The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man
US ... probably showed Iraq how to make chemical weapons, anyway (back when they were fighting Iran).
You're thinking of the French.
I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio
Originally posted by finkian
they shouldn't? That's smart. Take the troops away. Because whether or not Saddam has much power with his own oil-- if he could cut Kuwait's supply off? And gain a significant control of trade routes in the persian gulf? Um, no thanks.
If the Arab world has a problem with it, they will respond. If the UN has a problem with it, we will respond. There is no need to keep troops there, IMO.
At least with the Gulf War last time we had a coallition. This time everyone is against us and there is no smoking gun to point to.
(West Wing is on! )
"Chegitz, still angry about the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991?
You provide no source. You PROVIDE NOTHING! And yet you want to destroy capitalism.. you criminal..." - Fez
"I was hoping for a Communist utopia that would last forever." - Imran Siddiqui
on the Kurds issue. Note how we don't fight a war to create Kurdistan. No...why not? Because they don't have oil to give us. Sure we denounce the genocide of Kurds, but we don't do a full scale coallition to respect popular soverignty.
Don't for one second think that it's anything but our own national interests which dictate if we go to war or not, not the prosperity of a people.
"Chegitz, still angry about the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991?
You provide no source. You PROVIDE NOTHING! And yet you want to destroy capitalism.. you criminal..." - Fez
"I was hoping for a Communist utopia that would last forever." - Imran Siddiqui
Originally posted by finkian
Of course we do--- and which arabs would be unhappy about losing saddam on their border? Hmmmm... none?
That may be true, but they're not going to say (as has been proven by recent happenings), "Yes, America, come and please, do whatever the hell you want!"
And our troops in Saudi Arabia are almost as much of threat to them as our not being there would be. Why do you think terrorists started going after Egypt? Perceived American alliances don't do good things for keeping Arab leaders alive.
If playground rules don't apply, this is anarchy! -Kelso
If the Arab world has a problem with it, they will respond. If the UN has a problem with it, we will respond. There is no need to keep troops there, IMO.
At least with the Gulf War last time we had a coallition. This time everyone is against us and there is no smoking gun to point to.
(West Wing is on! )
With the arabs all pissed off at each other anyway? half are busy yelling at the palestinians for not finding a peaceful, the other half is funding them, and everyone is occupied thinking they can threaten Israel.
And not EVERYONE is against us, btw. There are countries who would very much like to see saddam gone. And they will probably go with us. Or perhaps Britain doesn't count?
Originally posted by orange
on the Kurds issue. Note how we don't fight a war to create Kurdistan. No...why not? Because they don't have oil to give us. Sure we denounce the genocide of Kurds, but we don't do a full scale coallition to respect popular soverignty.
Don't for one second think that it's anything but our own national interests which dictate if we go to war or not, not the prosperity of a people.
Of course we don't do anything outside our national interests. What's the use of that? It's a waste of money to do that. And, unfortunately, money runs nations.
Originally posted by finkian
Nope, US did spend a lot of money arming the Iraqis.
I didn't say otherwise. Pay attention to what I responded to. I could be thinking of the French aid to thier bioweapons and nuke program though.
PS I really want to express my awe at the collective threadjack.
I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio
It's also the american way to ensure that needed markets maintain a certain reasonability for our own good-- and Europe's, I might add.
So let me get this straight... if someone has something you need, and won't sell it to you at the price you like, it's the american way to take it by force?
That confirms my first point (a) that the US does what it does based on US self interest alone.
"I'm a guy - I take everything seriously except other people's emotions"
"Never play cards with any man named 'Doc'. Never eat at any place called 'Mom's'. And never, ever...sleep with anyone whose troubles are worse than your own." - Nelson Algren
"A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." - Joseph Stalin (attr.)
(blushes) oops, was that my ignorance showing? Last I'd heard, the royal marines were doing something... Anyway, (tries vainly to recover) as loathe as I am to refer to fez, there are nations behind us. And I doubt they'll really mind when Iraq is able to sell every last drop of oil they own when we have someone sane in office there and sanctions can be lifted.
Originally posted by finkian
And, unfortunately, money runs nations.
Yes, we should stretch ourselves as thin as possible, reinstate the draft, raise income taxes to 70%, use all the money on weapons and campaigns against every bad scarey guy in the world. That would be much better than the "unfortunate" situation of money running the nation.
If playground rules don't apply, this is anarchy! -Kelso
So let me get this straight... if someone has something you need, and won't sell it to you at the price you like, it's the american way to take it by force?
That confirms my first point (a) that the US does what it does based on US self interest alone.
lol, who's interests are we gonna do it based on? Slovakia? nope, it's not taking it by force... it's preventing someone else from taking it away from us.
lol, who's interests are we gonna do it based on? Slovakia? nope, it's not taking it by force... it's preventing someone else from taking it away from us.
Taking it away from us?
So the US owns the oil in Iraq?
This gets better and better...
"I'm a guy - I take everything seriously except other people's emotions"
"Never play cards with any man named 'Doc'. Never eat at any place called 'Mom's'. And never, ever...sleep with anyone whose troubles are worse than your own." - Nelson Algren
"A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." - Joseph Stalin (attr.)
Yes, we should stretch ourselves as thin as possible, reinstate the draft, raise income taxes to 70%, use all the money on weapons and campaigns against every bad scarey guy in the world. That would be much better than the "unfortunate" situation of money running the nation.
As thin as possible? Raise to 70%? Reinstate the draft? And you think that this is going to happen?
Like I've said, it's silly to say we are getting rid of "every" scary guy in the world... or else north korea wouldn't be an issue, nor libya, nor syria, nor.... ad infinitum. Nope, just the ones who actually affect us. Like Iraq.
Tweet
)
Comment