The Old Hack

The Moderator: By popular request, I am relaunching the political discussion thread. Once again, however, I must stress that it will be very strictly monitored. Adherence to the forum courtesy rules will be enforced with especial care here. This is a particularly contentious topic and no flames, personal attacks, scandalmongering nor slurs of any kind will be permitted. People have a great range of opinions and while it is hard to remain calm and civil at times we should nevertheless strive for that to the best of our ability. Use of particularly offensive terms about other posters (including but not limited to 'RWNJ', 'SJW', 'Nazi' and others) will result in immediate warning points. We had some good and beneficial discussions on the old thread and largely managed to remain civil and respectful. I hope we can accomplish the same here. Remember: do not post here in the heat of anger and always keep in mind that your fellow posters are people, too. Last point: as in the old thread, when I do post here it will be in my capacity as moderator only. It will be easier for me to moderate here if I do not allow myself to become personally involved. While I do have a political bias, I will do my best to not let it affect me. And remember that as always, you have a right of appeal to the admins if I make a decision you disagree so much with that you find it unacceptable. The Old Hack

This is the latest outrage that has right wingers up in arms. It is apparently aimed at a population group with brains that have significant trouble keeping up with a moldy cheese. On a good day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l3CD7qo2xQ

I started to think about some military matters that I feel do not belong in the politics thread and am therefore creating a new thread for it. Recently I started to think about the use of conscripted troops versus volunteers, training and equipment (or absence thereof), and situations they are deployed in. (Disclaimer: I myself was a volunteer and I personally find the use of conscripts highly problematic. Still, I can see that there are times where grim necessity may compel their use.) All else being equal, volunteers tend to be superior to conscripts. But there are situations where conscripts may function quite serviceably. This happens if: They are well motivated, for example if deployed in defence of their homeland. They receive a decent amount of training. They receive equipment and munitions that are if not necessarily modern at least capable of keeping up. They are not used beyond what may be reasonably expected of them. (Holding a pre-prepared defensive line is good. Frontal assaults, not so much.) This is all of course subject to change. Conscripts may also battle harden, for example, and as time passes, they may gain in capabilities and receive better training. And taking time to build their morale is never a bad idea. Unfortunately not all leaders have the foresight to use conscripts in such a way. In a certain war I do not think I need to name one side has found itself being driven out from areas it seized in the opening months of the conflict. It has suffered painful losses in equipment and experienced troops and the morale of its troops is... not good. The Great Leader of this side has determined that the correct response is to engage in, shall we say, a leveé en masse, in which a large number of civilians is conscripted into fighting. Few of these have had any active military experience for years, some of them have never been trained. They are being shipped to the front line in a haphazard way, their organization is poor, they have a desperate shortage of NCOs and what equipment they do have available is old if not obsolescent. (I must point out that 'obsolescent' is not quite the same as 'obsolete.' An aging bolt rifle might fairly be considered obsolescent. A muzzle-loading smoothbore musket? Probably obsolete.) The scenario they are headed for is not a happy one. They are facing a smaller but much better motivated and trained army largely consisting of volunteers, one with half a year of battle hardening to bolster it. Its leadership is superior and they are riding high on a wave of recent victories. They are pushing their opposition back and have momentum on their side. I am having trouble seeing any scenario in which the conscript forces, large numbers notwithstanding, is headed for anything but disaster. If their leaders do have the foresight to have them prepare a defensive line and attempt to hold it, that might help. Some. I can see only two hopes for these hapless conscripts. One, the weather might provide it with some cover; autumn rains might turn the fighting zone into a morass of mud and temporarily slow or halt fighting. This might buy them time to train and get at least some improved weaponry. Two, there could be agreement on an armistice or a peace. The latter is hard to see happening but I do not wish to rule it out. I'm interested in hearing the opinions of other posters, if you can either spot any mistakes I have made or if you can add anything. Discussion of different scenarios in which conscripts are employed would be very welcome. Lastly, this is a general thread for discussion of matters military, be they real life, speculative fiction, wargames and computer games. Go nuts. Humor is also welcome. Thank you all for your attention. ~tOH.

Um, has it become accepted norm to bill the enemy for losses you sustain during a war you started? Will we be seeing Japan sue the estate of Admiral Nimitz for the loss of four fleet carriers during the Battle of Midway?

I kinda liked him back then. That ended with his later escapades. I can mourn what he was back then. I will shed no tears over what died today.

He is by far more likely to be remembered as the man who destroyed the status of the US as a superpower.

It is an amazing plan. Commit an illegal act of war that will alienate all the most important allies of the US at a massive cost, all to get something that the US could have had for the asking just by informing the Danish government that they wanted it!

That disgusting tubful of decomposing orange lard you keep festering in the Oval Office just made the following observation about NATO. When informed that his actions might cause it to break up, he casually threw out "They probably wouldn't have helped us anyway." I am going out on a limb here and assuming that the people present on these forums have heard of the events of September 11th, 2001. In the immediate aftermath of these, the United States invoked Article Five of NATO, calling the other member states for aid -- the only time so far in the history of NATO that Article Five has been invoked. And they DID come. Denmark in particular made a larger per capita contribution than any other member state and also suffered the largest proportionate number of casualties. But that has clearly slipped the Mango Kaiser's rapidly dimming mind. I mean, the destruction of the Towers didn't really rate as far as history goes. Bah!

