Forum
A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Page 620 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
redcrane (1045 D)
28 Jun 10 UTC
Does France border the North Sea in World Diplomacy variant?
I'm confused. that is all.
2 replies
Open
yebellz (729 D(G))
28 Jun 10 UTC
Power Preferences
Which powers are you favorites to play as? Which do you despise? Give reasons why...
17 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
05 Jun 10 UTC
The Top 10 Greatest Militaries Of All-Time
I love philosophy, literature, and theatre, and hope to make that my life's work, but when I was younger, Military History was one of the biggest things for me- and it still is fascinating. So- who WERE the greatest Military Forces of All-Time, 10 to 1? 2 Notes: -Comparisons between time periods is inevitable, but just remember the merits of the each Force -"Great" can be forces that fought to conquer or for peace, and all branches of the Military should be considered
Page 6 of 6
FirstPreviousNextLast
 
warsprite (152 D)
21 Jun 10 UTC
@Octavious It is with the US military personal. Typical disconnect with US civilians
Yeah, respecting the contributions of others seems to be a gene missing from our national DNA.
figlesquidge (2131 D)
21 Jun 10 UTC
@war - The UK never claims to have fought without assistance from across the pond, but equally these weren't gifts. The British had to pay for US support, a debt only recently repaid.
warsprite (152 D)
21 Jun 10 UTC
@figlesquidge I agree, but I've seen some post grossly understate the importance of US production contribution to the war, mostly when comes to the Eastern front. This was not aimed at the UK in anyway just to the few who belittle the importance of US production in the war.
largeham (149 D)
21 Jun 10 UTC
How could one belittle US production to the war effort? The US supplied the USSR, and helped them back on their feet after the shock of Barbarossa, and the US easily out produced Japan to the ground. Sure, one Sherman may not be equal to one Panzer, but if you've got four Shermans (not that they're bad tanks) for every Panzer, then...
warsprite (152 D)
21 Jun 10 UTC
@largeham By claiming that the USSR could have single handly won the war.
figlesquidge (2131 D)
21 Jun 10 UTC
Quite an interesting thing here on current militaries:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/apr/01/information-is-beautiful-military-spending
warsprite (152 D)
21 Jun 10 UTC
@figlesquidge Very good. More people should read it. It gives a different perspective on the whole military spending debate, and claims of US intent of world domination.
figlesquidge (2131 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
Not sure about the second one - the fact you're not spending so much as a proportion doesn't mean you're not trying to take over the world!
warsprite (152 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
Well no, but it would mean a half hearted effort at best, just increasing per capita spending to the level of Jordan, and man power to Isreal's level would make it more believable. Paticularly when you consider the size potential oppositon forces. At it's current level the US forces are stressed with just Iraq and Afghanistan.
centurion1 (1478 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
We could wipe any nation off the face of the earth in conventional warfare. In our age of modern warfare technology trumps numbers.
figlesquidge (2131 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
It should be noted some of those per Capita figures are extreme because of large oil revenues.
I can only really speak on Oman, but there the oil belongs to the government, and the income from it is used instead of taxation. As a result employing a large armed force actually helps the nation by providing jobs, rather than being a burden on taxation.
aslan (125 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
@BusDespres and anyone else who thinks Canada hasn't influenced any wars. Let's look at them again shall we?
WWI: produced 1/3 of allied artillery shells, put in more man hours at the front than the US, were used as the British Empire's assult troops (along with the Australian's and Kiwi's) and took key positions in the German line (second battle of Ypres, the Somme, Passchendale, and Vimy are just examples where the Canadians held the hardest part of the line for all or part of the battle).
WWII: provided half the cover for convoys to Britain which kept Britain in the fight before the US even joined, again used as assult troops (Italty, and D-day being the best examples), after Dunkirk was the only fully armed division in the whole British Isles, provided many of the "so few" pilots during the Battle of Britain.
I'm not trying to nominate the Canadian armed forces (even though our joint task force is pretty amazing and holds all the in-combat sniping records, including shots over three kms), I'm just saying our own media knocks our armed forces enough so you don't need to start.

