Re: bayonettes are too a useful device

John spake thusly upon matters weighty: 

> Define overreact in the context of a couple hundred nutcases, probably

> on drugs, throwing rocks, molotovs, and covering the fire of a couple 
> dozen guys with AKs.	My perspective is that it's better to live with 
> having waxed a couple of idiots who are too stupid to live anyway 
> (defined as anyone who thinks a riot with live ammo is a spectator 
> sport) than to cease living.	

The point here I think is something that you might not be addressing 
(or maybe you disagree with). As I recall how the Canadian forces 
teach their UN guys how to deal with this stuff (from War College 
information) is 

*NEVER ESCALATE* 

That means you always use minimum force necessary to contain the 
situation and you never escalate (say by firing first). Now, if 
you're shot at with small arms, you reply with same (you don't 
escalate to tanks guns or autocannons).   

In general, you try to avoid putting your personnel in these 
situations. I think Intel failures are usually what puts ground 
pounders in these situations (or stupid politicos). 

> Also note that there is a difference between putting down rioting 
> American citizens (or other people you are charged to protect) and 
> dealing with rioting Third Worlders who are aiding your enemies.  

Yeah, the American's likely have better firearms. (*grin*)
 
> To make this relevant, how many of the troops normally used in 
> Dirtside/Star Grunt games care about that?  Certaintly not Foreign 
> Legionairres (OK, rename them Colonial.  Safe diff) nor ESU personell 
> (come on, they consider T-59s crowd control in their capital city!)
nor 
> a lot of other cultures.  

Whoooooah there John. 300 years is 300 years. Are you telling me (by 
making those comments about FSE and about ESU) that I should take 
from that that the modern Americans (NAC) have no respect for 
aboriginal rights and plan to heard them together and have them 
killed? I think every country has moments in its past to be ashamed 
of. And I think China (who you are referring to) has changed 
governments and character thereof a few times in the last 300 years. 
I'm sure that their are a lot of Chinese who really didn't think much 
of the Tianamen affair. As an aside, why is it you seem to like to 
dwell on the past of countries? The future would seem more relevant 
given the direction of the GZG games. If we look at trends, the 
trends toward increased freedoms and capitalism even in China are 
clear. I think in 300 years, the US (NAC) might end up eating the 
dust of the powerful ESU economy. The average asian inolved in 
commerce seems to have a harder work ethic and a better understanding 
of 'doing business' than your average North American.  

I think it's silly to tar countries with the actions of more than one 
generation back. (in 300 years, any country could be anything....). 
Otherwise I'm going to have to ask the that you tar the NAC with all 
the crimes of the US, Britain, and its other constituent countries 
for the last 300 years. Which is not only probably unjust (IMHO), but 
also not reflective of where the countries are actually headed. 
 
Here endeth the sermon (I just noticed how preachy that all 
sounds....). 

Tom.  
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay
Software Specialist
Police Communications Systems
Software Kinetics Ltd.
66 Iber Road, Stittsville
Ontario, Canada, K2S 1E7
Reception: (613) 831-0888
PBX: (613) 831-2018
My Extension: 2036
Fax: (613) 831-8255
Software Kinetics' Web Page: 
     http://www.sofkin.ca
SKL Daemons Softball Web Page: 
     http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/softhp.htm
**************************************************/