hear you go :wink:
You Are 20% American
You’re as American as Key Lime Tofu Pie
Otherwise known as un-American!
You belong in Cairo or Paris…
Get out fast - before you end up in Gitmo!
hear you go :wink:
You Are 20% American
You’re as American as Key Lime Tofu Pie
Otherwise known as un-American!
You belong in Cairo or Paris…
Get out fast - before you end up in Gitmo!
@Cmdr:
i think what got me was the beer one :roll: i preffer no beer but the hard stuff, Jack and Russian water
Russian Water is Vodka.
I know, but thats not as fun to say
drat you beat me by 3%
You Are 85% American
You’re as American as red meat and shooting ranges.
Tough and independent, you think big.
You love everything about the US, wrong or right.
And anyone who criticizes your home better not do it in front of you!
i think what got me was the beer one :roll: i preffer no beer but the hard stuff, Jack and Russian water (well that’s not too Amarican eather).
sports was a pain, i liked 1 sport out of each catagory but dis like the other. man that one wasn’t fair :lol:
only times i ever used them was 1 per nation so 3/2, works out fine as Axis ones are a lot better IMO.
@ncscswitch:
I notice no one wants French Resistance either :evil:
that would be because the French suck… why get a few extra guys who already lost there home? :lol:
take the “/” out of the first move, then it will work
edit: well then you got it before i posted :-D
it is a flaw in him. he went to a church and thus associated with people that have raciest views. if you chose to go to a place and par take in that place’s activities then you associate with it. you may not agree with all that is said, but there is a good chance that a lot you do. when the place makes strong statments then it is easy to say how you would agree with them if you stayed.
lets say you go into a church to join and the preacher and congragation all seams good that day, then a month latter you hear a serman that says the problem with Amarica is that blacks are doing (insert statment). what would you do then? i would hope you would say something or go some place else. if you stayed but said something and it happens again then you should leave as now the church is acting in a way that you don’t agree with. but if you stay and there is no change and you sit back and enjoy then you are by not disagreeing with it saying “it’s ok to say that and i’m ok with being told that is how it is.”
look at it a diffrent way. your son goes to school and you meet the teacher. the teacher seams nice and all. a few weeks latter you see that same teacher well not at school standing at a war protest. nothing wrong with that, but then the spouce of that teacher (or boy friend/girlfriend) escalades the protest via violance. the teacher may not be particapating in said violance but the teacher also is not stopping there spouce. now you may agree with the teachers stance on the war (or not, it’s not relavent IMO), but the teacher did by asociating with the violance that came from it in effect condone the violance. now it could be a 1 time deal that the spouce got out of hand, but lets say you look into it and find that this spouce has a record of this well with the teacher. do you realy think the teacher is going to be the best influance on your son? the teacher may be good at there job, but you arn’t there to see all that the teacher says and dose all the time. who is to say the teacher isn’t telling your son that violance is ok to protest?
put that in context, the teacher is the same as Obama and we don’t know if he will take what he learned from from his preacher and take that into the presadencey and say “you know what the US did a lot of bad and so we realy deserved what we got, we shouldn’t be in Afganistan going after the Talaban, so lets pull out.” he won’t say we deserved it, but dosn’t mean he won’t think it… he did listen to his “spearital adviser” for 20 years tell him that the US is bad and that the US is trying still to kill blacks and do other bad things, after 20 years i’m pritty sure some of it stuck.
Bids have to be bassed off of skill, both yours and the opponant. for now my friend and i have yet to have the Axis loss with a bid zero… why? we havn’t mastered the Allies stratagy yet, although i think i have just won the first time with Allies at bid 0.
on the reverse by same friend and i have played a friend that i used to play a lot who is highlly skilled but is new to Revised. we gave him a bid 8 and kicked him all over the place as we had been playing a few games already against each other and had a good idea of how to make the Allies work right.
as a reverse i have played 2 games with mjkusn01 now both he was Axis and we went with bid 8 for those (or was it 7?) and he won both games. first i was beat around like a rag doll but i was still prity green to the game (had played 3 games before that with only one as Allies). the secound game my record had only changed to 5 games and 2 as Allies; i lost again but my mistakes were less and i feel i did much better and my loss was due over all to 1 or 2 bad timed moves and Allied build up that took a little too long for Europe. i think i would have been in place to land in Europe a turn or two too late.
now what am i saying hear?
