Posts made by ZimZaxZeo

There seems to be wisdom in each poster’s answer.

Certainly mat is correct that it can be very comforting – and debilitating to your Axis foe – to boast a pair of large inf & rtl stacks to shift around for defense & counterattack… and absolutely Inxduk is on target about monitoring the Axis purchases and determining how to undermine them with the best combination of Soviet inf rtl & arm units… and I also like the determination of Aquarius_1715 to stay mobile: the deployment of your forces is often as vital as your dicerolling!.. meanwhile, Drumstix likes to “keep it simple” with inf until he sees a weakness in the Axis line – and then be prepared to charge through and make Germany’s day miserable with an attack led by armor and rtl…

Guess what: I like FTRs. SOV can barely afford them, but as one poster points out, you start off with a considerable supply of inf – so why not spice things up with some jazzy air power!

Although expensive, FTRs are more maneuverable than tanks – they don’t have to park in territories they help take (in fact they are forbidden to), so they always “live to fight another day” making them less likely than tanks to get eradicated. Plus, they have supreme defensive value! Find a way to add on a FTR here and there – you are bound to lose some, and even though your Allies may supply a few more, you will find they come in very, very handy.

I believe the Play-By-E-Mail system on aaeuropemc.com also uses the 2-or-less rule.
Note that Battleships still offer support fire at 4-or-less in Amphib Assaults.

Har Har – now I sees why they calls you “El Jefe” dude!!

It’s a zany world, but some hombre has to run it, ey?

Cheneyworld - - this is where I head for the MOON!!

(((Speaking of which, has anyone here read the rilly fine novel, “The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress” by Robt. Heinlein? Great stuff, really original, one of the finest from a fine and imaginative (if often didactic) writer.)))

@Deviant:Scripter:

Oh my gosh, you’re seriously under the impression that the upper class doesn’t pay the most taxes in this country? :o

Mr. D:S,
You indeed have a point, although I believe you stretch it a bit too far. The “upper class” – let’s just call them the rich – do pay oceans of income taxes, largely on capital gains. Perhaps the top one percent pays in as much as a third of all income tax dollars collected by the IRS. Indeed, the fact that they pay in so much is the main reason why they stand to benefit far beyond the general wage earner does in the ongoing tax cut offensive: they will get by far the biggest breaks.

My position is that one dollar in taxes – or even 100 dollars in taxes – paid by the rich, is easier for them to bear than one dollar in taxes paid by the poor or the middle classes. I don’t claim that the general layout of the income tax structure is unfair, but the balance of pain has been spreading downwards of late. And those two million job losses in the past two or three years have mainly pushed the lower-rung populations to the edge. The rich tend to have more options.

Anyway, I don’t concede that the rich pay “the most” taxes. It seems to me that the great American middle pays the most, not only in taxes but in fees. And beyond the actual dollars, the middle certainly pays more proportionate to their net worth and household budget!

Good Lord! (not to mention Gee Whiz!) At that rate of fire, coupled with the potency of the shot, this must have indeed unleashed devastation. You are saying that a seasoned crew could fire every three seconds!?

Shades of Patrick O’Brian and Cap’n Lucky Jack Aubrey!

Certainly, Mr. D:S,

There are a variety of interesting public documents available via this website:

http://www.house.gov/reform/min/inves_admin/admin_contracts.htm

The site also features several replies by the Army to this Congressman’s inquiries. Apparently, Secy. Rumsfeld has not yet replied to the letter sent to him (I haven’t checked the website for awhile).

and a google-check shows plenty of news coverage of the Halliburton track record as well…

The pattern is to overbill the Army for projects done on a cost-plus basis, then when caught overbilling, to pay the fine. Typically, the fine is rather modest in comparison to the magnitude of the original contract and the profits. That’s why Halliburton has continued to repeat the same type of overbilling, year in and year out (including the years when Cheney was its CEO).

It seems to me that our government must make a more appropriate response to such law-breaking than to essentially rubberstamp the process. For instance, Halliburton could be placed on probation, or even excluded from the bid process for a set period. Furthermore, the government could disallow the type of cost-plus contracting that encourages a company like Halliburton to bilk the Army. Thing is, there are vested interests within the Pentagon (and now, certainly, the White House). Somehow, they must be getting taken care of by their wink-wink-nod-nod pals in the private sector, because they too are repeatedly approving these contracts.

Let’s see – Do you as Deutschland get +12 for turn zero also?

Umm – I am a Mac-happy dude, so mapview won’t work here.
What I do have is a map with open slots in each territory (which I manually update after each turn, and we can email it back and forth) – guess I got it off of Thrasher’s website awhile back. It’s not too terribly klunky – and it’s color-coded, meaning you can cut & paste the units in their home colors from one territory to another as areas are conquered. Hmm. The units are designated in type only. Would be cool if they were icons instead.

