OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

User avatar
Plodder
Posts: 967
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 3:56 pm
Location: New Zealand

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by Plodder »

I've been quietly chuckling at some of the comments here, pretty picky bunch.[:D] I've no problem with the MG no.2 carrying his tripod in a bear hug, (it was only a couple of shots anyway that they showed it) those things can get heavy after a while so he was probably just resting his shoulders.
Gen. Montgomery: "Your men don't salute much."
Gen. Freyberg: "Well, if you wave at them they'll usually wave back."
User avatar
KG Erwin
Posts: 8366
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Cross Lanes WV USA

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by KG Erwin »

One must remember that the Marines who landed on Guadalcanal were inexperienced, so it's not surprising that they act like it.
Image
User avatar
bairdlander2
Posts: 2288
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:25 am
Location: Toronto Ontario but living in Edmonton,Alberta

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by bairdlander2 »

Unless anyone here on the forum was in the USMC at the time(which i doubt) they cant realley comment on whats realistic and whats not.
User avatar
Titanwarrior89
Posts: 3282
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2003 4:07 pm
Location: arkansas
Contact:

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by Titanwarrior89 »

Thats not a totally true statement. Some guys here who were not alive during ww2 did have to qualify on ww2 weapons or actually saw some of them operate. When I went into the Navy in 68' we had to qualify with the M1. While I was in I did see th BAR and the 30cal MG operate. Yes in 1968. Got out in 70 and went into the Army until 93.

So do I know how the marines acted under fire during the Guadalcanal campaign-nope. But at least I no what looks right and sounds right on some of these weapons showen. There probley others here with similiar exsperiences.[;)]
ORIGINAL: bairdlander

Unless anyone here on the forum was in the USMC at the time(which i doubt) they cant realley comment on whats realistic and whats not.
"Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure. After Guadalcanal, he retreated at ours".

"Mama, There's Rabbits in the Garden"
Poopyhead
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:42 pm

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by Poopyhead »

Granted no one can comment on what actually happened day to day, but neither can this TV show. We are commenting on what the show portrays as history, and yes the HBO site has this show as a history lesson. If the writers portray all of the Marines were gay, or that Demi Moore shaved her head and joined the Marines at the Canal, or that unarmed Japanese soldiers were sadistically butchered, then yes I wasn’t there, but just as sure, I would comment.
The average age of the inexperienced Marines was 17, but their leaders weren’t 17 or inexperienced. Napoleon said, “An army of lions led by a rabbit will always be overcome by an army of rabbits led by a lion.” Sgt Basilone wasn’t a leader who was a rabbit. He had served in the Marines for three years in the thirties in Central America. Leaders like him were in the 1st Marine Division. They would have kept their Marines in the right uniform, with their weapons ready and not lying around on the beachhead. Discipline isn’t something that you leave on the parade field. Victorious units always have it. Dale Dye should have told them this.

Astrologers believe that your future is determined on the day that you are born.
Warriors know that your future is determined on the day that your enemy dies.
User avatar
ilovestrategy
Posts: 3611
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 8:41 pm
Location: San Diego
Contact:

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by ilovestrategy »

Well, I saw part 2. Spoiler below!

























Being an ex Marine it did my heart good to see the Army supplies get raided by jar heads on the beach!!!!!  OOH RAH! [:D]
After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!
Image
oldspec4
Posts: 748
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 2:34 pm

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by oldspec4 »

There are no EX Marines..only former Marines [:)].  Semper Fi..
GoodGuy
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:36 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by GoodGuy »

ORIGINAL: Poopyhead

The average age of the inexperienced Marines was 17, but their leaders weren’t 17 or inexperienced.

If 17 really was the average age, then this would mean that there were soldiers say 15 and 16 yrs old, as well as 18-19 or even 20 yrs old soldiers. If I am not mistaken, the minimum age was 17 (parents' consent needed), and 18 (without parental consent). Now add to this boot camp (3 months?) and additional training (up to several weeks or even several months), plus relocation to and build up of forces in the PTO (several weeks, if not 2 or 3 months). At the time the "inexperienced" Marine hit the landing beach, he was still inexperienced, but clearly older than 17.
Napoleon said, “An army of lions led by a rabbit will always be overcome by an army of rabbits led by a lion.” Sgt Basilone wasn’t a leader who was a rabbit.[/b]

Having a "lion" as leader can't substitute the need for training (weapons training, coordination, combined arms training, etc.) and surely can't substitute combat experience, though. If I am not mistaken, Basilone did not have combat experience before he got there, but he had received plenty of training.
The training standard in the USMC was probably higher (and rougher for the recruits), but I could imagine that there were some units which did not train continuously after boot camp. Not being used to combat conditions, I could also imagine that one or another unit had to adapt to such conditions first, in their first fight, no matter whether in practice it then took some 30 mins only, or hours/days.
He had served in the Marines for three years in the thirties in Central America. Leaders like him were in the 1st Marine Division. They would have kept their Marines in the right uniform, with their weapons ready and not lying around on the beachhead.

