04-Oct-2024 00:06 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
[Forum] MicroAmiga available in October.ANN.lu
Posted on 28-Aug-2004 19:07 GMT by drHirudo126 comments
View flat
View list
After some delay, the first Next generation Amiga at affordable
price will be available at the dealers in start of October. More info is Here The suggested end user price for these boards is as follows:

µ-A1-C - gbp349/euro499/USD599 (ex VAT/sales tax)
µ-A1-I - gbp399/euro599/USD699 (ex VAT/sales tax)
List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1JoannaK28-Aug-2004 19:26 GMT
Comment 2ehaines28-Aug-2004 20:05 GMT
Comment 3Lando28-Aug-2004 20:19 GMT
Comment 4Lando28-Aug-2004 20:20 GMT
Comment 5coldfire28-Aug-2004 20:37 GMT
Comment 6Anonymous28-Aug-2004 21:11 GMT
Comment 7Anonymous28-Aug-2004 21:17 GMT
Comment 8Anonymous28-Aug-2004 21:44 GMT
Comment 9Anonymous28-Aug-2004 21:53 GMT
Comment 10Lando28-Aug-2004 22:15 GMT
Comment 11Lando28-Aug-2004 22:20 GMT
Comment 12Anonymous28-Aug-2004 22:56 GMT
Comment 13ABM$28-Aug-2004 23:43 GMT
Comment 14Anonymous28-Aug-2004 23:45 GMT
Comment 15Ronald St-Maurice29-Aug-2004 00:18 GMT
Comment 16drHirudo29-Aug-2004 02:01 GMT
Comment 17JoannaK29-Aug-2004 03:02 GMT
Comment 18DarrinRegistered user29-Aug-2004 03:49 GMT
Comment 19DarrinRegistered user29-Aug-2004 03:52 GMT
Comment 20DarrinRegistered user29-Aug-2004 04:13 GMT
Comment 21JoannaK29-Aug-2004 04:24 GMT
Comment 22DarrinRegistered user29-Aug-2004 04:50 GMT
Comment 23Anonymous29-Aug-2004 07:41 GMT
Comment 24The_Gunner29-Aug-2004 08:12 GMT
Comment 25Anonymous29-Aug-2004 08:39 GMT
Comment 26Don CoxRegistered user29-Aug-2004 08:47 GMT
Comment 27SeerRegistered user29-Aug-2004 09:23 GMT
Comment 28DarrinRegistered user29-Aug-2004 09:24 GMT
Comment 29Amon_ReRegistered user29-Aug-2004 09:28 GMT
Comment 30Amon_ReRegistered user29-Aug-2004 09:36 GMT
Comment 31Amon_ReRegistered user29-Aug-2004 09:44 GMT
Comment 32Anonymous29-Aug-2004 09:45 GMT
Comment 33Amon_ReRegistered user29-Aug-2004 09:51 GMT
Comment 34Anonymous29-Aug-2004 09:53 GMT
Comment 35Don CoxRegistered user29-Aug-2004 09:56 GMT
Comment 36Anonymous29-Aug-2004 10:09 GMT
Comment 37Anonymous29-Aug-2004 10:11 GMT
Comment 38Fei29-Aug-2004 10:33 GMT
Comment 39Anonymous29-Aug-2004 10:43 GMT
Comment 40itix29-Aug-2004 10:57 GMT
Comment 41Anonymous29-Aug-2004 11:09 GMT
Comment 42Amon_ReRegistered user29-Aug-2004 11:29 GMT
Comment 43Amon_ReRegistered user29-Aug-2004 11:32 GMT
Comment 44Anonymous29-Aug-2004 12:29 GMT
Comment 45Anonymous29-Aug-2004 12:34 GMT
Comment 46Dan29-Aug-2004 12:37 GMT
Comment 47Anonymous29-Aug-2004 13:09 GMT
Comment 48Don CoxRegistered user29-Aug-2004 13:56 GMT
Comment 49marcik29-Aug-2004 14:22 GMT
Comment 50Anonymous29-Aug-2004 14:44 GMT
Comment 51AdmV29-Aug-2004 15:15 GMT
