At 3/19/06 04:47 PM, Peregrinus wrote:

At 3/18/06 09:11 AM, wastedwizard wrote: I would like to join

Welcome, wastedwizard. You're stalking me in all my clubs, aren't you?

No why would I do a thing like that? anyway just to check is this for modern warfare or for any wars?

At 3/16/06 12:05 AM, Peregrinus wrote:

Either way, I'm Canadian., We only had a handful of soldiers in Nam...

I read in "Dirty Little Secrets of the Vietnam War" (bad title, interesting concept. Myths and facts sort of thing) that there were about 40,000 American draft dodgers but this number was made up in full by Canadians who volunteered for 'Nam.

Also:

Gunnery_Sergeant, GSgt., requesting permission to join The War Crew.

Yeah, I know, I have a 2nd Lt. bar on my sig. So it's either 2Lt/Ensign or GSgt.

At 3/20/06 08:51 AM, Gunnery_Sergeant wrote: Gunnery_Sergeant, GSgt., requesting permission to join The War Crew.

Post a few more times here and you'll be on the members list

At 3/20/06 08:53 AM, Gunnery_Sergeant wrote: Yeah, I know, I have a 2nd Lt. bar on my sig. So it's either 2Lt/Ensign or GSgt.

It own't be 2/Lt, as that's my rank here. You'll start at the bottom and work your way up the chain :)

I saw MASH (original movie) for the second time yesterday. Damn good movie.

At 3/20/06 10:07 AM, Gunnery_Sergeant wrote: I saw MASH (original movie) for the second time yesterday. Damn good movie.

I never really liked that show i useually watched a war documentry when it was on. I learn more from them then in school.

At 3/20/06 09:58 AM, Peregrinus wrote:

At 3/20/06 08:51 AM, Gunnery_Sergeant wrote: Gunnery_Sergeant, GSgt., requesting permission to join The War Crew.

Post a few more times here and you'll be on the members list

At 3/20/06 08:53 AM, Gunnery_Sergeant wrote: Yeah, I know, I have a 2nd Lt. bar on my sig. So it's either 2Lt/Ensign or GSgt.

It own't be 2/Lt, as that's my rank here. You'll start at the bottom and work your way up the chain :)

He (2nd Lt. Peregrinus) is right about the ranks. You will have to go work your way up the ranks to become a 2nd Lt. Later I'll add the finishing touches of Chapter 1 and add the first 2 paragraphs of Ch. 2.

At 3/19/06 04:57 PM, wastedwizard wrote:

At 3/19/06 04:47 PM, Peregrinus wrote:

At 3/18/06 09:11 AM, wastedwizard wrote: I would like to join

Welcome, wastedwizard. You're stalking me in all my clubs, aren't you?

No why would I do a thing like that? anyway just to check is this for modern warfare or for any wars?

This crew is about any wars current or old styles. From the well known to the unknown wars that are not discussed that much.

Here is an updated on the ranks structure:

The War Crew
Officers-
Supreme Commander: GeneralMBison
Generals: RedGlare, Nomader, ChurroNG (last posted here on 1/1/06)
Lieutenant General: seventy-one (last posted here on 1/29/06)
Major General: marchingtyrants (last posted here on 1/13/06)
Brigadier General: brandon_ross (inactive, remove from list?)
Colonel: <none>
Lieutenant Colonel: <none>
Major: <none>
Captain: falcon trigger
Lieutenant: canada_rocker, CrimsonRocker
Second Lieutenant: Peregrinus

Staff Noncommissioned Officers (SNCO)-
Sergeant Major: <none>
Master Sergeant: <none>
First Sergeant: <none>
Staff Sergeant: -Jag-

Noncommissioned Officers (NCO)-
Sergeant: rayzerblayze
Corporal: <none>

Non-Rate Soldiers-
Private First Class: <none>
Private: <none>
Under Radar: wastedwizard, Gunnery_Sergeant

At 3/20/06 07:04 PM, GeneralMBison wrote: Here is an updated on the ranks structure:

Good update, Sir. I think Gunnery_Sergeant is close to being able to have him listed as a non-rate, or even NCO.

Here is something we all can talk about. Today is the 3rd year that the U.S. invades Iraq. How do you feel about the war today? Explain

At 3/20/06 04:56 PM, RedGlare wrote:

At 3/20/06 10:07 AM, Gunnery_Sergeant wrote: I saw MASH (original movie) for the second time yesterday. Damn good movie.

I never really liked that show i useually watched a war documentry when it was on. I learn more from them then in school.

True, the history channel (or equivalent) does provide lots of excellent programming. Ever heard of BAT-21? Famous rescue. I watched a documentary about the Air Force PJs and this story happened to come up. Very interesting.

At 3/20/06 07:29 PM, GeneralMBison wrote: Here is something we all can talk about. Today is the 3rd year that the U.S. invades Iraq. How do you feel about the war today? Explain

While I realize that it was mismanaged and silly to go in on the grounds of WMDs, I recognize that removing Saddam was a fundamentally good thing. However, a few things bother me.

Such as- there not being enough American and allied soldiers in Iraq and HMMWVs used as opposed to combat-capable vehicles, namely the M113s.

Speaking of light vehicles, what do you guys think of the Stryker?

At 3/20/06 08:03 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote: True, the history channel (or equivalent) does provide lots of excellent programming. Ever heard of BAT-21?

Good Movie. I saw it maybe a year and a half back.