I think what you describe (what you think how things really had been) is rather a myth. The US units that landed at Omaha Beach had received a lot of training, boot camp in the US, additional training after boot camp, and even more manouevres and training in Britain. That was a luxury the Japanese or the Germans could rarely afford after 1942. German recruits were lucky when they received 6 weeks of training (boot camp) around mid 1944. In late 1944, in many instances German recruits got their uniforms, their helmets, their gun, and they were declared combat ready within 3-7 days. Prior to the Ardennes offensive, there were units that had been almost annihilated in France, say like the 12. SS-Panzer-Division "Hitlerjugend", where then surviving NCOs were used to reestablish the division by making use of the remaining skeleton unit, which didn't even have the structure of a typical German Shadow-division anymore. The rebuilding occured from November to December (where the rebuilt Division was then scheduled to participate in the Ardennes offensive on 16th of December), granting the recruits roughly 4 weeks of training. The unit's performance was poor.

That said, I'm convinced that discipline comes with routine and even more with a lot of training, or - like for some German units defending or counterattacking on German soil - with fighting to the last bullet in fear of loosing their homeland.

So, when these trained US units hit Omaha, they suddenly faced some (unexpected) heavy opposition, and what happened? They were actually still lying on the beach, as the fierce defensive fire from the Germans made major moves almost impossible. It took some senior officers to kick the soldiers' butts to come up with solutions or to lift their spirits, simply because lying there for another 2 or 3 hours would have resulted in their destruction. It was most likely more about survival instinct than about a proper level of discipline and routine, especially since quite some mishaps occured in that sector (tanks dropped at the wrong locations, some tanks sunk, rocket barrage totally ineffective as the rockets fell short of the beach, obstacles were not cleared in time, etc. etc.), which all had the potential to undermine morale and discipline.

The Japanese officers observing the US landing on Iwo Jima actually reported that the US units were scattered all over the beach and suffered substantial losses, due to the Jap artillery bombardment and the MG-nests at the beach-line. Initial progress was slow, or even non-existent for a while, and that was not just because of the soft and warm ground (which made landing of tanks and heavy equipment and even crawling even more difficult), but because the Japs actually put up quite some resistance. If I'm not mistaken, the 2 USMC Divisions (4th and 5th) which were tasked with taking the beaches had quite some combat experience, but their casualty rate over the course of their commitment was still relatively high (2,400 troops IIRC).
So this example clearly demonstrates that even experienced units have to adapt to combat environments and conditions, and they have to overcome the moment of shock (eg. caused by unexpected heavy enemy fire) as well, before they can access their routine "program" again, which - in turn - enhances discipline.

In comparison, the US 88th Infantry Division received additional training repeatedly solely because its commanding General insisted on keeping this particular unit in good shape, even when it was deployed to a quiet sector in North Africa, where it could use a French fort as training base. When sent to Italy, he made them train again for an extended period before being committed for the first time, quite some units in the PTO could not do that. Then, after the rather calm winter 43/44 the unit was able to muster a successful offensive against 2 German Inf Divisions (which were fatigued and could not afford the luxury of leaving the front line to refresh and train), mainly because it had the possibility to train and stay in good shape during that rather calm period.
The 88th penetrated the Gustav line and later on the Gothic line and performed well if you consider it had no combat experience. They even pursued the enemy multiple times, as their physical fitness had reached a high level, due to the extensive training.

Other US units, which had not received training after boot camp did not perform on that level.
The 88th finally crumbled during its last major offensive in Italy, though, they experienced more than 6,000 casualties, purely because the US did not employ a proper unit rotation scheme, it remained on the front line for too long. At that point, the 88th received more casualties than it inflicted on the enemy. It still says a lot about US tactics and US leadership, if you consider that in 1944 the enemy was often more fatigued, understrength, under-equipped and even forced to field depleted or garrison units and even Luftwaffe units, in quite some sectors.

