. I don't think we in the States heard much about it, being preoccupied > with other things. I think the idea is that China would try to get economically valuable targets. Assuming the targets aren't destroyed in the process. I think land wouldn't be an issue, China's got plenty now. Besides, with Russia's economic condition, China could buy the land if it controlled the economically strong region of Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan... Cor __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.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: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 23:13:29 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: Laws of War > > Very true, just one note; the time to convict these people was in the 50's and > 60's not the 90's, these criminals > have lived there lives to the full, and trying to make a case (now) is nearly mote > at this point. > > Steve > > Try saying that to the survivors of these men's crimes (there are still some,) or their families. See how you'd feel after someone wiped out your friends and family, even after 50+ years. I bet you'd still like to see them face justice while you still have life left. Cor __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.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: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 02:31:04 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: China v. Taiwan At 02:06 AM 3/8/00 EST, Damage169@cs.com wrote: > >Also, to comment on the relationship between Taiwan and the PRC, until Nixon >became US president, the US had considered Taiwan to be the legitimate >government of all of China, forced into exile on the last unoccupied province >of their country. Once Nixon went to the PRC, the way the US responded to >Taiwan was that it was a permanently separated province of the nation of >China, just as Panama had once been a province of Colombia but was now a >separate nation. IIRC, even the UN considers Taiwan to be a generally >independent nation, but not quite, as Taiwan has not been given voting nation >status. I may be wrong, but I do not believe so. > I suspect the only real reason they're not recognized as an independent country is that they haven't asked to be. It would help of course if China accepted it, but once you've been de facto indepdent for this long, usually other countries will recognize you. As an aside: Taiwan really has very little history as a province of China. My understanding is that China only controlled it for a short period in the early 20th century (maybe the late 19th also?), and that before that it was independent, while after that it was controlled by Japan. 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, 8 Mar 2000 19:49:25 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: NATO symbols [Urgent!] Does anyone know where I can find an online key for the latest NATO map symbols? 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: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 02:12:18 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: Conversions This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BF88A3.BAD792C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Does anyone know of a method (or downloadable or viewable resource) = converting v1 stats to v2? I'm not just talking character sheets (I = think those would be fairly easy, just a little work. But, I'm talking = about weapon and vehicle stats. I have some v1 books (Soviet Vehicle = Guide, Krakow, Airlords, the such) that I haven't gotten v2 copies of = yet. But, I've been playing v2. Maybe I should go back to v1, since I = have most of what I'm looking for in that (except maybe the Heavy = Weapons Guide.) Cor - ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BF88A3.BAD792C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 
Does anyone know of a method (or downloadable = or=20 viewable resource) converting v1 stats to v2?  I'm not just = talking=20 character sheets (I think those would be fairly easy, just a little=20 work.  But, I'm talking about weapon and vehicle stats.  I = have some=20 v1 books (Soviet Vehicle Guide, Krakow, Airlords, the such) that I = haven't=20 gotten v2 copies of yet.  But, I've been playing v2.  Maybe = I should=20 go back to v1, since I have most of what I'm looking for in that = (except maybe=20 the Heavy Weapons Guide.)
 
