EVE Search - Armchair general meets reality

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Armchair general meets reality

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page

Author	Topic
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated	Posted - 2008.07.31 21:28:00 - [91] Edited by: goodby4u on 31/07/2008 21:29:35 Originally by: Kirjava Originally by: Buff Plankchest Oh yeah, Iran is gonna sink a Nimitz class carrier Shit happens, the UK lost an aircraft carrier in the Falklands war. Yes you guys lost a cruiser and 2 destroyers if I remember my history correctly. But remember a nimitz class carrier has a several hundred mile aegis radar system setup, so anything coming will be seen unless there was an immense screw up, and even if there was the carrier would not be the ship to go down. Lastly, there is no chance in hell america will go into Iran any time soon unless either Iran or Israel does a massive **** up.
Zephyr Rengate dearg doom	Posted - 2008.07.31 21:37:00 - [92] A new war would be pretty funny though.
Ademaro Imre Caldari Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.07.31 21:44:00 - [93] Originally by: Kirjava Bish, if America wants to do that then it can, but if it tries to pull the UK in - I would be placing bets on the odds of a revolution here. The people wouldn't stand for it and its beginning to dawn on people in my area that protests do bugger all to the current government. If America goes - it goes alone unless Iran starts nuking people, thats a whole different kettle of fish. Then, its too late. There will be no way of knowing just who Iran gave bombs too, and where those bombs are, where they are floating in a small boat off shore of a major city, or already planted inside a city. The aim of politics is to keep the populace alarmed and clamorous to be saved by menacing it with imaginary hobgoblins. The urge to save humanity is a false front for the urge to rule it.
Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.07.31 22:06:00 - [94] Originally by: Ademaro Imre Then, its too late. There will be no way of knowing just who Iran gave bombs too, and where those bombs are, where they are floating in a small boat off shore of a major city, or already planted inside a city. Modern civilization could very well breakdown in the ensuing panic and fear if Iran just test-detonates a nuclear bomb, then says it has planted 5 of those bombs in major cities around the world and will detonate them unless their demands are met. You know damn well that if Iran did any such thing every military facility in the country would be leveled by the combined airpower of Europe and the US. Iran is not going to start handing out nukes to terrorists any more than Russia is, or any more than Iraq would have. Why? Because whatever ideological values they hold, they're always trumped by real world realities of the situation, and those realities are that giving nuclear weapons to terrorists or being linked to doing so endangers their sovereignty from both the international community and the terrorists, who have an unbeatable trump card. Ironically, the quote in your signature is appropriate here. The mentality that we need to strike first "because the smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud" is little more than fearmongering and not a terribly realistic scenario. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)
Kirjava Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.07.31 22:29:00 - [95] I agree with Tar, if Iran did that then they would likely forfeit their population. Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007.