that a Bid is based off skill/confert. if a player is confident in there skill then a low bid is fine, but not so much then a higher bid should be taken. i feel the 7-9 is probably prity center of the road, but a 0 against some one who hasn’t got the Allies down yet is perfectly with in reason. i mean if you were to play me as the Allies based on my track record with them why would you need a bid of 3 even? i can’t win with a bid 0 :lol:
a simple fix for the India thing is make the India teritory (maybe all of SE or Eastern Asia) like it is in A&A pacific. UK has a factory to start with and a India buffer teritory so UK can’t lose the factory early.
as for Africa, Italy could take Egypt first turn still as i’m sure Italy will have a moderatlly large navy on it’s first turn, Egypt won’t have more then a few units so can’t hammer into the Italian troops and win, so between the Italian navy drop and whats already there it should be little trouble. it just allows the UK to evacuate if it wants or make some kind of gambit to counter. i always personally haited that the UK got ripped apart on G1. this if done right prevents the tare apart of both Egypt and navy in Europe region well at the same time wouldn’t allow UK to make for a large strike of any kind… in other words UK keeps some starting units (or can) but dosn’t gain any real ground.
@JWW:
He’s a “hot” pic of me. Get it I’m hot… nm
Ok I just vomitted all over my key board. What the fcuk is going on here :? :x :-P :oops:
I have pixs of GG (gayguy - not that there is anything wrong with that) playing a violin and Smellyfish label’d “hot”. Enough is enough! No more MAN pictures.
If you don’t watch it I’m going to send 36 & B-loaf to your house so that we eliminate some of the gayness on this site.
Some one needs a hug.
Group Hug!
in keeping with no China (as thats how it is), i would say the best is:
Germany
USSR
Japan
UK
Italy
US
why?
it makes no sence for Russia to go before Germany as Russia should be reacting to Germany. also it allows Russia to start with W Russia in there hands and not have the German front streached unless they want it to be. also it makes W Russia if liberated by US/UK go back to Russia as it should IMHO.
Russia goes next so they can react and also move before Japan so Japan dosn’t kill there Eastern front before they can react.
then Japan, this allows Japan to make the Pearl harbor attack if they want with out interuption and also have the inishative in the East.
UK next as they can now react to the war that just hit them on both fronts (granted they were already at war with Germany, but not so much Japan so thats why hear).
Italy, this way no Axis or Allies are back to back, other wise they would go around the time of Germany, but that would make for too much of a 1/2 punch for both Axis and the Allies. (Germany take Italy reinforce or UK take and US reinforce).
last is the US as they don’t enter the war till after the Japan attack, but the reason for so far after Japan is simply break up.
now i have sceen ppl say make an Allies turn and an Axis turn, i don’t care for this personally. it may be fun to try, but i think it causes problems in that it would basicly be a 2 person game with just a straight up back and forth push. not that this is nessisarally bad as it would allow the UK/US to land together, but it also allows the 3 Allies to make a big push together.
Russia is always in a tight spot with it’s need for lots of infantry but not much other stuff. by doing the linked turn if i was US or even UK i would focouse on Air and not ground units to send to Russia and then let Russia clame the teritories well the UK/US provide all the Air power=punch. end result would be in game turms now of Russia having a huge Air force to gain land with a huge army of infantry and artillary. i think this would dominate in Europe. 1 US bomber ariving each turn and 2 UK fighters a turn with the Russian stacks of infantry. i doupt Germany and Italy could fight against such a huge force that could attack them together each turn.
Athletesfoot (hehe that is funny), i think thats a little too boyish for the ladys :-P
welcome to the board.
Darth Maximus , JWW, Ncscwitch, Rising Dragon, Gamer and Jennifer are just a few of the fairly accomplished gamers on this site. Look through some of their games and you should be able to view some good tactical games amongst them. If your looking to join, and want to play some quality games, head to the league and join up, but be warned, you will get hooked. 8-)
ya what he said.
