Matrix Games Forums

quote]Anyone know how the Bf 109s and earlier Fw 190s performed against the US planes around the torch landings and Tunisia battles?[/quote]


Well they had to stop providing P 38s for the pacific as the losses were so high in north africa, plus the USAAF did some reverse lend lease and used lots of spitfire squadrons in for some reason [:D]

As far as I know, we still have an occurrence of dogfight between US made carrier borne-planes and Luftwaffe fighters - I recall to have read something about a clash between a few FAA Hellcats and Fw190s over the Norvegian Sea, late in the war. If it proves to be right, well that's probably the only encounter of this kind that happened during the whole war... Any thoughts?

EDIT: got a source here

Royal Navy Hellcat I's (F6F-3) from 800 squadron were involved in escorting Barracuda attacks on the german battleship Tirpitz from April to August 1944 in Alta Fjord, Norway. One of these operations, on 8 May 1944, the Luftwaffe fighters flew up to protect the battleship. Some of the 800 squadron Hellcats from HMS Emperor went to attack the German aircraft and shot down 1 Fw-190 and two Bf-109G fighters. The Hellcats suffered one loss to the Luftwaffe and another to anti-aircraft fire. Sub Lt. B. Richie claimed the Focke-Wulf and went on to claim a total of 6 kills, becoming one of only a few Royal Navy Hellcat aces.

http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/squadrons/800.htm

Maybe some other fights of this kind happened, but I suppose they proved to be very rare...

AJ

Well maybe your first post (with 'dare' was not insulting but your second with

Well i'd better wonder what kind of TV or education you may get in your remote hidden hole of Hungaria someday

is definitely an INSULT not to mention the this last one

btw, if you have difficulties getting a good psychiatrist in Hungaria for consulting, please give me a call, I may help you to find a good one elsewhere in the Union...

In case you did not now my country's name is HUNGARY in english, not Hungaria. Just for your info.

Based on the above I dont see a reason FOR YOU to call a moderator rather for me, unless you treat the comparison between Castro and Saddam one, favouring the latter.

I have a strange feeling that you are not even french, but a rumanian living there. This behaviour is not francophone, but much rather from the BALKANS. Are you a miner from the Gil valley maybe? You know one of those who ran amok in Transsylvania in 1991? Remember beating hungarians and gypsies with iron bars? IF this theory is right it just would verify you rudeness. BUT THIS ONLY A THEORY.

Now THAT supposed to be insult.

You can now run for your psychiatrist, btw I happen to know a good one in Geneva, Switzerland (I can recommend you for lack of selfcontrol[:D]) or you can call a moderator -right now- because an ugly man has taken away your candy. [:P]

Well if you ask me... i would rather live in Castro's Cuba then in Batista's Cuba... yes Castro is a Dictator yes he fights his political enemy's but remeber that same things happend when Batista Ruled Cuba... the only difference is that In Castros Cuba every one can get some education and some Health care no mater how much money he has...[:D][:D][:D] As for Choseing between Saddams Iraq and Iran i would rather live in Iraq[:D][:D] and i don't know why US dosen't like Saddam... becouse they supproted him in his fight with Iran and sure did they know about Using Chem on Kurds and Iranians but that wasen't bad then... and now... "Yep Saddam you were cool when you fought Iran but know you know easy come easy gone... we have to remove you..."[:D][:D][:D]

I have a strange feeling that you are not even french, but a rumanian living there. This behaviour is not francophone, but much rather from the BALKANS. Are you a miner from the Gil valley maybe? You know one of those who ran amok in Transsylvania in 1991? Remember beating hungarians and gypsies with iron bars? IF this theory is right it just would verify you rudeness. BUT THIS ONLY A THEORY.

Geez don't you want to write a novel about me, we'll share the benefits together or give them up to Matrix for WiP2...

