StormeagleOption for the additional 10 F-16 Block52 is NOT going to be activated! instead the money of Greek tax payers will go for 30 – new generation – fighters said the new Greek Minister of Defence Bagelis Meimarakis, after the Hellenic Defence Council (KYSEA) session.
WHAT :confused: 😮 😮 Only 30!!! new generation fighters????? :confused: 😡
Same old…same all….. 🙁
StormeagleBloody awesome! can’t wait to see some pics or videos.
However it is not a huge chalange for the russian display pilots.
Doing the Cobra while flying through it, well that’s a chalenge:)
would that be something or would that be something???
It would be something: It is called : Spectacular Suicide :diablo: :dev2:
StormeagleEither supply something that support this asinine comment…or go back to drinking your kool-aid. :rolleyes:
First of all I didn’t insult you US Agent, second, Kool-aid is american, we don’t drink it over here and third, if you look just a little over what happen to oil prices because of the Gulf and who gained and who lost, you will get all the proof you want. Except of course if you don’t want to find a proof for what US gov, is doing to the world economy….
By the way, let me refresh the memory of our American friends here. Do you remember that the reason Sadam went to war with Kuweit was that Kuweit was pumping oil from the common oil fields that it has with Iraq, in a bigger proportion than it’s share when Iraq was fighting with Iran. Then when the Iran – Iraq war was over, Iraq asked Kuweit for it’s stolen oil in money. Kuweit refused. Then iraq asked OPEC for an increase in world oil prices to 30 dollars / barel to be able to pay off it’s war expences. OPEC refused. Then Iraqi officials met with the lady ambassador of US in Iraq and she declared that in any Iraqi action against Kuweit the US would remain neutral. Then Iraq invaded Kuweit and the US invaded Iraq. Now the oil went to 60 dollars / barel and stil some people believe they haven’t earned enough and it should go to 100….
Bottom line: It all about oil control and money.
Stormeagleif you look closer to the image, you will see that its a Harrier GR.3
not a sea harrier
OK Nils, I stand corrected.
StormeagleWhy would Finnish Air Force Buffaloes, Hurricanes, and Fokker fighters fit in with the theme of this thread?
Or a RN Sea Harrier for that matter?
StormeagleSOC, on this statement:
Or should the world be happy with Kofi Annan’s relatives profiting from Oil For Food and just leave Saddam be to murder his countrymen? On that note, if it’s okay for Saddam to do it, then by the same logic nobody should have interfered with the FRY.
I hope that you really ARE joking right? Because if not then you are either way too naive or simple blindfolded. Are Kofi Annan’s relatives the only ones proffiting from drug for oil? Who is proffiting now with the oil proces going up the gazoo for no reason AT ALL? For help, check out the Bush family, the Cheney family and even Kontoliza rice’s family (do you know she has an oil tanker which she promptly named after herself?)
It is Huliburton charging the US armed forces two and three times over the rations given to the troops in Iraq and yet there are no lawsuits, no charges, no nothing. On the contrary, Hulliburton gains some lucrative contracts to rebuild New Orleans…….. 😡 😮 😡 AND who is honorary Vice President at Huliburton? Mr Vice Prsident Dick (shooter) Cheney. By the way SOC, try shooting a friend of yours at a hunting trip, and see if you will get away with just a pat on the hand…..
Wake up people !!!!!!!!!!!! They are sc…ing with you in order to get even richer than they are and yet you support them because they have you believing that it is the only patriotic thing to do. And just because some european voices say “NO” to this charade, they are bad and have to be disciplined.
As for the other part about Sadam, right, in order to stop Sadam from killing his people, you are killing them instead. have you counted how many civies lost their lives by the US forces? Now if you add the number killed by the so called insurgents, you get a really grim figure of civilians paying for a “free democratic” Iraq. And don’t forget that the moment the foreign troops leave Iraq there will be a civil war since there is no leadership to join the people in that country. Thus, more bloodshed. And all this to stop Sadam whom the US armed and created in order to fight the Islamic revolution of Iran.
