Jahled

Wow! That thread seems like just like last week! I've just read this article in Newscientist which was mind blowing, and also ONLINE!!! http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19626264.200-heavyweight-black-hole-is-a-record-breaker.html To put some context on it a Black hole with the mass of the moon would measure an incredible 0.011cm, of our lovely earth: 2cm (though they wouldn't last long) Apparently, tiny superdense blackholes no bigger than a proton can also exist, though their formation would require pressures greater than the greatest available in our entire universe, except during the big bang.

Quite. Is it still being debated in your congress despite the Turkish Parliament's vote, btw? Also, 12/10 to Bush for awarding the Congressional Gold Medal to the Dalai Lama despite the usual words of 'grave concern,' from the fascist Chinese government; bang in the middle of their five-yearly communist conference! Absolute class!

'Many werewolves died bringing us this information,' doesn't quite have the same edge from Mon Mothma, does it?

Which is perhaps why I view party-politics with so much disdain. My politics is fairly much middle of the road, which over here in the UK is the political ground all three of our main Political parties are fighting to occupy. On some issues I lean to the left, on others it leans to the right; which probably makes me a radical- or extreme-centerist! On this issue, I am simply disgusted at the timing; and I am sure the Republicans would have pulled exactly the same stunt had it been a Democratic President in office, I can say as a political neutral concerning US politics. Surely the present mission in Iraq, despite whatever your misgivings about the reasons/execution for the present conflict were, are now to repair Iraq to some semblance of order and stability, perhaps even our moral duty given the disaster we unleashed upon their society under the pretext of a threat it was neither in it's leader's interests to act upon, or any evidence of ever actually having. The Kurdish north of Iraq has largely been untouched by the horrific violence seen elsewhere, but all this is now threatened by the Turkish parliament voting overwhelmingly, by 507 votes to 19, to supporting military action, perhaps justifiably, against PKK groups attacking their soil from bases in Northern Iraq. The PKK have led a murderous campaign over the last few decades for some imaginary Marxist Kurdish homeland spanning not just Turkey, but Iraq, and Iran; as if that's ever realistically going to happen. Despite some misgivings about the modern Turkish states approach to the Kurd's right to their expression of cultural identity, bombs and violence are not the answer, especially when the cessation of territory is your apparent goal. That simply does stuff like harden hearts against a troublesome minority, and flex muscle against it. But as Tex points out, modern Turkey is not the Ottoman Empire of old that undertook the atrocities against the Armenians, despite being the nexus of that old Empire. The United States congress passing a resolution at this time undoubtedly simply hardened hearts in their parliament to vote for affirmative action, given how American influence is perceived across the world. They felt a deep affront against their modern national identity. They percieve a bellicose motion in the US congress and react with a similarly bellicose reaction which is only going to perpetuate violence in a region of Iraq, where previously there has been virtually none, except by Saddam when he was in power, or by foreign Muslim insurgents 'outraged' at their relaxed approach to their religion, or simply to fuel hate. Given the PKK are quite rightly viewed as a terrorist organization by both the US and EU, it could be argued by the stupid why haven't we acted against them ourselves. But that's hardly a practical argument in the present Iraq is it? The most stable region of a complete mess, and we divert over-stretched troops to stir it up into a region of conflict? Thanks to some neoconservative muppets behind Bush we have entertained a war which was thoroughly unnecessary, when we were and are still fighting another one in Afghanistan which was thoroughly justified and still is, unless you consider stuff like the suppression of women to the point of virtual slavery acceptable, and lots of other fascist stuff as well, sponsored by Saudi-Arabian religious dogma. Turkey could, and still might, approach it's present situation, with a more appropriate military reaction, perhaps building up it's military forces it's borders and fighting off any incursions by PKK terrorists. Whilst this is hardly the most practical solution in military terms, which would be to make the best defense in attack, and try and destroy the PKK, my guess is the Kurds will simply melt before them, and stretch the Turks deep into Northern Iraq. I ramble, but with a headache, concerning this mess.

What really happened at that X-Wing launch

Wow! You're getting married Mith? I missed that! A huge WOO to you guys!

