street228

another advantage to co-pilots is: if there are both,pilot and copilot, in a fighter. when boarding parties head for the fc, they are shut out of the whole fighter, and the pilots are less likely to be injured. if you only have the pilot in his seat, the intruder gets in the fc and the pilot takes damage. I am NOT absolute, that this is the case. It is the apparant case, based on my observations, during such situations. It also seems, that the co-pilot, IS the bomber, based on their ability increase, after finishing assignments.

That is GOOD! puts a whole new meaning to the phrase, "Being a horses ass!!" LOL [ 05-28-2004, 12:24 PM: Message edited by: street ]

lol, I did that on earth, right after I got my copy of UC. couldnt kill em and take trophies, but had a blast learning how to aim and fire all the FP weapons.

Now, those were entertaining reports. And really gives anyone new, a REAL perspective, on how the game can be played in ROAM.

quote: Maybe my comments are falling on deaf ears... "In time, though MANY do not speak, the entire truth, as to what this "so called" war, will precipitate, will be known. We may be DEAD, but the future generation, of the WHOLE world, will have the oportunity to LEARN from our DISGRACE, as a NATION."

quote: LMAO!!! Man, you guys are just. plain. weird. .....and I thought it was just me. Naw! just finding some REAL enjoyment in your hard work. The challenges in life, already recognized, or dead..one must look for the FUN in life..eh? quote: All quiet here Still searching I've got clean scan This does NOT look good Incoming DArn, I missed I missed! I missed! Yeeeeee Hawwwwwwwwww See? Told you it wouldn't hurt Scratch one bogey Preparing to jump SHHHUSH !! Cmder CHAVIK!....you will have me spending NEXT weekend UPGRADING my BATTLECRUISER...er...I mean my home security system!. That's what I did LAST weekend!

quote:how about "Marines are in combat on the subdeck" (basement)? LOL...sorry!, I Dont have a basement, But I guess I could divide the house up into Decks, for each floor.... Deck 1 & 2. Then, I would have to go all the way and designate my garage bays as shuttle bay 1 $ 2. Nooo...I am happy with the novelty: "AS IS". I DO'NT want to end up seeing the shrink for obsessive compulsiveness or post tramatic stress, due to "UNIVERSAL COMBAT" battle fatigue..LOL

lol..."WOOKIE in SKIVVIES" eeew!! Thanks for the Visual SC!!

they were Killed. whiplash or something...lol probably damaged life support or some such, on the fighters during the battle.That has Been my experience. go to medbay and reclone them. There are multiple places to see if they are DEAD. quote: just smack me on the forehead and I'll look again. [ 05-25-2004, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: street ]

when you take the time to install an audio chip and amplified circuit into your house alarm, which says: "Warning, INTRUDER DETECTED". and another in your driveway alarm, which says: "Warning, AQUIRED!" (I'm not OBSESSED,.......Well, maybe a little!)

quote:Everyone is up in arms about Abu Ghraib. It makes me laugh to see everyones' righteous indignation about it, when every day in the US prison system, there are far worse cases of criminal abuse happening and we turn a blind eye to it. There are so many laws and regulations in this country now, if the Police knocked down your door today, and entered your home with a search warrant, they would find "something" to arrest you for. The criminal justice system,now, is no more than a money making scheme and many innocent citizens are incarcerated for any menial infraction of a myriad of laws, from local laws to federal laws. Not every inmate is guilty of some heinous crime and many are railroaded into jail. Why? A: Prison Industries. Prison Industries are a money maker for someone, using what equates to slave labor. If their labor force begins to dwindle, they easily cure the problem by sending out the Gestapo for more bodies. Does anyone, other than the criminal justice system and our Barristers, know what our laws are? Truer words, have never been spoken!!!!!!!!!

quote:Two words: Space Walk LOL...duh!..that one never even crossed my mind...I have GOT to be getting OLD!! but again...moving along at top speed, in heat of battle, would leave you in deep Sh*t, suddenly jumping out the nearest hatch!!