Ademaro Imre Caldari Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.07.31 22:30:00 - [96] I am not so sure I can agree with you. Spain caved into terrorist demands to remove their 500 soldiers from Iraq. The election was basically a referendum on their 500 soldiers. I believe that would be repeated everywhere. Governments may act sanely and appropriately in such a scenario, and risk/suffer massive casualties, but the citizens will not act sanely and they could effect the decisions of their governments. And there will be, no doubt, a large and influential amount of citizens in every nation that will rather cave into demands for Sharia Law, than risk losing a city, or killing tens of thousands, or millions (maybe tens of millions) of Iranians (who largely disagree with their government) to extinguish the threat, knowing that terrorist cells already have their instructions for using the planted bombs. The Taliban didn't act sanely when it ruled Afganistan, neither did *****. The aim of politics is to keep the populace alarmed and clamorous to be saved by menacing it with imaginary hobgoblins. The urge to save humanity is a false front for the urge to rule it.*
Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.07.31 22:42:00 - [97] Originally by: Ademaro Imre I am not so sure I can agree with you. Spain caved into terrorist demands to remove their 500 soldiers from Iraq. The election was basically a referendum on their 500 soldiers. I believe that would be repeated everywhere. Governments may act sanely and appropriately in such a scenario, and risk/suffer massive casualties, but the citizens will not act sanely and they could effect the decisions of their governments. And there will be, no doubt, a large and influential amount of citizens in every nation that will rather cave into demands for Sharia Law, than risk losing a city, or killing tens of thousands, or millions (maybe tens of millions) of Iranians (who largely disagree with their government) to extinguish the threat, knowing that terrorist cells already have their instructions for using the planted bombs. In order for the world to be held hostage by Iran, every nation in the EU and basically every western nation on the would have to back down. I don't think that would happen in the US at least, because we're too stubborn to deal with terrorists trying to hold the nation hostage even if it would (from a purely logical perspective) be better to do so than risk nuclear attack. I can't really speak for other countries, obviously. Besides, since when has conversion by force been a successful strategy? I can't recall any point in history that it worked especially well. Something else to consider - if terrorists got their way in Spain, why haven't they tried the same thing elsewhere since then? They've had plenty of time. Quote: The Taliban didn't act sanely when it ruled Afganistan, neither did ****. A dictatorships first objective is and always will be to sustain itself - Iraq invaded Kuait (No idea how it's spelled) because *** thought that they could get away with it. The UN called his bluff. *** also thought that the US was bluffing when we said we'd invade, and unfortunately for him, he was incorrect as well. If you think about it, how would Iran being a nuclear power be any more dangerous than Russia was during the Cold War? Russia didn't use its nukes because they knew the US would respond in kind, and no one wants to rule over a smoldering husk of a planet that would be left after a global nuclear war. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)**
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.07.31 22:58:00 - [98] so you are reasoning that they fought hard against invasion as reason to invade
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.31 23:57:00 - [99] Originally by: Bish Ounen Funny that. I remember very clearly before the first AND the Second Iraq war the "experts" were saying the EXACT SAME THING. And yet, Iraq wasn't another Vietnam. Don't confuse a potential war with Iran with our recent jaunt in Iraq. Iraq was a broken country, hemmed in by massive economic and military restrictions for a decade, with a growing-scale rebellion in the northern Kurdish territory and a hugely unpopular leader. Iran is an oil-rich country with a relatively popular government (as these things go), with a relatively well funded military (only about 30% less than Israel's very highly regarded military). They are not even slightly the same thing, except that they're geographically kinda nearby... ------ Originally by: Micheal Dietrich You can even get a midget with a camera to sit on the floorboard.
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated	Posted - 2008.08.01 00:16:00 - [100] Originally by: Patch86 Originally by: Bish Ounen Funny that. I remember very clearly before the first AND the Second Iraq war the "experts" were saying the EXACT SAME THING. And yet, Iraq wasn't another Vietnam. Don't confuse a potential war with Iran with our recent jaunt in Iraq. Iraq was a broken country, hemmed in by massive economic and military restrictions for a decade, with a growing-scale rebellion in the northern Kurdish territory and a hugely unpopular leader. Iran is an oil-rich country with a relatively popular government (as these things go), with a relatively well funded military (only about 30% less than Israel's very highly regarded military). They are not even slightly the same thing, except that they're geographically kinda nearby... Actually according to wiki the Iraqs military funding is 4.9billion whilst Irans is about 6 billion.... Not much of a stretch tbh.