Than finally pull all your troops out of any European country, especially of Germany. We don´t need them anymore here after the cold war is over. Thanks for the help. But those garrisons are much too important for any US-Governments. I would actually disagree with this statement, Eagle dude. Whilst the threat of immanent Soviet invasion may have receded, I welcome the presence of the United States military on my soil at least, as do a number of our Eastern European neighbours, be it for other reasons with their memories of Communism. During the nineties Serbian nationalism got seriously out of hand with the breakup of Yugoslavia, with thousands of innocent people being murdered. When the international community decided upon affirmative action to try and hault the extermination of Bosnian Muslims by the Serbs, the United States yet again took the lead. No oil in Bosnia remember. The existence of US military bases in Europe without question made the logistics of the campaign to end the atrocities in Bosnia much easier.

No, it seems my ability to use punctuation eluded me last night..

Hahahahahahahahahaha

Like choose the best moment available to pass a motion. I actually felt pain in agreeing with the current mob of Bush's administration agreeing with their pleas for some semblance of sanity here. Yes, there is overwhelming evidence the Turks undertook a wholesale slaughter of Armenians, but is right now the best time to piss off a nation in denial concerning the genocide when they are about the most progressive largely Muslim nation on the planet? Turkey is at pains to remain a modern secular society, free from the dogma of the religious muppets they, and we see, else where as it's neighbours. They are a vital regional ally, and with present middle-eastern instability about as good as a friend as we could ask for, and some muppets in the US congress insist upon passing a motion, that attacks a nation's sense of historical integrity and identity. Turkey has not had Germany's forcible treatment in addressing it's crimes upto now; a motion such as this was simply poorly judged in timing, and pointlessly executed to the benefit of none. It left me stunned

Given Russia has far more reserves in either to be getting on with, why go to war and subsequently be destroyed securing more invading Alaska?

I think China learned that lesson; that'll be the next tough nut to crack I think something that is somewhat overlooked is the fact that both Taiwan and South Korea have huge military standing arsenal's. Combined with the United States' mobile battle groups, I don't see how China could possibly overcome a combined military stance against them. There are also the 'wild cards' such as India, Thailand, and the sleeping military regional giant, Japan. For China to take any aggressive military action in Asia, it would instantly compromise it's borders. India already has fought the Chinese to a stand still during one war, is now armed with nuclear missiles, and has very major issues with the Chinese concerning their dam-projects, which as well as sinking it's neighbour Bangladesh and causing an immigration problem, is causing an environmental problem within India itself. China has spent decades sponsoring various lunatic Maoist groups within India itself, remember, so even if it is not now, there is still little love loss for the trouble these pockets of hate have been causing trouble. Nepal is still a mess because of Chinese engineered Maoist insurgency in the past, still haunting it today. A combined effort against China by these bordering nations would be to much for China to overcome, and simply wreck the economic progress it has made since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Why would it risk all that, and such regional instability? At the very least all such a confrontation would do is cause the Chinese people themselves to overthrow the communist system. Curiously, consider the six nations that possess aircraft carriers in our world: the United States (off the scale with about thirteen super carriers), France with one, the UK with two, (and one more moth balled), and two semi-super carriers being built, Brazil with one, Thailand with one, and India with one. The latter two speak volumes about the region. When the Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales come into service that will be two carriers needing new homes. The Chinese, off the top of my head, bought some Russian relic, for 'research purposes,' or something similar, but are as yet completely reliant on air power from their own airfields, which whilst the largest air force in the world, is going to be overcome by superior aircraft arranged against it, en masse. It's Navy leaves a lot to be desired as well. Hence, I genuinely don't have an immediate concern for China acting on it's frequent bellicose reterict concerning the will of the Taiwanese people in officially declaring an independent republic, after all these years. China has learnt from watching Communism crumble elsewhere, and seems these days like a simply much more authoritarian version of democratic Russia, it still being a one-party fascist state. I think half the problem here is Russia has so many new borders with volatile states and regions these days. The vast majority of Russia borders Asia, not Europe, with dictators who are clearly mad enough to rename months of the year after their mothers, ban beards etc, with the ever present threat of Islamic muppets bubbling under all. I think Russia is obviously nervous. There is no way on earth it can genuinely feel threatened by the rest of Europe about to invade it, despite virtually an entire century of Europe being screwed over by it's expansionism. All two world wars did was devastate Europe, in the midst of which create the horror of Hitler, and the slaughter of millions. Given the prosperity of Europe, and that being felt now in Russia, it is doing little more than 'acting the big guy,' from dead memories of a pointless cold war stance of old. Let us ignore Russia concerning the missile shield. Nothing is going to become of it. It is empty rhetoric. I welcome the continued American military presence in Europe for the time being. It won us the cold war, and me having to either live in a post apocalyptic waste land or addressing everyone as comrade.

