Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Sabrina ravenhrtx@*******.net
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 12:19:21 -0600
but comared to the other lists iam on this one probly does much less
complaining
compared to the other lists who seem to think that with every new
release that need to post 50 msgs on on it stinks... I commend the grid
sec people and the people on the list in general..

Sorry had to send my compliments

but heres a question..concerning armies.. who in the current sr year
has the largest?

__________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Message no. 2
From: dbuehrer@****.org dbuehrer@****.org
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 11:37:55 -0700
Sabrina wrote:
\
\ but heres a question..concerning armies.. who in the current sr year
\ has the largest?

I think the CAS has the biggest military force.



-Graht
--
"Apparently I'm insane. But I'm one of the happy kinds!"
-Wally
Message no. 3
From: Arclight arclight@*********.de
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 22:54:01 +0100
And finally, Graht expressed himself by writing:

<snip>

> I think the CAS has the biggest military force.

Well, Cyberpirates says Japan Imperial State rules
the pacific. Aztlan's forces aren't that small either.
The AGS has territorial forces and the mercenary MET2000
Rapid Reaction Forces. I suppose Russia (or CIS, or what-
ever) will maintain a big army too. Then there is the
UCAS, France, UK, the native american forces, Amazonia,...

arclight
Message no. 4
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 17:07:51 EST
In a message dated 11/16/1999 1:38:23 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
dbuehrer@****.org writes:

> \ but heres a question..concerning armies.. who in the current sr year
> \ has the largest?
>
> I think the CAS has the biggest military force.

I don't believe this is "Canon", but on the Megacorporate Side of things, the
biggest to track military is Saeder-Kruppe. I'm not sure if the
"Governmental/National" Army topic has ever been "officially"
addressed.

-K
[Hoosier Hacker House]
[http://members.aol.com/hhackerh/index.html]
ICQ#-51511837
Message no. 5
From: Arcaist arcaist@*****.de
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 00:19:11 +0100
> I think the CAS has the biggest military force.

Well, again it's a question of how you define "biggest". The number of
soldiers/tanks/aircraft? Naval power? Nuclear potential?

--
(>) Arcaist
WHO'S NEXT ?!

BABGY #101 ::: MMLX ::: www.s-s-r.de
Message no. 6
From: abortion_engine@*******.com abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 18:42:30 -0500
> And finally, Graht expressed himself by writing:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I think the CAS has the biggest military force.
>
> Well, Cyberpirates says Japan Imperial State rules
> the pacific. Aztlan's forces aren't that small either.
> The AGS has territorial forces and the mercenary MET2000
> Rapid Reaction Forces. I suppose Russia (or CIS, or what-
> ever) will maintain a big army too. Then there is the
> UCAS, France, UK, the native american forces, Amazonia,...

The CAS has the force of armored infantry, which is to say tanks. I also
believe they have the largest ground force, period.
Message no. 7
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 00:27:37 EST
In a message dated 11/16/1999 6:51:06 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
abortion_engine@*******.com writes:

>
> The CAS has the force of armored infantry, which is to say tanks. I also
> believe they have the largest ground force, period.

Time to end this little discussion I think. I have asked Jon Szeto and Mike
Mulvihill about this little consideration myself, most specifically about the
MBT's. IF I am remembering clearly, and Jon could clarify, the "Stonewall"
project is a line of crap ... and Mike M. feels the same way. It's kind of a
scam to cover up whatever is really happening...(where did all that govt.
spending go to?)

-K
[Hoosier Hacker House]
[http://members.aol.com/hhackerh/index.html]
ICQ#-51511837
Message no. 8
From: Arclight arclight@*********.de
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 12:10:53 +0100
And finally, Ereskanti expressed himself by writing:

<snip>

> Time to end this little discussion I think. I have asked Jon Szeto and
Mike
> Mulvihill about this little consideration myself, most specifically about
the
> MBT's. IF I am remembering clearly, and Jon could clarify, the
"Stonewall"
> project is a line of crap ... and Mike M. feels the same way. It's kind
of a
> scam to cover up whatever is really happening...(where did all that govt.
> spending go to?)

I don't see why the non-existance of the Stonewall answers the question
which country has the biggest army. Sure, it would be an ace in the sleeve
on
the battlefield, but a strong military force depends on a lot more factors.

arclight
Message no. 9
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 12:18:21 +0100
According to Arcaist, at 0:19 on 17 Nov 99, the word on the street was...

> > I think the CAS has the biggest military force.
>
> Well, again it's a question of how you define "biggest". The number of
> soldiers/tanks/aircraft? Naval power? Nuclear potential?

Army size is generally measured in how many troops, AFVs, ships, aircraft,
etc. you have -- mainly troops. If one country has a half a million
soldiers and another has 300,000, the former is generally said to have the
larger army. That doesn't mean it will win a war with the other country,
though -- the question, "Who has the strongest military force?" is much
harder to answer, as it depends on manpower, equipment, motivation, and a
lot of other factors. For example, Iraq had an army about twice (I think)
as large as the coalition against it in the 1991 Gulf War, but it didn't
win. On the other hand the US military at the time of the Vietnam War was
the most modern armed force in the world, but it essentially lost to a
third world army whose only real advantage over the US was that it had
plenty of motivation to fight.

In SR, you have to ask who will be the most willing to fight (for whatever
reason), and who has the resources to maintain a strong military. Those
countries which qualify in both areas will probably be the ones with the
biggest/strongest militaries.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Destiny is a state of mind
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 10
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 12:18:21 +0100
According to abortion_engine@*******.com, at 18:42 on 16 Nov 99, the word
on the street was...