Read your history man. The US is in constant wars ever since it gained its constitution and for the most part these wars were aggresive. That is why the rest of the world likes American civies but hates the guts of your policies and politicians.
StormeagleOK people, I am from Greece and I have to say that Greece although disagreeing with the US policy in Iraq and Afganistan AND the Balkans, has at this moment one batalion-unit in Kosovo, one in Afganistan and several smaller units to other parts of the world along with other european and non-european countries trying to keep people from killing one another. So I really don’t understand the notion of our friends leaving in US who think that they are left all alone in this world to act as a good policeman to us all…
Second: In the Falklands / Maldives war, the Brits fought on their own. Right or wrong is not the issue at this point BUT they did not start a war and then called NATO or the EEC to join in on their part. They fought alone and almost lost alone. Mind you also that the EXOCET missiles that cost them so much were French!!! The only help they requested and got from their allies was to stop any further exports of EXOCETS to Argentina for the duration of the conflict.
Third point: When the world thought that there was a true aggression against the intersets of the globe, there was help to the Americans from everybody and that was KOREA. In Iraq, the Neocons started a war to gain access to the markets of the gulf and to control the Iraqi oil. Why should we support them on that?
If anyone attacks the US, trust me, we will help any way we can, but when the US attacks whom ever Halliburton thinks is a good profitable target, then the US is wrong and should consider itself lucky that the whole world doesn’t have the guts to fight against her.
StormeagleAlright gentlemen; notice I didn’t say “hey kids”; most of you are very militarily/politicaly oriented and well versed. So, on that note: In the opinion of any non-Balkan, Middle Eastern, or diehard Soviet communists; Will the United States involve itself in any upcoming conflict based on these scenerios. This isn’t warmongering foolishness on my part, it is a sincere desire to evaluate world opinion among the few, the proud, the War Junkies. Answer the questions please.
1) Kosovo independance is imposed by UN. Serbian population votes on a referendum not to let kosovo secede; and then promptly the Serbian military invades. (Obviously not this easy, but work with me). European troops fight. Does America…
a. Withdraw from Kosovo through Serbia to Nis or Bosnia, in accord with the recently drawn up free movement agreement with Serbia.
b. Fight with it’s European Allies and commit further ground forces.
c. Fight with it’s European Allies and commit Air power.
d. Fight with it’s European Allies, withdraw, and claim Kosovo is a European problem.
e. Withdraw before the fighting even begins and says f*ck that noise, that’s definitely your problem. (TO EU)
f. Stay put in camp in Kosovo and make it clear that if one single US soldier is killed, wounded, or MIA, that there will be hell to pay.
g. Strictly provide logistical and strategical aid in the form of transport, information, and material aid
.
I would think that C. has more merrit under the circumstances (Iraq not over and Iran about to start).
2) Kosovo independance is imposed by UN. Serbian population votes on a referendum not to let kosovo secede; and then promptly the Serbian military invades. (Obviously not this easy, but work with me). European troops do not fight. Does America…
a. Withdraw from Kosovo through Serbia to Nis or Bosnia, in accord with the recently drawn up free movement agreement with Serbia.
b. Fight by itself and commit further ground forces.
c. Fight by itself, commit major Air power, and an invasion sized force to control the situation.
d. Fight by itself, withdraw, and claim Kosovo is a European problem.
e. Withdraw before the fighting even begins and says f*ck that noise, that’s definitely your problem. (TO EU)
f. Stay put in camp in Kosovo and make it clear that if one single US soldier is killed, wounded, or MIA, that there will be hell to pay.
g. Strictly provide logistical and strategical aid in the form of transport, information, and material aid to albanian units
.
Phrased like this I guess the only answer I can think of is f. Stay put, bring in fear and gain time to clear the situation in the other fields.