Tarminic 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.08.01 00:21:00 - [101] Originally by: goodby4u Originally by: Patch86 Originally by: Bish Ounen Funny that. I remember very clearly before the first AND the Second Iraq war the "experts" were saying the EXACT SAME THING. And yet, Iraq wasn't another Vietnam. Don't confuse a potential war with Iran with our recent jaunt in Iraq. Iraq was a broken country, hemmed in by massive economic and military restrictions for a decade, with a growing-scale rebellion in the northern Kurdish territory and a hugely unpopular leader. Iran is an oil-rich country with a relatively popular government (as these things go), with a relatively well funded military (only about 30% less than Israel's very highly regarded military). They are not even slightly the same thing, except that they're geographically kinda nearby... Actually according to wiki the Iraqs military funding is 4.9billion whilst Irans is about 6 billion.... Not much of a stretch tbh. What was it during the time immediately before the invasion? Remember that Iraq has economic sanctions that prevented it from purchasing most goods that had a significant military application. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated	Posted - 2008.08.01 00:32:00 - [102] Edited by: goodby4u on 01/08/2008 00:35:05 Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: goodby4u Originally by: Patch86 Originally by: Bish Ounen Funny that. I remember very clearly before the first AND the Second Iraq war the "experts" were saying the EXACT SAME THING. And yet, Iraq wasn't another Vietnam. Don't confuse a potential war with Iran with our recent jaunt in Iraq. Iraq was a broken country, hemmed in by massive economic and military restrictions for a decade, with a growing-scale rebellion in the northern Kurdish territory and a hugely unpopular leader. Iran is an oil-rich country with a relatively popular government (as these things go), with a relatively well funded military (only about 30% less than Israel's very highly regarded military). They are not even slightly the same thing, except that they're geographically kinda nearby... Actually according to wiki the Iraqs military funding is 4.9billion whilst Irans is about 6 billion.... Not much of a stretch tbh. What was it during the time immediately before the invasion? Remember that Iraq has economic sanctions that prevented it from purchasing most goods that had a significant military application. Well the guy origional quote said before the first and second one, and this was before desert storm I believe. EDIT: nope it was in 2006.
F'nog Amarr Celestial Horizon Corp. Celestial Industrial Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.01 06:59:00 - [103] I have no doubt that we could "defeat" Iran in a war. All it would entail is a bunch of B-52s and B-2s, plus fighter-bombers, to pound them into the stone age, not to mention regular fighters to take out their air force and a wide spread of cruise missiles. But that's basically what we did in Afganistan, and it hasn't worked out so well, has it? And that's what worries me. Even with our low-manpower restrictions, we could successfully attack them and lay their country to waste. But it would only make things worse in the long run as it would ** off the regular people who just want to raise their crops, milk their goats, and go about their lives. While they may have hated America because that's what they were told to do, it really didn't have any impact or concern in their lives. Afterwards, they really would hate America and have actual reasons to do so, like their dead family. And I don't know that some of our leaders realize this distinction. Originally by:** Kazuma Saruwatari F'nog for Amarr Emperor. Nuff said Originally by: Chribba Go F'nog! You're a hero! Not a Zero! /me bows
Mark Lucius Kinetic Vector	Posted - 2008.08.01 07:41:00 - [104] Look at all the armchair dictators in this thread. ---
ivar R'dhak STK Scientific	Posted - 2008.08.01 13:04:00 - [105] Originally by: F'nog And I don't know that some of our leaders realize this distinction. Oh the leaders (or those that actually tell them what to do) realize this very well. As they do realize the profits one can make out of it. (Hint: Cheyney) Most people in this thread are much too simpleminded in their belief of how our selected military and civilian leaders operate and for whom. As a parting shot to this thread(I got better things to do than trying to eradicate willful ignorance), google "supersonic cruise missile" and then look at how big the Persian gulf is. Remember: Sunburn could be bad for ya. _ Mal-`Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-¦Big damn heroes sir.¦ Mal-¦Aint we just.¦
mamolian Eternity INC. Project Alice.	Posted - 2008.08.01 14:47:00 - [106] Ever since watching this video earlier.. been watching several hilarious vids from George on youtube etc.. -----------
Xen Gin Universal Mining Inc Forged Dominion	Posted - 2008.08.01 15:02:00 - [107] Edited by: Xen Gin on 01/08/2008 15:03:44 Originally by: F'nog I have no doubt that we could "defeat" Iran in a war. All it would entail is a bunch of B-52s and B-2s, plus fighter-bombers, to pound them into the stone age, not to mention regular fighters to take out their air force and a wide spread of cruise missiles. But that's basically what we did in Afganistan, and it hasn't worked out so well, has it? There is a difference between subjugation and annihilation. A lot or Iran's populace are quite good people, while the more extremes hold a grip on policy making and power. Any sort of premeditated attack on Iran by Israel or the US, would incur high penalties for the west. I don't think the US could subjugate Iran by invasion, the resistance would be too high, the civilian and US soldier casualties too much for the American public. Iraq is a cakewalk compared to Iran, and If it did have a nuke, I would have no doubt that it would be willing to use it in self defence against Israel or even against a US invasion force in Iran itself. Iran knows that it can never attack Israel without provocation and without incurring the wrath of the West. To attack with a nuke would be suicide for all of Iran, as the US/UK/Israel wouldn't hesitate to launch back.