Btw indeed it's Hungary, sorry about that (no idea why I said Hungaria here...).
And no offense to your country, Id like to see the Balaton once in my lifetime, as much as I would like to get to countries just like Slovakia or Slovenia when I will have both free time and the money for a nice tour [8D]

Ok I'll be Romanian for you so if it fits you, but please, one nationality a day, or I may get lost...

As for Choseing between Saddams Iraq and Iran i would rather live in Iraq

Yes Saddam had ONE good point, he was a Baasist and therefore somewhat laic. At least before 1992, when after the defeat, Islamist-like behaviour was a nice way for him to get back on his feet as a last-chance support...

At least people in his country were not supposed to get death sentenced for defending themselves when people try to rape them...

Well if you ask me... i would rather live in Castro's Cuba then in Batista's Cuba... yes Castro is a Dictator yes he fights his political enemy's but remeber that same things happend when Batista Ruled Cuba... the only difference is that In Castros Cuba every one can get some education and some Health care no mater how much money he has... As for Choseing between Saddams Iraq and Iran i would rather live in Iraq and i don't know why US dosen't like Saddam... becouse they supproted him in his fight with Iran and sure did they know about Using Chem on Kurds and Iranians but that wasen't bad then... and now... "Yep Saddam you were cool when you fought Iran but know you know easy come easy gone... we have to remove you..."

There is a principle in statecraft that goes like this:

"My enemy's enemy is my friend."

While I can go along with it during an actual war, I have problems with it in peacetime. But US policy (not by any means uniquely) often does this sort of thing. It may be short sighted on some occasions?

There is another principle in statecraft, enshrined in international
conventions:

"Do not interfere in the internal affairs of another state."

This one is also probably short-sighted, but its intent is to avoid causing wars and that is not entirely bad.

It is not yet a principle of US policy that we "promote democratic institutions everywhere all the time" - but it is becoming so. Tolerating anti-democratic institutions is not a way to promote either human rights per se nor governments that will be genuinely friendly with US interests.
Consider PRC. This country is actually hostile toward the USA, not to mention many of its immediate neighbors, and it sees nothing wrong with supplying Iraq with a biological weapon, or Pakistan with plans for an atomic bomb (a copy of which was turned over to us by Lybia). A country that will not grant its own people civil rights - nor respect the rights of companies - is not going to respect its agreements on any subject. Thus the violation of deals about "don't use this computer for military purposes" and so on. Until a country has political principles of a sort we can relate to, it is a de facto enemy, and it should only be considered an ally if we are in the field and need their military help immediately. Just because we were upset with Iran was no reason to support Iraq in an aggressive war it started. We are in fact much more popular in Iran than in Iraq - even today - and also we have a good deal more in common than most American's realize. Our civilization has several roots, but we know a good deal more about those from the Mediterranean area than we do about those from Iran/Persia. Iraq was badly corrupted by its colonial experience - first under the Ottomans but later under the British. The Sunnis were deliberately selected to rule as a minority (so they would need British help), and encouraged to use whatever means were needed to preserve power. Breaking that habit is not going to be easy - if it is even possible. [I fear we may give up in disgust before Iraq is able to develop viable institutions. Our record of doing this well - staying on principle regardless of cheap shots in the media - is not entirely good.]

Consider PRC. This country is actually hostile toward the USA, not to mention many of its immediate neighbors, and it sees nothing wrong with supplying Iraq with a biological weapon, or Pakistan with plans for an atomic bomb (a copy of which was turned over to us by Lybia). A country that will not grant its own people civil rights - nor respect the rights of companies - is not going to respect its agreements on any subject. Thus the violation of deals about "don't use this computer for military purposes" and so on. Until a country has political principles of a sort we can relate to, it is a de facto enemy, and it should only be considered an ally if we are in the field and need their military help immediately.