At 3/20/06 07:29 PM, GeneralMBison wrote: Here is something we all can talk about. Today is the 3rd year that the U.S. invades Iraq. How do you feel about the war today? Explain

Pass

At 3/20/06 08:06 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote: Speaking of light vehicles, what do you guys think of the Stryker?

Meh. Needs a bigger gun and better armor.

Well, about the Stryker, I can provide quite a few sources that discuss its various, ah, "benefits," namely the tires.

http://www.geocities.com/wheelsvstracks/

By the way, I think that the Stryker is a great vehicle. That is, only if it's used behind the front lines. In asymmetrical warfare, like in Iraq and Afghanistan, there are no "front lines." So, use it only at home and in secured bases.

By the way. For anyone who wants a USMC rank insignia (or US Army, Navy, Air Force or Coast Guard officer insignia), here's a website: http://www.rleeermey.com/computer.php (Scroll down to AIM icons and then copy and paste or drag to desktop.)

At 3/20/06 08:15 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote: By the way, I think that the Stryker is a great vehicle. That is, only if it's used behind the front lines. In asymmetrical warfare, like in Iraq and Afghanistan, there are no "front lines." So, use it only at home and in secured bases.

The problem with the Stryker, and in my country, the Light Armoured Vehicle (LAV III) in Afghanistan is that the roads cant handle the size of them. In the last month and a half, about 10 Canadian soldiers have been either Killed or wounded when their LAV III's have rolled over etc.

Yeah, I'd heard about that. Not pleasant at all.

Funny thing:

The Stryker is actually made in Canada.

At 3/20/06 08:43 PM, GSgt_Liberal wrote: The Stryker is actually made in Canada.

Yeah. It's basically the same as the LAV III, except the LAV III is more versatile (i think 8 different possible models)

I don't doubt it.

Today we have a new soldier promoted to his first rank. He is Gunnery_Sergeant. His rank is now Sergeant. Congats to Sgt. Gunnery_Sergeant.

The War Crew
Officers-
Supreme Commander: GeneralMBison
Generals: RedGlare, Nomader, ChurroNG (last posted here on 1/1/06)
Lieutenant General: seventy-one (last posted here on 1/29/06)
Major General: marchingtyrants (last posted here on 1/13/06)
Brigadier General: brandon_ross (inactive, remove from list?)
Colonel: <none>
Lieutenant Colonel: <none>
Major: <none>
Captain: falcon trigger
Lieutenant: canada_rocker, CrimsonRocker
Second Lieutenant: Peregrinus

Staff Noncommissioned Officers (SNCO)-
Sergeant Major: <none>
Master Sergeant: <none>
First Sergeant: <none>
Staff Sergeant: -Jag-

Noncommissioned Officers (NCO)-
Sergeant: rayzerblayze, Gunnery_Sergeant
Corporal: <none>

Non-Rate Soldiers-
Private First Class: <none>
Private: <none>
Under Radar: wastedwizard

At 3/20/06 10:47 PM, GeneralMBison wrote: Today we have a new soldier promoted to his first rank. He is Gunnery_Sergeant. His rank is now Sergeant. Congats to Sgt. Gunnery_Sergeant.

Lol, and to think we just got rid of the Gunnery Sergeant rank...how amusing would that have been...

i think iraq was a bad idea.was it really worh it to invade.

At 3/21/06 12:12 PM, rayzerblayze wrote: i think iraq was a bad idea.was it really worh it to invade.

Its all well and good saying that now but if he had, had weapons of mass destruction we could not take a chance and also he was commiting crimes against his own people.

well i would agree with that.it could have been devestating if weapons were found

At 3/21/06 12:21 PM, rayzerblayze wrote: well i would agree with that.it could have been devestating if weapons were found

Actually, if weapons were found, Iraq wouldn't be the hot issue it is currently. Cause Bush would have been right.

bush being right.thats hard to believe.do toy think the real reason for the invasion was to get the oil or to finish the job his dad started.or did he really care about helping iraq.

At 3/20/06 07:29 PM, GeneralMBison wrote: Here is something we all can talk about. Today is the 3rd year that the U.S. invades Iraq. How do you feel about the war today? Explain

Maybe a bit late, but I'm still throwing my strong opinion on this one.

The press only shows us the bad things - the EMPs going off to the side of the road in Baghdad, as they show it live with their video camera on their balcony.

What are we missing?

We're missing the compassionate things - schools being set up, a new goverment (with elections), houses being built by soldiers, and more.

Although, maybe, the good don't outway the bad, it's still worth noting all the progress that's been made.

General Nomad, out.

At 3/20/06 10:47 PM, GeneralMBison wrote: Today we have a new soldier promoted to his first rank. He is Gunnery_Sergeant. His rank is now Sergeant. Congats to Sgt. Gunnery_Sergeant.

Thanks, sir. But I changed my username: Sgt. GSgt_Liberal

At 3/21/06 12:38 PM, Peregrinus wrote:

At 3/21/06 12:21 PM, rayzerblayze wrote: well i would agree with that.it could have been devestating if weapons were found

Actually, if weapons were found, Iraq wouldn't be the hot issue it is currently. Cause Bush would have been right.

That's true. But intelligence suggested the presence of WMDs. But they weren't there. Lesson: Military intelligence is an oxymoron.

Point being: We should have said that we're invading for human rights reasons. The UN may not have backed it, but more nations would back "human rights" than possible WMDs as a rationale. Afghanistan, however, is where we SHOULD be. And should have stayed until that mess was straightened out.