|
FAUXTON posted:
 Vaccination rates (bacterial meningitis) for 2 year olds 
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 07:54
|
|
Calvinists are still holier-than-thou dicks, as in they literally believe a finite number of people are chosen for salvation and if anyone somehow loses faith it means they never were a holy person to begin with.
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Edit: And these sorts of things were circulated in the same way; this letter shows up in 1586 in someone else's treatise about why holy water works. Everyone's collecting anecdotes (or printing satirical woodcuts) that prove the correctness of their religion and the complete poo poo-eating moral and intellectual bankruptcy of their enemies. Turns out that if you invent widespread literacy, people never shut the hell up. My absolute favourite thing about everything you study is how there were so many ordinary people shouting their opinions into eternity, and you read whichever writings happened to survive. I'd love to have a conversation with an open-minded person from that era and talk about the ways life changes and stays the same in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 08:09
|
|
|
Yeah this. Also: "Look! Smartphones! I created these because I am a loving wizard of electricity - nah totally loving with ya!" and similar technological pranks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 08:14
|
|
|
I really wish I could hang out with the people I study, but I don't think I could drink that much and live. Chamale posted:My absolute favourite thing about everything you study is how there were so many ordinary people shouting their opinions into eternity... http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22766029 He may have been one of the first people to have been into fashion as such; not just interested in looking good but interested in being interested in looking good, if you will. He also includes two nudes of himself (age of 29), to document that he had gained weight. Slavvy posted:Yeah this. Also: "Look! Smartphones! I created these because I am a loving wizard of electricity - nah totally loving with ya!" and similar technological pranks. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 08:51 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 08:33
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:"This technology allows you to call a dude a poo poo eating dog's oval office from a distance." They'd go from The Gods Must Be Crazy style bafflement to spamming Goatse in about five minutes. Thirty Years' War mercenaries were the original GBS. Also my other favourite thing is that hedgehog flag, I'm seriously considering getting a pillow or something with this design. What book is it from again? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 08:52
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Also my other favourite thing is that hedgehog flag, I'm seriously considering getting a pillow or something with this design. What book is it from again?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 08:55
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Dreißigjährigen The German language is a beautiful disaster. Also, thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 09:01
|
|
|
Chamale posted:The German language is a beautiful disaster. Also, thank you. German language is the perfect shouting/barking orders language. A joke I came up when reading Horrrible Histories books: a normal dog goes "woof woof", a German dog goes "waufenzie, waunfenzie woof woof" Man, Horrible Histories, probably was what got me into history Right, now, I probably have stupid questions: 1. Tell me about the Russian active defense system on tanks: if those fuckers had it in Afghanistan, why didn't they use it more often afterwards and why are Amrikki so slow in adopting it? 2. If Bradley has suffered mission creep that left it a strange mongrel, why are other IFVs not gathering similar shame? Was British Warrior, say, designed as it is know and it all went smooth? 3. Reading Flames of War Africa book I always see "yeah, these colonials are badass, but Jesus, did British leadership hosed them up". Was British leadership pre-Montgomery that bad, and why, and did any of them pay for their shitness? 4. What can you tell me about Goums, Ghurkhas and Maoris in WWII?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 09:22
|
|
|
JcDent posted:1. Tell me about the Russian active defense system on tanks: if those fuckers had it in Afghanistan, why didn't they use it more often afterwards and why are Amrikki so slow in adopting it? The original Drozd system deployed in Afghanistan wasn't astoundingly effective, on the balance. You basically had to be pointing the turret at/near the incoming projectile, and even then it basically fired a frag round with a proximity fuze so it was a hazard to any infantry nearby. It wasn't great at covering in the vertical, either, so popping out of concealment above and/or to the side of a tank (such as from a roof in Grozny  ) would foil it. They improved it over time and now it's called Arena. The US didn't really have a need for something like that because we weren't rolling tanks into asymmetric warfare until 2001. Between that and whenever Raytheon got their poo poo together we were probably buying Israeli-made systems which were way more fully developed, not to mention better-tested since Israelis love sending AFVs into urban areas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 10:38