I’ll send ya a sample when I get a few moments. We can post our logs & results and whatnot in a new topic under GAMES forum (assuming other A&AORG types will dig tracking our experiment with your theory).

So, wanna tell my your handle on aaemc? Sounds like you’ll set up the game start over there. Cool.

Certainly gentlemen, this is no defeat – merely a clarification.

If I may add to the above outlines and points of interrelatedness of some of the forms of government, allow me to observe: much of the question has to do with PROPERTY. Should we prefer the government to own more property, or for individuals and non-government entities (corporations, associations, trade unions, cooperatives, etc.) to own more?

It seems to me that the type of government that is seen in the most favorable light around the world these days is some kind of “democratic republic with a human (socialist) face.” Interesting to note, while perusing the various definitions of socialism in the webzone listed above by Mr. Janus, that “socialism” was once read pretty much as equal to communism, with the emphasis on the government owning all – but that today socialism pretty much means that the government provides a certain safety net for the poor, a cushion to the workers against major economic shocks, etc.

None of this makes running an empire any more or less fun, I suppose. But it would be more evil fun to be Ming the Merciless under an absolute monarchy!!!

Si, Señor Jefe,
Cheney knows how to run an oil business, certainly one that thrives on cheating the US Army and all of us taxpayers.
The main original point of this rave is that I don’t trust him to serve in the public interest.
Let him go off and make gazillions for his cronies in petrocorpland, including his Saudi pals and whatnot.

By the way, recent reports point out that the Halliburton deal in Iraq is actually two deals, one for the $500m or so to fix up the Iraq infrastructure, and then an open-ended deal to operate and distribute the goods from the Iraq oil patch: a deal that will indeed be worth $$billions, if it is allowed to stand.

Ah, yes: the famous “fog of war” in its manifestation on the diceboard!

Well Mr. Inxduk,
I shall be ready to go at it in earnest next Monday – we could do the preliminary bid-in to aaemc this week. My dogtag there is JZAM.

I don’t wish to hurt anyone’s pride – and I do think the formulas, logarithms, and constructions are a testament to imagination, persistence, resourcefulness and yes even FUN – but reading through these posts makes me realize how much I LIKE ROLLING DICE!!! YEEEHOOO!!

Anyone think that’s strange??

Mr. Janus,
Due to my lack of a classical education, I have not read Plato’s “Republic” in any detail, however the idea of an enlightened dictator directing the affairs of a republic, through the filter of an elected seante, has been around at least since the fourth century B.C.

Oh, and for real fun, I recommend the fantastic flick “Things To Come” which dates to, oh, say 1930. First of all, it was the “Star Wars” of its day in terms of advancing the level of motion picture special effects (one of its predecessors in that department was of course “Metropolis” by Fritz Lang). But more apt for this discussion, Things To Come projects a post-apocalyptic, war-shattered world where order and justice finally come about by virtue of a dedicated, selfless federation of pilots (read: fledgling technological superpower) that is poised to forge a world government, transcending all past “states” and regional governments.

I would suggest that we are eons away (well, maybe not “eons” I mean eons are like beyond the end of it, man, like billions of years) – so let’s say we are rawthuh distant from a time when local governments would cede their sovereign powers to any world gummint. Sure, the European Union is doing something like this, and regional treaty orgs do exist around the planet, but we already have a world governmental meeting place – lacking the executive that you describe, and lacking the clarity of superior authority on matters of law, rights and enforcement… but a governmental meeting vehicle for all humanity, nevertheless – and it is called the United Nations.

Still, it seems worthy to ponder. And while you do so, give a listen to this catchy tune:::::

“The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield.”
— President Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826).

Subsidiary, shmudsidiary, my man.
D:S, that’s how it is done, dude. Read up on Enron, read up on off-shore corporations, read anything on three-card-monte. Bait and switch, dawg!

If you live in the US, perhaps you’ve received telemarketing and junk mail offers to sell you “We’re Building The Neighborhood by MCI” aka cell phone service. What is MCI? It was one of the original cell phone competitors, launched in the late 1970s. It was absorbed into a wonderful outfit called Worldcom, a superheated dotcom-telecom meteor of a company. Worldcom didn’t need the brand “MCI” anymore.
Whoops! Turns out Worldcom did an Enron. Now it’s bankrupt, sued, blued and tatooed, now it’s being shredded, now its former top execs are being run to ground by the SEC and other fed enforcers. What does it do? END its EXISTENCE and at the same time (marvellouse lawyers!!) CHANGE its NAME to… MCI! Ta-daa! A brand-new shiny smiley cell phone provider! What the 'eck does the hapless consumer know? Sign me up!!
What was MCI last year? A “subsidiary” of Worldcom, gathering dust and mold on the shelf. What is MCI this year? A funnel for cash! A dodge from prosecution and liability! Who is the subsidiary now? The DEFUNCT Worldcom.