The same (the lack of a proper unit-rotation scheme) was experienced by some USMC units in the PTO, because their COs were a bit too eager and insisted that their particular units could finish the job, and that the assistance of US Army IDs was not needed (Iwo Jima?), where then the Infantry units still had to take over later on, after the USMC units appeared to be fatigued and loosing effectiveness.
Discipline isn’t something that you leave on the parade field.

Well, but discipline might get dropped for a while, especially if a unit doesn't have combat experience, and if a given group of soldiers is busy with processing some unforgettable impressions, like seeing their mates being shred to pieces, like flying arms and legs, and if they have to find some cover themselfs. I wouldn't deny that some soldiers were and are able to cope with such new environments right away, but the majority will have a moment (if not minutes or more) of shock. In contrast, it took totally untrained units (like the 106th ID in the Ardennes - 1944) hours to process the shock (partially a whole day) in addition to their CO not reacting properly, it took them way too much time to recover, so they got surrounded and ended up as POWs. The 106th wasn't depleted, it wasn't fatigued, it wasn't like it had starved for days, it just had not received additional training after boot camp and it had no combat experience, it could not even rely on training experiences. Due to the lack of divisions in the ETO, it was common procedure to deploy such units in supposedly calm sectors, like *cough* the Ardennes, in order to give such units time to assimilate and adapt to the environment.
The neighboring unit (I think it was the 99th US ID) had received some additional training in Britain at least and it performed ok, as it managed to hold parts of the Northern shoulder.
"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006
User avatar
Sarge
Posts: 2197
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 7:46 am
Location: ask doggie

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by Sarge »


lol, this from the crowd that screams historical realism from game designers working part time from home.

You can't say something you see in a movie never happened in real life. Chance are, it did.
those things can get heavy after a while so he was probably just resting his shoulders.
One must remember that the Marines who landed on Guadalcanal were inexperienced, so it's not surprising that they act like it.
Unless anyone here on the forum was in the USMC at the time(which i doubt) they cant realley comment on whats realistic and whats not.


Great stuff ………………[:D]
GoodGuy
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:36 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by GoodGuy »

ORIGINAL: Sarge

Here is a good example how to hump a tripod in Indian country, never folded.......NEVER !

I'm watching a video on youtube atm, covering the Guadalcanal Campaign. Jump to 1:20 in the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqH3guGc ... re=related

A vet (Jasper Hood) states that his unit (of the 1st Marine Division) had just completed boot camp at Paris Island and was then shipped to New Zealand. According to the narrator, they were supposed to go through a 6-month training before being committed anywhere. Suddenly, after 1 week, the program was canceled and the entire 1st Marine Division tasked with taking Guadacanal and Tulagi, as the US had learned that the Japs were building an airbase on canal.
If true, the HBO show might be more accurate than you think.
"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006
GoodGuy
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:36 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by GoodGuy »

ORIGINAL: Sarge

lol, this from the crowd that screams historical realism from game designers working part time from home.

Part 3 of the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omZZ-O7F ... re=related

If you skip to 1:04 in the video, a part that obviously covers a unit on combat patrol, you can see a guy shouldering a .30 cal machine gun (M1919), while the gunner shoulders a tripod that appears to be partially folded. You can also see 2 other guys carrying the belts for the .30 cal. (note: not cases). This scene is a neat example for a (4-man) MG squad following the army manual almost completely down to a tee. IIRC, the 2 soldiers who carried the ammunition were supposed to carry them in these bulky cases, quite cumbersome in a jungle environment. By the way, it was a grunt (MG assistant) who had to carry the MG, not the gunner.

You guys shouldn't be so hard on the "Pacific" series.
"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006
7th Somersets
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 1:20 pm

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by 7th Somersets »

I'm trying to figure out why Iceland was colored red on the big map early in the show. It looked like red was used to show Axis occupied territory elsewhere.

