1. Gurkha news: "Elite" Gurkhas from the Reconnaisance Company (I think it was
a company) in some English shire are now being used to train conservation
officers trying to protect rare bird populations. Why? The Gurkhas are trained
(esp these ones) for covert surveillance activity in advance of a main force.
Their combination of fieldcraft, communications, OP site selection,
operational readiness, surveillance gear, professionalism and general "ghost
in the woods" abilities make them ideal trainers for the conservation
authorities who are unarmed, but whose job it is to (without being detected)
surveil and record in evidence information about crimes (in this case rare
bird egg abductions) being committed and then they relay this info to the
Police for action. Kind of an interesting use for an elite force!
2) Graveyard scenarios: Very neat idea actually. Of course, Nyarlathotep or
Cthuga would be interesting visitors....:)
3) War of 1812: The foremost people who got screwed were the Indians led by
Tecumseh. When Brock died, that pretty much doomed their agenda. They stayed
and fought when the Brits kind of bugged out on them. But before that,
Queenston Heights and a few other places saw to it that the USAians didn't end
up staying up North here too long. Now, OTOH, Canucks like to trumpet about
burning Washington. In some sense, people who lived or were stationed here did
that... but it was BRIT REGS (maybe with some irregulars from local area) that
did this, not really Canadians. OTOH, the only one who'd defend this war as a
victory for the USA would be someone who thinks that they need to defend such
weak claims....
4) Afghanistan: John, Adrian may not have it entirely right, but I'm afraid
the NG flyboy that dropped the bomb may have gotten a bit trigger happy. The
Canadians are over there under U.S. authority as an integrated part of the
operation. How exactly is it that the controller did not say "We have
Canadians training down there!". Did he not know? Did the pilot not read his
advisories? Did someone in the US or Canadian staffs screw up in the chain and
the notification not get passed on? And when the controller advised TWICE not
to release ordinance, what was the pilot thinking? I think there are some
screwups that happen. I'm not out for blood like some folk up here for several
reasons: Bush shouldn't have made a big deal of it IMO (nor should we). To me,
it was the sad and tragic result of operations in active theatres. And 4 guys
isn't much to the USA.... you guys kill more soldiers than that in a typical
weekend excercise! For us, that's 10% of our army! (I'm exaggerating, but the
USAF routinely bombs stuff like US SF, USMC, etc so this is hardly a new thing
for the US CinC) Also, I'm not about to jump on the pilot until I know he was
the one that screwed up. I don't have all the facts, nor do you, at the
moment. When both reports come out, we'll see who screwed up and what fubar
situation led to the result. Was it a staff problem? Did the Canadians not
have some key piece of gear? Was the NG pilot (and others of his formation)
rushed through requalification courses in order to (on paper) get the unit
combat ready when it really wasn't? (This has been alleged by former officers
from the unit). Who KNOWS? I find the idea of asking for his ass on a platter
at this point ridiculous, but so is blaming the Canucks for having the bad
luck to be in the same theatre as the USAF and trying to do their job. The
truth WILL come out, never doubt it. Someone screwed up. How about we wait
until the reports are out before we start offending and defending? Or is a
balanced viewpoint to much to ask?
5) Adrian, I'm not sure Canada has been involved in a war in the last 50
years. If so, only 1. The current "War on Terror" (a lot like the "War on
Drugs") is not a war by any act of parliament of which I am aware. You cannot,
I believe, by definition, declare war on an NGO. This is semantic, but it has
some important ramifications.
6) DAWG, I'm sure the people saved from genocide (and not everyone is, to be
sure) by UN forces (even unarmed ones, by their mere presence and observation)
are thankful. The job is tough, but I've met a lot of Canadian soldiers (maybe
all the ones that didn't run off to the States in bitternness?) who seem to
understand the importance of what they were doing and who understand the
contribution they made. Sure, not every evil has been prevented by it, but
some have. And that's more than not intervening ever stopped.....
7) Basques in Space: I too like this idea. I think the Basques would make an
interesting and very distinct force. Anyone care to drum up some TO&E or
notional futurehist?
8) Gurkha figs: Unlike KHR, I like the faces. I find they look less cartoony
than a number of the NAC faces. Now, are they perfect? Nope. But they at least
are differentiable from the anglo facial construction, and with some
appropriate paint shades, they look pretty good.
9) WW2: John, hate to break it to you buddy, but the Germans were going down
in any event. If the US hadn't decided to launch Overlord, it just would have
given the Russians carte blanche to take the rest of Europe. Yes, the
Yanks had the bomb (sort of). But in-theatre,
the T-34s and the Russian Air Force (often
under-rated, but unjustly so) would have
savaged the US forces if it had ever come to it, and the battle hardened
soldiers who'd fought their way to the Reich itself could have pushed the US
Army into the sea without the bomb. Of course, you will choose not to believe
it, but Russia could probably have finished Germany all by its lonesome.
BTW: I have read accounts from US sources that suggested that the US would not
have been able to deploy another atomic warhead after Nagasaki for some
months, perhaps even a long enough period for the Russians to push the Allied
armies into the sea. I've seen conflicting reports in this area, but the most
credible ones seem to indicate this may have been the case. Now, of course,
the RUSSIANS had no idea this was true. It's probably one of the tacit reasons
that Churchill was reined in from his plans to head to Moscow.