Comment 52DarrinRegistered user29-Aug-2004 15:27 GMT
Comment 53marcik29-Aug-2004 15:58 GMT
Comment 54Don CoxRegistered user29-Aug-2004 15:58 GMT
Comment 55marcik29-Aug-2004 16:03 GMT
Comment 56Anonymous29-Aug-2004 16:10 GMT
Comment 57Don CoxRegistered user29-Aug-2004 16:18 GMT
Comment 58Anonymous29-Aug-2004 16:26 GMT
Comment 59Anonymous29-Aug-2004 16:38 GMT
Comment 60Anonymous29-Aug-2004 16:43 GMT
Comment 61Don CoxRegistered user29-Aug-2004 17:05 GMT
Comment 62Fei29-Aug-2004 17:24 GMT
Comment 63marcik29-Aug-2004 18:36 GMT
Comment 64Anonymous29-Aug-2004 19:33 GMT
Comment 65AdmV29-Aug-2004 20:01 GMT
Comment 66AdmV29-Aug-2004 20:03 GMT
Comment 67steve-o^29-Aug-2004 22:08 GMT
Comment 68coldfire30-Aug-2004 01:39 GMT
Comment 69hooligan/dcsRegistered user30-Aug-2004 02:15 GMT
Comment 70Amon_ReRegistered user30-Aug-2004 03:58 GMT
Comment 71Amon_ReRegistered user30-Aug-2004 03:59 GMT
Comment 72AdmV30-Aug-2004 06:14 GMT
Comment 73Anonymous30-Aug-2004 06:29 GMT
Comment 74Kronos30-Aug-2004 06:34 GMT
Comment 75Anonymous30-Aug-2004 06:37 GMT
Comment 76Anonymous30-Aug-2004 06:44 GMT
Comment 77Anonymous30-Aug-2004 07:01 GMT
Comment 78Anonymous30-Aug-2004 08:14 GMT
Comment 79priest30-Aug-2004 08:15 GMT
Comment 80Anonymous30-Aug-2004 08:17 GMT
Comment 81steve-o^30-Aug-2004 08:49 GMT
Comment 82marcik30-Aug-2004 08:58 GMT
Comment 83AdmV30-Aug-2004 10:20 GMT
Comment 84DarrinRegistered user30-Aug-2004 10:36 GMT
Comment 85Don CoxRegistered user30-Aug-2004 11:49 GMT
Comment 86Olegil30-Aug-2004 12:57 GMT
Comment 87Fei30-Aug-2004 14:24 GMT
Comment 88Fei30-Aug-2004 14:27 GMT
Comment 89Don CoxRegistered user30-Aug-2004 14:35 GMT
Comment 90DarrinRegistered user30-Aug-2004 14:40 GMT
Comment 91pixie31-Aug-2004 00:08 GMT
Comment 92coldfire31-Aug-2004 01:33 GMT
Comment 93hooligan/dcsRegistered user31-Aug-2004 01:36 GMT
Comment 94Fei31-Aug-2004 04:06 GMT
Comment 95takemehomegrandmaRegistered user31-Aug-2004 07:02 GMT
MicroAmiga available in October. : Comment 96 of 126ANN.lu
Posted by AdmV on 31-Aug-2004 07:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 92 (coldfire):
OK, Your comment:
England may have been exhausted but the US was just hitting it's stride at the end of WWII. At wars end US Naval Yards were producing an aircraft carrier per week, there were battleships under construction, one 90% complete, that dwarfed the largest current battleships. Aircraft of all types were being produced faster than pilots could be trained to fly them. Patton and other American Generals were spoiling for a fight and had division after division of well equipped, well trained, battle hardened and victorious troops. Stalin could have been dealt with. Invading Russia is one thing...throwing the Russians out of Poland would have been another.

