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
Then put up. Show me a credible source saying that government forces tried to take on the Badr Corps.
When did I say they were targeting the Badr Corps, or any militia for that matter. Try not to get lost in your own rhetoric, the government forces targeting specific militas is YOUR fantacy.
which is an extremely lucrative region due to oil revenues.
Exactly. That in and of itself is the most common sense reason to go after Basra while very obviously ignoring Sadr's main power centers. It really is simple Ramo, the Iraqi government nees Iraq's only port and oil hub open for buisness for them. It doesn't matter to them who is sitting on it, they have to go.
Targeting Basra would mean mainly targeting Sadr.
Basra is not Sadr's power base, which doens't mean he doesn't have influence there. If your intent was to take out Sadr attacking Basra is not the way to do it, period.
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
When did I say they were targeting the Badr Corps, or any militia for that matter. Try not to get lost in your own rhetoric, the government forces targeting specific militas is YOUR fantacy.
Or the LA Times' fantasy.
You're not substantiating the absurd things that you've said in this thread. Show me proof that there was a significant effort to go after Badr Corps territory in Basra.
You can't, because there wasn't. Only the Sadrists were targeted.
Exactly. That in and of itself is the most common sense reason to go after Basra while very obviously ignoring Sadr's main power centers. It really is simple Ramo, the Iraqi government nees Iraq's only port and oil hub open for buisness for them. It doesn't matter to them who is sitting on it, they have to go.
There was a complicated set of reasons. I said it from the outset, in the articles I've been posting. That doesn't meant that the gov't wasn't primarily going after the Sadrists. Importantly, "who has to go" is constrained by the political reality. For instance, one of the three major militias are a huge component of your armed forces and the dominant party in your government. Going after Fadhila means making an enemy when you can ill-afford to.
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
Basra is not Sadr's power base, which doens't mean he doesn't have influence there. If your intent was to take out Sadr attacking Basra is not the way to do it, period.
It makes far more sense to attack where they're weaker, and where their territory is more profitable, than the converse.
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
You're not substantiating the absurd things that you've said in this thread. Show me proof that there was a significant effort to go after Badr Corps territory in Basra.
Why would I spend times substatiating claims that are not my own? Hint: I never said the Iraqi government was targeting the Badr Corps.
Importantly, "who has to go" is constrained by the political reality.
Who had to go was dictated soley by who was interfering with port and oil export operations.
It makes far more sense to attack where they're weaker, and where their territory is more profitable, than the converse
No, it doesn't, because if all the Iraqi government wanted to do was keep Sadr from selling oil (and its not like Sadr controls the oil infrastructure of Basra anyway) all they have to do is tell their loyal clients on the two oil platforms that ALL oil coming out of Basra is transported to for loading to shut off the tap.
Those oil platforms also just happen to be home to a hundred odd US marines and naval personel. They also happen to have 2 major coalition surface combatants and 4-6 minor ones within 3000 yards at all times. In other words, Sadr or anyone else has no ability to sell Iraqi oil on their own terms. Now they can hold the whole trade up for a cut, sure, but we saw what that possibility (or reality, maybe he was already doing that) provoked.
The government retook Basra becasue they need the oil themselves, not to mention the port which is the sorce of quite a bit of non oil related commercial traffic when opperating. The simplist answer tends to be the right one.
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
The two smaller militias have an alliance but they are defacto two separate groups.
The military wing of ISCI is the Badr Corps. One is a militia, and one is not. It's the Sinn Fein/IRA distinction.
Why would I spend times substatiating claims that are not my own? Hint: I never said the Iraqi government was targeting the Badr Corps.
You realize how ****ed your argument is, right?
You: "No, I said he took on every militia in Basra SUCH AS the Badr Corps."
Put up or shut up. You claimed that the gov't went after all the militias, including the Badr Corps (and Fadhila). If that were true, a substantial part of the operations were directed at Badr (and Fadhila )territory. Where's the goods?
The government retook Basra becasue they need the oil themselves, not to mention the port which is the sorce of quite a bit of non oil related commercial traffic when opperating.
I never asserted otherwise. That doesn't make it the only reason, and the government, incidentally, is largely one of the militias that make off with a substantial cut. I know this is crazy, but Iraq is a complicated place, and multiple incentives are working in tandem.
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
Who had to go was dictated soley by who was interfering with port and oil export operations.
Show me the proof.
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
The interesting thing here is that this whole "targeted" Sadr thing is simply made up. It is not coroborated by the actual offensive or the stated objectives, but mearly opionion, including all your articles. It is yet another "must be true" fantasy of intrigue and sorted plots by scotch drinking cigar smoking old men in wood paneled rooms.
You're the one who needs a smoking gun Ramo, because your story goes against the observable facts.
You realize how ****ed your argument is, right?
You: "No, I said he took on every militia in Basra SUCH AS the Badr Corps."
