Creating You (Make Your Own Everything) V.2

[Xekliv]

A: Special operations are not infantry.

Right. They're humvees.

[Den Svenska Riket]

A: Special operations are not infantry.

Right. They're humvees.

SpecOps are infantry, the SEALS are infantry. MI7 operatives are infantry.

[Xekliv]

Right. They're humvees.

SpecOps are infantry, the SEALS are infantry. MI7 operatives are infantry.

Twas a joke.

[Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen]

A: Special operations are not infantry.

Right. They're humvees.

Thank you for demonstrating your lack of knowledge.

[Fashiontopia]

I'm not sure why it's so hard for you to understand that infantry are not the backbone of a modern military.

Then why is it that everytime a nation goes to war they still put what entity on the ground first?

FOOT SOLDIERS... every leader in the world declares war to send troops to invade a nation... they don't automatically go say... send tanks, artillery and nukes... they only say put troops on the ground. Sure there are tank and artillery units. But when you look in any militaries' structure you see that the most abundant entities are Infantry Divisions with APC and AFV ACCOMPANIMENT... when you're inside a hunk of metal known as a tank you have very limited view... you could practically have a sworm of enemy troops with Anti-Tank weapons nearby and hiding and your tanks would know it. Plus a tank cannot shoot in every direction at once... an Infantry unit can. Artillery can't question civilians to get insight on where enemies are hiding, likewise artillery doesn't have anywhere near as many applications as Infantry does. Do you realize that tanks can't do infiltration of compounds? Nor can they move through dense forest or steep mountains.

Infantry is the backbone because they are all purpose... and can go almost anywhere you need them to to do the smallest or largest missions. Sure a nuke can end a war quickly if used on the right nation, but if you fire on the wrong country you might have 10 nukes pointed out and hundreds pointed back at you.

[Anomalous Research and Containment]

C) Bomb the complex to soften up resistance, and sift through the rubble with special forces.

The noise attracted too much attention underground, which made the guards proceed to execute the hostage.

GAME OVER

And before you say it, you must know that Galla has no definition of the word "subtle".

Right. They're humvees.

SpecOps are infantry, the SEALS are infantry. MI7 operatives are infantry.

Infantrymen are land based soldiers who are specifically trained for the role of fighting on foot to engage the enemy face to face and have historically borne the brunt of the casualties of combat in wars.

Special operations troops are not infantry, they are special operations troops.

[Xekliv]

I'm not sure why it's so hard for you to understand that infantry are not the backbone of a modern military.

Then why is it that everytime a nation goes to war they still put what entity on the ground first?

FOOT SOLDIERS... every leader in the world declares war to send troops to invade a nation... they don't automatically go say... send tanks, artillery and nukes... they only say put troops on the ground. Sure there are tank and artillery units. But when you look in any militaries' structure you see that the most abundant entities are Infantry Divisions with APC and AFV ACCOMPANIMENT... when you're inside a hunk of metal known as a tank you have very limited view... you could practically have a sworm of enemy troops with Anti-Tank weapons nearby and hiding and your tanks would know it. Plus a tank cannot shoot in every direction at once... an Infantry unit can. Artillery can't question civilians to get insight on where enemies are hiding, likewise artillery doesn't have anywhere near as many applications as Infantry does. Do you realize that tanks can't do infiltration of compounds? Nor can they move through dense forest or steep mountains.

Infantry is the backbone because they are all purpose... and can go almost anywhere you need them to to do the smallest or largest missions. Sure a nuke can end a war quickly if used on the right nation, but if you fire on the wrong country you might have 10 nukes pointed out and hundreds pointed back at you.

I bet he's just mad because his nation is full of sissy bitches who can't lift a twig.

[Anomalous Research and Containment]

I'm not sure why it's so hard for you to understand that infantry are not the backbone of a modern military.

Then why is it that everytime a nation goes to war they still put what entity on the ground first?

FOOT SOLDIERS... every leader in the world declares war to send troops to invade a nation... they don't automatically go say... send tanks, artillery and nukes... they only say put troops on the ground. Sure there are tank and artillery units. But when you look in any militaries' structure you see that the most abundant entities are Infantry Divisions with APC and AFV ACCOMPANIMENT... when you're inside a hunk of metal known as a tank you have very limited view... you could practically have a sworm of enemy troops with Anti-Tank weapons nearby and hiding and your tanks would know it. Plus a tank cannot shoot in every direction at once... an Infantry unit can. Artillery can't question civilians to get insight on where enemies are hiding, likewise artillery doesn't have anywhere near as many applications as Infantry does. Do you realize that tanks can't do infiltration of compounds? Nor can they move through dense forest or steep mountains.