coldfire

Lets start to look into that. Soviet army forces stood at 12.5 Million men and Women. They had on the ground at the VERY least matching numbers of tanks. The T34 is a better tank than the tommy cooker (Sherman). You also ignore tha ABSOLUTE fanatacism of Soviet forces at the time. Consider Stalingrad where they did not have enough guns, so they would send two men with one gun. When one man fell the other one would pick up the gun and continue fighting. The Soviets would expend human beings at a rate unthinkable in Britain or in America. The soviets had no problem producing weapons in massive numbers just like the US. In some areas they lacked types of weapons, such as in Naval terms. But you are not talking about a Naval issue, you are in a primary sense talking about the European theatre, one where you face massed forces of Stalins Organs, T34's, Millions of men, armour, artillery, You no longer have Air superiority, and you lose the ability to bomb the enemy industrial infrastructure. Oh, and just so you know this, you have no access to Polish areas. None. You have to attack through the russian held areas of Germany, or come through by Indaving other states like Czechoslovakia.

http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Political-Science/17-471American-National-Security-PolicyFall2002/4B404E48-D98D-4C05-B494-0AC08DF051F7/0/174710819451949.pdf

Further, the 'Autumn Storm' offensive by the Soviet Union against Japan would not have occured. The Soviet airforces facing the allies can be taken from here:
http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/George_Mellinger/soviet_order_of_battle.htm

This does not include units seemingly including the 3,000 hurricanes Britain sent the Russians.

Quite frankly, what you suggest is for the western allies to turn on an enemy at least the equal of nazi germany at its height in terms or number of weapons, men, equipment, and manufacturing capability.

Do you somehow believe that the American and British Airfroces would be able to fly to Tankograd and bomb the russian tank factories?
What, you'd start trying to bomb Moscow? You'd commit to Coldfire's 'Barbarossa II'?

I think NOT.

Now, lets say I was as stupid as you, and I thought it was even half possible to shunt the Soviets out of Eastern Europe. Lets say you did. Do you somehow believe they would drop back to their borders and just accept it?

Further, if the US and the Allies could not move out of the European theatre, just how will you allocate the forces needed in the Pacific against Japan?
Jump...
#105 coldfire
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 97priest31-Aug-2004 07:54 GMT
Comment 98priest31-Aug-2004 07:56 GMT
Comment 99takemehomegrandmaRegistered user31-Aug-2004 08:30 GMT
Comment 100Olegil31-Aug-2004 09:04 GMT
Comment 101Sammy Nordström31-Aug-2004 09:26 GMT
Comment 102pixie31-Aug-2004 10:35 GMT
Comment 103Alkis TsapanidisRegistered user31-Aug-2004 10:49 GMT
Comment 104MarkTime31-Aug-2004 18:51 GMT
Comment 105coldfire01-Sep-2004 01:42 GMT
Comment 106Fei01-Sep-2004 03:50 GMT
Comment 107AdmV01-Sep-2004 06:38 GMT
Comment 108priest01-Sep-2004 07:31 GMT
Comment 109Olegil01-Sep-2004 08:13 GMT
Comment 110Don CoxRegistered user01-Sep-2004 11:13 GMT
Comment 111Amon_ReRegistered user01-Sep-2004 11:20 GMT
Comment 112Fei01-Sep-2004 13:08 GMT
Comment 113Anonymous01-Sep-2004 15:23 GMT
Comment 114Abuse01-Sep-2004 16:17 GMT
Comment 115hammer02-Sep-2004 00:13 GMT
Comment 116hammer02-Sep-2004 00:31 GMT
Comment 117coldfire02-Sep-2004 03:07 GMT
Comment 118Anonymous02-Sep-2004 03:25 GMT
Comment 119priest02-Sep-2004 05:28 GMT
Comment 120hammer02-Sep-2004 11:21 GMT
Comment 121hammer02-Sep-2004 11:26 GMT
Comment 122hammer02-Sep-2004 11:31 GMT
Comment 123John Block02-Sep-2004 11:51 GMT
Comment 124hammer02-Sep-2004 21:13 GMT
Comment 125hammer02-Sep-2004 21:17 GMT
Comment 126hammer04-Sep-2004 08:25 GMT
Back to Top