Aenis Veros Caldari Alphaflight	Posted - 2008.08.01 15:27:00 - [108] Originally by: Bish Ounen Iraq is a freer, more prosperous, and stronger nation than she has been for a long time. You haven't been then I take it? There is more internal conflict and higher death tolls than ever in the history of the nation. Mostly because no longer is there anyone who can control the Sunnis and the Shiites who love to kill each other. But I guess you're right, now they are "free" to do so.
Captain Hudson Caldari Royal Hiigaran Navy	Posted - 2008.08.01 18:05:00 - [109] Originally by: Patch86 Originally by: goodby4u And I understand the military is not invincible, but we will crush Iran. Whats your basis for thinking that? They have a large and experienced army, a good record of fighting full scale wars, a large (if ageing) air force, support no doubt from paramilitary (read: terrorist) groups, not to mention a defensive advantage. The US military, on the other hand, is already stretched to near-capacity on several other fronts. I mean don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly an expert or anything. But aside from nationalistic idiocy, is there any reason to assume the US would have an easy time of it? Iran have a estimated 11 million stong in paramilitary groups., that really is enough to give you a bad day The Real Eve FanFest
Ademaro Imre Caldari Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.08.01 20:47:00 - [110] Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 01/08/2008 20:47:35 Originally by: Aenis Veros There is more internal conflict and higher death tolls than ever in the history of the nation. That is patently false. The aim of politics is to keep the populace alarmed and clamorous to be saved by menacing it with imaginary hobgoblins. The urge to save humanity is a false front for the urge to rule it.

Ademaro Imre Caldari Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.08.01 20:56:00 - [111] Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 01/08/2008 20:59:33 Originally by: Tarminic If you think about it, how would Iran being a nuclear power be any more dangerous than Russia was during the Cold War? Russia didn't use its nukes because they knew the US would respond in kind, and no one wants to rule over a smoldering husk of a planet that would be left after a global nuclear war. I will not assume that the Iranian leadership is sane. Achmenxxxxx says we wants to bring back ther 12th or 14th or whatecer Imam from the dead by worldwide fire. I am just not so sure that Europe would standup to Iran. Only two countries can even hurt Iran, the UK and France, and only the UK can put troops or aircraft over Iranian territory. Would the UK subject itself to a nuclear exchange (dirty bombs, tactical nukes) over Poland? I doubt it. Darfus, Sudan are just across the shores from Europe, and no one in Europe o far has had the guts to stand up to wants goin on their. I do not believe that when push comes to shove, the UK or France will suffer massive losses for smaller countries. The radicals want the spread of Sharia Law. What happened in Spain was an oppurtunity, and afterwards Al Qaeda is being destroyed. But, radical Islam is winning so far so they haven't needed to try to puish small countries. Sharia Law got an official stamp from the judical branch in the UK, and the Dutch can't draw certain cartoons now. They did not need to blow up rail tracks for that. Radical muslims only need to stage a few riots and European countries shrivel up in fear and crush their own freedoms. When the stakes are raised much higher, by Hezbulloh, there will be more fear and panic. And the UK, US, will not even have a government to attack. Obliterate parts of Syria because of what Iran is doing? Citizens will never allow it. They will rather have their internet and cable TV be undisturbed, and avoid massive troop losses than come to the rescue of Poland or Portugal. The aim of politics is to keep the populace alarmed and clamorous to be saved by menacing it with imaginary hobgoblins. The urge to save humanity is a false front for the urge to rule it.
