LOD...chill man...by no means was I inferring that Sweden's contribution was a 'token effort'. Of course I acknowledge country size, population, ect...in comparison to size and scope of military forces. My statement was.."Token efforts (ie. personnel, equipment, ect.) by various countries...", I wasn't speaking of Sweden in particular there.

Many times, in recent joint military actions, however, the contributions made by 'many' countries reminds me of an old saying some of us military guys used to describe those not on the front lines..."in the rear with the gear", that's where many countries 'chose' to be.

Yes, each and every contribution is valuable, no matter how small or what capacity....but usually, when it comes to slinging lead, it's the US soldier or sailor that's out in front.

But your statement, "'m pretty sure we have payed more/capita to the UN than you ever did..", could perhaps use some research to prove correct.

I'm actually endorsing the behavior of Sweden (during our lifetime) to be copied by the US. I'm sick of this 'new world order crap'....it doesn't work and it never will...especially when you consider the Muslim peoples.

Having multi-cultures within one country is not a successful strategy....a country will never have all peoples of the 'same mind', but that's the goal and that's history....when there's too much division and clashes of values and morals, the decline is guaranteed.

A house (or country) divided will fall.


geography.about.com/od/politicalgeography/a/unmembercountries.htm

globalsolutions.org/united-nations/funding

www.foxnews.com/world/2009/09/17/budget-believe-billion/

Last Edited : Thursday, 31 March 2011 - 10:01

RE: 20 game campaign - 5 to go ! 5 to go ! 5 to go ! I was steamrollered so bad the last one I was in, I've still got tread marks down my back ! Wait. Steamrollers. No treads. Anyway , you all get the idea. Feed my masochistic streak - join,join,join ! Go and register NOW !!!!!!!!

RE: Camp 21743 - We need 5 more upstanding ( or not ) WOL citizens to get this game off the ground . Slugs and Low Life are welcome ( I need the company ) ! This should be a game where NAPsters are woosies . No holds barred ! Refer to the game terrain as the " Cage of Doom "! ... beginning to sound like the announcer for one of those trashy wrestling matches my son watches . Do other countries have( or should I say are afflicted by ) " professional wrestling " ?

Yes the US pays 22% of the UN budget, Sweden 1%, so we pay more/capita, as I suspected The annual cost per person in the world is about $4. Not very much imo.

Last Edited : Thursday, 31 March 2011 - 13:20

yes trots we are inflicted with the American style wtestling ,i dont know why i call americanised ,i think it's because there's alot more vocals ,tattoos long hair and tantrums ,,,,no thats not true ,,,,i'm just trying to compare what i see now in Britain and what i used to watch (with my nan) in the 1970's .but it still had the hair,vocals etc .. . it must just be more enjoyable when your under the age of 8 or over the age of 80 . lol

Actually, all countries contributions are calculated on the per capital income of their citizens (the goal being that everyone pays an equal share).
I seem to remember, from quickly reviewing some of the data, the US share would be 26%, but there was some type of waiver, lowering it to the 22%, you've quoted (making your statement correct IF no other waivers exist).

My opinion (and many others on this side of the pond) believe it's wasted money....sure we can find some good things done or accomplished by the funding, but reviewing the entire picture, employees, decisions, history...ect..., there's a ton of waste and abuse...making the UN now (in many opinions) a failed organization.

I would be extremely happy to see the US withdraw our contribution and participation. I nor (most US citizens), I suspect, (especially military folks) would like to see more infringements on a individual country's rights....the current trend is towards a 'world' government...and what organization is already in place to fill that slot?

Last Edited : Thursday, 31 March 2011 - 15:26

I support the idea of the UN. The world is composed of self-seeking nations and needs a body that can deliberate among them, imperfect as it may be. I'd also approve of a UN backed force that could be used in place of individual nations deciding to control despots with arms.

You may say I'm a dreamer...

I doubt you could find any bigger organization consisting of humans to be flawless and without corruption.
Would you really rather be outside looking in as countries like Russia and China dictate the new world order?
The UN may not be perfect but it's the best we have. If you want it to become better the way to change it is from within.

Last Edited : Thursday, 31 March 2011 - 16:42

I think we all know the reason U.N was created....
for those that dont -after the world war II and Hitlers antics ,we all decided we never wanted to see a repeat of the atrocities (spelling) that occured.

I'm not sure of how NATO was created but i'd be interested to hear views . just American and europe treaty ?? i dont know right now.

All I can say is There is an almighty hand that grips the worlds' resources .Now we can go on in depth on this subject, but the way i feel ,the resources and indiginous tribes are treated more recpectively and humanely than they were , say 30 years ago .,high profile cases more so,protests,, etc. Thats not to say it cant improve on a massive scale.

Libya is obviously high profile and rich in resources ,, the way i see it is As long as this wealth and money isn't abused by Gadaffi. Abused i mean the recent atrocities etc .

Theres nothing to say that Libya cant do the honest thing , earn an honest wage ,people can live comfortably, blah blah ...

So it's Tell Gadaffi to comply or go into all out war with him and we'll suffer repocussions long after for it ..as with previous events.
Gadaffis' got the choice ,'just dont kill all your people' ..
But everyone one is walking on eggshells ..Although France dived in there pretty quick.

I think the French were very concerned that Libya was a massive threat. ,and i'm not surprised being across the sea .
everyone else is prittle prattling around causing anger allround , and 'intending' on shoving a big pile of rocket launchers in the arms of the rebels ,and let them get the blood on their hands and do the dirty work ...
They just need to train them ,which appears a problem atm
as news reports i've seen today..