Cor
- ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01BF88A3.BAD792C0-- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.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: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 02:12:57 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: Thoughts, ides, what-not This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01BF88A3.D2168040 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I thought I'd throw in some more thoughts. As to the cold weather discussion that was ongoing earlier: Harold = Coyle's "God's Children" deals with it's effect, a little, on the = understrength platoon followed in the story. The current situation = takes place in Central Europe in mid-February. Also, the effects of starvation discussion: Same thing. The = platoon's original assignment was a patrol that was only suppose to take = the better part of the day. So most of the members only brought one = MRE. They've recovered additional MREs, enough to be almost a days = worth of rations that they've had to stretch for two days. Then another = recovery, but again on;y 2 packages each, that may need to be stretched = two or more days. I had also been thinking of the issue of player tactics and such. = There had been a very good discussion going on earlier dealing with = that. I'm sure there are many GMs on here with now military = background. But even then, I'm sure most of us have a better = understanding of strategy and tactics than the common civvie. We tend = to be interested in such things, so we've picked up a lot through = reading, movies, research, etc. The same may be true for the players, = but cannot be counted upon. One idea that was put forth, and a very good one, was to run the = players through some practice missions. I've been thinking of that, and = decided to have it be part of military training: i.e. War Games. But, having no military training myself, the only tactics I know are = the ones I use myself. To teach those few to the players would be to = give them more an advantage than they should. I thought then I might be = able to give them some basic ideas dealing with patrols, fields of fire, = that such; but leave the real tactics to them. Then I'll run some = training defence, offence, patrol, and encounter missions; before = sending them into the "real world." The campaign I was thinking would be more like current affairs, not = post-apocalyptic. A conventional (or nuclear perhaps) WW3 may = eventually result, but I'm thinking of starting off with something like = a peace-keeping mission, or some sort of recovery (like in the Ten = Thousand, or almost like the movie The Peacekeeper.) =20 I know that for T2K, one of the complaints have been officer or SOF = heavy groups. I may only have two players anyhow. If I want it to be a = standard Army unit, then I will have to augment them with NPC grunts. = Since I want the players to be leading, either a squad or a platoon, = they will probably be officers. Probably dumb-s**t 2nd LTs (no offence = to any 2nd LTs out there.) The training missions will allow them to = develop some tactics and observation/patrol techniques. I'm still = considering having them be senior NCOs, but that would take more time = "in" to promote, and also would assume character experience that the = players wouldn't have (or myself, for that matter.) But, the common = idea from the books I've read, after a few training missions, the = players would be about as "real world" smart as 2nd Lts. Anyhow, these were some thoughts I've had. Not looking for debate, = but would like to see other ideas, comments, suggestions. Especially = anything verifying the deal with NCOs and 2nd LTs.=20 Cor - ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01BF88A3.D2168040 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 
 
I thought I'd throw in some more = thoughts.
 
As to the cold weather discussion that was = ongoing=20 earlier:  Harold Coyle's "God's Children" deals with it's effect, = a=20 little, on the understrength platoon followed in the story.  The = current=20 situation takes place in Central Europe in mid-February.
 
Also, the effects of starvation = discussion:  Same=20 thing.  The platoon's original assignment was a patrol that was = only=20 suppose to take the better part of the day.  So most of the = members only=20 brought one MRE.  They've recovered additional MREs, enough to be = almost=20 a days worth of rations that they've had to stretch for two = days.  Then=20 another recovery, but again on;y 2 packages each, that may need to be=20 stretched two or more days.
 
I had also been thinking of the issue of = player tactics=20 and such.  There had been a very good discussion going on earlier = dealing=20 with that.   I'm sure there are many GMs on here with now = military=20 background.  But even then, I'm sure most of us have a better=20 understanding of strategy and tactics than the common = civvie.   We=20 tend to be interested in such things, so we've picked up a lot through = reading, movies, research, etc.  The same may be true for the = players,=20 but cannot be counted upon.
 
One idea that was put forth, and a very good = one, was to=20 run the players through some practice missions.  I've been = thinking of=20 that, and decided to have it be part of military training:  = i.e. =20 War Games.
 
But, having no military training myself, the = only=20 tactics I know are the ones I use myself.  To teach those few to = the=20 players would be to give them more an advantage than they = should.  I=20 thought then I might be able to give them some basic ideas dealing = with=20 patrols, fields of fire, that such; but leave the real tactics to = them. =20 Then I'll run some training defence, offence, patrol, and encounter = missions;=20 before sending them into the "real world."
 
The campaign I was thinking would be more like = current=20 affairs, not post-apocalyptic.  A conventional (or nuclear = perhaps) WW3=20 may eventually result, but I'm thinking of starting off with something = like a=20 peace-keeping mission, or some sort of recovery (like in the Ten = Thousand, or=20 almost like the movie The Peacekeeper.) 
 
I know that for T2K, one of the complaints = have been=20 officer or SOF heavy groups.  I may only have two players = anyhow. =20 If I want it to be a standard Army unit, then I will have to augment = them with=20 NPC grunts.  Since I want the players to be leading, either a = squad or a=20 platoon, they will probably be officers.  Probably dumb-s**t 2nd = LTs (no=20 offence to any 2nd LTs out there.)  The training missions will = allow them=20 to develop some tactics and observation/patrol techniques.  I'm = still=20 considering having them be senior NCOs, but that would take more time = "in" to=20 promote, and also would assume character experience that the players = wouldn't=20 have (or myself, for that matter.)  But, the common idea from the = books=20 I've read, after a few training missions, the players would be about = as "real=20 world" smart as 2nd Lts.
 