PS - I too dislike web-boards. The list, esp with
archives, is a treat. Killfile the people you don't want to hear from or use
the awesome and godlike power of the delete key! It's kinda like a Jedi Mind
Trick:
<with a wave of the hand> "I do not want to read this thread."
<presses delete>
"I did not want to read that thread."
Tomb.
From: Thomas Barclay <kaladorn@magma.ca>
> 3) War of 1812:
You're welcome to do it again, although would have been better a few years
ago....
> 6) DAWG, I'm sure the people saved from
Distinction: the UN forces on the spot are not necessarily screwed up,
themselves. Some of them certainly are, but some aren't. However, if
the UN HQ gives them an idiotic ROE -- which as I understand it has
been the case too often--then to some extent the UN is responsible for
the rapes, murders etc that could have been prevented if HQ had let the
soldiers do their jobs properly.
Of course, some UN agencies actually do cause problems, but it's off
> --- Thomas Barclay <kaladorn@magma.ca> wrote:
> 4) Afghanistan: John, Adrian may not have it
Undoubtedly. Someone dropped the ball. Possibly the pilot, possibly someone in
his chain of command, possibly someone who had the information on his desk
that the Canadians were running around playing Cowboys and Indians and failed
to push that information to bombdroppers.
> active theatres. And 4 guys isn't much to the
Bullshit.
There have been 7 training deaths in the post-9/11
time frame and it's to the point that we've heard
rumors that the brass is considering an Army-wide
safety standdown for a day or two to reasses.
> 9) WW2: John, hate to break it to you buddy,
Sure. After a lot more time, bloodshed, and probably after Britain had to sue
for peace leaving the Russians to it.
And would the Russians have won with the Luftwaffe actually involved in the
campaign? Probably. But not definitely.
> Yanks had the bomb (sort of). But in-theatre,
T-34 has got to be the most overrated tank in history.
Sure it was nice, but practically every tank in the
US front line units was a 76-armed varient. And
nearly every time the 76-armed M-4 met a T-34 the
latter came out the looser.
> under-rated, but unjustly so) would have
The Red Air Force would have been eaten for lunch by the USAF. Sorry, but
that's the way it is. The USAF was designed to destroy the Luftwaffe and they
did so. Nearly 70%, IIRC, of the 1944 Luftwaffe was deployed
against the USAF/RAF strategic bombing campaign. If
they had been present the Red Air Force would have been meaningless. The Red
Air Force was designed to provide close air support and not much more.
Besides, in Korea the Russians did not show terribly well, and that was flying
far superior aircraft to the 'Mericans.
> savaged the US forces if it had ever come to it,
Or the war-weary soldiers who'd just barely trudged
the whole way would have refused to fight one more stupid war against their
recent allies and done a 1917 on their high command.
> BTW: I have read accounts from US sources that
Probably.
> Thomas Barclay wrote:
> 5) Adrian, I'm not sure Canada has been
I'm not sure if you'll count it in the last 50 years, but we did show up for
the Korean War.
> --- Jaime Tiampo <fugu@spikyfishthing.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure if you'll count it in the last 50
Umm, by my math 1952 was 51 years ago.
> John Atkinson wrote:
That the start of the end?
> On Thu, 30 May 2002, Thomas Barclay wrote:
> 9) WW2:
I'm not commenting on how they would have fared against the US as I just have
no clue about that. But one thing that surprised me reading 'In Deadly Combat'
by G.H. Bidermann, a german NCO and later lieutenant on the east front, is
just how much grief the russian airforce was giving them. I went 'the russians
had an effective airforce? wow, i had no idea!'
The book, btw, is a sure recommendation to anyone interested in the period. It
describes Bidermann's exoperiences from the big advances in 41 all the way to
getting trapped in the Kurland pocket up until 45.
(Including the curious rumour going about amongst the beleaguered landsers
that the allied fleet was coming to rescue them from the pocket, to integrate
the wehrmacht into the allied forces to push the russians out of
europe....)
Cheers,
I have to disagree with this. The Mig-15 and F-86
were about as evenly matched as any set of combat aircraft. Both had strengths
and weaknesses that could be exploited but neither could be called far
superior to the other.
Bob Makowsky
> --- John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Besides, in Korea the Russians did not show terribly
On Thu, 30 May 2002 22:08:40 -0400, "Thomas Barclay" <kaladorn@magma.ca>
wrote:
> 2) Graveyard scenarios: Very neat idea actually.
Cthuga and Nyarlathotep (sometimes colloquially called "Nigel Laptop") would
be a _wee_ bit nasty for any sized force you could put on the table
(well, Nigel would depend on the aspect that he used, but most of them are
real nasty...). I suggest a shoggoth or three, Dark Young of Shub Niggurath,
and the occasional Star Spawn of Cthulhu. Dark Young are particularly good, as
they are often mistaken for trees when standing still and in the darkest of
night. I have a scenario brewing for this...
