You got a good point there too, especially about the languages, I'm a 15-year old European and I can speak Dutch, English, a bit French and I can speak German (sort of)..Spearhead wrote:
Are you five or something? Have you ever even been to Europe? You have the reasoning of an adult retard or a 5 year old.stryyker wrote:
one mistranslation of a word could lead to the deaths of a thousand men.Reaxzion wrote:
An army of different languages can function properly, just look at Belgium or Switzerland.
They're not as foolish as you think. In fact, you're a fool for thinking that. While it's not real life, remember that 2 of the best guns in BF2 are German made. Many more, too.
Since you've already proven your stupidity, you do know that most Europeans speak at LEAST 2 language, right? Even the worst General wouldn't be as stupid as to mistranslate a word, b/c one, he would probably speak the language, and two, there's a 100 percent chance someone in their unit spoke it too.
If I were European, I'd be pretty fucking offended. More offended now that I'm from the same country as you
Poll
Should there come a European (Union) Army?
| Yes. | 55% | 55% - 61 | ||||
| No. | 44% | 44% - 49 | ||||
| Total: 110 | ||||||
im not saying it wouldnt work, im just saying its an impractible idea. There is a good oppertunity for a Coalition nonetheless, but an organized multinational army? no sir.
It was just an example, to show how language-shit can get out of control.Spearhead wrote:
Uh ya, they were still using Zeppelins, Bi-planes, bolt action rifles, tanks that moved a 2 MPH, and horses to carry messages in WW1.Reaxzion wrote:
Indeed, good point, that's what happend to the Belgian troops in WW I. The Dutch-speaking soldiers (the Flemings) didn't understood what their French-speaking officers (Wallonians) were saying, causing them to make wrong actions..stryyker wrote:
one mistranslation of a word could lead to the deaths of a thousand men.
I think times are a little different now.
Last edited by Reaxzion (2006-08-10 17:03:21)
It could work, but then again we (the entire world) could also colonize the Moon too, but that won't happen because of the human nature to disargee about anything and everything.
Iceland will nuke the moon the year 2054[1FR]S3v3N wrote:
It could work, but then again we (the entire world) could also colonize the Moon too, but that won't happen because of the human nature to disargee about anything and everything.
Mathematical problems for space-borne missions can completely fail even if they're off by .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000stryyker wrote:
considering a joint space mission failed due to a metric-imperial miscalculation, the margin for error during war, especially with orders, is too great to overlook.
000000000000000000000000000000000000001.
With something as simple as translating, especially in Europe, they'd have to be pretty damn stupid to screw it up.
Last edited by Spearhead (2006-08-10 17:06:15)
what if it is a miscalculation for close air support? hmmn? then many friendlies die because the pilot and ground attack officers did not understand eachother.Spearhead wrote:
Mathematical problems for space-borne missions can completely fail even if they're off by .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001.stryyker wrote:
considering a joint space mission failed due to a metric-imperial miscalculation, the margin for error during war, especially with orders, is too great to overlook.
With something as simple as translating, especially in Europe, they'd have to be pretty damn stupid to screw it up.
Now, that's an exaggerationSpearhead wrote:
Mathematical problems for space-borne missions can completely fail even if they're off by .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000stryyker wrote:
considering a joint space mission failed due to a metric-imperial miscalculation, the margin for error during war, especially with orders, is too great to overlook.
000000000000000000000000000000000000001.
With something as simple as translating, especially in Europe, they'd have to be pretty damn stupid to screw it up.
yeah, I got your point, but technology has advanced hundreds of times since WW1.Reaxzion wrote:
It was just an example, to show how language-shit can get out of control.Spearhead wrote:
Uh ya, they were still using Zeppelins, Bi-planes, bolt action rifles, tanks that moved a 2 MPH, and horses to carry messages in WW1.Reaxzion wrote:
Indeed, good point, that's what happend to the Belgian troops in WW I. The Dutch-speaking soldiers (the Flemings) didn't understood what their French-speaking officers (Wallonians) were saying, causing them to make wrong actions..
I think times are a little different now.
As a European, you've got to admit that you'd have to be pretty stupid to mistranslate military orders. Or to have a General that speaks one language
there is no cetainty in war.Spearhead wrote:
yeah, I got your point, but technology has advanced hundreds of times since WW1.Reaxzion wrote:
It was just an example, to show how language-shit can get out of control.Spearhead wrote:
Uh ya, they were still using Zeppelins, Bi-planes, bolt action rifles, tanks that moved a 2 MPH, and horses to carry messages in WW1.
I think times are a little different now.
As a European, you've got to admit that you'd have to be pretty stupid to mistranslate military orders. Or to have a General that speaks one language
Some of us are kind of forced to know different languages, those who speak only one, well, they live in a country with millions of people....300,000 folks speak Icelandic...
Do scientists spend years calculating the exact coordinates for close air support? No, I think the war would most likely be over.stryyker wrote:
what if it is a miscalculation for close air support? hmmn? then many friendlies die because the pilot and ground attack officers did not understand eachother.Spearhead wrote:
Mathematical problems for space-borne missions can completely fail even if they're off by .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001.stryyker wrote:
considering a joint space mission failed due to a metric-imperial miscalculation, the margin for error during war, especially with orders, is too great to overlook.
