I've been searching for news of a modern combat mod for RO. What I want to see is America, Russia, China, Germany, UK, North Korea, and Canada implemented.
Upvote
0
In smaller scale actions they can't use all of their resources, Although I admit some of those are rather fancyi personally think that having the U.S. Army in a realistic mod of modern combat would be a blunder. Think about it, thermal imaging, night vision, pin point air strikes, and somewhat better guns. the enemy better be able to turn into ghost or something because when the s**t hits the fan for them its over. America's army is way powerful most nations dont have the manpower or the armorment to take the U.S. army
Thank you
And I bet you're one of those Americans who does not understand why America has a reputation for arrogance. If something kicked off in Europe, eg Germany vs France (purely hypothetically) and no nuclear weapons were used, do you really think the USA would bother to get involved? Or if Britain were invaded by France, or anyone for that matter. Don't try and tell me the USA would lift a finger, we all know that the 'special relationship' is entirely one-sided.
And in all honesty I do not expect the US would help countries in Europe if they were being attacked by an aggressive state, provided that state would have played ball with the US government/economy (see 'the Nazis').
Heh, sorry you see me as arrogant. America's contribution in WWII was a fine one, and all due credit to her. But where was she in the Suez Crisis? Or in the Falklands? In both, she actively discouraged the use of force by her apparent 'allie' Britain, who has backed her in everything she does. I do not see this as 'evidence throughout history' that she has always 'helped an allie'.
Also, your facts about Korea and Vietnam are incorrect. Korea was a UN operation which the US was a large part of. As for Vietnam, I find your misconceptions about the French very amusing. The Indochinese War (where the Viet Minh drove the French out of North Vietnam) finished in 1954, a full 9 years before US troops arrived in the country! How this is the US 'helping the French who ran off' I do not understand. And also, they did not arrive to help the French, but to prevent all of Vietnam becoming Communist as they feared the spread of communism (see the stepping stone theory) through Asia.
Additionally, and I hate to say this, WWII was over 60 years ago. The USA's international policy has changed considerably since then. She is no longer the friend of her 'allies' she once was. I'm sorry that you believe the propaganda about America always going to the aid of nations under threat or in a dictatorship. Where is the USA in the Sudan? Where were they in Chile?
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, and I expect you'll come back with the one-size-fits-all 'you just hate the USA and our freedoms' answer, but that's in no way true. Having been to the USA, I love it as a country. Some of its people, I have reservations with. Its government I despise. But as a country I love it.
Next time, please look into your facts before stating things which are offensive, naive and in some cases very untrue! And please, don't brand me as arrogant for pointing out the simple facts of the matter, and indeed for stating my opinion. If the US would jump in straight away to a war in Europe as you say, why has it not intervened in the countless wars in Africa? And as far as I remember, the peacekeeping work in Eastern Europe has been led by the United Nations, an organisation you say would just beat about the bush and not get anything done! Tell that to the people of Kosovo, my friend.
If the US would jump in straight away to a war in Europe as you say, why has it not intervened in the countless wars in Africa? And as far as I remember, the peacekeeping work in Eastern Europe has been led by the United Nations, an organisation you say would just beat about the bush and not get anything done! Tell that to the people of Kosovo, my friend.
Heh, sorry you see me as arrogant. America's contribution in WWII was a fine one, and all due credit to her. But where was she in the Suez Crisis? Or in the Falklands? In both, she actively discouraged the use of force by her apparent 'allie' Britain, who has backed her in everything she does. I do not see this as 'evidence throughout history' that she has always 'helped an allie'.
Also, your facts about Korea and Vietnam are incorrect. Korea was a UN operation which the US was a large part of. As for Vietnam, I find your misconceptions about the French very amusing. The Indochinese War (where the Viet Minh drove the French out of North Vietnam) finished in 1954, a full 9 years before US troops arrived in the country! How this is the US 'helping the French who ran off' I do not understand. And also, they did not arrive to help the French, but to prevent all of Vietnam becoming Communist as they feared the spread of communism (see the stepping stone theory) through Asia.
Additionally, and I hate to say this, WWII was over 60 years ago. The USA's international policy has changed considerably since then. She is no longer the friend of her 'allies' she once was. I'm sorry that you believe the propaganda about America always going to the aid of nations under threat or in a dictatorship. Where is the USA in the Sudan? Where were they in Chile?
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, and I expect you'll come back with the one-size-fits-all 'you just hate the USA and our freedoms' answer, but that's in no way true. Having been to the USA, I love it as a country. Some of its people, I have reservations with. Its government I despise. But as a country I love it.
Next time, please look into your facts before stating things which are offensive, naive and in some cases very untrue! And please, don't brand me as arrogant for pointing out the simple facts of the matter, and indeed for stating my opinion.