quote:What did you do? Just stare at PERSCAN and hope that your AE's mad kombat skillz paid off? It's either that,when they are on the bridge, or run like hell... . I choose the latter. I send my AE to medbay, where I always keep two marines. This usually works for me. If there are other options, I would be interested in hearing them. :cool:

quote:But you both are stuck in the class warfare, there is only so much money garbage. And the rich take money from the poor in order to be rich crap. ROFL!!!! My bank account is a VERY Private matter(or would be, if it were'nt open to the government EYEBALL (Thank YOU again bush!!!..) I would'nt bother attacking the statement immediatly above, as it is there as an attempt to poke fun But seriously: you speak as if, I live in poverty... or something. I suppose, I should put some sort of history concerning myself in that thread where everyone tells who they are; however, even though that may serve to put a LITTLE credibility to the things I say; I do NOT believe it would be the prudent thing to do. quote: This is BASIC economics folks, it is NOT rocket science, it is NOT hard to understand. I would contend:It would APPEAR simple to those who do NOT take the time to view EVERY aspect. There are many, many variables in what comprises: "A NATIONS" economic viability. And,it does take some "IN DEPTH" research and learning, to comprehend how it all works together. My personal conclusion, concerning this whole subject,has slowly come to the following end: street says: " I have grown very weary with this, and do not have the time, nor the patience, to TEACH......... READ, READ, READ, READ, and READ some more; however, read some NON-FICTION and NON-POLITICAL "BOOKS" You would be AMAZED, how far off your views, in fact, ARE! " believe what you will. [ 05-21-2004, 05:50 PM: Message edited by: street ]

quote:Where did you get the values 100 billion compared to 1 TRILLION... I will be more than happy to do the math if I knew where you got those values. fact is, if one were to be REAL critical, I would imagine, it comes from the same subjective reasoning, as statements similar to the following: quote: The government does NOT and cannot create wealth, it can only TAKE it. When it takes less of that wealth, it builds the economy, when it TAKES that wealth, it slows the economy down. He forgets, ALL the money being fused into the society, due to this war, is in the form of a HUGE dollar DEFICIT..(2billion plus per day at present)..the DEFICIT,like LOANS, has to be collected by the government. This causes temporary increase in the economy TODAY, but MUST be paid for in the future....and how would one propose the money be paid back without some TAX increase. This has been the methodology of the REPUBLICAN party for YEARS. they always do TREMENDOUS deficit spending, then blame the democrats for trying to balance an impossibly huge deficit budget through small tax increases. Bush is showing his ineptness, in playing BOTH roles. TAX decrease..with Tremendous Deficit spending. This will put the load on our childrens's children, or we face a NATIONAL bankruptcy in the future. In a way, though I would bush loose this coming election, I wish he could spend enough time in the white house, to be the one who has to wrestle with the terrible situation which MUST come in the future. The pendulum will always swing back, and he has given THIS one, a tremendous push, which we will ALL regret in the future.(problem is, he can only serve two terms and this will haunt the american people far longer than 4 years) here let me do a little bit of the math: 2.3 billon per day for 42 days(6weeks)= 96.6 billion every 6 weeks......LOL [ 05-21-2004, 05:35 PM: Message edited by: street ]

quote:cadrian, your right. check it out. do a little research into the 1980's recession. THE REAGAN years. Also check out the FIRST 6 things reagan did when he came into office. It was during the reagan administration...they coined the whole philosophical phrase:"TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS" above I said RECESSION quote: The ONLY BOOM was in TEXAS..due to lack of regulation in the building industry,and it completly dwindled to near nothing, by 1985!!! The above was a sarcastic response to what YOU say were boom years...as you well know And, by the way, This small piece of prosperity which TEXAS enjoyed DURING the RECESSION, had very little influence on the overall economy of the nation, at the time of the 1980's RECESSION. quote:The ONLY BOOM NOTE: the word ONLY!!!! quote:The Boom of the 80's and 90's were because of Reagan, and the new Boom is Bushes.. YOUR statement saying BOOM of the 80's directly above: NOTE: there are no contridictions as to my statement. YOU CALLED ME ON NOTHING. The very IDEA, that you THINK we are in a BOOM, at the PRESENT, only PROVES your logic has NO accurate basis, by which to come to LOGICAL conclusion. Telling ME to get a grip...is nothing more than a futile attempt to establish some credibility to your own subjective conclusions based on FALSE premises. quote: and then call me names because I called you on it. WHERE, in God's Great name, did I CALL YOU NAMES???????????? As SC always says, when confronted with RUBBISH: street says: "RUBBISH" [ 05-21-2004, 01:28 PM: Message edited by: street ]

