RE: Re[2]: Merc Guild

--- Eli Arndt <eli_arndt@wattosjunkyard.com> wrote:

> I suggested no such thing.  The example holds true,
> hoever, outgunned, is outgunned.  The point is, it's
> not what you have it's how you use it.  If all wars
> were rated on what you had, the US wouldn't be a
> country of its own.  

Really?  As near as I can tell, the Americans and
Brits used more or less identical small arms. 
Artillery was identical because most of our artillery
was captured Brit arty.  There was less of it, true. 
And of course, having the French Navy on our side for
one of it's few moments of total glory helps.  And a
couple thousand French Marines were also helpful--but
not as much as a the variety of trained officers that
the French loaned us in the early stages.

> What gauls me, is that no matter what, the original

What divides you into three parts??  I'm confused.

> statement was defended.  If you had just bothered to
> rephrase your comment say something along the lines
> of, "Arabs have yet to win a tank war" there would
> have been no problem, but instead you decided to
> pass judgement on an entire people/culture claiming
> their innefectiveness was somehow a part of who they
> are as a people.

Hey--that's not the only data point I have on the
subject.  Arabs are. . .  a hobby of mine.

John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/