Ban Google Earth.....

2007-01-13 07:07:49

#1

usmarine2007: Banned; +374|6380|Columbus, Ohio

.... save a British life or anyone else for that matter.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh … ogle13.xml

Bubbalo does not think they should be called terrorists since they attacked a military base, if you would like to discuss that there is a thread for that.

Last edited by usmarine2007 (2007-01-13 07:27:47)

2007-01-13 07:13:05

#2

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|6779|UK

the link doesnt work.

2007-01-13 07:17:37

#3

Hurricane: Banned; +1,153|6643|Washington, DC

The fuck didn't you post this already?

2007-01-13 07:28:31

#4

usmarine2007: Banned; +374|6380|Columbus, Ohio

Hurricane wrote:
The fuck didn't you post this already?

The fuck? Yes. And if you did see it you could see why I restarted it.

2007-01-13 07:32:23

#5

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6594|SE London

I think banning Google Earth would be taking things a bit far. It would be much easier to tell them to not include military locations in their maps, that'd avoid all this trouble.

2007-01-13 07:34:51

#6

Vilham: Say wat!?; +580|6779|UK

Shouldnt be banned, the maps should be blurred out or areas removed. Then the army needs to rotate tents and things so the data is useless anyway.

2007-01-13 07:35:09

#7

usmarine2007: Banned; +374|6380|Columbus, Ohio

Bertster7 wrote:
I think banning Google Earth would be taking things a bit far. It would be much easier to tell them to not include military locations in their maps, that'd avoid all this trouble.

I agree. Just used Ban as an eye catcher.

2007-01-13 07:37:09

#8

jonsimon: Member; +224|6508

usmarine2007 wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
I think banning Google Earth would be taking things a bit far. It would be much easier to tell them to not include military locations in their maps, that'd avoid all this trouble.
I agree. Just used Ban as an eye catcher.

That was kinda silly, now everyone that doesnt read this specific post will think the thread is about you wanting to ban google earth.

2007-01-13 07:39:17

#9

usmarine2007: Banned; +374|6380|Columbus, Ohio

jonsimon wrote:
usmarine2007 wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
I think banning Google Earth would be taking things a bit far. It would be much easier to tell them to not include military locations in their maps, that'd avoid all this trouble.
I agree. Just used Ban as an eye catcher.
That was kinda silly, now everyone that doesnt read this specific post will think the thread is about you wanting to ban google earth.

get over it and move on.

2007-01-13 07:44:16

#10

ssj3barua: Member; +55|6702|Indianapolis, IN, U.S.

jonsimon wrote:
usmarine2007 wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
I think banning Google Earth would be taking things a bit far. It would be much easier to tell them to not include military locations in their maps, that'd avoid all this trouble.
I agree. Just used Ban as an eye catcher.
That was kinda silly, now everyone that doesnt read this specific post will think the thread is about you wanting to ban google earth.

I guess if you can't read down that far, it really doesn't matter.

2007-01-13 07:45:28

#11

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|6634|London, England

I thought the Google maps were really outdated? Like a couple of years? Hardly useful. Now if they managed to get some super secret russian satolite pikters or Iranian UAV pikters that were taken very recently. That'd be a different story.

2007-01-13 07:50:41

#12

jonsimon: Member; +224|6508

ssj3barua wrote:
jonsimon wrote:
usmarine2007 wrote:

I agree. Just used Ban as an eye catcher.
That was kinda silly, now everyone that doesnt read this specific post will think the thread is about you wanting to ban google earth.
I guess if you can't read down that far, it really doesn't matter.

Not everyone reads every post in a thread before commenting. I often read the OP and then respond to it alone, esspecially when there are multiple pages.

2007-01-13 07:54:00

#13

ssj3barua: Member; +55|6702|Indianapolis, IN, U.S.

jonsimon wrote:
ssj3barua wrote:
jonsimon wrote:

That was kinda silly, now everyone that doesnt read this specific post will think the thread is about you wanting to ban google earth.
I guess if you can't read down that far, it really doesn't matter.
Not everyone reads every post in a thread before commenting. I often read the OP and then respond to it alone, esspecially when there are multiple pages.

That's just bad forum etiquette.

2007-01-13 07:55:47

#14

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|6720|67.222.138.85

Just not showing military posts would be ideal, but not practical. There would be so many small encampments over the world that it would be a huge task to try and filter out all of them, and even them it would be obvious that there is at least something there when you hit a spot on the map that you can't see.

2007-01-13 07:57:12

#15

splixx: ChupaCABRA; +53|6752|Omaha, Nebraska

Uh like if you live in the same city or state for that matter you already know where the bases are located... Nothing to do with google maps. Thread is NULL.

2007-01-13 07:59:58

#16

ghettoperson: Member; +1,943|6662

What can you do? Probably the best thing to do would either to not show military bases that are in locations that would endanger the lives of the occupants, or to offset the images by a mile or so.