Infantry is the backbone because they are all purpose... and can go almost anywhere you need them to to do the smallest or largest missions. Sure a nuke can end a war quickly if used on the right nation, but if you fire on the wrong country you might have 10 nukes pointed out and hundreds pointed back at you.

When you look at people who died in wars, most of them died from artillery.

Your argument is invalid.

[Alimeria II]

I would draw some art if people would give me proper suggestions. And not question me.

I think the suggestions mentioned were originally for Sevvania's truck some pages back. You posted your trucks around the same time.

I suggested Katyusha for Sevvania's, and now I'll suggest it for yours.

Really? Cause I sure don't see anyone else's truck that was posted around the same time as mine and plus my post was quoted in the people's stuff. And I ain't putting something from around 1940 in my Steampunk 1910's truck.

Can somebody please suggest something other than a stupid overpowered 50 cal. I would only use 50 cal maybe in the Nixon Shipkiller. Not on a Truck that's going to be deployed and used mostly in close-mid ranges. And I've already decided I would use my Gatling Gun, so no trying to get me to use another machine gun.

put some riflemen in the back of the truck. like some 1915 French or Tommy soldier (Tommy is American and British)

This is for my own Nation. And I've got my own soldiers. And I will put people when I'm done with it.

[Den Svenska Riket]

SpecOps are infantry, the SEALS are infantry. MI7 operatives are infantry.

Twas a joke.

I know that, just letting Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen know

[Xekliv]

When you look at people who died in wars, most of them died from artillery.

Your argument is invalid.

Stop pretending that artillery is the only fucking.. anything that's placed on the battlefield.

[Anomalous Research and Containment]

Twas a joke.

I know that, just letting Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen know

Know you're wrong?

Well, that's one way, I suppose.

When you look at people who died in wars, most of them died from artillery.

Your argument is invalid.

Stop pretending that artillery is the only fucking.. anything that's placed on the battlefield.

I'm just saying that artillery is the most important, relatively, to everything else. It causes the most casualties and paves the way for infantrymen to capture and hold territory with the support of tanks and aviation.

[Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen]

Twas a joke.

I know that, just letting Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen know

The problem is that you're wrong. None of those are infantry.

When you look at people who died in wars, most of them died from artillery.

Your argument is invalid.

Stop pretending that artillery is the only fucking.. anything that's placed on the battlefield.

It's not the only thing placed on the battlefield. Why do you insist on putting words in other people's mouths?

Infantry is not the backbone of the military, nor has it been for at least a couple of centuries. Is it vital? Yes. Is it numerous? Yes. Could your military do without it? No. But that doesn't make it the backbone of the military.

[Den Svenska Riket]

I think the suggestions mentioned were originally for Sevvania's truck some pages back. You posted your trucks around the same time.

I suggested Katyusha for Sevvania's, and now I'll suggest it for yours.

Really? Cause I sure don't see anyone else's truck that was posted around the same time as mine and plus my post was quoted in the people's stuff. And I ain't putting something from around 1940 in my Steampunk 1910's truck.

put some riflemen in the back of the truck. like some 1915 French or Tommy soldier (Tommy is American and British)

This is for my own Nation. And I've got my own soldiers. And I will put people when I'm done with it.

ok sorry dude, what page is the truck on and I will look at it. I may not know how to do this but I can design things if that makes sence to you.

[Xekliv]

I know that, just letting Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen know

Know you're wrong?

Well, that's one way, I suppose.

Stop pretending that artillery is the only fucking.. anything that's placed on the battlefield.

I'm just saying that artillery is rather obviously the most important, relatively, to everything else.

I'd like to see proof that artillery does more than just blow shit up. Does artillery think for itself? Does it have flesh? Can it move through areas that a tank cant? Can it walk? Can it hold a gun? Does it have emotions? IS IT A FUCKING HUMAN BEING?

[Xekliv]

It's not the only thing placed on the battlefield. Why do you insist on putting words in other people's mouths?

Because that's what you're telling us.