With something as simple as translating, especially in Europe, they'd have to be pretty damn stupid to screw it up.
Are you familiar with NASA? They spend years upon years doing these super-duper equations. Why? Because it's space travel. It's a new frontier.
Close air support doesn't require years of math to complete. I'm just making a point that your little detail about the failed space mission hardly has anything to do with combat efficiency.
NASA f*cks up every now and then, and they're dealing with American numbers and the English language. It's a wee bit harder than you think
Last edited by Spearhead (2006-08-10 17:18:24)
Sometimes, I get the feeling that some Americans think that Europeans are stupid, cowardly and always 'fight' with themselves..
Europeans are far, FAR superior to the US for international Cooperation. the fact is, we are the USReaxzion wrote:
Sometimes, I get the feeling that some Americans think that Europeans are stupid, cowardly and always 'fight' with themselves..
Last edited by stryyker (2006-08-10 17:13:25)
Dude, go to Europe, I went there knowing about 5 words of German and 1 word of French. I probably talked to 100-200 people when I was there for 2 weeks, and about 2 or 3 of them had slight trouble understanding what I was saying.stryyker wrote:
there is no cetainty in war.Spearhead wrote:
yeah, I got your point, but technology has advanced hundreds of times since WW1.Reaxzion wrote:
It was just an example, to show how language-shit can get out of control.
As a European, you've got to admit that you'd have to be pretty stupid to mistranslate military orders. Or to have a General that speaks one language
It's not as complex as you believe.
An EU Army would function fine, it's just the leadership issue that would be a problem.
Here in the Netherlands we got to learn French, English, German and on some schools even Spanish, we learn all those languages and no-one learns Dutch..PBAsydney wrote:
Some of us are kind of forced to know different languages, those who speak only one, well, they live in a country with millions of people....300,000 folks speak Icelandic...
It's probably the same situation as in Iceland?
Using one language in a single military organization will always be better then a multi-lingual military organization.
You only have to know one language so the chance of error will always be less as far as communication is concerned.
The chance of error is probably nowhere near equal to the mutual benefit a combined army could provide in terms of strength so erm, go for it
You only have to know one language so the chance of error will always be less as far as communication is concerned.
The chance of error is probably nowhere near equal to the mutual benefit a combined army could provide in terms of strength so erm, go for it
That sort of stuff has happened in the USA too.stryyker wrote:
considering a joint space mission failed due to a metric-imperial miscalculation, the margin for error during war, especially with orders, is too great to overlook.
Here theres no requirement to learn a second language, but at my high school we were given a choice of a European language; French or German, and a choice of a Pacific language; Japanese or Maori (NZ natives language). I chose German and Japanese.Reaxzion wrote:
Here in the Netherlands we got to learn French, English, German and on some schools even Spanish, we learn all those languages and no-one learns Dutch..
It's probably the same situation as in Iceland?
AFAIK, dutch isn't taught in schools and isn't taught at my university, though I have been taught a few words of dutch...mostly curse-words...
God ver domme! Klootzak! Strunt! And a few others I don't know how to spell And such greats as Heineken and Oranjeboom of course
Unless there becomes a universal langauge in Europe thats not gonna work. I think NATO is as far as its gonna go.
Esperanto = FailCapt. Foley wrote:
Unless there becomes a universal langauge in Europe thats not gonna work.
NATO -> I sure hope not. A military collaboration within the EU -> yes, to an extent.
IMHO
I need around tree fiddy.
this is the funniest series of replies ever.Reaxzion wrote:
I know, and I replied : I don't agree with you calling Belgium crap.SwampDog wrote:
As i said, I don`t have any real justification for calling Belgium crap.Reaxzion wrote:
I don't agree with you calling Belgium crap.
Yes thats what the world needs is another army, ffs just do it the cheap way & build a terrorist army since thats what people would call it anyways.
N.A.T.O. is there to stay I'm afraid.
N.A.T.O. is there to stay I'm afraid.
Backed you up in Afghanistan and Iraqstryyker wrote:
England?
Two world wars, and, IIRC, one of the world's best tanksstryyker wrote:
Germany?
Three words: French Foreign Legion.stryyker wrote:
FRANCE?!?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_U … tle_groups
Already in the making.
Officers as well as soldiers trained in NATO standard of military orders.
Already in the making.
Officers as well as soldiers trained in NATO standard of military orders.
O H M Y G O D ! !PBAsydney wrote:
Yep, FN Herstal is a Belgian arms prdocution company.Reaxzion wrote:
The FN P90 is Belgian too?PBAsydney wrote:
Belgium makes some fine wepaons, without the Belgians there wouldn't be any M249!
Europe has many countries with powerfull armies
Germany, UK, Sweden and I think Ukraine has some kind of a good army aswell.
Plus we have the best tanks, Challenger and Leopard ftw!
You cant be serious saying that Sweden has a powerful army ??
As an argument. How about those fine Swedish fighter planes. Has one ever landed with out exploding ?? ;-)
And Yes I'm Finnish, witch explains why I just had to respond to this unbelievable claim....