> The CAS has the force of armored infantry, which is to say tanks. I also
> believe they have the largest ground force, period.

Armored infantry != tanks. It means infantry fighting vehicles, which
quickly turn to burning wrecks in a straight-up fight against MBTs.

The fact that the CAS Army is described as such IMHO probably means it is
mainly an infantry force, a bit deficient in tank strength, but trying to
make up for that by mechanizing as much of its infantry as possible.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Destiny is a state of mind
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 11
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 08:43:04 -0500
> > The CAS has the force of armored infantry, which is to say tanks. I also
> > believe they have the largest ground force, period.
>
> Armored infantry != tanks. It means infantry fighting vehicles, which
> quickly turn to burning wrecks in a straight-up fight against MBTs.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. <waves hands randomly> Shut up. I'm a complete idiot.
Infantry, tank, infantry, tank. Two different things. APC, tank, APC, tank.
Still two different things.

Sorry, I was not thinking. It must have been the buttered cat thread that
did me in. :)
___________________________________
I told you this morality of mine would kill us all.
Message no. 12
From: abortion_engine abortion_engine@*******.com
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 08:44:38 -0500
> > The CAS has the force of armored infantry, which is to say tanks. I
also
> > believe they have the largest ground force, period.
>
> Time to end this little discussion I think. I have asked Jon Szeto and
Mike
> Mulvihill about this little consideration myself, most specifically about
the
> MBT's. IF I am remembering clearly, and Jon could clarify, the
"Stonewall"
> project is a line of crap ... and Mike M. feels the same way. It's kind
of a
> scam to cover up whatever is really happening...(where did all that govt.
> spending go to?)

Huh? Where's *that* printed? Is it? Then what is the Stonewall? What's
really happening? Whose idea was this? Come on, K and Jon, details, man!
[Within NDA bounds, of course. :) ]
___________________________________
I told you this morality of mine would kill us all.
Message no. 13
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 09:00:48 -0600
>IF I am remembering clearly, and Jon could clarify, the "Stonewall"
>project is a line of crap ... and Mike M. feels the same way. It's
>kind of a scam to cover up whatever is really happening...(where
>did all that govt. spending go to?)

Where, indeed...? <conspiratorial grin>

Patrick
Message no. 14
From: Patrick Goodman remo@***.net
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 09:07:32 -0600
>> It's kind of a scam to cover up whatever is really happening...
>> (where did all that govt. spending go to?)
>
>Huh? Where's *that* printed? Is it?

Nowhere. Yet. Possibly not ever.

> Then what is the Stonewall?

Good damn question. But consider the name of the project for a moment, and
factor in other meanings for the term "stonewall".

Patrick
Message no. 15
From: Ereskanti@***.com Ereskanti@***.com
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 13:49:00 EST
In a message dated 11/17/1999 6:42:18 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
gurth@******.nl writes:

> On the other hand the US military at the time of the Vietnam War was
> the most modern armed force in the world, but it essentially lost to a
> third world army whose only real advantage over the US was that it had
> plenty of motivation to fight.

Gurth, just one point here. *THIS* is a poor example to draw upon IM, and
many others, O.

-K
[Hoosier Hacker House]
[http://members.aol.com/hhackerh/index.html]
ICQ#-51511837
Message no. 16
From: dghost@****.com dghost@****.com
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 21:00:09 -0800
> In a message dated 11/17/1999 6:42:18 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
> gurth@******.nl writes:
>> On the other hand the US military at the time of the Vietnam War was
>> the most modern armed force in the world, but it essentially lost to a

>> third world army whose only real advantage over the US was that it had

>> plenty of motivation to fight.

I missed the original post so I swiped this from K ... Thanks K :)

Gurth, the US was at a SERIOUS tactical disadvantage. Additionally, IIRC
(which I prolly don't), they were initially unprepared for fighting in
those conditions. Even so, the US did fairly to decently well. Had the
war been fought in "neutral" terrain (ie, the inhabitants, if any are not
aligned to either side, and neither side is entrenched), the US would
have won rather decisively.

--
D. Ghost
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.
-Groucho Marx

___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
Message no. 17
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 12:36:35 +0100
According to dghost@****.com, at 21:00 on 17 Nov 99, the word on the
street was...

> >> On the other hand the US military at the time of the Vietnam War was
> >> the most modern armed force in the world, but it essentially lost to a
> >> third world army whose only real advantage over the US was that it had
> >> plenty of motivation to fight.
>
> I missed the original post so I swiped this from K ... Thanks K :)
>
> Gurth, the US was at a SERIOUS tactical disadvantage.

Yes, they were. They put themselves there, to be precise. (Ever seen
Platoon? Sgt. Barnes' comment about politicians in Washington basically
sums it up.)

> Even so, the US did fairly to decently well. Had the war been fought in
> "neutral" terrain (ie, the inhabitants, if any are not aligned to either
> side, and neither side is entrenched), the US would have won rather
> decisively.

Show me one war that was fought on neutral ground where the inhabitants
were not supporting one or both sides...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Destiny is a state of mind
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 18
From: Bira ubiratan@**.homeshopping.com.br
Subject: I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 17:45:23 -0200
On Thu, 18 Nov 1999 12:36:35 +0100
"Gurth" <gurth@******.nl> wrote:

> Show me one war that was fought on neutral ground where the inhabitants
> were not supporting one or both sides...

Specially if one side tended to attack said inhabitants :) .

Bira - SysOp da Shadowland.BR
http://members.xoom.com/slbr
http://www.terravista.pt/Nazare/2729
ICQ# 4055455

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about I know this is a bit OT but i gotta say...and a question, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!