3) Kosovo autonomy and not independance is imposed by UN. Albanian population lifts arms against UN to force kosovo secession; and then promptly the Serbian military invades. (Obviously not this easy, but work with me). European troops fight. Does America…
a. Withdraw from Kosovo through Serbia to Nis or Bosnia, in accord with the recently drawn up free movement agreement with Serbia.
b. Fight with it’s European Allies and commit further ground forces. (if so, against who: both ethnic groups)
c. Fight with it’s European Allies and commit Air power. (again, who?)
d. Fight with it’s European Allies, withdraw, and claim Kosovo is a European problem. (same question)
e. Withdraw before the fighting even begins and says f*ck that noise, that’s definitely your problem. (TO EU)
f. Stay put in camp in Kosovo and make it clear that if one single US soldier is killed, wounded, or MIA, that there will be hell to pay.
g. Strictly provide logistical and strategical aid in the form of transport, information, and material aid
.
Again probably f. In this case time will run against the Serbs and thus the US will try to prolong its presense with the minimum commitment.
4) Kosovo autonomy and not independance is imposed by the UN. Albanian population lifts arms against UN to force kosovo secession; and then promptly Serbia says, “you made your bed, now you have to sleep in it” The European troops fight. Does America…
a. Withdraw from Kosovo through Serbia to Nis or Bosnia, in accord with the recently drawn up free movement agreement with Serbia.
b. Fight with it’s European Allies and commit further ground forces.
c. Fight with it’s European Allies and commit Air power.
d. Fight with it’s European Allies, withdraw, and claim Kosovo is a European problem.
e. Withdraw before the fighting even begins and says f*ck that noise, that’s definitely your problem. (TO EU)
f. Stay put in camp in Kosovo and make it clear that if one single US soldier is killed, wounded, or MIA, that there will be hell to pay.
g. Strictly provide logistical and strategical aid in the form of transport, information, and material aid.
Again F. They will stay and pretend to work on a peace plan while helping the Albanians. Then at the first sign of Serb victory, they will create (if necessary) a case to allow them to get involved against an allready tired opponent, in order to settle the issue with the Albanians gaining independence.
StormeagleRoberto, do you have any more pictures of Swiss cave-airbases? I remember seeing in a picture of some Hunters hanging from the ceiling but I can not find it any more. Can somebody help on that?
Stormeagle[QUOTE=Hawk75]
QUOTE]
Hawk, If I could reach you I would kiss you…. I am searching for almost a year for a picture of a croatian warpainted M18 Dromader (I have a black and white picture from Insignia Magazine) and then CHAFFFFF I find it here in an unexpected thread…..
Do you happen to have other material on agricultural aircrafts of former Yugoslavia in warpaint from the war of 1991?
Thank you.
StormeagleHum I think the 4014 is infamous for being marked with 1 confirmed kill, plus 13 kills that probably were the result of the imagination of a high ranking Iraqi pilot… who went on to become a general because he was one of the first four iraqi pilots trained on the Mirage.
Nic
Is there a clear picture of the kill marks? I ‘ve never seen an Iraqi plane or an Iranian plane with killmarks although it is understandable that both Air Forces downed planes of the other side in the Iran – Iraq war….
I wonder if the Mig25 pilot that downed the US F18 in the first Gulf War put any killmarks on his plane….. : :diablo:
StormeagleAny news about the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers Greece asked from US Navy?
The answer was NO (as in NO WAY)…..Then they gave the Spruances to Turkey along with an Anchorage Dockship…….Just to keep the balance….. 😡
StormeagleIll be honest, I dont know how fast triremes went, noone does because exact desciptions of their design do not survive, so we are forced to piece together fragments of information about them. As I said, I do know how fast the Galleys of the Battle of Lepanto went, up to 8 knots, and they were huge, double the length of a trireme and quite wide. Its only logical that if to ships are in a ramming battle, the faster ship has much greater advantage. I fail to see the greeks use a design developed over hundreds of years for the sole purpose of ramming being only 2 knots faster than a much larger ship that was not optimised for speed at all. We know for example that the oarsmen on triremes sat on greased seats that allowed the oarsmen to slide back and forth the way oarsmen on modern rowing sculls do. This is a feature that would only be used if a ship was able to hit very high speeds that would have to afford a large range of movement for the oar to impart power while moving at speed.
