BF Evo, future weapons
- Thread starter Reaverman
- Start date
Mac V said:
Sort of. Sorry to use this example again but when I was with a media crew (ITV news) during Lebanon they debated every point (including one bloke being accused of having double standards in favour of the Israelis). I think the reason it got such a bashing as a war was that it was obviously not a just war (and the Israelis never help themselves. Clusterbombs being a good example).
As Hiro says the Israelis actually did win, especially good as Hez had been digging in for a couple of years. From what I've heard (and most of this is from tertiary sources so its debateable content) the reason for the casulties were due to the reservists who apparently were completely out of their depth, being used ot police actions not to combined arms warfare. This link is pretty good on the Merkarva in Leb '06: http://www.network54.com/Forum/211833/thread/1168715614/last-1168991159/Assessing+the+performance+of+Merkava+Tanks
Hope that helps all.
The armoured suit by the way rocks! I wants one!
Easy to survive if the head hides out in the Iranian Embessy while his minons get plastered left and right....
Anyway:
China waits patiently for rearmament in 2050
Jon Grevatt Jane's Asia-Pacific Industry Reporter
China will wait until the middle of this century before embarking on a period of "energetic rearmament", a leading East Asian defence expert has claimed.
Ron Huisken, a senior fellow at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University, added that China's short-to-medium term priority would be to focus on economic growth.
"While this is in progress military rearmament will not be a top priority," Huisken added. "They will not let rearmament slip but economic power is their top priority."
Huisken's comments followed the recent publication of China's National Defence White Paper.
He said that the Chinese government is becoming very aware of its military image: "In order to rebuild the Chinese military they have had to make a hugely uncharacteristic decision to play ball with the rest of the world. It is like a race to achieve military status as soon as possible using the old Chinese way, against the need to change internally to be internationally recognised."
Huisken believes that this change in image is part of Beijing's plan to energise rearmament by the middle of this century.
"They are focusing on what they call 'Peace and Development' and this means that they are still waiting before carrying out a programme of energetic rearmament.
Anyway:
China waits patiently for rearmament in 2050
Jon Grevatt Jane's Asia-Pacific Industry Reporter
China will wait until the middle of this century before embarking on a period of "energetic rearmament", a leading East Asian defence expert has claimed.
Ron Huisken, a senior fellow at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University, added that China's short-to-medium term priority would be to focus on economic growth.
"While this is in progress military rearmament will not be a top priority," Huisken added. "They will not let rearmament slip but economic power is their top priority."
Huisken's comments followed the recent publication of China's National Defence White Paper.
He said that the Chinese government is becoming very aware of its military image: "In order to rebuild the Chinese military they have had to make a hugely uncharacteristic decision to play ball with the rest of the world. It is like a race to achieve military status as soon as possible using the old Chinese way, against the need to change internally to be internationally recognised."
Huisken believes that this change in image is part of Beijing's plan to energise rearmament by the middle of this century.
"They are focusing on what they call 'Peace and Development' and this means that they are still waiting before carrying out a programme of energetic rearmament.
I'm sure they did. Trouble is there is a considerable body of opinion that says the opposite. The truth will inevitably come somewhere in between.
This makes interesting reading
http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/060817_isr_hez_lessons.pdf
btw, to get back to a game-related question, how are the characteristics of thermobarics represented in the rules?
They're not, just as of yet. Given that iit's a characteristic of ammunition, like HE and AP rounds, I don't think they'll actually represent it in game. That said, I'd say
XM1040 40mm Thermobaric Grenade (Fired from the M203)
Range: 16" Damage: D10
This weapon causes a –2 penalty to Armour rolls and will roll extra Damage Dice (but only D6+2 with no penalty to Armour rolls) against every model within 3” of the centre of the model its first Damage Dice is allocated to - these extra models need not be in Line of Sight. It may only be fired once per turn, and never as a reaction.
XM1040 40mm Thermobaric Grenade (Fired from the M203)
Range: 16" Damage: D10
This weapon causes a –2 penalty to Armour rolls and will roll extra Damage Dice (but only D6+2 with no penalty to Armour rolls) against every model within 3” of the centre of the model its first Damage Dice is allocated to - these extra models need not be in Line of Sight. It may only be fired once per turn, and never as a reaction.
captainsmirk
Mongoose
Isn't that always the way with guerrila conflicts...
However I think that the international community should have noticed by now that the Israelis really don't care what they think about them any more, that ship sailed a long time ago...
Whether we agree with what the Israelis do doesn't matter, because they don't care, we long ago lost the ability to influence them...
Nick
However I think that the international community should have noticed by now that the Israelis really don't care what they think about them any more, that ship sailed a long time ago...
Whether we agree with what the Israelis do doesn't matter, because they don't care, we long ago lost the ability to influence them...
Nick
captainsmirk
Mongoose
I was talking about the international community at large, which seemed to think that the Israelis were interested in listerning to what they had to say...
As for the UK, I believe one of the main Israeli tanks for most of their history was the Centurion...
As for the US, if they tried pushing the Israelis to far they would loose that influence. Especially as the Israelis are producing increasing amouts of equipment themselves. Note how Bush did absolutly nothing to dissuade the Israelis in Lebanon...
Nick
As for the UK, I believe one of the main Israeli tanks for most of their history was the Centurion...
As for the US, if they tried pushing the Israelis to far they would loose that influence. Especially as the Israelis are producing increasing amouts of equipment themselves. Note how Bush did absolutly nothing to dissuade the Israelis in Lebanon...
Nick
Similar threads