|
|
|
JcDent posted:3. Reading Flames of War Africa book I always see "yeah, these colonials are badass, but Jesus, did British leadership hosed them up". Was British leadership pre-Montgomery that bad, and why, and did any of them pay for their shitness? The colonials are nowhere near as impressive in the Second World War as they were in the First, oddly enough - something worth a study, I think. Blaming the British army's problems solely on its leadership is really simplifying the case. Like pretty much every other aspect of their war effort early on, Britain was paying the piper in the desert for a decade of pre-war neglect. They're understaffed, underequipped, and split amongst way too many threatened and potentially threatened fronts. Yes, some of their desert leaders are bad, but some of them are good, too. But early on they lack air superiority, and also have understaffed sigint, mediocre tanks (though it's possible to overstate this: the issues are more with reliability than anything else), an at-times crippling AT-gun shortage, and--what keeps killing them--absolutely wretched all-arms coordination. Montgomery comes in at the right time to take advantage of enormous improvements throughout the whole army that have been in progress since the war began, combined with a distinct material advantage. In that regard, a lot of his work had already been done for him, not by Wavell and Auchinleck (we tend to get way too big-picture in Desert Campaign discussion and attribute everything to each sides' respective commanders), but by the people who at last managed to get the 6 pounder out in sufficient quantity so that the 25 pounder wasn't forced to switch away from its main role to do a half-assed job at being an AT gun; the people who at last built a large and effective sigint organization that finally handled Ultra and other intel sources rapidly instead of sitting on the info until it was obsolete; the deals that got sufficient Shermans out to the front; the people that established air superiority; those that interpreted and disseminated German doctrine, so that the British better understood what they were up against and how best to counter it, etc. etc. Montgomery gets a lot of flack, too: his failure to pursue Rommel after 2nd El-Alamein is a constant source of complaints (and to some degree that's fair). But, it's hard to read about a year and a half of Eighth Army's continual failures to win the sort of free-wheeling engagement that the Germans do so well, and then wonder why Montgomery isn't looking to take his tired army on a gently caress-it-and-charge all-out pursuit of the Afrika Korps. You can't know about what happened at Gazala and not be wary of "having the Krauts right where we want them." The Brits had a tightly leashed organization that didn't respond anywhere near as well to battlefield chaos as did the German structures. Their key to victory was making the Germans fight the sort of fixed pounding match that the British have always done so well at. Monty understanding this was significant: knowing your own army's weak spots is an oft-overlooked skill. Xotl fucked around with this message at 12:10 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 10:50
|
|
|
JcDent posted:1. Tell me about the Russian active defense system on tanks: if those fuckers had it in Afghanistan, why didn't they use it more often afterwards and why are Amrikki so slow in adopting it? IIRC, the Russians had two systems in active service at the time, but neither was used in Afghanistan because Drohzd was exclusively used by the soviet marines and Arena was almost exclusively installed on command tanks in their Cat A frontline units. The only Cat A units they ever sent into Afghanistan were a couple VDV and Spetsnaz units, none of which had their own MBTs. quote:2. If Bradley has suffered mission creep that left it a strange mongrel, why are other IFVs not gathering similar shame? Was British Warrior, say, designed as it is know and it all went smooth? About the only other contemporary NATO IFV that tried to have its own ATGM capability that I can think of was the Marder and that's a man-portable Milan launcher you can slot into an external port on the turret - and the entire doctrine of the Panzergrenadiers was built around small squads that wouldn't try to split up into fireteams because their IFV was the second fireteam of the squad. None of that splitting your squad into several transports because someone designed the new transport with less capacity stuff there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 11:17
|
|
|