Kirjava Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.08.01 21:03:00 - [112] Edited by: Kirjava on 01/08/2008 21:07:07 I believe in the UK what happened was what happens in the Islamic Community in Britain is allowed to use its law on itself assuming all parties respect said laws. Not an expert but it comes with the whole freedom of speech and expression here and this is it in practice. One person, the head of the Protestent Church in Britain whose name momentarily eludes me "suggested" that this practice be formally let into British Law and mosy of the nation wanted his head. We do have a lot of laws regarding minorities (whites making up over 90-95% the population if I recall) but the kiddy gloves are a pennies drop away from being discarded should something serious like a nuclear exchange. With regard to Darfur - the bitter pill. It is not our problem. Therefore with more pressing issues domestically, the G8 governments are all bark and no bite, the Sudanese know this and by the time we are in a position to do anything about it there will be noone to save probably. If it turned out they were sitting on oil reserves the size of Saudi Arabia we would be all over it, the Oil would make it our problem. Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007.
Nuala Reece Caldari Trinity Nova Trinity Nova Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.01 21:12:00 - [113] Originally by: Kirjava Originally by: Buff Plankchest Oh yeah, Iran is gonna sink a Nimitz class carrier Shit happens, the UK lost an aircraft carrier in the Falklands war. Not to mention the now notorious 'fixed' wargames of a few years ago: Quote: The Army Times reported that, as commander of a low-tech, third-world army, Gen Van Riper appeared to have repeatedly outwitted US forces. He sent orders with motorcycle couriers to evade sophisticated electronic eavesdropping equipment. When the US fleet sailed into the Gulf, he instructed his small boats and planes to move around in apparently aimless circles before launching a surprise attack which sank a substantial part of the US navy. The war game had to be stopped and the American ships "refloated" so that the US forces stood a chance. from Linkage If a general, hamstrung by having the rules bent heavily against him, can manage that in a wargame imagine what a real nation could do when the Pentagon doesn't have the option to tweak the rules as it goes along or demand a time out to 'refloat' it's lost ships. Trinity Nova Mercenary Services Web Site - Nominated for the 2008 E-ON Magazine Awards
Kirjava Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.08.01 21:40:00 - [114] If that did happen and the US Navy was sunk by Iran - what would happen on the global stage? My thought is that they would be ****ed in the short term as they would lack the teeth to do much with the Marines and Navy + Naval Airforce.... Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007.