Just an example…

Like the prime poster (dubya also gatorade) sez, “same as the old war.”

What is our new mode of war these days? Superclass first-world US force takes on third-world (Iraq) or even fourth-world (Afghanistan) force.
Good job mashing the Taliban, but the followup is crumbly.
Masterful work trashing the Saddam’s Baaths, but winning the peace looks a bit prickly.
Where to next that fits the pattern? Find a place that’s already pitifully screwed up… apply our might… declare victory and an end to hostilities… apply bandaids… scan abroad with haste for the next glorious adventure.

This is no way to run an empire. It is also a cruel way to ruin the morale of our armed forces. Anyone see “Gladiator” – what did the most gifted, loyal and charismatic warrior in the empire really want? To go home to his family and his farm. Who betrayed him? The political rulers, far from the battlefield… which makes me wish McCain would run again for President. None of these military geniuses – Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz – ever served a day in a combat zone. It seems W didn’t even bother to serve out his draft-evading National Guard duty.

So who’s next?

They seem to be attempting a Chile-style (1973) coup d’etat in Iran… stay tuned. But it would be extremely unlikely that we will send in masses of troops. Also doubtful is Syria or, I think, anywhere else in the Middle East. Bush (that is, Karl Rove, his chief campaign advisor) has already shifted gears. Last year he shifted from fighting terrorism to decapitating an Arab state. More recently he has shifted from making war to earning a peace trophy. Please note that his most consistent activity over the past three weeks is collecting huge trunks of dough at pre-election lunches, speeches and dinners. It started as soon as he parked his Roger Ramjet stage prop on that aircraft carrier.

I agree with several posters who note that we are too close to the active electoral campaigning for a shooting war – unless used with skillful timing in late summer 2004 as a distraction from the damn hit-and-run sniping against our troops that we seem destined to endure in Iraq for a long while to come.

Things in Iran could move through several sharp-turn phases over the next 12 months. At such a juncture when the government there has changed hands, is on shaky ground, but remains defiant on making and owning nuclear power and/or weapons, perhaps then we could see US-led military intervention there (summer 2004).

In the meantime, however, the White House is focused, as it must be, on plans to destroy the prospects of several would-be world leaders, by the name of Kerry, Lieberman, et al. Phase One of this “war” will be concluded by spring 2004.

Hey – it’s term limits in spades, baby. The 22nd amendment to the Constitution, I believe. If Bush could be elected over and over again, then maybe he wouldn’t be in such a hurry to shift gears. Maybe our campaign to root out the baddest guys across the Islamic crescent from Morocco to Pakistan would be more methodical, allowing for beneficial alliances, timely consolidation, logical progression, clear and unifying principles, and new benign structures of stability and prevention. Maybe. But it ain’t.

By the way, Mr. Janus:

Would you please post a quick working definition of “socialism” and maybe give us an idea of how it would compare & contrast with your global republican empire?

Mr. bossk,

I would suggest that a “pure democracy” – by which we mean direct rule of the people – can only exist on Gilligan’s Island, or some other very-low-population enclave.

Representative democracy, where mass votes are funneled into some type of legislature, isn’t referred to as democracy, but as a republic – correct?

So, as you mentioned, we have a democratic republic as our form of government in the U.S.

Hi Mr. EJ,

1. Mr. Cheney (reluctantly, and at the urging of his party stalwarts) gave up the $36m (your figure; I haven’t checked) or whatever amount – in order to trade up! Surely the argument was put before him that, as VP, he could stand to make 1,000 times that much, ultimately. He was able to see that the $36m was a down payment on future influence, riches, power.

2. Right – he mastered his natural urge to realize all available riches in the moment. He instead opted for deferred gratification.

3. No argument here, either. Nobody takes the White House job for the salary.

4. Expect him to never step down. Cheney is not a steppin-down kinda guy. He will serve out 2004, and if re-elected will serve until 2008. Indeed, I predict he will contest Bill Frist for the presidential nomination in 2008 (check back here in five years if you’d care to discuss the finer points).

I don’t know about your Democrat moles within Halliburton – but I would direct anyone interested in the issue to examine some of the documents in the public record, compiled by the nebbishy-looking, bow-tie-festooned (D-Cal) Rep. Waxman:

http://www.house.gov/reform/min/inves_admin/admin_contracts.htm

This website includes a variety of links to the federal government’s trail of skirmishes with Halliburton, and the letter on the subject that Waxman authored to Secy. Rumsfeld recently.

I plunked in my vote for “Democracy” because you didn’t have a slot for “Anarcho-Syndicalist Commune” ((see the “Bloody Peasant!” sketch, aka Scene 3 in <<monty python=“” &=“” the=“” holy=“” grail=“”>>)) and also because I am willing to give Thomas Jefferson the benefit of the doubt…!</monty>