As we're speaking about heretics (that is to say, Calvinists), it's worth mentioning that a lot of early-mid medieval heresy was poo poo-scary from a milhist perspective, particularly the stuff going on in Eastern Europe. People were loving poo poo-scared of Hussites and Lollards. Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laager Disinterested fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 12:43
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:I got the mental image of wolves immediately body slamming themselves into a pit as soon as a single drop of holy water touched the bottom. It's just that good! He either sprinkled holy water on the pits, or steak. Could go either way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 13:21
|
|
|
100 Years Ago Today, we're talking about Mafia! No, not the Cosa Nostra, the small island ten miles off the coast of Tanzania. Alex Letyford has a bad day, Enver Pasha runs away, and on Page 5 of the paper, President Poincare prohibits the provision of psychoactive plonk to patriotic poilus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:100 Years Ago I liked the mortar and pestle joke in the last one. Just wanted you to know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
Magni posted:IIRC, the Russians had two systems in active service at the time, but neither was used in Afghanistan because Drohzd was exclusively used by the soviet marines and Arena was almost exclusively installed on command tanks in their Cat A frontline units. The only Cat A units they ever sent into Afghanistan were a couple VDV and Spetsnaz units, none of which had their own MBTs. My understanding, and I can't find the reference at the moment, was of the few companies of tanks that they did live field trials with the system was prone to false positives and on one occasion killed some infantry and disabled another nearby tank and was promptly removed from service in field units.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
Murgos posted:My understanding, and I can't find the reference at the moment, was of the few companies of tanks that they did live field trials with the system was prone to false positives and on one occasion killed some infantry and disabled another nearby tank and was promptly removed from service in field units. Could be. Drozhd was kind of a one-trick pony. You wanted a couple tanks with it at the head of a big fuckoff tank column about to frontally smash right into an opposing force capable of throwing a poo poo load of ATGMs your way. An Afghanistan-style guerilla fight wasn't exactly what it was designed for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
You would think that an active missile defence system that only (or at least heavily) focused on the space above a tank would be pretty useful, since it somewhat limits the danger to friendly infantry while at the same time being able to deal with attacks from the top which are pretty common these days, either from top attack munitions like Javelin or rockets from the tops of buildings.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Problem: you now have a hungry bear next to you.  FAUXTON posted:
HEY GAL posted:This Jesuit had to spend 24 hours with a Calvinist: first you'll be shocked, then you'll be inspired. My school days were awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
JcDent posted:2. If Bradley has suffered mission creep that left it a strange mongrel, why are other IFVs not gathering similar shame? Was British Warrior, say, designed as it is know and it all went smooth? The Bradley's development really wasn't as troubled as the internet would have you think. It is just a program everyone is familiar with because it was the subject of a movie. The real story is...a lot less interesting. The MBT-70 project (which WAS a real abortion of a thing and should be widely mocked) produced an early IFV prototype that was just as bad if not worse than the MBT-70 was. It looks like the Bradley's fat retarded cousin which it basically was. The actual Bradley program didn't really kick off until 1972, and it was about this time that ATGMs emerged as the new cool thing so they put the TOW launcher on it. The thing was finalized by 1979 which in modern terms is actually a really short development timeline, and the vehicle itself has been pretty excellent throughout its service life. Whatever the issues were with its development the concept was pretty fundamentally sound, as evidenced by the fact that practically all modern IFVs mimic the Bradley pretty strongly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Whatever the issues were with its development the concept was pretty fundamentally sound, as evidenced by the fact that practically all modern IFVs mimic the Bradley pretty strongly. Which ones? The IFV category is based on Soviet BMP, and Bradley mimicked that down to being amphibious (thanks to a floatation screen akin to Sherman DDs), having firing ports (now welded shut) and carrying an external ATGM launcher (a thing since then dropped even by BMP-3 in favour of gun barrel launched ATGM).
