Editted from: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

[alvino]

Re: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

Alvino is the least credible person here and shouldn't be listened to.

Fuck you. At least I dont have a bigass ego like you do. If you're going to start insulting others on their creditablity, then you shouldn't be listened to, furthermore you shouldn't even be here. You and your ridiculous ego can go somewhere else.

 

[Giancarlo]

Re: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

And more fucking idiotic ranting...

I was not talking about the US Hitler started
World War II by invading Poland? Or did World War II start only when America joined - or that nobody started stopping him until America joined? You know less than I if you believe that.

I was talking about America joining the war, not about WWII starting. If I said anything about WWII starting, I misspoke. That statement was strictly about the United States.

War can be short while sticking to Honour; there have been many wars shorter than modern wars involving larger forces and stronger opponents. Strategy is not the same, and its not as important - given the power of some militaries today with the air power they wield even I could plan a war against Iraq and win. The civilian casualties would be drastically higher as that would not be in my plans but it would not be difficult to win.

This is essentially proves you don't know a damn thing you are talking about. And you know what? I don't think you understand the art of war to begin with.

Not as an insult of course; but are you actually capable of doing this without resorting to insults? It is an opinion - but as I said before its all about opinion when it comes to things like this. Right and wrong are clouded in your beliefs and personal situations - so not even your insult was completely correct; as my beliefs on what is worthy of honour are apparently vastly different to yours. If indeed you have any opinions on honour whatsoever.

You have no opinions that deserve any respect because you are arrogant and almost always wrong. Shall I say anything more? You were wrong in the debate about homosexuality, and you are in this debate too. I don't let my opponents out of their holes, which they dugged themselves... without a severe bruising.

My Spirits would be low against an American Army; wouldn't yours? I'm personally annoyed that they didn't put up a fight because they really should have but still - you can't blame them. Have any Communist or Fascist Parties been included in these free Elections?

I strongly support the United States and the United State military, fool.

I merely pointed out the confusion of the man whose life seemed to go on for at least 200 years.

You merely pointed out nothing as usual. You proved that you are nothing more then an ignorant little man who seeks to open a heated argument around here. How old are you anyways? 16?

This is what I do not completely understand about you. You seem both unwilling to realise meaning in anything anybody says however - you demand the realisation of everything you say as truth. I have pointed out that all comments on Machine Guns and Honour are all opinion; that is no rhetoric and you may deny it all you want. Insult me all you like, I am found of debate and realise people do get angry - but Alvino has made no such point and you should not merely insult his credibility without even debating a thing with him.

I think those who point out such things are no less then moronic, alvino is a crazy nutcase who needs to be corrected. I'm here to make corrections when people make blatantly wrong statements. And like it or not, opinion becomes rhetoric. That's the way this world works. I debate and I debate with passion. I will not leave anyone unscathed. Scorched earth.

Saying things are rhetoric or stupid is the stupid person's way out of a debate. Not even that - but you did not comment on what I said; if you read it you obviously didn't understand it. Opinion's, while debatable, cannot be fully wrong or fully right. Your knowledge of what you talk about is not at question in that snippit. Are you the only one here who should be listened to?You did not actually answer my question as to you point...

Fuck you. I did understand it. You are the one who doesn't know how to understand anything, nor can you comprehend proper english. And I'm tired of your little belittling statements. Opinions can be fully wrong. Like ones formed on a "9/11 conspiracy".. where the US government was somehow responsible for setting up the whole thing. Opinions can be fully wrong.

War has always been that. In Sun Tzu's era great hordes of men fought each other - and though bloody it is the gentleman's war. Honour was gained and lost on battlefields even before Sun Tzu. I would have thought you would know this having read the Book? The Gentleman's War did not start and stop - it stopped when technology began to allow people to kill at distances it would take weeks to walk, months and years to walk. It began when people were able to kill people at distances they could not see and could not also be fired back at. The Gentleman's War is not that

The Gentleman's war was the WRONG way to fight a war. It was improper and softened people. If you want to look at how these old generals were awakened, look at WWI. The same people who did these "gentlemens wars" were called upon to lead in WWI. They failed. It never stopped, again your foolish opinion means nothing. The Art of war will never die.

- it is to fight your enemy, while not necessarily on equal terms on personal terms. To give your enemy the honour of being able to fight back - not trying to think of ways to stop people from getting missiles to you while thinking of ways to make missiles not possible to be stopped by the enemy.Misconduct? Misuse of Power? That's something you'll have to prove before you can have been removed in an instant and banned. Its a big thing to say for someone who resorts to insults when they're debating.

Again an opinion that doesn't mean all that much to me. It is just another little statement with absolutely no backing. There is plenty of honor in the wars of today. I think you should be removed because obviously you have issues with people around here. I resort to insults? Look at your paragraphs of nonsense.

The one who gives up is the looser; because none can win when it is about opinions.