nahtoh Caldari StrikerCorp	Posted - 2008.08.01 23:24:00 - [115] Originally by: Ademaro Imre Edited by: Ademaro Imre on 01/08/2008 20:59:33 Originally by: Tarminic If you think about it, how would Iran being a nuclear power be any more dangerous than Russia was during the Cold War? Russia didn't use its nukes because they knew the US would respond in kind, and no one wants to rule over a smoldering husk of a planet that would be left after a global nuclear war. The radicals want the spread of Sharia Law. What happened in Spain was an oppurtunity, and afterwards Al Qaeda is being destroyed. But, radical Islam is winning so far so they haven't needed to try to puish small countries. Sharia Law got an official stamp from the judical branch in the UK, and the Dutch can't draw certain cartoons now. They did not need to blow up rail tracks for that. Radical muslims only need to stage a few riots and European countries shrivel up in fear and crush their own freedoms. When the stakes are raised much higher, by Hezbulloh, there will be more fear and panic. And the UK, US, will not even have a government to attack. Obliterate parts of Syria because of what Iran is doing? Citizens will never allow it. They will rather have their internet and cable TV be undisturbed, and avoid massive troop losses than come to the rescue of Poland or Portugal. Acutaly it was more alnong the lines of giving Muslems the same kinda coucils that Jews have here...abritation groups that can use the gudelines of their religions while UK law is still the over riding law of the land that was mooted by a judge. So it does not seem to be anything but allowing abretration between 2 muslims using some ismlamic tradtions if both parties agree to it. In itsself not too worrying, as signal for some of the more unblanced segments of the worlds religions more worrying (and yes i mean the loony tunes on both sides here). Personally I think SOME muslims should fecking well grow up, but then I pretty much feel the same for any feckwit that demands freedom for themselves and tries to limit it for others. You know the "all muslims are brothers and we must defend them and anybody who attacks one does it to all and the west is guilty!!!!!!" pretty much my respose to that is "right back at ya shithead". Frankly They can have their reigion and be happy with it, enforce it on me and you can kiss my Hairy Scottish Arse (unless I visited a Muslim country that is, your country your rules, our coutry our rules). If Iran gets nukes then it should be made crystal clear "use them and your country is going to become a big glowing hole, no ifs no buts no excuses". Does this mean I am intorlent or just someone that wants to live and let live? ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self
PanOfSpam	Posted - 2008.08.01 23:36:00 - [116] I hate to say it, but the only way for the U.S. to keep peace with Iran is a series of strategic nuclear strikes... on the red states. (I'm joking of course, I'd never seriously suggest the destruction of so many countless bovine lives)
Alpha Prime Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.08.02 00:32:00 - [117] If US attacked Iran, for any reason, that will be the start of the 3:rd and final world war. There is no price on true lojalty
ricko mortis	Posted - 2008.08.02 02:44:00 - [118] Its allways funny to see a country with a stockpile of what 10000 nukes telling some country it cant enrich uranium incase its making a nuke..hypocrisy at work stupid Americans and there we will save the world mentality Honestly Iran is a sovreign nation and can do what it bloodly well wants inside its own borders, the posts in this thread about dirty nukes on european cities ect ect is nothing but propaganda spread by America and its croneys to cover up some other reason to invade iran (Oil)..o crap I mentioned the O word...better ship me to cuba.
F'nog Amarr Celestial Horizon Corp. Celestial Industrial Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.02 06:29:00 - [119] I agree that it's hypocritical that we don't want other countries to build nuclear weapons, but we're talking about Iran here. It's not the most reasonable of countries. I just don't know that their leaders realize that using a nuke anywhere is a seriously BAD idea. That doesn't mean we should invade or attack them either, though. Negotiating is a much safer and more sensible route to take. Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari F'nog for Amarr Emperor. Nuff said Originally by: Chribba Go F'nog! You're a hero! Not a Zero! /me bows
Nebulous Minmatar Thukker Insurgents	Posted - 2008.08.02 07:08:00 - [120] Originally by: ricko mortis Its allways funny to see a country with a stockpile of what 10000 nukes telling some country it cant enrich uranium incase its making a nuke..hypocrisy at work stupid Americans and there we will save the world mentality Honestly Iran is a sovreign nation and can do what it bloodly well wants inside its own borders, the posts in this thread about dirty nukes on european cities ect ect is nothing but propaganda spread by America and its croneys to cover up some other reason to invade iran (Oil)..o crap I mentioned the O word...better ship me to cuba. You forgot to mention that america are the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons, the two bombs that were dropped on japan were in my opinion the most disgraceful and cowardly attacks on a nation that has ever been commited, at the time most of the war capable men were at war so in the major cities you were only really left with women, children and old people. No nation can justify such an attack and can not tell other nations that they can not make nuclear weapons for themselves after engaging in such an act. -------------

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.