@warsprite. Although the US did produce huge amounts of war material in both wars, much of it wasn't used in the descive part of the wars. Most US divisions weren't fully armed or trained when they arrived in 1917-18, and by the time they were equiped and ready, the German army had already sustianed to many loses in the March Offensive (1918) and the "Black Day of the Germany Army". Essentially, I'm saying the US helped speed up the war, but Germany had already lost.
In the Second World War, the US admittedly did more, but wikipedia is wrong on this one. The USSR had more tanks than the US, but, I'll agree with your reasoning with the ships and trucks. Again however, as has already been pointed out Stalingrad was the black day of the Germany army in this war. It was the Russian tanks that took Berlin. You can argue that it was because Hilter had two fronts to defend, but the US only made up half of one front. Sure, we don't know how this war would have ended without the US, but you can't say they were the number one reason for allied victory in Europe. They did a lot in the Pacific, but I'd like to point out they refused British and other allied ships to help in large numbers, but I digress.
Essentually, why should the US be near the top of the greatest militaries of all time if they needed major help from their allies to defeat one country? Wouldn't that make the German military miles ahead for being able to last as long as they did massively undermanned and undersupplied?
I think that to be the greatest you have to do it alone, or be outmanned and outsupplied, to be truly the greatest.
warsprite (152 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
@figlesquidge Valid point. A small population in many oil counties would also distort the numbers. You need X number of men to defend a country no matter the population.
Mafialligator (239 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
<3 aslan.
warsprite (152 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
@asian 1st: I was talking of WW2 not WW1. 2nd: I did and so did Wiki state they did have more tanks. 3rd: If it had not been for the US lend lease (which started in June 41 for the USSR) USSR would not have had the tanks or supplies to beat the Germans at Stalingrad. By the end of 42 the USSR recieved 3,000 Shermans, 2,500 planes, 87,000 motorized vehicles. 4th: Some of those tanks going into Berlin were Shermans with red stars on them. USSR recieved over 4000 Shermans by the end of the war. 5th Because most of the food producing areas where under occupation in the USSR would have starved to death before they could have beaten the Germans. SPAM, SPAM, SPAM, and more SPAM feed the Russians.
warsprite (152 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
that's @aslan
warsprite (152 D)
22 Jun 10 UTC
As for needing allies to beat one country that's bull. 1: We were fighting 3 counties on two fronts, across two oceans. 2: The US was getting into it's stride by 44. 3: An invasion of Europe without the UK would have been difficult and much more in blood. but could have been done. I know not of this not wanting Common Wealth Naval help in the Pacific. Perhaps it was felt it could be better used in the Atlantic War, or that some UK carriers still used biplanes which would have been cut to pieces by Zeros. Japan was more than out classed in production but they had a massive advantage in standing ships and planes at the start, and it was touch and go at first. Finally, not everyone accepts your definition of the greatest.
JECE (1322 D)
28 Jun 10 UTC
KaiserWilly: I'll get to it eventually.
Borogrove (292 D)
28 Jun 10 UTC
The Russians won world war two. It would have been impossible without the American aid but they were the ones that lost 21 million men. The eastern front was like the western front but on a gigantic scale.
For most of the war Stalin was demanding the western front. It can be argued that the Americans did not want this so as to weaken both countries. The Americans made a lot of money from the war, though they supplied armaments for free to the Russians the Brits had to pay for their equipment resulting in America having a raging economy.

It was a good decision by America much better to have foreigners fight your wars and make money from it. This can be seen also in the cold war era with proxy wars e.g. Afghanistan and start of Vietnam. America has a great military industry (most money spent on the Military than any other nation ) but their Military is not top ten in world history
@ warspite (ironic name by the way for this topic btw) America is probably the greatest supplier and maker of war machines but their military is not in the top ten of world history.
aslan (125 D)
28 Jun 10 UTC
@Borogrove. thanks. Just because America was a great supplier of military equipement, doesn't mean that they have the greatest military.
@warsprite. The US wouldn't have even joined the European war if Britain was invaded and defeated in 1941. You can't land troops as a surprise if they have to cross the entire atlantic. (Sure, some d-day troops were straight from the US, but they had a decoy destination, which if Britain was defeat they wouldn't have had). The US would have focused totally on the Pacific and would have welcomed the wearing down of the German and USSR in the struggle. On top of this, without British and other allied troops (such as the Canadians) it would have taken much much longer for the US to think about launching an invasion even if they were invovled. At this point the Atlantic Wall would have been completed and inproved. To top it off, the artifical harbours that were used to bring in the majority of the supplies for the first months after d-day couldn't have been dragged from the US, leaving the allies to have to take a port on d-day. This would have equalled Deippe (part II) on a much wider scale. Sorry, if a country needs major allies to win a war it doesn't have one of the top ten miliaries of all time. Top 25 maybe, but not top ten. (And yes I'm saying that the USSR should be more like top 25 than top 10).