Haven't seen the programme yet - so unsure about the date that the map was depicting. Denmark 'owned' Iceland, and therefore when it was captured by Germany, Iceland theoretically became 'Axis' occupied until it was 'liberated' by UK forces in 1940 before being handed over to US control.
Poopyhead
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:42 pm

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by Poopyhead »

GoodGuy, wie geht’s? If ten thousand Marines are 17 (or even younger if they actually lied to join) and one thousand are not, then the average age is 17 point something. I read this statistic about the Marines at the Canal in a book and not all books have been transferred to the internet (but I’ll check it for you).
Training is great, but no substitute for leadership. I think I’ll go with Napoleon on this one. You have a lot of interesting material, but I thought we were discussing Guadalcanal, not the War in Europe. However, from your own post, it looks like the commander of the 88th Infantry Division was a lion and wanted to see via training if he had any rabbits leading his unit. I have 21 years in the Army and I know where discipline comes from. Training teaches soldiers what to do, but men aren’t tin soldiers. Someone still has to order them to do it, see that they actually do it and check that it is done right. Someone has to stand up and yell “Follow me!” and know that he is the example that his disciplined men will follow. That’s how it works in the Army and I am certain that the Marines are no different.
Astrologers believe that your future is determined on the day that you are born.
Warriors know that your future is determined on the day that your enemy dies.
User avatar
Zakhal
Posts: 1407
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by Zakhal »

Never been in jungle but I can certainly relate to the stomach problems that the marines had in the second episode. In my first long training camp I ate coal tablets just to avoid getting a weak stomach. I also minimized my eating. I didnt shit for almost a week. After the first visit to the latrine things went bad very fast though.
"99.9% of all internet arguments are due to people not understanding someone else's point. The other 0.1% is arguing over made up statistics."- unknown poster
"Those who dont read history are destined to repeat it."– Edmund Burke
GoodGuy
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:36 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by GoodGuy »

ORIGINAL: Poopyhead

GoodGuy, wie geht’s?

Gut, danke, und selbst? [:D]
Training is great, but no substitute for leadership. I think I’ll go with Napoleon on this one. You have a lot of interesting material, but I thought we were discussing Guadalcanal, not the War in Europe.

Well, but the examples from the ETO clearly show how important training and a sufficient time frame for assimilation were (and still are), and that leadership can't substitute a certain level of training/fitness.
However, from your own post, it looks like the commander of the 88th Infantry Division was a lion and wanted to see via training if he had any rabbits leading his unit.

I don't think so. He was a General who believed that thorough training and a good level of physical fitness are the key for good performance and stable units. A lion can motivate, but he can't transform soldiers into trained/able troops just by raising his voice and kicking their asses.

Nowadays, USMC, Navy Seals and many US Army units/branches employ thorough physical and tactical training.

In a classified study, which examined the 1950 US retreat to the South Corean Coast, US officers complained about the low level of training/fitness within quite some US units that were deployed to Corea. The authors also complained about a "new generation" of recruits who did not have the same level of fitness as some of those back in WW2, including soldiers with weight-problems and other maladies, while the intervening Chinese PVA forces were able to perform 18-miles marches (daily) during the night to avoid Air recon and to reach the Corean combat zones, which took 18 days. They had a way higher level of fitness. Plus many of them were highly skilled and their officers employed superior tactics (eg. V-formation attack), usually resulting in the destruction of an enemy position or the enemy's retreat.

So, in this study, fitness and training, or the lack of thereof, and their impact on morale/discipline/performance were explicitly mentioned. After several Chinese attempts to fully encircle Marines and other units (who managed to fight their way out, but with very high losses), the 8th US Army had to execute the longest retreat in US Army history.
I have 21 years in the Army and I know where discipline comes from. Training teaches soldiers what to do, but men aren’t tin soldiers. Someone still has to order them to do it, see that they actually do it and check that it is done right.

I think soldiers were more of tin soldiers than you think, especially if it came to routine and the training that allowed for a good level of routine. And if a soldier is overstrained or if he has his moment of shock, training surely helps to overcome such moments, as the soldier will remember and execute what he has learned during training, so he may even act like a robot. You can kick and cuss at someone who doesn't know what to do, but chances are that he'll need constant yelling, if he did not receive sufficient training.... and that's what you don't need in combat.
Someone has to stand up and yell “Follow me!” and know that he is the example that his disciplined men will follow. That’s how it works in the Army and I am certain that the Marines are no different.

Yeh, leading by example can work, and the numerous Medals of Honor display that it actually did work at times. But if you have a bunch of totally green soldiers (like I tried to explain with the example of the 106th Inf Div), even that may not work.
"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006
User avatar
New York Jets
Posts: 628
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2001 8:00 am
Location: St. Louis, MO but stuck in Bremerton,WA

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by New York Jets »

ORIGINAL: Doggie

Not everybody does everything by the book. You tell troops not to bunch up and they still huddle up. When the smoking lamp is out, somebody will light up under a poncho. When you're humping for miles and haven't seen anything but squirels, noise discipline goes out the window and you carry your gear the most comfortable way possible.