quote:Boom of the 70's? WTF are you talking about? Boom of the 70's, you are absolutely hilarious. The Boom of the 80's Jag, You are so Misinformed, or completely blind, it is uterally rediculous. Anyone who lived, and worked in the 70's and through the 80's KNOWS, we went through the BIGGEST recession since the GREAT depression ,during the early 80's. did you forget about the chrysler bail out?..Whole cities went bankrupt. The Federal Government Bailed out STATES!!... Man..talk about ignoring REALITY!!!. The ONLY BOOM was in TEXAS..due to lack of regulation in the building industry,and it completly dwindled to near nothing, by 1985!!! The ENTIRE automotive industry was in trouble. Most auto workers in the united states were layed off..going back to 20 years senority. 1/3 NEVER went back to work. It wasnt until around 1987-88 that the economy started to pick back up and leveled off. We have YET to reach an equitable position, in economic recovery, as we enjoyed from 1969-1979. MAN!! it is no wonder, there are so few people willing to discuss these issues on this forum You, my man, need to do some READING, if you do not know from first hand experience!!!

quote: Cadet Member # 5761 Member Rated: posted 05-20-2004 07:04 PM Hey I'm not saying Kerrys perfect or even good for that matter. I was just saying that the economy is only really comming back because of the war. Most of the time when we have used Tickle Down, which is the theory that give to the rich and they give to the poor who then buy stuff in a nut shell, it hasn't worked. Maybe I am wrong thats just what I thought. I havent done much research on the subject I just thought I would add my opinion. Personally I havent heard much of Kerrys speaches. He doesn't come to Plover much <---- Joke the only reason to come to Plover is to go to Stevens Point and the only reason for that is to go to UWSP. cadrian, your right. check it out. do a little research into the 1980's recession. THE REAGAN years. Also check out the FIRST 6 things reagan did when he came into office. It was during the reagan administration...they coined the whole philosophical phrase:"TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS" the Reagan administration tore the livin crap out of the boom of the 70's and vertually eliminated the middle class. YeaH!! we need more years like that!! HEIL BUSH!!

quote:Where is the Media coverage about this topic? GOOD QUESTION...(makes one wonder as to the validity of the topic in general...and also brings to bear: Questions concerning our interpretation of "What is reliable MEDIA" in general. If one basis their conclusions on a media, as unsubstantial as DIGITAL media(meaning the web), one may, in fact, have some really misplaced conclusions, as to what is REAL, and NOT so real. I suspect, this has caused much of the confusion concerning the facts, in regard to this war. Not to mention, one's reading comprehension level plays a huge role in how one understands what is written. I have also noted: Many read what they want to read, and inadvertantly ignore the small details which would give any given sentence or article an entirely different meaning. Meaning: In a media, such as the internet. you could possibly find yourself reading an article one minute, and go back to same article a couple of minutes later, and not even realize, some of the facts have changed. In other words: There is no way to verify the validity of such a media, as the HISTORY of the media itself, is subjective to the writer and subject to editing, or complete erasure, at any given moment. If one would stand on any given conclusion, one SHOULD, have multiple verifications of each primise they have used to build such a conclusion. Much of the disagreements I have had, in this whole discussion of war, with many of you. I have many sources of information to which I contribute my conclusions. I, personally, do NOT entirely base my information concerning this war, or anything else, on the WEB, or the nightly news. I would hope you would show enough objectivity in your judgement, and designation of mutual respect for yourself, and others, to do the same. This is not an issue of DEBATE with me. Just a plea to ALL of you, to apply a little rationale