Since I am asking for sources on your claims, I must supply the thread with some sources for mine:
Thus, based on Thukididis, the developer of the trireme was a Korinthian by the name of Ameinoklis and the ship was first developed around 705 BC for the purpose of beating the pirate ships that were devastating the Aegean trade routes. The trireme was better equiped and faster than the ships used mostly during that time (more specificaly: the Penticontor [50 oarsmen in one row] and the diireme [100 oarsmen in two rows and most favored in the Ionian coast]).
The trireme was used across the Aegean and the Eastern Mediteranean Sea from 700 to 300 BC. Mind you, that many of the ships of the Persian Fleet in Salamis were also triremes of the Ionian Greeks. But it was tactics that won the day.
There are many references in the works of Thukidides, Herodotus, Aisxylos and Ploutarxos.
In Greece they were build with Fir tree since it is lighter (the trade ships were build with pine tree because it wouldn’t rot easily)
The total weight of the ship was 45 tonnes, the ram weighted 200 kgrs and the speed only with the sail was about 5 knots. normal speed with the oarsmen was 8 knots with a maximum of 10knots. The crew was 200 with 170 on the oars 16 were the deck crew and 14 were soldiers (archers, etc).
The most usuful visual reference we have are : The Lenorman sculture from the Acropolis (410-400BC) and a few presentations on gravestones held in the National Museum of Greece in Athens (Dimoklides), or the one held in Munich (Dimitrios) where there is a representation of the stern.
The end of the triremes was the naval battle of Amorgos (322BC) when 240 Athenian triremes were beaten by heavier but more modern Macedonian ships (tetriremes, pentiremes, etc)
StormeagleBecause 10 knots is slo-o-o-o-w. Even Venetion galleys of the Battle of Lepanto which looked more like giant barges were able to make 8 knots with 7 men at each oar. Since a Trireme was a ramming weapon, it had to be fast or it was useless, almost 10 knots is not fast.
I know its not fair of me to make a claim and not have available proof, but I didnt know it was a contestable issue at the time and so didnt record my facts. So think of my statement that there were two banks of oars on a trireme as a puzzel I offer anyone to solve rather than a assertion of truth.
Mixtec, 10 knots is NOT slow for a 37m long vessel loaded with 170 sailors plus a number of archers and powered only by its’ oars……How fast do you think any vessel on oars can go? The ramming technique doesn’t mean that the vessel should be going 30 knots, it is a matter of hardened sharp bow against the other vessel’s soft side and/or rows of oars (which would render it motionless and thus an easy target).
StormeagleId like to see specially what is said in that relief, as Ive said previously, there are too many archiologists trying to make a name for themselves by trying to interpret (often falsely) archiological evidence. But I will give you credit in finding something that does seem to offer substantial proof. They are also incorrect in saying that the Greeks invented the trireme, it was a ship type used by the Phoenisions long before the Greeks.
Mixtec, when most of the world’s historians are CONVINCED about an issue due to a number of different evidence, then in order to come up with a different idea, it is YOU that need to provide the necessary supportive proof of what you say and not the other way around. In my country there are passages from Thoukididis and pictures of triremes and analysis of ancient naval warfare where the triremes are discribed thoroughly. Much more so than the Bizantine Dromon for example. I told you before that there were even different names given for each row of men on the oars based on their position. What is your proof in disregarding all these, please. By the way, why is a ship of 30 meters long that achieved almost 10 knots, a large manstrocity?
Sign In
