Oppositions to Arabs

[Zero]

Judaism is not represented because Only people who are predominantly Jews are Israelis. So if you exclude Isralis You dont have Judaism in game!

It's NOT being anti-sematic. However what you are doing is enforcing affirmative action against religion. AS A MINORITY, I believe Affirmative action is wrong. I have takent the both ends of affirmative action as an asian american because sometimes the card plays right for me and sometimes it doesnt (for example school that has 45% asians enrolled.) I hate the idea of having a native american student accepted just because we had same skills but the school had large population of asians. I also hate seeing a white person rejected because we had a same skill level but the school was perdominantly white and it did not favor him. If you have to add Isralis JUST FOR THE FACT of having Judaism. That is so wrong.

EDIT: Whats even sadder is that sometimes its doesnt even have to be the case that they have to be equally qualified.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by Caliban
Israel is a superpower? Really? Well, just because they have some nukes ( ), this does not mean they are a superpower... and fighting armed civilians is not a challenge for any country in the world, you don't have to be a superpower for that purpose.

But I agree on your other points. The cultural influence the Jews had and their detailed history give them the "right" to be in the game (maybe even more than Germany or France... or the US!)

Oh, and Judaism not only had profound influence on christianity, christianity DEVELOPPED out of Judaism. Jesus was a Jew!

Well I agree with your agreement. But I will beg to differ with your assessment of Israel as a superpower. Read that article that I included a link for in a previous post. Their military is staggering, to say the least. As I even said, I'm shocked by the potency of their military. The fact that they can run 2.5 times the number of sorties daily (I think it was daily) than we can is just a small example of their readiness. I don't what kind of military might exists in Europe, but I'd bet Israel could certainly match them. The only country near them that poses anywhere near a threat to them is Iraq, because Hussein also has a standing force of 1mil+. And Iraq ONLY poses a threat to them because Iraq is willing to use any type of weapon to win.

I'm not a big fan of "winning at all costs", or that "the end justifies the means".

[Zero]

I'm sory there's so many posts flying over this thread at this time I don't think I can respond to all of them. So if I throw old stuff back it's prolly cause I didn't have time for it.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by Calc II
Judaism is not represented because Only people who are predominantly Jews are Israelis. So if you exclude Isralis You dont have Judaism in game!

It's NOT being anti-sematic. However what you are doing is enforcing affirmative action against religion. AS A MINORITY, I believe Affirmative action is wrong. I have takent the both ends of affirmative action as an asian american because sometimes the card plays right for me and sometimes it doesnt (for example school that has 45% asians enrolled.) I hate the idea of having a native american student accepted just because we had same skills but the school had large population of asians. I also hate seeing a white person rejected because we had a same skill level but the school was perdominantly white and it did not favor him. If you have to add Isralis JUST FOR THE FACT of having Judaism. That is so wrong.

Your first paragraph is likely true.

I also agree with everything you said in your second paragraph 100%. But as you now know, I don't want to include Israel just because of Judaism.

EDIT: What I mean is, I want to include Israel as a Civ in Civ3, but NOT just because of Judaism. There are other reasons to include them.

[Traelin]

Double Post.

[Zero]

Yes, I think we settled the idea, I said I denounce the idea of including hebrews just for religion alone and you remind thats what you are saying.

Let's drop the whole religion part right now before we argue about the small details

[gsmoove23]

Traelin,
Read your article again. I think the comparisons it made for the Israeli and American forces were qualified by the phrase in the MidEast, at the moment. It made the point that this would change with a considerable and costly movement of forces to the MidEast by the US. Israel is not a superpower. It IS a superpower in the MidEast which isn't saying much. I'm not certain but I doubt their military compares with GB, certainly not Russia, perhaps not even France and I'm quite sure Turkey could at least give it a run for its money. For that matter China, India and maybe even Pakistan surpass it.

You should also realize that Israel, because of its political situation, is almost at a constant state of mobilization and would certainly be surpassed by a good number of other countries if they also were put in the same place and definately if they lost the 2bil in military and 1bil in economic aid a year the US give them.

Earlier in the thread you discounted this aid because we offer aid to many countries but, to the whole continent of Africa we only give 10 bil compared to 3bil to tiny little Israel. That of course is only what we give in overt donations.

As for cultural influence, yes they have it. A number of books were written a long time ago, Jesus was a rabbi. These factors snowballed into Christianity and Islam but after the death of Jesus and Mohammed's break with the Jewish community, where he taught his followers to pray to Mecca instead of Jerusalem the influence ends. It has had a huge affect on the world because of the enormous success of those religions, a success that cannot be ascribed to the Jews accept for giving it its initial spark.

However, this doesn't even matter because its a game of civilization not culture. Culture is a part of it but it does not stand alone in the game. If there were an option in the game where a civ could be absorbed by another and then appear later(which would be pretty cool) I might change my mind.