Even when you've been warned about booby traps and mines, you get tired of avoiding trails and gateways, and that pair of binoculars or commie pistol is irresistable.

You can't say something you see in a movie never happened in real life. Chance are, it did.

I couldn't agree with this more.

No disrespect intended to Sarge but, just because you post one pic of a soldier carrying his tripod mount properly in "Indian" country does not mean that EVERY other Marine/Soldier in combat areas carried their gear properly as he shows.
"There comes a time in every man's life, and I've had plenty of 'em."

- Casey Stengel -
Poopyhead
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 4:42 pm

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by Poopyhead »

GoodGuy: Mir geht es gut! (Ich bin ein Ami, wie meine Mami.)

I think that this show continues the myth that perhaps we all want to believe, of a group of poor, dumb sobs making the most of it and winning through by shear guts and courage. Those of us in the know, learned that battles are won when a team (not a mere group of men) do the right things. I think that the men of the 1st Marine Division wanted to pound the Japanese on Guadalcanal into dog food, that they were led by men like Puller who were razors and that they outperformed battle hardened veterans against great odds through discipline, not luck. Now make a series showing that.
Astrologers believe that your future is determined on the day that you are born.
Warriors know that your future is determined on the day that your enemy dies.
GoodGuy
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:36 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by GoodGuy »

ORIGINAL: Poopyhead

Mir geht es gut! (Ich bin ein Ami, wie meine Mami.)

LOL.
For those who don't speak German, he just said "I'm an Ami [American], [just] like my mommy". [:)]
I think that the men of the 1st Marine Division wanted to pound the Japanese on Guadalcanal into dog food, that they were led by men like Puller who were razors and that they outperformed battle hardened veterans against great odds through discipline, not luck. Now make a series showing that.

I don't mean to depreciate US achievements or the quality of the 1st USMC on Canal, but the "great odds" mainly consisted of Malaria, battle fatigue and illnesses (dysentery, 1 in 5 Marines suffered of this).
The initial Marine contingent of 11,000 troops brought to Canal faced a Japanese contingent of ~ 2,800 men, where 2,200 of them were construction workers (Korean and Japanese).

It wasn't before the Tokyo-Express kicked in, and after a number of smaller battles where the Japs were totally outnumbered (except for some action at one ridge, IIRC), that a significant number of Japs got to Canal, but even then the Japs underestimated the American buildup that had occurred meanwhile, so that the Jap commander had 20,000 troops at his disposal, while the US had 23,000 troops.

The Japs totally underestimated the strength of the US contingent on Canal during the entire course of the campaign, which led to ill-fated attacks. Bad comm was another problem the Japs had to deal with, along with severe malnutrition, fatigue, Malaria and illnesses. The bad communication prior to the Japanese attack(s) on Henderson airfield resulted in the absence of an actually planned two-pronged attack. During the battle for Henderson the US lost 60 men, but the Japs lost 1500.

The greatest achievement in the Canal area was that the US managed to wear down the Japanese airforce in that sector, and the number of planes/pilots and ships the Japs then lost in the unfolding aerial and naval battles could never be replaced sufficiently. Overall the US had committed ~60,000 troops to the Guadacanal campaign (~7,000 killed), the Japs committed ~36,000, but had lost 31,000 men (killed), they lost 38 ships and some 800 planes. The US Navy could easily replace their losses (29 ships), just like the Air Force (~600 planes lost).
"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006
User avatar
JudgeDredd
Posts: 8356
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
Location: Scotland

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by JudgeDredd »

I had a little game (for the Commodore 64 or the Amiga 500 - it might even have been an old DOS game on my 486 in the 90's) which played out Guadalcanal. I can't remember exactly how it played, but it had night and day turns, and you had to get your ships in at night and/or attack the Tokyo Express.

It was a reasonable game.

Anyway, I'm going to stop reading this thread until I get to see it!
Alba gu' brath
User avatar
Zakhal
Posts: 1407
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland

RE: OT "The Pacific": Your Reviews

Post by Zakhal »

The book "Japanese destroyer commander" has excellent briefing on what went wrong in guadalcanal. It was the japanese inflexibility, piecemeal commitment and allied radar that was killer in night ops iirc.  
"99.9% of all internet arguments are due to people not understanding someone else's point. The other 0.1% is arguing over made up statistics."- unknown poster
"Those who dont read history are destined to repeat it."– Edmund Burke
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”