Anyhow, these were some thoughts I've = had.  Not=20 looking for debate, but would like to see other ideas, comments,=20 suggestions.  Especially anything verifying the deal with NCOs = and 2nd=20 LTs.
 
Cor
- ------=_NextPart_000_0023_01BF88A3.D2168040-- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.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: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 02:13:46 -0800 From: "Corey Wells" Subject: Re: Help with Squad, Platoon, and Company personnel and loadouts... This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_002F_01BF88A3.EF52EFE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I also wonder if anyone can give the number of personnel in common = squads and platoons. By this, I mean the common US Armor platoon, = Infantry, Airborne... I know that in the US, there are 4 man crews in Armor, which would be = the squad, and usually 4 tanks to a platoon. As for that, if someone = could also give the make up of a company. If I remember correctly, the = company commander and XO both have their own tracks? And there is = usually 1 or more support vehicles (usually APCs, for command and = supply...) So that would be 14 tanks in a company, plus assorted = attached support vehicles. If someone could also give a load out for the squads/platoons. IE, = the Squad leader, asst Sqd Leader, the weapons loadout (1 SAW, rifles, = how many m203s, any LAWs?) And also the common attached personnel for = the platoon. I know there is an RTO, and I think the platoon leader and = Platoon NCO don't count as part of the squads. So you have 3 squads of = X personnel, plus the Lieutenant, NCO, and RTO. My understanding is = that the medic isn't actually part of the platoon, but taken from the = battalion's personnel. But the unwritten rule is to try and assign the = same medic to the same platoon. So he becomes an unofficial member of = the platoon. Also, often there is a weapons team (usually ATGM) = attached to the command group (the LT, RTO, Medic...) I'm trying to put together a platoon. I think I made mine a little = large, and perhaps strong. I had heard there were 40 men in a platoon, = but the one reference I can look up right now (Harold Coyle's Sword = Point) says 31 with 9 man squads. I had for a long time heard 8 man = squads, but with only three squads, then wouldn't fill a 40 man platoon. Any help would be appreciated. Cor - ------=_NextPart_000_002F_01BF88A3.EF52EFE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 
 
 
I also wonder if anyone can give the number of = personnel=20 in common squads and platoons.  By this, I mean the common US = Armor=20 platoon, Infantry, Airborne...
 
I know that in the US, there are 4 man crews = in Armor,=20 which would be the squad, and usually 4 tanks to a platoon.  As = for that,=20 if someone could also give the make up of a company.  If I = remember=20 correctly, the company commander and XO both have their own = tracks?  And=20 there is usually 1 or more support vehicles (usually APCs, for command = and=20 supply...)  So that would be 14 tanks in a company, plus assorted = attached support vehicles.
 
If someone could also give a load out for the=20 squads/platoons.  IE, the Squad leader, asst Sqd Leader, the = weapons=20 loadout (1 SAW, rifles, how many m203s, any LAWs?)  And also the = common=20 attached personnel for the platoon.  I know there is an RTO, and = I think=20 the platoon leader and Platoon NCO don't count as part of the = squads.  So=20 you have 3 squads of X personnel, plus the Lieutenant, NCO, and = RTO.  My=20 understanding is that the medic isn't actually part of the platoon, = but taken=20 from the battalion's personnel.  But the unwritten rule is to try = and=20 assign the same medic to the same platoon.  So he becomes an = unofficial=20 member of the platoon.  Also, often there is a weapons team = (usually=20 ATGM) attached to the command group (the LT, RTO, = Medic...)
 
I'm trying to put together a platoon.  I = think I=20 made mine a little large, and perhaps strong.  I had heard there = were 40=20 men in a platoon, but the one reference I can look up right now = (Harold=20 Coyle's Sword Point) says 31 with 9 man squads.  I had for a long = time=20 heard 8 man squads, but with only three squads, then wouldn't fill a = 40 man=20 platoon.
 
Any help would be appreciated.
 