Trotsky In the 1970's we had 'big daddy' and 'giant hay stacks' ,,,the costumes were much more basic.. I'd like to see the 'Nacho Libre' stuff ,,,is it spanish or brazilian or both ? or the cartoon version my kidz watch 'El Tigre' ...
Mexico I beleive ,,,that looks a right laugh

Last Edited : Thursday, 31 March 2011 - 17:27

Yes, Mog....it is just a dream....
Just look at Iran....what has the 'community of world nations' accomplished there?
How many nations currently have dictators and abuse their citizens? How many....it's not just Libya, right?
So...tell me, what has the world done to correct that?
Has the UN solved all those atrocities?

Yes, it's a great thought, dream, vision...whatever term you wish to use....but it's not reality....

No serious acts happen until the trouble is on their own doorstep....then when blood is required to be shed....when even the most liberal realizes words carry no power....then the will to actually force will materialize.....it's coming, it won't be very long until the lines are drawn again and everyone will chose sides....and yes, the blood will flow.....we're seeing the start now.

The UN may have had a big impact on Iran. Who knows what might have been if there had been no UN? The democratization of a country isn't a fast fix process. It never was anywhere. Took us in western europe at least 50 years, and a world war, from when the ideas of socialism started to get equal vote for all for example. Why do you expect it to happen in a short time in countries who still live in 19th century circumstances?
Also we have the liberals to deal with, who wants to turn the process backwards by giving more power to the already rich while starving the poor.

Last Edited : Thursday, 31 March 2011 - 18:36

Sugarleo, I realize the UN isn't what a rational peaceful person might wish for but it's the best we've done to try to stop wars. I know some wars can't be stopped, it is humanity's shame. Force will continue to be used in some situations. The less force used, the better.

Without dreams and dreamers though we might as well just give up and start murdering each other for that last can of beans. Giving up on peaceful solutions is no answer, even if they won't always work. Talking is always better than fighting.

Now, pass the doobie, you're bogarting, man!

How'd you know, Mog?

No, guyz...being ex-military...you never wish for war and of course, like in the smallest disagreement between two people or two countries with 200 million...talks are always the best and first thing to do.

But that's the point....since the end of WWII....when a country or leader or faction got outa hand...did talking or UN actions stop it? How many UN resolutions were enacted against Saddam Hussein? What did it take to end his/Iraq's actions or aspirations? Force....ultimately...that's what it always takes....

Saying the UN is the best we've got...is just showing the will is not there yet to do what needs or requires to be done. As always...we try to delay what, in the end, must happen.....all that is accomplished is usually making the solution more dangerous and more costly, than simply taking the problem/country/dictator on when the danger/risk is first identified.

And LOD, my friend, really? UN's impact on Iran?...the impact the UN 'gave' to Iran was providing a pedestal for Ahmadinejad to spew his bile.

Look about....Turkey now desires a 'friendlier' relationship with Iran...What do you think Egypt's attitude will now be with Iran as well....we already know Syria and Lebanon's...Palestine?...looks like the beginnings of a coalition to me (can we all say 'gangbang'?)...I know I don't have a crystal ball here...but the 'writings on the wall'.

That's the world's problem....no one wants to 'see' the truth....keep turning the other cheek to the play ground bully and what happens?...you get pushed around more...(hopefully some of you saw the recent video of the two boys from Australia)...but finally stand up and put the bully down and the onslaught ends....yeah, we want to think we're all more civilized than previous generations, right?...we're not...muscle, blood and guts are still required resources...in our game...and in our world.

Congrats Harley for winning Potm

rex

hmm??

Last Edited : Saturday, 2 April 2011 - 20:48

Wow
talking about other games (this one is just a disk game(i.e. not an online competitor game));
any of you ever try that old *"Barbarian Invasion"* from the *"Rome Total War"* collection?

My computer finally allowed me to reinstall it after some problems I had had with it,
but wow I finally played as the Western Roman Empire, got it turning a large enough profit to at least retrain troops (i.e. archers against the Samatians, Vandals, Goths and now even the Huns); I've even succeeded to cause them to run away from two of my walled cities and recaptured one that they defeated.

However,
now that I've reached a stage where I might start turning my attention to improving my cities, the few that have revolted seem to have been given a special edge to be able to resist recapture, (that is, beating my generals with their generals and beating my peasants and higher level armies with peasant armies).

That just turns me off that the game tries to adhere to history by getting unrealistic instead of allowing me to rewrite history.
Any of you ever try that *"Barbarian Invasion"* as the Western Roman Empire at medium difficulty level?

Something else though is that I finally learned how to stack the armies so that they're more like a heavy tank in action instead of a flimsy daddy long legs.

rex

Last Edited : Monday, 11 April 2011 - 14:59

sounds good rex ,might have to give that a go

It's pretty frustrating ...
had the game several years (wasn't cheap back then either)
and now finally got to 384 AD without being buried in debt.
The sad part though is that when you try everything possible with available gold to pacify the populace from rebellion, the only thing that works to get them back to a happy enough state to turn a descent tax profit is extermination.

rex

Sounds like it sort of parallels the historical Byzantine Emperor Justinian . I'll have to check that game out.

Well I just threw out a whole other post about it though because it is another game and it does take time away from playing this game
and believe it or not I am enjoying playing that old classic 2005 game against my old adversary.

Suffice it to say that you can play as one of ten peoples and the Byzantines (eastern Roman Empire) are one of them,
but the toughest to play are the Romans (western Roman Empire).

rex