Put up or shut up. You claimed that the gov't went after all the militias, including the Badr Corps (and Fadhila). If that were true, a substantial part of the operations were directed at Badr (and Fadhila )territory. Where's the goods?
You are so predictably childish when you know you are wrong
What I said:
1.) The objective of the offensive was to restore civil order to Barsa thus reativating the commercial port and restoring the oil trade for the government.
2.) In order to do so they have to fight whoever is in the way, NOT ANY PARTICULAR MILITIA.
This is not hard Ramo. Do you just have a particular taste for quibbling?
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
WTF. I just gave you an LA Times article backing up my position. I could find others if you really wanted me to, but I'd rather not waste my time.
You're standing by interested government proclamations and your pet theory over actual reporting. Just sad...
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
WTF. I just gave you an LA Times article backing up my position. I could find others if you really wanted me to, but I'd rather not waste my time.
None of your articles overcome the overwhelming failure that is your argument, because not a single one will ever change the fact that Barsa is not Sadr's power base, or the fact that bringing order to Basra helps Sadr.
The facts in your LA Times article support me (in fact there was only one fact reportd, that Iraqi troops stormed significant sections of Basra), even if the usually hack commentary predictable and hilarioulsy comments in the unusal fashion.
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
They attacked the Sadrist areas of Basra, and left the Fadhila and Badr areas alone. Every report of the battle that I've read has said that. I repeat:
The offensive in Basra so far has targeted only Sadrist neighborhoods and has avoided going after the Al Fadila al Islamiya party of Basra Gov. Mohammed Waeli or the Badr Organization, both of which have elements that have contributed to the problems in the port city.
As for your pet theory, I've already explained why mine is better. I don't care to repeat myself over and over again, particularly when you neglect to answer my questions in this regard.
Let's deal with observable fact, please. Where's the empirical evidence that Maliki tried to take out Badr and Fadhila militants elements in the city?
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
They attacked the Sadrist areas of Basra, and left the Fadhila and Badr areas alone.
Yeah, that sounds plausible, Iraqi forces just waltzed straight through the entire city directly to where the few Sadr parts were. When did the Iraqi's get air cav?
The only rational answer, the only militia that offered resistance is Sadr's. Militias shirking in the face of government control is a GOOD thing Ramo.
But please, what fantasy scenario do you have for how Iraqi troops got unfettered access to Sadr neighborhoods?
The objective was to regain control of Barsa and the port terminals, which they did. If that didn't involve the wholesale destruction of any militia, oh well. You see Ramo, that wasn't the objective.
As for your pet theory, I've already explained why mine is better. I don't care to repeat myself over and over again, particularly when you neglect to answer my questions in this regard.
Yes, let me break down your explanation.
1.) The objective was Sadr despite not attacking his power base.
2.) Its really cool and imagine political intrigue.
3.) Despite Sadr giving in to every government demand save one, Sadr wins!
Let's deal with observable fact, please. Where's the empirical evidence that Maliki tried to take out Badr and Fadhila militants elements in the city?
Did I say he did? Is this part of the same fallacy where you claim I said the target of the offensive was the Badr and Fadhila militants in the first place.
Here are the observable facts Ramo.
1.) The troops said there were going to restore civil order in Basra and recapture the port and did.
2.) They did not say they were going to target Sadr, and in fact specifically picked one of the only Shia cities where Sadr isn't the head honcho (though for reasons entirely independant of Sadr).
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.
Yeah, that sounds plausible, Iraqi forces just waltzed straight through the entire city directly to where the few Sadr parts were.
I don't know why you keep asserting that it's only a "few" parts. My understanding is that it's a large part of the city. And more importantly, this is exactly what reporting has been saying. In fact, the Badr Corps joined in, in the action with gov't forces against the Sadrists.
Again, show me some evidence, any evidence at all that the gov't tried to occupy neighborhoods held by the Badr Corps and Fadhila.
Yes, let me break down your explanation.
You sure can beat a straw man. Let's deal with one question, at a time, though. Where's the evidence that the gov't moved against any other militia besides JAM?
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
1.) The troops said there were going to restore civil order in Basra and recapture the port and did.
2.) They did not say they were going to target Sadr, and in fact specifically picked one of the only Shia cities where Sadr isn't the head honcho (though for reasons entirely independant of Sadr).
The only observable facts have to do with government assertions.
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
The offensive in Basra so far has targeted only Sadrist neighborhoods and has avoided going after the Al Fadila al Islamiya party of Basra Gov. Mohammed Waeli or the Badr Organization, both of which have elements that have contributed to the problems in the port city.
I could provide others.
Here's Reuters:
The attacks have targeted the Mehdi Army while leaving two other powers in Basra, the Fadhila party and the militant Badr Organisation of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC) -- which supports Maliki's Dawa Party -- largely untouched.
Of course, all those media types are liars, and the only person we can trust is Nouri al-Maliki. He's like teh Jesus.
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
Tweet
Comment