@Cmdr:
releasing his pastor’s sermons where he shows his racist colors and trying to attribute those stances to Obama
this of all of them isn’t bad IMO, yes his Pastor has made racist remarks and also anti US remarks. but the thing is that the Obama family has gone to this church for around 20 years, you can’t tell me that of the sermons shown Obama was not at at least one of those, he has made a big show of going regularlly, so ether he was before his run or he was not.
but give him the benafit of the doupt and say the pastor only had the anti US and racist remarks on the few times the Obama’s didn’t show up. if we take that and say he was not there, we can look at the church and say from experiance from other churches that usually regular members are friends, not all with all but a good number are friends with at least a good number of others. also most people will share opinions when talking when they are friends so i’m sure some of the anti US or racest things would be brought up in talks with the Obama’s. again this isn’t incriminating as he may not have been there durring those sermons.
now the real problem comes from that pastor Write is accredited by Obama as his mentor or one of them (i’m not sure right now on the exact word), now you may not agree with your mentor all the time, but it would be hard to have a mentor that is far from your own belife system. the Obama’s would have to know his stance at least some what to question it.
if we look at Machel’s (Mrs Obama) statment just a short time ago of “This is the first time i am proud to be an American” it shows that there is some credability at the vary least that there is at least some Anti American thoughts in the vary least there house hold.
i don’t know about any of your houses but major decisions are made between my self and my wife; looking at history more then a few 1st ladies have had influence on our presidents decisions.
the bottom line is at the vary least this brings up the questions to be asked and thought over for people so they can look and see more on there lives and how they think so the American people can make an informed decision on who they are.
LHTR also has optional individual victory conditions on page 36. In this case, whichever power has increased its national production level from the start by the greatest percentage of IPCs is the individual winner (basically final income divided by starting income). This also allows the possibility of a tie, but there is less of a chance of one.
this is the best way IMO as it is the most fair.
@Cmdr:
I remember at one time Jen had a web site with a lot of pics, based on what I saw there the bathing suit pic is the real thing even if its 10 years old… I also learned that Jen is a treky nut
M36 you don’t know me very well
I had to have a lot of digital images of myself for the company’s web page. Clients like to shop before buying time with an escort. :P
Anyway, I’ve always been a sci-fi geek. :)
i’m sure had you posted that last bit up, buisness would have been great… all those nerds who have no time to date but make tons of money would surly pay to spend some quality time with a lady who they can talk Klingon too :-D
@Cmdr:
(BTW, I support the government paying families to have more babies. I think a US Citizen born of US Citizens should be paid $5,000 which must be put towards bills incurred by the parents to support the baby like clothes, furniture, medical bills, etc. Babies are EXPENSIVE!)
and your choice to have. so the expense should not be on the government and in effect on those who have no children/are waiting to have children.
also by paying people to have kids you are encouraging people to pump them out for the cash and not be productive them selfs.
each child after the 2nd has to pay $5,000 to buy land and trees to plant on that land, then they have to pay tax’s on that land (although it’s government owned) till the day they die.
the $5k is bassed of the price of land from the 1990’s and as such would probably be higher in cost.
this is to offset there housing they will need and the food they will consume durring there life.
sorry miss worded my above statment. the child tax is being proposed in Austrelia, not passed yet.
Thing is we can’t/havn’t proven that the globe is warming due to any thing man has done. we have had global warming in the past (it’s how we got out of ice ages), and i’m sure man didn’t make so many camp fires that we warmed the earth.
now i am not saying that the earth is not getting warmer, but to say that man is the cause is rash.
now i am all for finding alternative fuels to replace what we have BUT they should work effectivly and guidelines should not be so drastic that it harms the economy. Global warming has been a big excuse for a lot of stuff that hurts people and the proff is not hear that people have had an inpact, or atleast a large enough of one to justify the harm done to people so far/being proposed. in Austrelia there is a new tax on children because of Global warming, in WA state there is a proposed tax on cars with larger motors to off set there carbon emisions due to Global warming (and yet in the Seattle area we have heavy traffic and a state that is wasting billions of dollors on light rail that only goes 14 miles well that same amount of money could open up lains on the freeways to open up congestion on the freeways).
Global warming is an excuse to tax people and hurt industry for no clear benafit.
yes a car that cost less in gas to run is a good thing for me to have, but that dosn’t mean I should have to have a good gas millage car.
the earth is in a cycle, thats all it is. if i remember right we had Global Cooling back a few years ago that was being blamed on man and polution we were doing. how can the same thing cause two totaly diffrent extreams?
@Cmdr:
@Cmdr:
drugs should be legal.
I agree wholeheartedly!
Sincerely,
Rush Limbaughespecially painkillers
No idea what you are referring too, Tim.
Rush was arested or detained (i can’t remember witch exactly) in Florida about 6 months back for being in posession of a few too many perscription pain killers.