[Alimeria II]

Really? Cause I sure don't see anyone else's truck that was posted around the same time as mine and plus my post was quoted in the people's stuff. And I ain't putting something from around 1940 in my Steampunk 1910's truck.
This is for my own Nation. And I've got my own soldiers. And I will put people when I'm done with it.

ok sorry dude, what page is the truck on and I will look at it. I may not know how to do this but I can design things if that makes sence to you.

Page 34.

[Anomalous Research and Containment]

Know you're wrong?

Well, that's one way, I suppose.



I'm just saying that artillery is rather obviously the most important, relatively, to everything else.

I'd like to see proof that artillery does more than just blow shit up. Does artillery think for itself? Does it have flesh? Can it move through areas that a tank cant? Can it walk? Can it hold a gun? Does it have emotions? IS IT A FUCKING HUMAN BEING?

So I should draw a field artillery fire controlman instead?

Ok, I'll get on it.

It's not the only thing placed on the battlefield. Why do you insist on putting words in other people's mouths?

Because that's what you're telling us.

No, that's just what you think she's telling you.

You're wrong.

[Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen]

It's not the only thing placed on the battlefield. Why do you insist on putting words in other people's mouths?

Because that's what you're telling us.

No, you just have spectacularly poor reading comprehension. I suggest you go back and read what has actually been said.

[Xekliv]

No, that's just what you think she's telling you.

What he meant was "artillery wins battles".

Nuclear weapons are the current epitome of the artillery branch as of the 21st c.

[Fashiontopia]

When you look at people who died in wars, most of them died from artillery.

Your argument is invalid.

You can't send 100,000 tanks into a war to make sure that a front is maintained so you need someone to do it.

Your argument is invalid because you're not counting on the enemy using conventional war tactics... you're thinking that you're facing insurgents in which it is certainly easier to level compounds than to send men in to filter them out.

What if their are enemy troops that only hide amongst innocent civilians and/or ancient landmarks that are important to not be destroyed? You can't use artillery because then you'll be killing innocent people or destroying landmarks that deserve to be preserved. No one would destroy the Effel tower or the Pyramids, or the Tower of Pisa or the Colosseum just because you don't feel like sending infantry in to flush the enemy out.

Longstory short Infantry are like drain CLEANER, artillery is like drain BLASTER... you're not trying to destroy the innocence or the landscape you're only trying to defeat an enemy.

[Xekliv]

I suggest you go back and read what has actually been said.

What he meant was "artillery wins battles".

Nuclear weapons are the current epitome of the artillery branch as of the 21st c.

[Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen]

When you look at people who died in wars, most of them died from artillery.

Your argument is invalid.

You can't send 100,000 tanks into a war to make sure that a front is maintained so you need someone to do it.

Your argument is invalid because you're not counting on the enemy using conventional war tactics... you're thinking that you're facing insurgents in which it is certainly easier to level compounds than to send men in to filter them out.

What if their are enemy troops that only hide amongst innocent civilians and/or ancient landmarks that are important to not be destroyed? You can't use artillery because then you'll be killing innocent people or destroying landmarks that deserve to be preserved. No one would destroy the Effel tower or the Pyramids, or the Tower of Pisa or the Colosseum just because you don't feel like sending infantry in to flush the enemy out.

Longstory short Infantry are like drain CLEANER, artillery is like drain BLASTER... you're not trying to destroy the innocence or the landscape you're only trying to defeat an enemy.

As a matter of fact, he's not saying that infantry isn't needed, just that it does not form the backbone of a military's fighting force.

I suggest you go back and read what has actually been said.

What he meant was "artillery wins battles".

Nuclear weapons are the current epitome of the artillery branch as of the 21st c.

I suggest you go back and read what has actually been said.

[Xekliv]

As a matter of fact, he's not saying that infantry isn't needed.

But you are.

[Our Most Resplendent Goddess Sen]

As a matter of fact, he's not saying that infantry isn't needed.

But you are.

Oh deary me, sorry for thinking you could actually read.

Fuck, Napoleon himself was the guy who said that god fights on the side with better artillery. Infantry are vital, yes, but they don't actually do all that much.

B: I said infantry didn't do much, not that they were useless. In fact, if you had reading comprehension you would have noticed I said they were vital.

Infantry is not the backbone of the military, nor has it been for at least a couple of centuries. Is it vital? Yes. Is it numerous? Yes. Could your military do without it? No. But that doesn't make it the backbone of the military.