Cor
- ------=_NextPart_000_002F_01BF88A3.EF52EFE0-- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.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: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 11:08:20 -0000 From: "Roger Stenning" Subject: Re: NATO symbols [Urgent!] Jim - > Does anyone know where I can find an online key for the latest NATO map > symbols? Try http://155.217.58.58/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/101-5-1/default.htm It's the current USMC military map symbols manual, based on the NATO stanag publication APP-6. BTW - it's only available in Adobe PDF format; the entire publication is around 3.5MB; chapters four onwards are what really contain the symbology. HTH. Best regards, Roger Stenning Webmaster, the Impossible Scenarios Group www.the-isg.co.uk *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 2000 10:51:44 -0500 From: "Chuck Mandus" Subject: Re: Laws of War Well, I have to agree that the time to pursue a lot of these war criminals from WWII has long passed to the point where you get diminishing returns compared to the effort you put into it ( a little economics lingo there). I'm pretty much to the point where if some of them got away, I'm sure when they pass on or even before that, if they are guilty, their kharmas will get them at some point. It maybe while they are still alive or after they pass away where they will be judged by by their deeds. One saying I have is that "you can never run away from your bad (or good) kharma." So to the guilty ones, they know who they are and they can never run away from that so they're going to have to live and die with that knowledge. Chuck, just some thoughts on the issue DE KA3WRW - --- "Truly those of us with brain cells are an oppressed minority..." - -- Jason Fox said after the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles had been cancelled. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Corey Wells" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 2:13 AM Subject: Re: Laws of War > > > > > Very true, just one note; the time to convict these people was in the > 50's and > > 60's not the 90's, these criminals > > have lived there lives to the full, and trying to make a case (now) is > nearly mote > > at this point. > > > > Steve > > > > > > Try saying that to the survivors of these men's crimes (there are still > some,) or their families. See how you'd feel after someone wiped out your > friends and family, even after 50+ years. I bet you'd still like to see > them face justice while you still have life left. > > Cor > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. > http://im.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. > > *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 2000 11:23:58 -0600 From: "Walter Rebsch" Subject: RE: Help with Squad, Platoon, and Company personnel and loadouts... This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BF88F0.CBB30960 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If someone could also give a load out for the squads/platoons. IE, the Squad leader, asst Sqd Leader, the weapons loadout (1 SAW, rifles, how many m203s, any LAWs?) And also the common attached personnel for the platoon. I know there is an RTO, and I think the platoon leader and Platoon NCO don't count as part of the squads. So you have 3 squads of X personnel, plus the Lieutenant, NCO, and RTO. My understanding is that the medic isn't actually part of the platoon, but taken from the battalion's personnel. But the unwritten rule is to try and assign the same medic to the same platoon. So he becomes an unofficial member of the platoon. Also, often there is a weapons team (usually ATGM) attached to the command group (the LT, RTO, Medic...) I don't remember enough to be of much help except to say that LAW's are not a TOE item. Maybe they are on a particular TOE chart, but in practice it doesn't go by any manual. SAW's, Rifles, M203's, etc... are all in a unit by a TOE chart. LAW's, claymores, AT4's, grenades, flares, mines, etc... is just a grab whatever you can carry deal. Typically a squad leader would tell a guy to get a LAW or 2, and tell another guy to grab a claymore or 2. But a lot of it is up to the individual soldier. You just grabbed all the weapontry you could carry (your pick) and off you went, but you ALWAYS had your TOE weapon and the basic load of ammo (minimum). At least that's how it was in the 82nd. 80 to 90% of what an airborne infantry guy carried by weight was ammo, guns, rockets, etc... If it ain't keeping you alive, you don't need to be carrying it. A couple changes of socks, an extra pair of underwear, your poncho and poncho liner, ALICE gear and everything else is was for killing things. Tent? What the hell is a tent? Cots, sleeping bags? You must be kidding! Luckily, since I was a staff weenie, I usually got to carry a sleeping bag and a little more spare clothing, but thats as far as luxury went. That way I didn't have to use the 'week and flip' rule very often (wear your underwear for a week, then turn it inside out and wear it another week). Now mind you, the infantry were issued sleeping bags, they just weren't allowed to use them. The weight was better spent carrying killing stuff, so you leave that silly crap at the barracks. LAW's were about half way phased out when I was in (1988-92). We used them in Basic Training, but they were uncommon in the 82nd. AT4's were much more common a weapon. Also, the AT4 I'm talking about is NOT the AT-4 in Twilight:2000 v1 rules. I don't have anything v2 so I don't know about it. An 'armburst' in the v1 rules seems like what an AT4 would be. Maybe someone knows where a TOE chart of common US units can be found on the web? I never studied the US Army's composition. Intel guys always think red, never blue (red is enemy, blue is friendly) so I'm not of very much use here... Walter - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BF88F0.CBB30960 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If someone could also give a load out for = the=20 squads/platoons.  IE, the Squad leader, asst Sqd Leader, the = weapons=20 loadout (1 SAW, rifles, how many m203s, any LAWs?)  And also = the common=20 attached personnel for the platoon.  I know there is an RTO, = and I=20 think the platoon leader and Platoon NCO don't count as part of the=20 squads.  So you have 3 squads of X personnel, plus the = Lieutenant, NCO,=20 and RTO.  My understanding is that the medic isn't actually = part of the=20 platoon, but taken from the battalion's personnel.  But the = unwritten=20 rule is to try and assign the same medic to the same platoon.  = So he=20 becomes an unofficial member of the platoon.  Also, often there = is a=20 weapons team (usually ATGM) attached to the command group (the LT, = RTO,=20 Medic...) 
=
I don't remember enough to be of much help = except to=20 say that LAW's are not a TOE item.  Maybe they are on a particular = TOE=20 chart, but in practice it doesn't go by any manual.  SAW's, Rifles, = M203's,=20 etc... are all in a unit by a TOE chart.
 