Well how about that. Even Senator Tom Tillis of the GOP thinks attacking Denmark is a bad idea. That at least is a small relief.

Articles of impeachment have been filed against the Doginator. I approve. Not sure how big a chance of success they have but it is nonetheless brightening my day. EDIT: I have just received a complaint from a Dr. Heinz Doofenschmirtz who says that DHS Secretary Noem is not one of his inators as they possess both charm and style. I hereby apologize for any confusion.

Political joke. After the Trump administration abducted the President of Venezuela without a preceding declaration of war, it didn't take long for various others to decide that if the US could do that maybe they could as well. Soon, the Penguin Liberation Front of Heard and McDonald Islands saw an opportunity to strike, entered through a hole in the half-demolished White House and made off with Donald Trump. On the very next day they released a video tape stating their terms. "Attention, American tariff lovers! These are our demands! We have your president! You have 48 hours to pay us a hundred million dollars! And if you fail to meet the deadline, WE WILL RETURN HIM TO YOU!"

And precisely how would that be any sort of constraint on the demented orange howler baboon? It is not exactly as if it has a history of respecting preexisting treaties or agreements of any kind.

Senator Mike Lee of Utah has just proposed reintroducing letters of marque and reprisal so private US citizens may be empowered to go after enemies of the US. A grand return to the age of piracy on the high seas. There is no possible way this could in any form or shape go wrong! Arrrrrrr! (Someone mentioned planting something illegal on some billionaire's megayacht and using that as an excuse for seizing it, plundering it and haul it off for selling in some neutral country, and this has caused me to be on the verge of being in favour of this insane idea. Where's my One Piece pirate flag?)

Anyway I was wrong. It wasn't two battleships. It was twenty-five. Twenty-five. I don't think the US had twenty-five battleships at the height of World War Two. Trump is a fucking moron and the people who enable him are a disgrace to the United States.

The convicted felon in the Oval Office has decided to build two new battleships for the US Navy. Battleships. I am sure they will not at all be obsolete from the moment the keels are laid and I look forward to the new vessels USS Inadvisable and USS Defaulted.

Supposedly he is going to stop breathing eventually. As far as I am concerned, once that happens it will be the best thing he has ever done.

You have to admit it. When it comes to diplomacy and international relations, Trump's abject incompetence and utter lack of comprehension is in a category of its own. He is currently doing all he can to worsen diplomatic relations with Denmark and the rest of NATO, citing the need for US access to Greenland, its strategic position and its rare earth elements. This notwithstanding the fact that he could have had all he wanted just by asking nicely back when NATO was still an ongoing concern and the US the most respected nation in the world. Denmark would happily have let the US have all the bases it wanted as well as access to developing facilities for the extraction of REEs. The only national leader I can think of that was even nearly as bad in history was Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, whose efforts helped work European relations into such a tangle that when WW1 was set off it spread like wildfire and ultimately ended three empires. In theory King Christian VII of Denmark was worse given that he was literally and medically retarded, but since his diplomatic efforts consisted solely of tamely signing whatever document was put in front of him, in practice he was only as bad as whichever political faction had access to the throne at the time.

I am sure that a squad of 13 men and a 37mm anti-tank gun will be enough to deter Germany from invading Denmark. (This was what we actually fielded against the Germans when they crossed the border to Denmark on April 9, 1940. It did not end well. We did manage to take out a Panzer I at the head of the German column, mind you, a loss I am sure completely crippled the future German war effort.)

So, what I am hearing is that Uwe Boll is better at running scams than the orange shitgibbon is.

Please. The demented orange howler baboon has never invented anything. Every single idea, concept or claim he has ever employed have all been stolen from others. Not entirely true. Venezuela is also a source of rare earth minerals.

1) I am having some trouble envisioning even a single member of the current administration having the intellect and education to make that distinction. 2) To me it follows logically that they have chosen the term solely to engender fear and outrage in their gullible base. 3) I would be astounded to learn that even a third of the people they had murdered near the coast of Venezuela were actual 'narco terrorists'.

Could someone please explain to me what a 'narco terrorist' is? The two purposes this seems to indicate are not in any way mutually compatible. A narcotics dealer is supposed to sell an illegal product, do so unnoticedly and hopefully profit from it. A terrorist is seeking to apply political pressure through public displays of destruction and killing that induce fear and panic in the targets. They generally do not care about profit. So a narco terrorist is... seeking to apply political pressure through publicly selling an illegal product marketed by way of displays of destruction and killing that induce fear and panic in their customers, ultimately gaining profit from this somehow? It is almost as if the Minister of War has made up this word salad during one of his frequent drunken binges and keeps using it in the hopes that it will generate outrage and anger among a public that he clearly believes is gullible and easily spooked.

It's all right. Pharaoh's people will put its organs in canopic jars and make sure the rest is mummified. It is almost exactly -- but not completely -- unlike a pyramid. Only not.

I have long known that Jeremy is one of the most powerful characters in EGS. He can immobilize Susan just by sitting on her.

I second the recommendation. I also recommend the TV series based on this series; it is excellent.