Potatoe_Cannon

Yeah Klif, Andrew Jackson was a bastard.America didn't handle the Native Americans well at all, and I don't believe anyone disagrees, but we don't hate Germany because of Hitler anymore, or Russia because of Stalin, or China because of Mao..... well we still don't like China but for different reasons. The point is that all America can do is make good in the future to make up for the past, and thats the major aim of many of our operations overseas in Africa and Asia.And BornToDie, you have it a little wrong. America didn't create smallpox, it was brought over from Europe. But we did give Indians blankets infected with smallpox, not much better. Like Klif said, we were just bastards back then.

The reason why the US is in all these countries in the first place is because the UN is useless as an international peacekeeper. It was founded for this purpose, but since then countries have begun using it simply to secure their own stakes in the world. For example, France has taken an anti-war stance against the war in Iraq and instead favored weapons inspections. Inspections would have left Iraq without WMD, but Saddam, who has used chemical weapons before, can easily import WMD from neighbors afterwards. (Iraq already bought hundreds of thousands of doses of atrapine, a nerve gas antidote, from the US and other sources, likely to give to their soldiers so chemical weapons can be used on the battlefield.) And if there are weapons in Iraq, the UN would have just confiscated them, they would have never attacked. After all, finding weapons in Iraq in violation of the UN resolution was hailed as "progress". And as for that, why aren't UN inspectors in North Korea? The reason why France only wants inspections is because they will sustain heavy economic losses from lost oil contracts in the Iraqi war. They don't give a damn about the Iraqi people, because if they did they would join our coalition. Saddam's first act in power was to execute his political opposition, and after the war in 91 he killed everyone who supported the Americans. America helps people like this because we had to win independence ourselves, and ironically enough, we play the role that France played in our revolution. There are many countries especially in Africa, as UnwantedHero said, that are oppressive and require intervention, but I think the US is more reluctant to go into jungle counties because of vietnam. We can't liberate all the countries that need it all at once, but given time, we'll get to them. The Middle East is first ebcause they pose a grave danger to us through terrorism. However Gator, we can't just bomb our problems away because of all the innocent people who we'd kill as well. We dropped surgical bombs and sent in ground troops in Iraq, and yet people are still whining about civilian casualties there. (btw VampMaster I'd like those stats you gave qualified, i.e. in what way 2442 children were killed. And also, the UN had its oil for food program in place during the embargo. If we had given more food to saddam, I doubt he would have shared much of it but with his supporters.) But Iraq is just the biggest threat in a Middle East riddled with problems. Saudi Arabia says they are our allies, yet their country produces terrorists such as Bin Laden, and members of their government still do support terrorism. The palestinians say they are fighting Israeli occupation, when in reality they are being as immature as children. Israel has offered them 98% of the land they wanted and they refused. And then during the latest round of peace talks, the leader of HAMAS vowed more attacks to derail the talks. They don't want peace, they want victory. And I'm also tired of people comparing the US and Israel to the terrorists. We kill soldiers, terrorists, and the people who support them. In the process, we also kill some civilians, but not very many, and not intentionally. Terrorists actually target civilians and people in their daily lives, including women and children. People shouldn't criticize America for accidently killing civilians, while we are fighting people who purposely target civilians. www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com

ok thanks psy

Hey psy, what gun is that in your sig? It looks like a scoped assault rifle, but with a 9mm clip. Its probably obvious though and I'm just missing it.

The U.S. foreign policy is right where it should be right now. Bush senior wanted to attack Iraq in 91 and the UN told him to give it more time. The event that convinced me that we needed to invade was earlier this year when Iraq turned over weapons that they didn't list in their weapons report (thereby violating the UN resolution) and the UN hailed it as progress. I'm tired of people using the logic that, since people die in war, war is therefore always a bad thing and should never be resorted to. We tried that during WWII, but appeasement only gave us a larger army to fight. We lost thousands and thousands of soldiers in WWII, and have to date lost a few hundred in this war (yet this war is much more widely criticized). In 1941 we had Pearl Harbor, and in 2001 we had 9/11. Some say Iraq didn't attack us on 9/11, but they played about the same role as Germany did in Pearl Harbor. The leaders of both 1941 Germany and 2001 Iraq are both, for lack of a better term, pure evil. So what's different in this war? Is it not on a grand enough scale for our star-spangled eyes? History has shown that ignored problems do not solve themselves. The US was right not to wait any longer lest Iraq become more powerful/dangerous to our allies in the region. Frankly, I'm shocked that we were the only people willing to help free the majority of people in a nation who were in danger every day of being killed by their government if they so much as spoke out against it. The UN gave Iraq months to hide their weapons and we're puzzled why we can't find any weapons? As far as I'm concerned, we don't need to find a thing. We deposed a corrupt and ruthless dictator, who in my opinion posed a much greater threat than Somalia ever did, and Democrats didn't object to the operations there. The people who determine our foreign policy study it all day every day, and they know mountains more than what we hear through the media. We usually don't even truly understand the motives behind our foreign policy, so its pretty shortsighted of people to think they know foreign policy better than our experts.However, Republicans are incompetent when it comes to the economy. The Iraqi war is plenty to bring our economy out of a recession. Its foolish to think that we should give millions of dollars to the rich to help the economy. These people have already lost a great deal of money, they are not gonna turn around and invest the money they get back from the government in the same stock market where they lost a great deal of money in the first place. They'll save it and wait for the economy to improve. The poor need relief now, not in 8 years when trickle down finally takes effect (and when our national debt becomes nearly insurmountable from all these tax cuts). We need a president who will be Republican in foreign policy and democratic in economic policy.In the next few years, people are gonna get fed up with the partisanship and biased legislation in this country, and with the presidential election turning into a vote for the lesser of two evils (like Akuma said), the libertarian party is going to become very popular. They are a nice mix between democrats and republicans, though also a bit radical, but I agree with them that the government should not protect people from their own stupidity. That's called natural selection. Take a serious look at them.