quote: But it's AMERICA street, NOT AMERIKA, I thought they would've taught that to you in school. Your Idea of AMERIKA, is not my AMERICA. My point again avoided and attacked by those who apparantly choose to wear blinders, rather than face truth. I am an AMERICAN, who stands for TRUE principle, and TRUE freedom, and the TRADITIONAL AMERICAN way of life. quote: All Kerry is, is a flip flopper, a lier, anti-military, anti-america, anti-education slamming the character of an individual,which you have little knowledge, is as irrational as your arguments. Especially when Neither yours or mine, would probably hold a candle stick.... Typical of the norm within this whole discussion. Bush, on the other hand, has already demonstrated his lack of such. (well, you seemed to have sucked me back in, for the moment...lol) check your premises by which you base your conclusions, and be honest with yourselves, for a change. following, what is considered, the winning horse, at this point, may appear appealing to you, but only serves to show what character is beneath your own fasod. This apparant winner's popularity will fade in due time. Mark my words. This has nothing to do with partisenship, but everything to do with principle, and moral fortitude.

quote: "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me" well, seriously. Hey cadrian!! I think you just said it ALL, in a nutshell!!!!

quote:Kerry will be better then Bush? Yeah right, If I hated Bush, there would be no way that I would even think that Kerry would be better. Kerry is a tax and spend liberal, who despises the military, and will do his best to see us destroyed. Within 6 months of a Kerry election, I would very confidentally say that we will be attacked by terrorists, that will make 911 look like a cake walk. We will be doing EXACTLY what Spain did. Sad Street, pretty sad... Well, to be perfectly honest, I doubt we will find out; however, we can only wait and see what happens in november, and then again wait and see, if such prophecy is justified, or even remotely coherent. I have, some very justifiable concerns, as to what may, or may not transpire if bush gains a second term.....but I am no prophet

In a few respects, yes; however, in most of his actions(especially concerning afghanistan and his executive order 166) I stood firmly against his stance. I did vote for bush..as I have mentioned earlier. I have voted republican for almost 30 years. This will be the first time I will ever have voted democrat.

Well, this will probably be my final post, in regard to this issue. The redundancy, I would asssume, is wearing a bit thin on all accounts. I am just a little behooved, how the recent findings,(and the past findings) of a couple of isolated shells or small stock of "U.N. BANNED" items within iraq, can be stretched into this AWESOME classification as WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, and thus twisted into Justification for THIS IMMORAL atrocity, of INVADING another country. I think it would be wise, you do some study, as to WHAT a weapon of MASS destruction is; then possibly, we could discuss this, in a rational sense. Thank You ALL, it has been fun, but it has become, redundant to keep refuting an argument, which is based on an entirely false premise. We will all do and think as we wish regardless. Will we not? Good luck to you, and your ambition for your STYLE of AMERIKA, with your STYLE of irrational leadership. I just like mine, to be a little more rational, and level headed, when it involves the future of MY FAMILY.