I have come to the conclusion, working over here and getting to know them, that some of our thoughts must get relativized in the way they can be explained much more easily with their own system of values, which is not at all the same as ours. I agree, as long as they are willing to do technological business with us for instance, as the demanding party, they should be the one to adapt themselves to our systems - but still, that's not simple.
You mustn't neither be mislead by the human rights report about conditions of human rights in China - for the common people they are still better than in many country, and I do not exactly live in a big city... As in every country when it comes to human rights, remember we talk mainly about "marginal" people fundamental rights (but in this country "marginals" are maybe as numerous as inhabitants in my country...), prisoners, political "criminals" (and this kind of definition can be more or less wide, I prefer not to judge but I guess I will agree with your estimation in any case...) and all of these, not the kind of people you'll come accross in the street, but rather the one who are kept between 4 walls for a reason or another - the main difference is that, as a matter of fact, I'd be much more happy as a prisoner anywhere in the west rather than in China, no doubt.
And about rights of the company, don't worry, the ones who are mainly upset are firstly the DoD's people rather than the businessmen, who clearly always find their mark - remember these "use this machine to make civil planes not military" or this kind of limitations are not made by the companies themselves, but are the results of decisions from the DoD and trade authorities, thus I wouldn't talk about company rights. Companies don't give a damn, they would sell anything to China without the now obligatory clearance from the State...
About more basic economic "rights", 2002 congress anyway cleared the remaining obstacles for business, with the right to property "as long as it stays in legal limits" [8|] As usual, don't expect them to be clear and accurate the way we would like it to be... but that's just enough for western companies to make the money they are looking for [8|]

I talk carefully with strange words, as I don't want to say anything more - you never now which is the level of, hum... watch of the internet police here, but by the way I think you understood my point, and be sure I understand yours too, and, let's say, I sometimes do more than simply "understanding". [;)]

You mustn't neither be mislead by the human rights report about conditions of human rights in China - for the common people they are still better than in many country, and I do not exactly live in a big city... As in every country when it comes to human rights, remember we talk mainly about "marginal" people fundamental rights (but in this country "marginals" are maybe as numerous as inhabitants in my country...), prisoners, political "criminals" (and this kind of definition can be more or less wide, I prefer not to judge but I guess I will agree with your estimation in any case...) and all of these, not the kind of people you'll come accross in the street, but rather the one who are kept between 4 walls for a reason or another - the main difference is that, as a matter of fact, I'd be much more happy as a prisoner anywhere in the west rather than in China, no doubt.

It is difficult to imagine a subject more complex than China. I regard it as the last true empire. [An empire is a collection of peoples ruled by a single people, regardless of the interests of each ruled people or area. I think "China" is a poor name - and I note not the Chinese name for the country - but that "The Han Empire" would at least give a sense of what it is about. So does "Central Country" - but that in cultural terms. Chinese Han think in terms of being the real center of the world and of civilization.]
If you are really interested in China, I run a web discussion group on the country - an international one with many academics - and many ethnic Chinese - or those like me who are married to ethnic Chinese - and also other professionals. I am rather pro-Chinese, but very anti-PRC, if one can imagine both wrapped up into one. I was married in China (my wife's maiden name was Lim) and I was once asked to explain the behavior of rural Chinese people by Hu himself - when he was not in his present exaulted position - so at least he thought I might have a clue! The fundamental problem in China is that there is what I call "second class citizenship" - if you are not an urban dweller you are not allowed BY LAW to have a good job. If you leave the fields and move to a city, you may only be a prostitute, a baby sitter or a scrap dealer. These people do not count as unemployed either. But if some city or industry wants their land - too bad for them. I have a great deal of respect for life in rural communities of the third world - you usually are so safe you do not need to lock your door - and people may be poor but they won't take what is yours. Once a poor person walked 8 km to return a watch I dropped - something that would never happen in the USA.

And about rights of the company, don't worry, the ones who are mainly upset are firstly the DoD's people rather than the businessmen, who clearly always find their mark - remember these "use this machine to make civil planes not military" or this kind of limitations are not made by the companies themselves, but are the results of decisions from the DoD and trade authorities, thus I wouldn't talk about company rights.