By the way, how would you treat these bigger nasties (but not full out Great
Old Ones) in SG2? Treat them as vehicles, sort of?
> 3) War of 1812: The foremost people who got
I believe I stated that early on, when I said that the First Nations were the
biggest losers of the war.
> Now, OTOH, Canucks
Very true. And it was in retaliation for the Americans burning and looting of
York (Toronto).
> 9) WW2: John, hate to break it to you buddy,
My World War II professor said that he believed it would take the USSR, or the
US, and probably both, to defeat Nazi Germany. It depended on what happened
with Japan. If Japan had attacked the Soviets instead of the Americans, the
world would have ended up looking a whole lot different.
Without the US taking on Japan, the Axis probably would have won the war. Once
Japan was engaged, though, Germany was going to be defeated. The only question
was by whom.
> BTW: I have read accounts from US sources that
Sorry, Tom, this is flat out wrong. Transport of the second plutonium core
(Fat Man used a plutonium core, Little Boy a uranium core) and initiator was
stopped on August 11, 1945 by G. C. Marshall. The Americans would have had a
third atomic bomb on Tinian ready for dropping on Japan on or around August 17
to 18.
However, your point is still valid. On September 15, 1945 it was stated in a
report that 209 atomic bombs would be needed if the enemy was the Soviet
Union. However, by June of 1946 the US had a total of 9 Fat Man style bombs in
stockpile. The limiting factor in manufacturing them was producing enough
plutonium.
> PS - I too dislike web-boards. The list, esp with
I'm sort of partial to Yahoo groups, because you can set it up for web
distribution or e-mail distribution. It has a built in archiving
feature, fully searchable, and it has a place to keep files. All those folks
who want to post scenarios, pictures, etc., etc. have a place to put them.
maybe john was referrinig to the MIG superiority over the majority of the US
jets and other aircraf?
it was designed to shoot down us bombers if i remember rightly, and it was way
ahead of the first US jets to see combat in Korea.
DAWGIE
> --- John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> wrote:
...
> > 9) WW2: John, hate to break it to you buddy,
-------
A 233 percent increase in the number of available aircraft plus the use of
first rate German planes would have had a major impact on the Russian front.
The end result would have been a 'truce' until one side was ready to try
again.
> > Yanks had the bomb (sort of). But in-theatre,
------
In the armored divisions the 76 could be considered
'mostly' standard issue. The Russians had moved
on to the T34-85 by the time the 76 armed Sherman was
available in any quanity, I am trying to ignore
the JS-1,-2,-3 when I say that.
> The USAF was designed to destroy the Luftwaffe and
-------
I will grant that this statement is true. Not stated is the fact the Germans
were required to play the game by U.S. rules, I.E. high altitude
combat. Until quite late in the war the Germans
could not match the U.S. performance at 20 thousand plus feet.
> Nearly 70%, IIRC, of the 1944 Luftwaffe was
-------
Granted.
> The Red Air Force was designed to provide close air
-------
Agree with the close support. You need to consider the USAAF was at that time
a high altitude force, having to play the game at low altitude by the Russian
rules would have caused excessive losses (Not to mention the damage that the
Russian close support would have caused to American
units that lacked proper/effective AA.)
> Besides, in Korea the Russians did not show terribly
-------
The Mig-15 has two advantages, firepower and
height, the F-86 has maneuverability.
The Chinese and Koreans tried to play the maneuverability game, they lost,
> > savaged the US forces if it had ever come to it,
-------
To Tomb, After the initial savage losses against the Red Air Force the allies
would have made good the losses
more quickly than the Russians. The Russian army
seldon was able to mount an advance that ran farther that a tank of gas for a
tank, most advances were visual, I.E. Take your unit an capture that hill,
wait for further orders.
To John, All units were rated politically, with the number of party members
largely determining the rating, read that as political officers if you wish.
The NKVD, the Russian SS, had a large number of field divisions, these were
not only elite units
but could be used to prevent/eliminate loyalty
problems in the army. Remember that the party had used this type of problem to
come to power!
Bye for now,
From: "Thomas Barclay" <kaladorn@magma.ca>
> 4) Afghanistan: John, Adrian may not have it
> --- John Leary <john_t_leary@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > T-34 has got to be the most overrated tank in
We've had this discussing on a semi-regular basis
here. The M4A3E8 could lunch on a T-34 regardless of
varient. Now, the JSs could have been a nuisance, but
then again so could our M-36s, which could embarass
pretty much anything on treads, even if they had no
armor. However, by late '45, how many M-26s would
have been entering the supply line had we stayed on a wartime production
schedule?
> Agree with the close support. You need to consider
We had the AAA units and the AAA weapons in-theater,
we'd just have to reform them. We got rid of 'em when we discovered that the
best AAA weapon is a flight of
P-51s.
> > Besides, in Korea the Russians did not show
Uh, Russians. There were a lot of Russians flying birds in that war.
> To Tomb,
"The Red Army could not have concieved or executed the advance made by the
Third Army through France."
--Joe Stalin
> To John,
But they couldn't stop Joe Russian from simply surrendering in large numbers.