quote: First, WRONG, his base is on the war, economy and the job that he is doing as president. ALL 3 are doing quite well. The economy being the most important at this point in time. You admit WAR first; however, Economy, only became evident AFTER, he put this generation into the BIGGEST deficit in history..Then and only then, did he finally decide to get off his war wagon long enough to appease some of his constituents, along with the rest of the population. and third, the job he is doing as a president would have been favorable, had he not used the hysteria created by the 9/11 incident as a political refuge, and went on, to literally terrorize the population into an atrocious crime,through lies, of INVADING a country to obtain its assets. quote:second of all, the media has an OBVIOUS bias, and looks for the "facts" that will back up that bias. The journalist and media of this country are behind the democrat party by a margin of at least 80%, and they work their tails off to help ANY Democrat candidate get into office and tear down ANY Republican that had the temerity to get elected in the first place. first of all, RUSH and the like have proven very effective in attacking the democratic administrations throughout the past 20 some odd years, and the democrats played very little in the entire field. second 80% of ALL newspapers and Television conglomerates within the USA are owned, or financed via huge conglomerates who stand on the right. I would assert, research into facts would help settle our differences(one republican to another) quote:And 4th, of course LOCAL economies will be effected by the military spending and the replacement of military hardware that was used during the war, but, it has very little National effect at all, except to possibly drive the stock of those same defense industries up a little bit. The war on Iraq has had and will continute to have little effect on the economy, until the oil from that country begins to flow, once that occurs, the effect will be a drop in oil prices, if we can get our fricking patroleum processing facilities up to speed as well that is. how you can assert, on one hand the war helps local economy, but drags down the whole economy is beyond me. The national economy is a whole bunch of little local economies. Amd as far as oil prices go...the oil IS flowing out of Iraq, AND the increased Price of oil, within the U.S. has nothing to do with supply and demand, or the price of OPEC. It was just recently announced by the oil industry(which BUSH has personal investment)that they have made RECORD amount of PROFIT in the last quarter. Your argument here, holds no water regardless, of what I; or you, personally believe. quote: The environmentalists have pretty well gotten that locked up on us, we cannot build the new facilities to process the oil, because the environmentalists are keeping us from building the new facilities that we desperately need to process the oil that we need. We have not built a new refinery in over 15 years in this country, so as our demand has gone up, our processing facilities have not been able to build to keep pace with the demand. But that is a WHOLE other discussion. True, Ill give you the enviromentalist have slowed the building of new facilities, within the protected habitats..but that has little to do with us not building refineries in the past 15 years. It has been since about 1980, and with good reason, and the reason has nothing to do with enviromentalist. The reason has to do with one of the first 6 things The Reagan administratiion did when it first came into office. We capped off about 70% of ALL our oil pumping stations. This was done to ensure we had reserves, to protect us against unilateral price hikes from OPEC. We have just recently reopend a small percentage of these reserves, since bush came into office. Our reliance upon OPEC over the last 25 years was a political move by reagan, which help instigate the 1980's recession. That recession, we never completely recovered from, and THAT is one of the underlying reasons for SOME of the economic increase as of late. And is contolled by the HARD CORE REPUBLICAN conglomerates. THIS has had more affect on the economy than those itty bitty tax breaks to those who didnt need them. I believe there is MUCH more to the whole picture, than you are willing to see. quote: As I say, history show us that this is true, OVER, and OVER, and OVER again. You cn make the claims you are making until you are blue in the face, but that will not make it true, NOR accurate in any way shape or form. History tells me that I am correct, and you are in a pipe dream somewhere, because you want so hard to slam Bush because you hate the fact that we took out Saddam Housien, and wish to back that up with your wild fantasies... I would agree with your history theory, if in fact, the conditions were identical;however, they are not!!. When the government steps in and regulates, the whole concept of supply and demand is moot. And the U.S. government, under the NIXON administration, did in fact, eliminate the whole concept of supply and demand attribution, when they(REPUBLICAN INDUSTRIAL conglomerates)successfully lobbied, and obtained FEDERAL regulation for energy within the United States. This is the KEY to the influx toward our APPARANT economic recovery, you are so quickly accrediting to bush..AND the amount of energy it takes to mobilize and maitain an invasion army in IRAQ is the LARGEST single mega-billion dollar industrial attribution toward our economy since WWII. I would assert this is NO minor contribution to the economic viability of this nation, at this time, and you are missing a HUGE influence of such toward our economy, which is controlled by the REPUBLICAN industrialist, if not BUSH, Himself. quote:you are in a pipe dream somewhere, because you want so hard to slam Bush because you hate the fact that we took out Saddam Housien, and wish to back that up with your wild fantasies... and to this deserves no response, as I am no lover of saddam housien, but would that my country had more self respect, and a whole lot less blood on their hands. Let the REVENGE for 9/11 die down a little, and use of proper judgement, is all I ask. Bush has PROVEN, he does NOT act rationally, nor intelligently in this mannor, unless he can PERSONALLY profit from his moves. And war has made him more profit(PERSONALLY) than his family could ever have made, standing for the principles which our constitution stands.