You really do not understand the fundamental reason property rights matter: without them there must be economic inefficiency and injustice.
In PRC vast numbers are displaced by projects (the great dam on the Yangze is just one - many city dwellers are forced from their homes too - with inadequate compensation in the best of cases). In PRC MacDonalds paid great sums for a fine site in Beijing - but lost it due to the selfish interests of an unethical person with party connections - and it must affect the willingness of many companies to risk spending millions of dollars to develop something and end up with nothing. The abuse of using computers for forbidden technologies only feeds the politics of restricting what Chinese companies and individuals can buy - even for really moral and economic activities - because it is impossible to know that the equipment is destined for the stated use when no rule has any meaning. Ultimately, such a situation is not in China's long term best interests - nor is it in the interests of individuals - be they displaced people in the Yangze basin, displaced residents in Shanghai, or investers.
Companies are not really bad things - and talking and thinking as if they are not really collections of people who invested their savings only means you cannot treat corporate citizens the way they need to be treated if you are going to create a climate which is business friendly - and thus able to do things like offer jobs. Being business hostile in effect is against the interests of all the people who either do not get jobs, or who lose jobs, because of the specific hostile policy. Not wise - even if you think in Mandarin.

Fishbed
I am glad that you found your normal voice.
If you come to Eastern Europe dont forget Poland and Croatia either. Krakkow has the most beautiful medieval center in this region, and Croatia has the nicest beach. Of course only after Balaton.[:D][;)]

As I stated before I dont want to discuss daily pilitics so I am out. Hopefully finally [:D]

You really do not understand the fundamental reason property rights matter: without them there must be economic inefficiency and injustice.

With all the due respect El Cid (never used this sentence so much in a single topic yet [:D] ) I do, and I understand fairly well both your arguments (not to say more), I was treating harmless basic points, but once more please don't ask me to say things I can't say that easily over there - I didn't know who I was talking to, thus I thought we were only considering "technological" business in the US-China formal way (you know, this DoD thingmie, the screening companies for the Red Army, the Nanchang Aircraft story and all of this).
But I want to stay longer in China than a single year, and thus don't wait for me to really debate or openly say my mind [;)]
But undoubtedly your points are very interesting, to say the least, the very least. [;)]

But you're right, I'd better not talking at all if it implies to talk largerly wrongly anyway, that's true.

But we will agree easily, I think, saying that free business in China, at any scale, is a myth.

AJ

The beer, the beer, Ursa, you forgot the beer!!!

I would give him some good Vodka[:D]

ORIGINAL: Hipper

quote]Anyone know how the Bf 109s and earlier Fw 190s performed against the US planes around the torch landings and Tunisia battles?

Well they had to stop providing P 38s for the pacific as the losses were so high in north africa, plus the USAAF did some reverse lend lease and used lots of spitfire squadrons in for some reason [:D]

The 109s and 190s quickly lost any local air superiority over north Africa.
The Luftwaffe warned it's pilots not to "Dogfight" with P-40s(an ironic turn of events), and P-38 Lightnings did just fine - too good, because North Africa/Europe came first on the priority list, and they started sending P-38s there at the expense of the Pacific (It was only overcold N.Europe that the P-38 wasn't loved...because it was too cold to fly it at 25,000')

Demo

Why is there any good beer in Croatia? [:D] I thought you were famous for your wine.

Queston of taste. Wines are great and getting better mostly thanks to small wineries so one must know his favourites. BTW, got a '95 Tokai at home which almost bought it yesterday after lucnh...
And beer...well I'm more of a beer person and there's only one beer for me and that's Karlovacko. Try it if you get the chance. I love a strong bitter beer not some girlie tasteless concotions, the sort Ron drinks 20 of and than rants about being drunk on the forum again...[:D]

Edited for: I'd expect Pauk to show up soon saying Ozujsko is the best. Don't listen to him, he likes cocktails[:D]

I'd bet on the Chinese rather than Russia or the US as far as manned space flights go. For non-human (robotic) research I suspect the US will remain in the lead for a while. I agree that the US ought to dedicate less money to armaments and more to pure research in general, but at the moment we have a president who has never seen a "defense" project that he did not like.