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
And BMP's are more or less designed to be a fighting platform for infantry in the event that the battlefield environment they are fighting in is an irradiated post-nuclear wasteland.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
If you were to be teleported back in time prior to 1800 where and when would you go if you were aiming for a truly peaceful period and place and period to live the rest of your life in? (And if you survived you could come back right where you left off so you have incentive to live). So far I've determined this was 11th century Japan, maybe 14th century Mongolia right after the Mongols finish their conquests and it seems that Scandinavia was pretty peaceful for the most part once they got over they got over their viking phase. The America's don't seem safe at any time period.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:If you were to be teleported back in time prior to 1800 where and when would you go if you were aiming for a truly peaceful period and place and period to live the rest of your life in? Western world, as close to 1800 as possible. Wars aren't as bad as the lack of modern(ish) medicine is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:52
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:If you were to be teleported back in time prior to 1800 where and when would you go if you were aiming for a truly peaceful period and place and period to live the rest of your life in? Class is a bigger factor than time or place most of the time in determining who gets it the best, it depends if I get a say in that. I'd rather be an average person in a place where the average person was not a subsistence farmer (which is pretty loving hard to find pre-1800).
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:it seems that Scandinavia was pretty peaceful for the most part once they got over they got over their viking phase. No, that period is pretty much the George RR Martin back catalog.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Which ones? The IFV category is based on Soviet BMP, and Bradley mimicked that down to being amphibious (thanks to a floatation screen akin to Sherman DDs), having firing ports (now welded shut) and carrying an external ATGM launcher (a thing since then dropped even by BMP-3 in favour of gun barrel launched ATGM). Defining the Bradley as a tracked vehicle, roughly 30 tons, with a turret-mounted autocannon and some type of ATGM capability: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puma_(IFV) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCOD_AFV http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Vehicle_90 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhay_IFV http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dardo_IFV You're arguably correct in saying that the BMP was the first successful IFV but it is really in a different class capability-wise (and weight-wise) than these are. bewbies fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Class is a bigger factor than time or place most of the time in determining who gets it the best, it depends if I get a say in that. I'd rather be an average person in a place where the average person was not a subsistence farmer (which is pretty loving hard to find pre-1800). I imagine if you had time to prepare and "you" was defined as the idealized version of you in terms of your persuasive abilities and ability to "Make stuff" I imagine you'd have some choice in that just as a result of your abilities; albeit it'd take some luck. Such as finding a village that would accept you and not drive you off as being a strange foreign weirdo. I imagine being a craftsman would be achievable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Imperial China had several long periods in which it was pretty secure and technologically more advanced than pretty much everyone else. Assuming you are teleported back as a modern person (and did some studying before hand!), then you are likely well equipped to do decently at the civil service exam and get a good place as a local administrator, hopefully steering clear of court intrigue. So that might be the best. A lot of other places tend to be reliant on family connections to not end up as a peasant like 90% of the population. 11th century Japan might be good for the aristocratic families, but for the 99% it was an age of grinding poverty, declining food availability and rampant crime. Even if you think you want to be a craftsman, you can't be if you can't afford tools, and the food and time to train. Normal people rise to that sort of position through apprenticeship. Fangz fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