*appreciates* Nicely Tofu!

*sigh* The last one wasn't that 'interesting to live through' Rob dude, largely on account of how realistic it got, with the amount of nukes concerned. We can thank Reagan for more or less bankrupting the Soviet system and making wiser heads in Russia realize it couldn't compete with free market economies, despite it's rather huge military spending. It's GDP couldn't cope. And that's that. Do you really think a far reduced Russia is going put it's self through all that again, when it can't possibly win?

best first post ever! Less is more

*Breaths*

Nice idea Eagle

The only things that really need replacing IMO are the bits of shoddy artwork that came with the original game, such as the event pics, the game interphase and most of the cards. Nice idea LF!

Ah! Things seem to be normal again!

the log out button is no longer in 'my account' profile

Hahahahahaha

This, along with the existence of western friendly eastern European states, such as Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, the Baltic states, etc; Russia is surrounded by either pro-western nations, or states who's economic interests, such as the central Asian republics, are overly reliant on ties with the West. Russia's own newly found economic prosperity is from trade with the west, now it's economy is stabilizing following the collapse of communism, and all the economic mismanagement that that was. Traditionally, Russia has always been a strong regional power; so now it's economy is stabilizing, it's recent antics, are nothing more than reminding all it's neighbours it is a strong regional power. But like China, why would Russia want to risk these newly found economic prosperity by entering a new cold war. It's only recovering because of it's co-operation with the global economy and having economic investment into it, and new customers for it's exports, such as the EU. Who is going to invest in a country in that climate, when you might go to war with it? And that works both ways. The amount of Russian super rich investing in London alone is unbelievable. Despite a few misgivings about it's young democracy, it has as a nation thrown off the communist notion a population has to be bullied and suppressed for it's economy to (almost) work. Putin isn't a dictator, he's certainly extremely authoritarian, but what do you expect after the turmoil; following the collapse of the Marxist economy? In Russia he has wide spread popular support for stabilizing the inevitable mess after Communism collapsed, and is seen as a no nonsense strong man. He can't run for President again, and is currently suggesting he runs for Prime Minister. He's a politician. Believe it not Russians want stuff in life like the rest of us, popular music, fashion, ipods, the Internet, etc, not a rather drab existence calling people 'comrade,' and being told what to think by the 'party.' As for their Military capability, ^what SOCL said above. It is largely two decades behind the West's military arsenal, and still is reliant on a conscript army. Use Wikipedia to get an idea of the completely overwhelming strength it would face if it entertained a new cold war. Despite wrecking it's economy, it wouldn't have any allies. It's old allies are now members of of NATO or waiting to join it, and all share a historical hatred for the years the Red Army imposed it's will upon them. That and the fact the EU would act as one against any perceived threat from Russia. Nations like Germany would simply re-militarize. This new cold war of yours is never going to happen, your hypothetical eastern axis or whatever you're on about would also simply never come into being; because China would simply want to sit back and enjoy the diversion of economic investment away from the new 'bad guy.' And visa versa. China is only the China of today because of economic investment and the fact they've realised when you open the doors and welcome it from without and let it bubble from within, you start to see the seeds of prosperity. China is not going to do much more than what Russia recently has either, because all it would do is make Japan re-arm, and aligned with it's western allies would face a military opposition it wouldn't be able to overcome, by any means. And as for your average Joe in Russia, who do you honestly think they want to feel part of and aligned to culturally, Iran or the prosperous West?

Hahahahaha *warms up Photoshop* BTW: Some of my photoshoppery has been earning zsl, and thus conservation, about £1000 a day now, £1800 on Monday alone: http://www.zslprints.com/page.php?page=topsellers Top three our my repair work, most of the rest are as well Edit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7021508.stm

http://www.jahled.co.uk/crusader.jpg