LAW's, claymores, AT4's, grenades, flares, = mines,=20 etc... is just a grab whatever you can carry deal.  Typically a = squad=20 leader would tell a guy to get a LAW or 2, and tell another guy to grab = a=20 claymore or 2.  But a lot of it is up to the individual = soldier.  You=20 just grabbed all the weapontry you could carry (your pick) and off you = went, but=20 you ALWAYS had your TOE weapon and the basic load of ammo = (minimum).  At=20 least that's how it was in the 82nd.
 
80 to 90% of what an airborne infantry guy = carried by=20 weight was ammo, guns, rockets, etc...  If it ain't keeping you = alive, you=20 don't need to be carrying it.  A couple changes of socks, an extra = pair of=20 underwear, your poncho and poncho liner, ALICE gear and everything else = is was=20 for killing things.  Tent?  What the hell is a tent?  = Cots,=20 sleeping bags?  You must be kidding!  Luckily, since I was a = staff=20 weenie, I usually got to carry a sleeping bag and a little more spare = clothing,=20 but thats as far as luxury went.  That way I didn't have to use the = 'week=20 and flip' rule very often (wear your underwear for a week, then turn it = inside=20 out and wear it another week).  Now mind you, the infantry were = issued=20 sleeping bags, they just weren't allowed to use them.  The weight = was=20 better spent carrying killing stuff, so you leave that silly crap at the = barracks.
 
LAW's were about half way phased out when I = was in=20 (1988-92).  We used them in Basic Training, but they were uncommon = in the=20 82nd.  AT4's were much more common a weapon.  Also, the AT4 = I'm=20 talking about is NOT the AT-4 in Twilight:2000 v1 rules.  I don't = have=20 anything v2 so I don't know about it.  An 'armburst' in the v1 = rules seems=20 like what an AT4 would be.
 
Maybe someone knows where a TOE chart of = common US=20 units can be found on the web?  I never studied the US Army's=20 composition.  Intel guys always think red, never blue (red is = enemy, blue=20 is friendly) so I'm not of very much use = here...
 
Walter
- ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BF88F0.CBB30960-- *************************************************************************** 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, 08 Mar 2000 12:31:43 -0600 From: Steve Subject: Retribution was Laws of War Corey Wells wrote: > > > > Very true, just one note; the time to convict these people was in the > 50's and > > 60's not the 90's, these criminals > > have lived there lives to the full, and trying to make a case (now) is > nearly mote > > at this point. > > > > Steve > > > > > > Try saying that to the survivors of these men's crimes (there are still > some,) or their families. See how you'd feel after someone wiped out your > friends and family, even after 50+ years. I bet you'd still like to see > them face justice while you still have life left. > > Cor Get real Corey! Of course I would want to bring them to justice, and I would be careful about this point, as my father lost family due to the communists in Russia, my grandma to the Germans. But at this point and time I can not see me creating a posse and fling over to Russia or Germany in vengeance over 50 years later. What if we got the wrong persons? This could cause another war and more innocent live would be lost. Blind vengeance is how religious and racial wars continue for hundreds of years. For example Serbia and Islamic people in the area, they have been at war for hundreds of years and this tends to cycle through the generations. At some point you have leave things to Karma, but if the evidence is there then by all means hang the b@stards, hang them without breaking their necks if you must. Steve *************************************************************************** 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 #127 *************************************