I don't know, with as much time, work, and money valve has put into HL2, I don't expect there to be any major bugs whatsoever. I think valve will make sure that either the steam bugs have been fixed or they won't base HL2 on it. I bet the last thing valve wants is for people to have major technical problems running one of the most anticipated computer games ever.

The moving files method didn't work for me, everytime I tried to open a game it would close the firearms window right after it opened. So I installed firearms 2.8 directly to the half-life folder in steam/steamapps/*email*, and then also in my SIERRA/Half-Life folder. I didn't have to move anything and it worked great.

I could not be more disappointed after having the prospect of a red sox/cubs world series just a day ago. Even one would have been fine, but noooooo, the marlins won't roll over and die, and the red sox blow a four run lead with their best pitchers on the mound. There's no curse, the red sox have just sucked/choked consistantly since 1918.Interestingly enough, scientists say that in the days following an eventual red sox world series victory, the death rate in boston will triple, because there's a phenomenon where elderly people can artificially prolong their life to experience an important event. Once the red sox win, a whole bunch of old people who waited years for it will die in the next few days afterward.

ok, unlike many people who have steam working, I sympathize with all you who can't get it to work, because its less than self-explanatory. Here's exactly everything I did and my steam works now, see if it works for you.Downloaded CD 4.5.1Uninstalled steam and deleted the steam folder (ironic that the uninstall file is called "Unwise" )Uninstalled Half-Life through the setup program in C:\SIERRA, deleted the Half-Life folder in C:\SIERRA, and restarted my computer.Reinstalled Half-Life and opened it to enter the CD key.Installed Half-Life update 1.1.1.0Reinstalled Steam (Full Download)Installed Firearms 2.8 Full in both C:\SIERRA\Half-Life and C:\Program Files\Steam\SteamApps\*email*\half-lifeI loaded up CD and Steam and everything worked. However, OpenGL no longer works for my video card, the best I can do is D3D at 800x600 so I'm hoping to get it up to 1024x768 eventually. Hope this helped.

I had that same problem with the client.dll. To fix it, you need to install firearms 2.8 into steam/steamapps/*email*/half-life. The client.dll file then will be in the steam folder so it should work.

I think I figured out the problem with steam on my computer, and its probably the same for most other people. I followed the instructions on www.firearmsmod.com and copied firearms and IFC22.dll to my firearms folder in steam/steamapps/*email address*/half-life, but when I tried to go into games, the screen would go black like it was loading something, then it would exit back to the desktop with nothing changed. However, when I go into the firearms folder in steam and delete the folder "cl_dlls" and then try and load up a game, I see the firearms background and a game beginning to load up, and then an error message saying my client_dll doesn't match the server's. This file seems to be the source of my problems, since I can't load a game with or without it. Hopefully someone can help me out with this.

You all are lucky, you can find the TA server. When I open steam and tell it to browse servers, it gives me 2500 servers because there's no filter option for game:firearms, and even then The Armory is not on this list of servers. When I choose games and then firearms, it starts opening a window, and then exits back to the desktop. Maybe reinstallation a few dozen times will fix this quagmire.

ok thanks, I'll reconfigure and see what happens.

Thanks a lot paradigm, it worked for me too.But I have another question. My vidoe card is configured to d3d as opposed to openGL. Whats the difference and which one is better?

Full armor everything, G36E, and med 1&2 (replaced with a G3A3 on upham ), or full armor everything, MP5, frags, bandages, and stealth, and occasionally the AK47 (and the drag if the score gets too uneven).Never the famas, assault rifle bullets with smg rof and decent accuracy, thats just too much power for one gun.

I have that same problem too whippet. Its a pain that I have to leave TA whenever river is being played. But for me, after this glitch happens on TA, even if I go to another server no matter what map it is it still has all these triangles on it. I have to exit the game and reload it to get the other maps to work properly. Maybe that'll help all you knowledgable guys figure out whats wrong with our computers, and please try to because I want this problem gone very badly.

I think the greater advantage of using an assault rifle over a SMG is simply the damage capacity. If you and your opponent are jumping around shooting at each other, him with a SMG and you with an AR, he probably won't kill you with the first clip, but you'll do about equal damage with larger bullets at a slower ROF. This means that when his clip runs out, you'll still have 10 bullets in yours, and then you can back up a bit and finish him off.The SMG advantage is when two people are running at each other or in a confined space, then first one to fill the other with lead wins. But if you move around enough with an AR, you'll take away his advantage. He'll run out of bullets first and you just have to step back and splatter him.