So how does Israel stand up to the other civs, Rome, Persia, Babylonians, Britain, Egypt, Russia. These are civs whose cultures expanded as their countries expanded, not tagged along to others as happened with the Old Testament which were incorporated into Islam and Christianity long after Israel had ceased to exist as a kingdom(a very small and relatively insignificant one). Perhaps the Koreans which I'm a little iffy about anyway(sorry Calc II, that is a Korean flag is it not?) but I must confess I don't know much about them.

PS. how do you do that nifty quoting?

[Zero]

Originally posted by gsmoove23

So how does Israel stand up to the other civs, Rome, Persia, Babylonians, Britain, Egypt, Russia. These are civs whose cultures expanded as their countries expanded, not tagged along to others as happened with the Old Testament which were incorporated into Islam and Christianity long after Israel had ceased to exist as a kingdom(a very small and relatively insignificant one). Perhaps the Koreans which I'm a little iffy about anyway(sorry Calc II, that is a Korean flag is it not?) but I must confess I don't know much about them.

Yes that is a korean flag. But that doesn't guarantee I am Korean. Met some guy with a German Flag who was turkish on another forum. For your answer, well i was born in US and both my parents are at least born Korea, my father being 100% korean, so I'm not sure what that makes me. All I know is that "S" for south korea was lot closer down the list than "U" For United States. So in my typical American fashion I opted to do less work scrolling down the list

Korea wasn't always small, they had their expansionsitc era where they reached all the way to northern manchuria under Kokyuryo (pre korean dynasty). But whether they were always small or not, korea isn't as significant as big boys like Roman or Egyptian civ that really achived big.

Still, civs like Korea Israel and other civ "qualify" as a civ in civIII since they do have some kind of achievements they had. But the problem is, the game can't have infinite amount of civs that firaxis can add so there has to be a cut offpoint. I dont support nor frown upon the fact Korea is in since Korea has legitimate reason to be in. Same applies to Israel. It has the same qualification to be in as with many other civ that is not in the game. But there's no need to force them in creating extra justifications. I do know it was higly likely a marketting move to add korea since there's market for huge korean gamers. Personally, I'd take Incas over Korea or israel anyday.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by gsmoove23
Traelin,
Read your article again. I think the comparisons it made for the Israeli and American forces were qualified by the phrase in the MidEast, at the moment. It made the point that this would change with a considerable and costly movement of forces to the MidEast by the US. Israel is not a superpower. It IS a superpower in the MidEast which isn't saying much. I'm not certain but I doubt their military compares with GB, certainly not Russia, perhaps not even France and I'm quite sure Turkey could at least give it a run for its money. For that matter China, India and maybe even Pakistan surpass it.

OK here's some countries' general military statistics. That is, I've only included the number of people actually in the military, but this info is enough to give a general idea on how Israel's military compares to its counterparts.

I will list the country in bold, and the source at the bottom. Also, ignore any politics in the links, I just performed a quick search based on 2002 numbers.

Russia: "There are well over 2 million people in active military service today, of which some 800,000 are conscripts; the rest are officers, contract soldiers and noncommissioned officers."

http://www.cdi.org/russia/198-3.cfm

France: "...President Jacques Chirac announced his decision to end conscription by 2002 and in the process cut the armed forces from half a million to 350,000"

http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/french-reform.cfm

China: "...Chinese military is 2.5 million, of which 1.8 million are in service with the PLA (ground forces)"

http://www.idds.org/chinasmil.html

Note: This is 2000 data, which means it's a bit dated, but you all get the point.

Iraq: "...400,000-strong armed forces..."

http://www.brook.edu/views/op-ed/ohanlon/19980319.htm

Wow, a little side note: We must have butchered them in '91, cuz that's only 1/2 of what it used to be.

Germany: Darn, couldn't find any info. Found an article that said it's really, really hurting ATM though (as in rusted equipment and stuff).

Israel: See previous thread. Over 1,000,000 below the age of 48.

Great Britain: Couldn't find any current info. I did find an article that said it has cut back so much on its military spending that it couldn't perform another Falkland operation right now.

Now of course we all know stats can be misleading. As my stats teacher used to say, "The average American has one boob and one ball" (I censored it, of course). But the point I'm trying to make is that Israel's military does indeed compare to everyone, given their total population of 7 million. They are noone's lapdogs. If anything, America is more their lapdogs than anything, due to AIPAC.

So Israel is indeed a superpower if you base it entirely on these numbers. But let's not do that. Why don't we base it on technology and strength of allies? Doing this, Israel is assuredly in the crem de la crem. The US's military has the best equipment there is, therefore so does Israel, because we sell them the kick-butt stuff.

By the way, Israel is not completely in a state of mobilization. If it were, then it's military population would increase to around 2.4 million, the total number of citizens that are militarily ready.

Again OT, but I'm shocked at how much Europe has been cutting back its military spending. A bunch of articles on the web are stating that the longstanding economic downturn is partially to blame.

I'm not sure what ya mean by nifty quoting? I just click reply with quote and cut and paste as needed?

