Posts made by Zooey72

@haxorboy:

Can someone lock this so she doesn’t further expand on why killing the Jews wasn’t in itself wrong or something even more absurd?

Well, you seemed to take the HS history class perspective on slavery by comparing it to the holocaust. It does not matter to me that you know the fact that slavery existed before america. It bothers me that you hear the word “slavery” and make assumptions about it without putting it in historical context. Slavery is wrong, no doubt about it. But you need to see it for what it is, and not what is spoon fed. Comparing slavery to the holocaust is ridiculous. Was slavery bad? Yes, but you need to look at the economics of it. In many cases it was better to be a slave than one of the dirt farmers in the south.

Recieving $ at the end of a work week does not free someone from slavery if thier standard of living is lower than that of a slave. People go on and on about slavery, but the monopolies that enslaved ALL Americans goes by as a foot note in history.

I made an assumption about you, and I apolagize for that. But you made a ridiculous remark to someone who was bringing up a differing view. I don’t agree with all Jen has to say (I am by no means a hard core christian - another assumption of mine that she is), but I do think that her argument is not flame bait or trolling. Just a different point of view.

Last point, on WW1 and the Germans.

The Germans did tech start the war. The assasination did not mean a thing to the German government. They wanted the war, there really is no argument there. The assasination was the pretext for the war. If it was not that, it would have been something else.

What most of you fail to see is that the reason the Germans started the war was because they were trying to avoid something that would have inevitably happened. Britian and France were funneling $ to Russia to build up thier military and thier infastructure… with the intent of waging an aggresive war against Germany. Germany started the war because time was not on thier side. As the railways got built in Russia, and the troop got better equipped germany lost its advantage. It was inevitable that a war would start. The longer Germany negotiated, the more advantage her enemies would have. Russia offered the allies something they didn’t have, manpower. Germany wanted to fight the war against Russia while it was still backwards ass and could not mobolize her troops.

I can not remember the exact quote, but it was something like this in reguards to how Germany viewed starting the war “yesterday would have been better, we need to act now, tommorow will be too late.”

@Janus1:

Isn’t the terminology a matter of semantics?

no. slaves are property, for no reason other than power. i.e. i have a big gun, and lots of other people with guns who support me, so i decide that i want you to work for me. without pay. forever, or until i get tired of beating you when you collapse from exhaustion. indentured servitude is a way of offering your physical labor to repay a debt. unfortunately, it is all too easily perverted by greedy people.
the major difference is choice. indentured servants choose to enter into their status, for a predetermined time. slaves dont have a choice.

Like I said before, what is the difference between paying someone to live a crappy lifestlyle because if they don’t they will starve, or being a slave? Another historical fact, slaves that stayed on the plantations after the civil war had a higher standard of living than the ones that left…. or the “white slaves” that worked in the factories in the North.

Work or starve hardly seems like a choice to me.

@haxorboy:

Can someone lock this so she doesn’t further expand on why killing the Jews wasn’t in itself wrong or something even more absurd?

Hey man, don’t throw stones. She brings up a point, I don’t agree with a lot of it. But it is a point. I think that it is funny that ppl like you can dismiss the slavery that took place before there was an America. Africans had been doing that for centuries (at least) to each other. Why is it only evil because white ppl did it too? Africans enslaved Africans, that is a historical fact. The treatment of the slaves was different in Africa than in the US, but by definintion they were slaves - they worked for no $.

You need to put things in perspective, rather than go by what you learn in high school which is more or less spoon fed.

@F_alk:

@Jennifer:

Slavery in and of itself is not wrong.

OMG !

My 2 cents on this one. You have to define slavery. It can be argued, very well in fact that before we broke up the monoplies in America the workers were slaves. Yes, they were paid, and tech. they could leave at any time they wanted to. But than they starve to death. I fail to see much of a difference between that and the slaves that came from Africa. Would it not have been slavery if they were paid only to have the money given back so that they can eat and have a place to live?

Lets say the slaves in America were actualy paid, and with all thier hard earned money they had the exact same life they had not being paid. It does not shock me at all that most of the slaves after the civil war stayed on at the plantations because they knew they at least had a roof over thier head. Slavery by that definition existed in the north before the civil war. Granted, you can not take a worker out and whip them. But that was not a frequent thing in the south.