News flash: there is a war on! [A war this President didn't start either.
It was formally declared in 1993 - not that we noticed - and there were a number of attacks we didn't associate with it before 911.] Procurement for the USN is down to 5 or 6 ships a year - horribly inadequate - in a DOD that claims to want "more sea basing." I think it is a dangerous thing we do not raise taxes and cut non-defense spending - sounds like Johnson all over again ("guns and butter") - something that led to hyperinflation. Are you on the same planet as I am?

News flash: there is a war on! Procurement for the USN is down to 5 or 6 ships a year - horribly inadequate - in a DOD that claims to want "more sea basing." I think it is a dangerous thing we do not raise taxes and cut non-defense spending - sounds like Johnson all over again ("guns and butter") - something that led to hyperinflation. Are you on the same planet as I am?

I don't know. I'm on Earth in the United States but tend to govern myself rationally rather than emotively as the neocons do. Yep. There's a war on. One we started with Iraq and some others. Our problem in Iraq is not going to be solved by adding ships to the USN. I'm not sure the goal of the war is necessarily the right one. But thats' in part because every time the goal is stated it's different from the previous version of "Why we fight."

I think the F-22 is a great plane. It's gonna stop some idiot from smuggling a dirty bomb into the US on an immigrant's back or a freighter HOW exactly? Bottom line is that we can't afford all the wars we can imagine we might fight. Period. Inconvenient as that sounds the implication is that the rest of the world has to step up vis a vis the "world cop thing" rather than requiring that the US and UK (with limited support from ex Cwealths) do the job alone. Meantime our infrastructure is being hurt, badly. We were better off with Hussein running Iraq, even if it's true that Iraqis were not better off with Husseing running Iraq.

IMO as ever.

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

News flash: there is a war on! Procurement for the USN is down to 5 or 6 ships a year - horribly inadequate - in a DOD that claims to want "more sea basing." I think it is a dangerous thing we do not raise taxes and cut non-defense spending - sounds like Johnson all over again ("guns and butter") - something that led to hyperinflation. Are you on the same planet as I am?

I don't know. I'm on Earth in the United States but tend to govern myself rationally rather than emotively as the neocons do. Yep. There's a war on. One we started with Iraq and some others. Our problem in Iraq is not going to be solved by adding ships to the USN. I'm not sure the goal of the war is necessarily the right one. But thats' in part because every time the goal is stated it's different from the previous version of "Why we fight."

I think the F-22 is a great plane. It's gonna stop some idiot from smuggling a dirty bomb into the US on an immigrant's back or a freighter HOW exactly? Bottom line is that we can't afford all the wars we can imagine we might fight. Period. Inconvenient as that sounds the implication is that the rest of the world has to step up vis a vis the "world cop thing" rather than requiring that the US and UK (with limited support from ex Cwealths) do the job alone. Meantime our infrastructure is being hurt, badly. We were better off with Hussein running Iraq, even if it's true that Iraqis were not better off with Husseing running Iraq.

IMO as ever.

[;)]Amen brother

ORIGINAL: Honda
Edited for: I'd expect Pauk to show up soon saying Ozujsko is the best.

Nah, you know that i'm man with taste.[:D] I drink Ozujsko and Karlovacko only if i have to... (not that they are bad beers but i have headache next day in the morning).

Usually i drink Stella Artois (produced in Croatia under licence), but when i want to celebrate i drink Leffe. But best beers IMO are (i'm talking about commercial beers - the best ones are made in Belgium/German monasteries but it's impossible to buy here in CRO so i stick with commercial beers).

1. Pilsner Urquell
2. Buccanero (you would be suprised but its Cuban beer - and yes, you are right i fall in love with Cuba Libre and Mojito when i was in Havana).
3. Guinness

ORIGINAL: Honda
Don't listen to him, he likes cocktails[:D]

Well, it seems that my cocktails throw you off balance last time we met[:D]