May as well just be in England or the United States in 1799 then.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Magni posted:About the only other contemporary NATO IFV that tried to have its own ATGM capability that I can think of was the Marder and that's a man-portable Milan launcher you can slot into an external port on the turret - and the entire doctrine of the Panzergrenadiers was built around small squads that wouldn't try to split up into fireteams because their IFV was the second fireteam of the squad. None of that splitting your squad into several transports because someone designed the new transport with less capacity stuff there. IIRC the drive to organically integrate the Marder into the squad with its own dismounts was, whether by push or pull, the result of it carrying less people than the old Panzergrenadiere in HS.30 (lang), M113, or Jäger(grenadiere, per Heeresstruktur III) in M113. At least when the original design specifications were written up they still expected to get into the fight with a full squad of infantry per vehicle, but alas. Also, I think that after 1980 the new, fourth, mobilisable company in every PzGrenBtl of the PzGrenBrig (hahahaha eat my German abbreviations!!!) still had their original-sized squads riding in M113s. Nenonen posted:Which ones? The IFV category is based on Soviet BMP, and Bradley mimicked that down to being amphibious (thanks to a floatation screen akin to Sherman DDs), having firing ports (now welded shut) and carrying an external ATGM launcher (a thing since then dropped even by BMP-3 in favour of gun barrel launched ATGM). Plus, the Bradley's rough contemporaries were AIFV (let's not forget the domestic, low-cost alternative shall we), Warrior, and CV90; some pretty major differences there I'd say. If there even was a big influence coming from US IFV design it'd have been a 1990s+ affair. Sooo, which vehicles then indeed. e: bewbies posted:Defining the Bradley as a tracked vehicle, roughly 30 tons, with a turret-mounted autocannon and some type of ATGM capability: I'm sorry to say that it looks like you're putting the cart before the horse here, with not much more than a cursory glance at Wikipedia, inspired by an arbitrary set of defining characteristics. Koesj fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
Koesj posted:I'm sorry to say that it looks like you're putting the cart before the horse here, with not much more than a cursory glance at Wikipedia, inspired by an arbitrary set of defining characteristics. Actually this stuff (specifically survivability and strategic mobility analyses) is what I do for a living, I just provided the wiki links for convenience. The characteristics are anything but arbitrary, they're kind of the defining elements of the capability. If you disagree with my opinion I'm very curious to hear why.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:May as well just be in England or the United States in 1799 then. Well, there's the war of 1812 and Britain is in the middle of the Napoleonic wars. I thought we wanted peaceful? Most people in the US were still subsistence farmers at the turn of the century, and all white men in the US don't even get the vote until the late 1820s. Of course, the real HARD MODE version of this question is: what if you were a woman? In which case, ... I have no clue. Fangz fucked around with this message at 18:29 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Actually this stuff (specifically survivability and strategic mobility analyses) is what I do for a living, I just provided the wiki links for convenience. The characteristics are anything but arbitrary, they're kind of the defining elements of the capability. If you disagree with my opinion I'm very curious to hear why. I don't disagree with your opinion, but it did take me a bit to work out your meaning when you said "Defining the Bradley as roughly 30 tons, with autocannon turret and ATGM capability, etc.", as being the defining characteristics that the Bradley laid out for future IFV types. Perhaps you're being a little bit too brief.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
If your one and only criteria was "peacefulness," without any other considerations regarding quality of life, finding one of the more obscure and out-of-the-way uninhabited islands in the Pacific with enough fertile soil to scratch out a living would probably do the trick. Other than that, "peace" seems to be a pretty relative definition before, say, roughly the modern period (and arguably even now). Even if the government of a given nation is not officially at war or suffering major civil unrest, there's almost always small-scale stuff flaring up here and there either internally or externally. A country that wasn't technically at war with anyone else could easily have been spending much of their time stamping out bandits or low-level dissidents and revolts, or having minor border skirmishes possibly instigated by bored bordermen without the knowledge or consent of their respective governments. Looking at when a country has been at war with other nations alone is not the best way of determining how peaceful life in said country would have been. Tomn fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Yeah, Pacific Island seems like the clear choice. Probably a smaller one, rather than say, Hawaii, which I've heard was populous enough to get pretty violent.Fangz posted:Imperial China had several long periods in which it was pretty secure and technologically more advanced than pretty much everyone else. Assuming you are teleported back as a modern person (and did some studying before hand!), then you are likely well equipped to do decently at the civil service exam and get a good place as a local administrator, hopefully steering clear of court intrigue. I'm intrigued by that suggestion; wasn't the Civil Service exam all about knowing your Chinese literature and Confucian philosophy? What most modern people would have is a reasonably strong background in maths, science, and the language of whichever country they grew up in. Nobody is going to know old-timey Chinese literature and philosophy, except maybe modern Chinese people? I have no idea what Chinese kids learn in school these days. As you say, one might be able to study for it, but I suspect the level required would be almost an undergraduate degree. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:04