Going further than that, in 100 years people may look at us now as being more or less slaves. Thier is a big difference between the really rich and the middle class now. I could see our future society thinking it shocking that it takes the average family 30 years of work to own a home. 100 years ago however we would seem rich in comparison because it is possible to own a home in your life time.

Food for thought

Mine would be that the attempt on Hitler’s life in 44 was succesful. The new German government unconditionaly surrenders with the Soviets NOT being in eastern eurupe and the Eurupean countries that became pawns in the cold war choose thier own destiny (as much as they can) avoiding the cold war.

Or, the US does not enter WW1. The Germans win, which means WW2 never happens.

Not that I would have wanted this to happen, but I think it would have been interesting if the German generals ran the war in ww2 instead of the half witted corpral (Hitler). I have no love for the Nazis, and thank god they lost, but I have the utmost respect for the brilliance of the german commanders of that war and I am curious if they could have pulled it off.

Depends on the time. If you mean during WW2, I pick a mustang for the simple fact that we won the war, hence I have a better chance of living. If you mean purely for fun, I would have to go with the ME262 or the Komet. The 262 because I think it out distanced other tech to an extreme that has not really been seen in war before or since (I am talking worldwide, not like the poles charging tanks with horses). The komet would be cool just because of the rapid climb. I bet most of those pilots could taste thier colons when that thing took off.

German tech during the war was unbelievable. It took us to the 80s to develop the stealth tech the germans had 40 years prior. And when we did develop it, we just stole thier idea.

Hey, I agree with Jen. Frannkly, I am suprised that the rest of the world is helping at all seeing how it is oh so fashionable to hate America. I have not done the search yet, but I am willing to bet that if you searched for “Muslim response katrina” you could find a butt load of pictures of “peace loving good natured muslims” dancing in the street.

Canada is not the same as the middle east. But you can be sure that thier envy/resentment of America is still a large part of thier society. My cousin was there a couple of years ago and he didn’t want to talk to anyone because if most found out he was American they would give him crap, or just be rude. Hey, thanks for the help, and I mean that with all sincerity. But I am of the opinion that we would be better served taking care of ourselves rather than sending billions in aid to countries who hate us, and once that aid is recieved having the “thank you” be “what, is this it?”

In short, I don’t want canadian help, german help, or help from our fairy god mother. I want the 300 million back that went to the tsunami. I want the $ back that went to Africa for aids (as if no americans have aids). How can I be so heartless? Are these tragedies caused by americans? Do we have any interest (other than “humanitarian”) with these countries? No on both accounts, so screw em. Not our problem. These people are unappreciative at best, our enemies at worst and they are owed nothing from us.

If these countries and thier people were REAL allies of the US than that would be different. For example, I have no problem sending aid to Kuwait, both the government and the people are friendly to the US. Same is mostly true of S. Korea.

They needed to put more space in, there was no real battle for the Atlantic. The whole ocean could be gone across in one movement in the other game. Now instead of the Allies only having to protect the UK sea square they have to protect shipping lanes. BUT, they balanced this out by making transports able to carry more.

Good Idea, Great applicaction.

If you are going by historical accounts than the german infantry would attack at 3 and the it would take 3 russian infantry to get a defensive dice of 1.

It is estimated that between 10 to 15 Russians died for every German that died.

I voted for germany. The key to allied victory is through Berlin. Just like in the real war.

@Jennifer:

AS:

Africa is different then W. USA. A) It is many more territories. B) It is not next to my capital.

Also, I may give Germany all of Africa if I think I can take Berlin before it will be a major factor.

This is not the reality of the game… First off, you won’t take Berlin by me spending 2 infantry a turn to fight in Africa, it is not a possibility. 2nd, with the loss of Africa and the middle east Britian (esp India) will be making 15 or so IPC a turn, effectively neutralizing any real pressure coming from them to cross the channel.

It takes 2 infantry a turn and agressive use of your airforce to knock the UK into submission. The only real threat my German fleet will ever be under is a suicide mission with a bomber to maybe kill my transport. Why would I move my ships into the Black sea? If I attack Caucus I will do it from Ukraine. Not to metion, caucus is nowhere near as important as Karelia, and that is where I focus my attention.