This is just plain wrong because in many cases someone is just plain wrong, and the other person is plain correct. In my case, I'm the one who is completely right about this.

In this case, you need to accept your defeat.

 

[Giancarlo]

Re: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

The T - 90 and T- 95 are still nice tanks, cost less, and weight less then the M1, and plus can cross deeper water, which makes them better at going through rough terrain, and makes for a better "gurilla warfare" tank then the M1. Head to head though, the newer version of the M1 will probably win against any modern tank when going head to head.

As usual, spoken without any evidence backing it. Also you must realize the Russians cancelled much of their tank projects because there have been lack of funds. The T-95 I don't think made it. And no tank is good at guerrilla warfare, because it is far too big and can easily be spotted from the air.

 

[Charchris]

Re: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

If this were in a classroom i would be asleep

 

[IAntDemo]

Re: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

RITE GIAN AND LK GETTING PISSED of i dident read any of the post because it to boring i wanted this to be a poll on which we meet up with, rite boys and girlz i pik CS:S when shall we meet up hopefully next week.

 

[rakedog]

As usual, spoken without any evidence backing it. Also you must realize the Russians cancelled much of their tank projects because there have been lack of funds. The T-95 I don't think made it. And no tank is good at guerrilla warfare, because it is far too big and can easily be spotted from the air.

The M1 Abram weights 60 tons, as proven in this link: http://www.ghostrecon.net/html/arms_m1abrams.htm (And that is real data, not data from the game itself).

The T-90 and T-95 both weight from 45 to 50 tons, depending on how much armor is put on.

As this link tells us: http://www.army-technology.com/projects/t90/

The tank is provided with a snorkel for deep fording and can ford 5m of water with equipment which can be deployed in 20 minutes.

I referred not so much guirilla warfare as going through tough terrain and outflanking the enemy, and striking them from the back.

The m1 Abram and T-90/95 have never faced off in official tank trials, or at least I don't know of any. Though a direct head to head the M1 would win, in terrain, the T-90 or 95 would probably outrun the M1, and be able to sneak up on it. Oh and, most tanks feature an anti-air system (flares, small missles), though it's useless obviously useless against fast combat aircraft.

 

[SocK_MaN]

Re: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

RITE GIAN AND LK GETTING PISSED of i dident read any of the post because it to boring i wanted this to be a poll on which we meet up with, rite boys and girlz i pik CS:S when shall we meet up hopefully next week.

Sounds good to me

 

[Giancarlo]

Re: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

The M1 Abram weights 60 tons, as proven in this link: http://www.ghostrecon.net/html/arms_m1abrams.htm (And that is real data, not data from the game itself).

The T-90 and T-95 both weight from 45 to 50 tons, depending on how much armor is put on.

As this link tells us: http://www.army-technology.com/projects/t90/

Since improper amounts of R&D were invested, it does not appear either the T-94 ever got off the ground. Though the M1 Abrams weighs more it has better arm and tracking capabilities. I was not asking for evidence of its weight, but rather any capabilities it has over the M1 Abrams.

The m1 Abram and T-90/95 have never faced off in official tank trials, or at least I don't know of any. Though a direct head to head the M1 would win, in terrain, the T-90 or 95 would probably outrun the M1, and be able to sneak up on it. Oh and, most tanks feature an anti-air system (flares, small missles), though it's useless obviously useless against fast combat aircraft.

It does not matter if something weighs more, because in this case the M1 Abrams has a better, more powerful engine. Also there is no such thing as the T-95, but the T-94. I don't know why I didn't catch that earlier. And a tank sneaking up another tank.... hahah.. with the M1's tracking, the T-90 will be heard from quite a distance away.

Speed for:

M1 Abrams:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m1.htm

M1A1/2 (displacement: 60 tons): 42 mph (regular speed), 30 miles cross country speed

T-90 (displacement: 46.5-50 tons): 65 k/m > 40 mph (regular speed), 45 km > 27 miles cross country speed

That quite clearly shows the M1 Abrams is a bit faster. By nearly 3 miles on the cross country. So how can the slower T-90 catch up to it? Quite clearly the M1 Abrams would outrun the T-90, despite being heavier. It is quite faster.

And what happened to the T-94:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/mbt-u.htm

"A new new Main Battle Tank, which was initially planned to enter service in 1994, remains in development due to financial restrictions."

And at this time it is still in "development". I even heard cancelled.

Next time when debating, do your research properly.

 

[Charchris]

Re: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

Someone should change to the"Which tank is better thread" or something but i got an idea, take it out to BF1942C Mod and use the Ts and the M tanks...

 

[alvino]

Re: Lets All Meet Up On A Game

alvino is a crazy nutcase who needs to be corrected.

said the moron with a fatass ego..... You are the one that starts most of the arguements in threads (there are others too). You're just like my mom. You just have to be right 100% of the time. And when you know youre not getting anywhere, you choose to piss others off. Don't believe me? Well ask all the other members in this forum. You may have some allies, but they won't last long.