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
bewbies posted:Actually this stuff (specifically survivability and strategic mobility analyses) is what I do for a living, I just provided the wiki links for convenience. The characteristics are anything but arbitrary, they're kind of the defining elements of the capability. Yes I know you do this for a living, and last time we had a round of discussion between us, about the future usefulness of MBTs and other heavy Armored Fighting Vehicless, I feel you never really came back to me about my points of 'looking at stuff from an almost exclusively US perspective'. But I should have said 'by providing nothing more than a cursory glance at Wikipedia', sorry about that. CV90 was, AFAIK, a very 'Swedish' program, with a pretty unique choice in armaments (40mm Bofors, some sighting arrangement which I forgot), part-inspired by the requirements to be able to effectively engage rotary targets. Plus there was always intention, plan, and subsequent use of it as a platform for a family of vehicles, not all of which actually went into service mind you. Both these factors differ pretty heavily from Bradley development, the latter from a programmatic point of view at least, and work on the CV90 was part-concurrent with that on M2/3 anyway - where was the cross-pollination? For those reasons I don't believe that you could claim that this "modern Infantry Fighting Vehicle [mimics] the Bradley pretty strongly". With Puma you can trace a pretty direct lineage to it through all kinds of Marder upgrades, and Marder 2 to boot, and their manufacturers and brain-trust are pretty much the same anyway. For all I know it represents more than 50 years of continuity in German IFV design. From a technical point of view - weapons, protection, automotive - I don't believe that you could claim that this "modern IFV [mimics] the Bradley pretty strongly" either, all in all it's a very indigenous (and supposedly higher tech) effort. I'd even go as far as saying that the implication of a German IFV mimicking a US design is pretty disingenuous. They came into IFV development earlier (together with France, everyone seems to forget about the AMX-10P), operated a metric shitton of them - for a longer time too, and like Magni said, had a different operational concept for them in Panzergrenadier units than other countries' Mech forces. With ASCOD and Dardo, I don't know poo poo about those programs. They've always struck me as 'me too!' efforts so sure, there might be tons of Bradley influences there. Also, you didn't mention the ROK and Japanese IFVs, which undoubtedly had lots of US input. So I'm not discounting US efforts or influences, but they deserve to be looked at from a case-by-case basis. I just don't agree with your blanket statement. On a macro level, with the BMP coming first, and Marder/AMX-10P soon after, I believe a lot of developmental paths and doctrinal uses of IFVs were well-covered. Within this first generation you had your fundamentally compromised all-in-one early effort, a heavier 'Western' version that got Anti-Tank missiles bolted on to it later, and an oft-forgotten French effort which could hold more troops and had its ATGM capability moved to a dedicated vehicle on the same platform (an interesting approach if you ask me). To me, the Bradley comes in as a more succesful, second generation version of the all-in-one, and indeed a number of vehicles followed it there (although boxed ATGM launchers didn't see as much take-up) But, from a single system point of view:
Koesj fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
You could always rely on the exotic foreigner angle to weasel your way into a Russian court, maybe you'll end up in one of those Guards units that is so elite and expensive they don't actually get to fight anyone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
Y'all are letting your civilization biases show. Just go back 18000 years or so, find some tribe, make charcoal draw8ngs of dickbutt. Be treated as a wizard, get all the BBQ mammoth you can eat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I'm intrigued by that suggestion; wasn't the Civil Service exam all about knowing your Chinese literature and Confucian philosophy? What most modern people would have is a reasonably strong background in maths, science, and the language of whichever country they grew up in. Nobody is going to know old-timey Chinese literature and philosophy, except maybe modern Chinese people? I have no idea what Chinese kids learn in school these days. As you say, one might be able to study for it, but I suspect the level required would be almost an undergraduate degree. Well, the particulars of the examination depends on how far back you go. General knowledge of Chinese literature and Confucianism would only get you so far depending on the requirements. There's also a poetry composition introduced during the Tang dynasty so that'll be a big barrier too. Studying would be a grueling process because there's a lot of memorization required.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:40
|
|