I can all but guarantee you (and only dice rolls hold me back from saying guarantee) that if you do not fight me in Africa at all I will win the game. My first turn every fighter I own attacks the UK fleet (with my navy) in the med and atlantic destroying almost all of it (if not all of it) before it can consolidate. So the UK starts with almost nothing. I than drop off my 2 infantry in Africa and push there insuring that not only does UK not have any pieces, I have taken away its ability to produce more pieces. 15 IPC a turn is a minimal threat to Germany.

For the price of maybe 2 fighters and 2 infantry a turn I have taken the UK out of the game. If you do not try to either put an IC in Africa, or focus somehow on taking it back from me… UK is a 15 IPC threat to me, which is laughable esp. since I am making 40+ IPC.

It is pretty easy to keep the russians at bay when I only have maybe 2 infantry (and I land my planes in Western for defense and possible attack, leaving 1 in eastern for possible swaps with Russia - and the bomber is there as well for that purpose) in Western at any given time because England is not longer a creditable threat to me.

You can try to sugar coat it all you like, but 10 IPC a turn off England and 10 IPC onto Germany will change the game.

And keep in mind as well, Russia does not have much in the way off offense in the begining. My typical buy with Germany is 5 inf, 1 tank, 1 fighter. Russia buys 8 infantry more often than not. He can not attack me with those numbers, and every part of my buy will be there to defend my eastern border as I destroy britian and gain ground in Africa which will tip the scales IPC wise so far in my favor that Russia will have no chance to compete with me when I decide to make my move there.

I have never lost a game playing Germany while I still held Africa. And I have been playing this game since it came out in 85.

Oh, and the fact that it is many more territories than Western US is a bonus. it Makes it that much harder for the allies to take back once I have it.

@AgentSmith:

1. Keep BB and original transport by Italy along with the purchased transport which makes for a moderate sized Navy.

But it will certainly end up a waste. As the Brits I would land ftrs in Cauc, and reinforce with Russians once this happens this fleet is toast. If it moves to the Atlantic its killed and if it stays in the med it is also killed. The problem I have is what does this do get you 2more infantry in Africa. By the way Germany doesn’t need or shouldn’t place large amounts of troops in Africa. Africa should be a distraction/sidebar, so that when the Allies go to retake it Germany can squeeze Karelia. Anymore than that is a waste. Further if you miss my sub I will send a bmb sub versus this fleet, and you’ll end up getting very little for your investment.

I could not disagree more with this statement. Adding up africa all together Germany stands to pick up 10 IPC from England, would you let the US give up western america w/o a strugle? Of course not. And as to how you would sink the German navy… How do you propose to keep pressure on Germany if you move the English air force to caucus? Or, how do you propose to protect the english navy w/o that air power… Because I can assure you, I will use the whole of the German air force to sink that navy in the English Channel.

It is possible to do suicde missions to sink the transport (use the UK bomber intending to land it in gibralter or an equally usafe place), and many times when I play Germany that occurs because the people I play with know I want africa, AND know I CAN NOT BE DEFEATED AS LONG AS I HOLD AFRICA! I have played this game since 85… Not once have I lost as Germany while still holding Africa.

2 infantry a turn is not a lot of $ to spend to secure 10 IPC, and deny England 10 IPC. Not to mention this money does not simply disapear, you have a force in Africa that MUST be taken out in order for you to beat me, and once secured… I will make it cost you to take Africa back. I have the advantage of location, any landing on the coast can be met with fighters from Eurupe. You must land a force capable of withstanding a counter attack AND a navy that can protect those transports. That is a lot of $ to spend.

No way. No good Allied player is going to let that fleet just roam around. I would advise to always make it priority number one in the first few turns. If it costs 1-2 aircraft sobeit.

The question is not whether you will let it happen, it is a question of what are you willing to do to stop it? Because I for one will not let my navy, and hence my $ in Africa go easily. And I have the benefit of both location and time. I own the airfields in Africa, and in time I will have all of Africa if you do not do something drastic to stop me.