2007-01-13 07:59:59

#17

ssj3barua: Member; +55|6702|Indianapolis, IN, U.S.

splixx wrote:
Uh like if you live in the same city or state for that matter you already know where the bases are located... Nothing to do with google maps. Thread is NULL.

Having an overhead view would probably be pretty beneficial to a mortar crew though.

2007-01-13 08:03:36

#18

ShowMeTheMonkey: Member; +125|6715

This obvious blaming of something else really pisses me off. It's not because of fucking google erth these men are being attacked, it's because they are under-equipped, under trained and with poor orders.

Our government is a fucking joke. THINK about a place before you invade it. Yes the Iraqis were under a horrible regime, but does that give us the right to invade? NO.

Many muslim countries think we have an evil regime and would love to invade us. But do they NO! As they don;t have the means, instead they use terrorism.

Just because we have the means to invade doesn't mean we should.

Sorry about that, but people I know have been killed in Afghanistan, and also watching "Dispatches" put things into perspective.

2007-01-13 08:10:36

#19

jonsimon: Member; +224|6508

ssj3barua wrote:
splixx wrote:
Uh like if you live in the same city or state for that matter you already know where the bases are located... Nothing to do with google maps. Thread is NULL.
Having an overhead view would probably be pretty beneficial to a mortar crew though.

A realtime one maybe. But a single picture only helps in knowing where to fire initially, not if you're hitting anything.

2007-01-13 08:12:45

#20

jonsimon: Member; +224|6508

ssj3barua wrote:
jonsimon wrote:
ssj3barua wrote:

I guess if you can't read down that far, it really doesn't matter.
Not everyone reads every post in a thread before commenting. I often read the OP and then respond to it alone, esspecially when there are multiple pages.
That's just bad forum etiquette.

Responding to the OP and gaurenteeing an on topic post is bad etiquette?

2007-01-13 08:15:15

#21

ssj3barua: Member; +55|6702|Indianapolis, IN, U.S.

jonsimon wrote:
ssj3barua wrote:
splixx wrote:
Uh like if you live in the same city or state for that matter you already know where the bases are located... Nothing to do with google maps. Thread is NULL.
Having an overhead view would probably be pretty beneficial to a mortar crew though.
A realtime one maybe. But a single picture only helps in knowing where to fire initially, not if you're hitting anything.

The article said that their accuracy was increasing, not that they were hitting targets dead on.

Besides with mortars you have a blast area, you don't need to directly hit a target to cause casualties.

2007-01-13 08:16:08

#22

Commie Killer: Member; +192|6400

ShowMeTheMonkey wrote:
This obvious blaming of something else really pisses me off. It's not because of fucking google erth these men are being attacked, it's because they are under-equipped, under trained and with poor orders.

Our government is a fucking joke. THINK about a place before you invade it. Yes the Iraqis were under a horrible regime, but does that give us the right to invade? NO.

Many muslim countries think we have an evil regime and would love to invade us. But do they NO! As they don;t have the means, instead they use terrorism.

Just because we have the means to invade doesn't mean we should.

Sorry about that, but people I know have been killed in Afghanistan, and also watching "Dispatches" put things into perspective.

This is not a argument about Iraq, stop derailing and delete your post please, I will then delete mine.

2007-01-13 08:17:50

#23

ssj3barua: Member; +55|6702|Indianapolis, IN, U.S.

jonsimon wrote:
ssj3barua wrote:
jonsimon wrote:

Not everyone reads every post in a thread before commenting. I often read the OP and then respond to it alone, esspecially when there are multiple pages.
That's just bad forum etiquette.
Responding to the OP and gaurenteeing an on topic post is bad etiquette?

but you miss what every one else has already posted, including posts that are most likely identical to yours.

2007-01-13 08:19:41

#24

san4: The Mas; +311|6701|NYC, a place to live

The satellite images are out there. Every government in the world has them. Google Earth brings them to the masses but Iran (or North Korea, etc.) could supply anti-US forces with the images anyway.

The only way to control the images is to control the satellites. Rumsfeld was pretty serious about weapons in space to attack and protect satellites and I'm sure controlling these sorts of images is one reason why (the other is controlling communications).

Lots of countries have complained to Google and Google has done some blurring to accommodate them. A hell of a lot of stuff slips through anyway.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07/19 … n_mystery/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/16 … t_carrier/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/13 … democracy/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/14 … n_results/

Last edited by san4 (2007-01-13 08:23:53)

2007-01-13 08:20:58

#25

ShowMeTheMonkey: Member; +125|6715

Sorry, but I see this as just a scapegoat for the REAL problems there.

BF2S Forums Ban Google Earth.....

Hurricane wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

ssj3barua wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

ssj3barua wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

splixx wrote:

ssj3barua wrote:

splixx wrote:

ssj3barua wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

ssj3barua wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

ssj3barua wrote:

splixx wrote:

ShowMeTheMonkey wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

ssj3barua wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Board footer