171 replies
gman314 (100 D)
24 Jun 10 UTC
England in the world cup
So what do people think about England's chances in the cup? They got out of the group stage but now have to play Germany. England's had trouble scoring and Germany's defence are amazing so their chances seem slim. And if they do beat Germany, they have to play the winner of Argentina-Mexico, which will most likely be a very tough Argentina.
63 replies
Open
terry32smith (0 DX)
28 Jun 10 UTC
Need 3 for live game...starts @ 10:45pmPST
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=32448
1 reply
Open
De Gaulle (0 DX)
24 Jun 10 UTC
Thoughts on Australia's New Female Prime Minister?
Open discussion
46 replies
Open
Gobbledydook (1389 D(B))
28 Jun 10 UTC
New World Dip Game!
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=32450

Bet is 5 only, so join!
0 replies
Open
rcnrcn927 (313 D)
27 Jun 10 UTC
Time
Just a suggestion for the site. You should make it possible for the player to set their time zone for the times. Times are in UTC-4, and where exactly is that? I don't claim to know anything, but isn't that in the Atlantic?
15 replies
Open
ava2790 (232 D(S))
21 Jun 10 UTC
rlumley - Please Post Your Forum Messages Here
Please post your forum messages here and only here.
62 replies
Open
paulyork64 (351 D)
26 Jun 10 UTC
new player games
ethics question.
is it right for an experienced player to take over a leaderless country in an existing game which appears to have been set up as a beginners game? or is it ok to join as long as you don't win?
4 replies
Open
The_Master_Warrior (10 D)
25 Jun 10 UTC
General Stanley McChrystal and President Barack Obama
Here's my thoughts. (See below). Go ahead and share yours.
90 replies
Open
TheGhostmaker (1545 D)
13 May 10 UTC
New League Season
The new Leagues have been made, and you should be emailed shortly about starting them.

The webpage isn't up yet, but I can announce that the leagues are:
194 replies
Open
De Gaulle (0 DX)
24 Jun 10 UTC
New South Wales(Australian state) bans Burqa
Thoughts?
159 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
26 Jun 10 UTC
I May Not Know Football, But As An Actor, I Know ACTING When I See It...
And Ghana deserves an Oscar for that...terrible cheats...there's running the clock, and then there's taking a fall EVERY DAMN PLAY...
42 replies
Open
ollieleas (100 D)
27 Jun 10 UTC
1 More Player, 4 Minutes to Join! Quick!
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=32406

Ancient Med, need 1 player!
1 reply
Open
ollieleas (100 D)
27 Jun 10 UTC
Live Ancient Med!
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=32406
2 replies
Open
curtis (8870 D)
27 Jun 10 UTC
live game gunboat 30 pts.
6 replies
Open
TheHand (656 D)
27 Jun 10 UTC
How prevalent is cheating?
In anonymous live games, I find myself doubting everyone whenever I lose. But I realize that it is probably not the case that there are cheaters in nearly every game I play, but there are probably cheaters in some. So, what is the likely prevalence of cheating? My guess would be about 1 in 5 games, taking into account communicating with other players in a gunboat game or meta-gaming. Is that accurate?
14 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
27 Jun 10 UTC
Is Your Prince A Baseball Fan, England?
I like him already, throwing out the ceremonial first pitch for my team, the Mets...

Can we sign him to a contract? ;) http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h2kG6DDcTVnMdmEzLlv-OTl_MKeAD9GJB0SO0
1 reply
Open
ava2790 (232 D(S))
26 Jun 10 UTC
rlumley - honourable campaigner or man of double standards?
Dear friends on webdip,
19 replies
Open
figlesquidge (2131 D)
25 Jun 10 UTC
143pt Live Anon Gunboat
So yes, I'd like to set one up. This would make it the first one worth over 1000 D...
206 replies
Open
timdcoltsfan (1099 D)
26 Jun 10 UTC
Just Want To Play
9 min left to play now in a 5 min Phase game. Only 10
8 replies
Open
obiwanobiwan (248 D)
26 Jun 10 UTC
Here, Just Want To Play People... Or Anyone Else...
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=32339
3 replies
Open
Timbo (224 D)
27 Jun 10 UTC
Any takers for a live game
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=32344
2 replies
Open
timdcoltsfan (1099 D)
26 Jun 10 UTC
Just Want To Play II
30 min I have never played this before and just want to try it out.
17 replies
Open
curtis (8870 D)
26 Jun 10 UTC
live gunboat
6 replies
Open
Live game
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=32318
5min/phase
1 reply
Open
terry32smith (0 DX)
26 Jun 10 UTC
Live - WE NEED YOU only 2 more!!! 12 min!
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=32314
2 replies
Open
curtis (8870 D)
26 Jun 10 UTC
gunboat live 20 pts
8 replies
Open
curtis (8870 D)
26 Jun 10 UTC
gunboat live 30 pts
3 replies
Open
Page 620 of 1419
FirstPreviousNextLast
Back to top