[Zero]

no not really. US sells military equipment to South Korea but that doesn't make them the kick asser. Don't know if this is true but another thread indicated South Korea ranks fifth in largest military. Yet N. Korea can absolutely wipe their enemy of the face of the planet and N.Korea doesn't get military equipment from US (obviously)

[bartdanr]

Originally posted by Calc II
(I visualize like an Incan civ, flourishing for hundreds of years kinda thing)

Actually, the Incan Empire was just about a century old when destroyed by the Spanish.

...and I would LOVE to see the Inca as well...my wife is from Ecuador, and I think South America needs to be in the game!!!!

[bartdanr]

Originally posted by sabrewolf


"panzer" is actually the german word for "tank" but also means "armour". in the 1st world war german tanks where a lot stronger, more effective and had superior armour. i think the UU is meant to be from that time.
also, in civ3 tanks/panzers come with motorized transport which in real life started towards the end of the 19th century...

I'm sure this was just a typo, since the WW I German tanks were insignificant (such as the LK II which I don't believe saw combat)--the Allies were the ones who really used the tank. I'm sure you meant WW II--right?

Even in WW II, German tanks weren't really that superior, especially early in the war. They just used them more effectively. The French army, in fact, had some good tanks (though small turrets and the lack of radio limited their usefulness), but used them with the same tactics that the tank was used in WW I. And until the Panther and the Tiger I tanks, the Soviet T-34 was the most outstanding tank in the world. (The Panther was built largely in response to it.) And don't forget the JS-2 Soviet heavy tank.

Blizkreig was effective because of tactics, not because of equipment. Some German equipment of WW II was exceptional--but a lot of it was dated and obsolete. (For example, the German Army still relied heavily on horse-drawn transport throughout the war.)

I have to view the German UU as being the tactics used by the Germans (such as written about before the war by Heinz Guderian and the British tank writers who influenced him.) I can't equate it with any specific piece of hardware.

Actually, I'd like the idea of a UU for every era...though this presents several challenges, for example what kind of ancient UU would the United States have, or what kind of modern unit would the Phonecians have?

[Traelin]

Originally posted by Calc II
no not really. US sells military equipment to South Korea but that doesn't make them the kick asser. Don't know if this is true but another thread indicated South Korea ranks fifth in largest military. Yet N. Korea can absolutely wipe their enemy of the face of the planet and N.Korea doesn't get military equipment from US (obviously)

I don't know too much about the Korean War and the present military states of North and South Korea. However, alot of the guys I work with have been enlisted military. From what they said, it's almost a freaking requirement to serve 9 months over there. Some of them served in Seoul, but some served near the DMZ and said it's crazy when you can see enemy snipers a couple hundred yards away.

Anyways, they told me that there's no way in heck North Korea could come close to taking out South Korea, due to our substantial presence there. Which leads back to my other point that we are a very strong ally of Israel, and yeah we do help them (and others) out a lot, but you still can't take their accomplishments away from them. I guess when the U.S. spends 278 billion annually on military expenses, we have a good deal left over for aid.

[Traelin]

Remaining 8 civs

Well since the Arabs are definitely in Civ3, it's really a moot point to wish they won't be. BUT -- we still have 8 spots left, right? So what would you all think about Israel being in a future XP?

[gsmoove23]

Ok I'm experimenting here,

Originally posted by Traelin
Germany: Darn, couldn't find any info. Found an article that said it's really, really hurting ATM though (as in rusted equipment and stuff).

For obvious reasons, people would be a little upset if they began mobilizing again, same for Japan.

Originally posted by Traelin
Israel: See previous thread. Over 1,000,000 below the age of 48.

I'm a little confused by this, I don't know where your previous link is but I've found this one which reports a much smaller number, while stating this is only an educated guess because the size of the Isreali army is classified.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/03/29/military.htm

Originally posted by Traelin
Again OT, but I'm shocked at how much Europe has been cutting back its military spending. A bunch of articles on the web are stating that the longstanding economic downturn is partially to blame.

Of course they're cutting back and its not entirely because of an economic downturn but a lack of need. They simply don't see the possibility of a large scale war and why should they with the EU slowly erasing borders. I can assure you, if Israel were in such a calm part of the world they wouldn't see the point either. This is what I mean, I didn't say Israel was fully mobilized but they are constantly at a high state of readiness because they are not in a calm part of the world, they are surrounded by possible enemies and they are currently occupying a heavily populated unhappy West Bank and Gaza, not to mention the Golan Heights. If France or England were in the same position you could be sure they have stronger richer nations with far more economic depth and they would be able to mobilize a much greater force.

Plus I don't see rating a civ on the strength of its allies.

Originally posted by Traelin
I'm not sure what ya mean by nifty quoting? I just click reply with quote and cut and paste as needed?

Thank you I had completely overlooked that, I hope this experiment worked.

All that being said I also think Israel is more then worthy of civ-hood in an XP or mod. My problem is, with a limited number of civs to choose from, Israel would seem like more of a political choice when there are more worthy options out there.

My list of other worthies definately Incan and Mayan and hearing more about the Koreans I think they're a good choice. Byzantines, no they're not the same as Romans. Goths. Can't think of more right now but I'll be back. Are there really 8 more slots?

PS. I have yet to here a really good argument against the Arabs on this thread.