NationStates Jolt Archive

link (http://************/s5il)

I found this link a couple of days ago and in my opinion it sums up the ultimate folly behind Bush's running of the 'war on terror'.

Thoughts?

It shows that what would be more logical is incursions by the SAS and other such groups to go in and eliminate the specific terrorists, rather than bombing them to bits.

I love blowing people up!

I didn't like it. The missiles came too slowly, didn't do enough damage, and the buildings were rebuilt too quickly. It made it impossible to bomb the town back into the stone age.

I know, how'd they learn to build so fast? I'm busy razing one half of the city and the other gets repaired

I know, how'd they learn to build so fast? I'm busy razing one half of the city and the other gets repaired
Yeah. It's bullshit. The only effective strategy would be to level the city and kill all of it's inhabitants, but they don't give you the weapons to do it. It's like this game was designed to teach people to deal with terrorism by developing bigger nuclear weapons and using them indiscriminately because that's the only strategy that would win.

link (http://************/s5il)

I found this link a couple of days ago and in my opinion it sums up the ultimate folly behind Bush's running of the 'war on terror'.

Thoughts?

I've saw this a couple of years ago, and remember it well. It has a good point, I feel.

This game has a very simple strategy. First, kill as many civilians as you can, catching a few terrorists in the blasts so you can call them "collateral damage". Very soon the entire population is terrorist and you can justify nuking the place. The simple solution is not always the best or desirable one.

I was hoping for some responses from some of the more ardent supporters of the 'war' on terror.:(

I was hoping for some responses from some of the more ardent supporters of the 'war' on terror.:(
Why would they respond to this? The video game might be fun, blowing up buildings and killing civilians usually is, but it's not realistic. It oversimplifies the whole situation to a ridiculous degree.

Maybe they should get a job writing spin for the whitehouse then. Or even speech writing. Talk about freedom, democracy and bring in NYC, when the topic has nothing to do with it.......

How do you win? Why are the missiles so slow? I wish there was some sort of ground-invasion option or a mode where things don't get rebuilt.

Meh. It provokes a few thoughts, but wont leave any lasting changes.

Probably have as much effect on the war on terror as defcon (http://www.introversion.co.uk/defcon) will on MAD...

There should be a nuke button. Those little whiny fuckers are annoying.

How do you win?You don't. It says so at the start of the game.
You can, if you're carefull, kill only terrorists though. But it's boring (you have to wait till one strays from the rest, and there's sufficient distance between him and the nearest civilian)
Why are the missiles so slow?Because otherwise targetting and killing everyone would be too easy.. (Maybe someone can mod the game to change it)

Why would they respond to this? The video game might be fun, blowing up buildings and killing civilians usually is, but it's not realistic. It oversimplifies the whole situation to a ridiculous degree.

Does it? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4608784.stm)

Game: Missile kills terrorist and innocents, causes anger, recruits more terrorists.

BBC News Story: Missile kills terrorist and innocents, causes mass anger across Pakistan, will almost certainly recruit more terrorists.

Frankly the game is earily prescient.

Frankly the game is earily prescient.
No. As has been mentioned, the game assumes:
A) That all the world's ground forces are apparently out for lunch at the moment, and will remain so for the immediatly forseeable future
B) All intelligence groups (CIA, etc) are also out
C) Arabs reproduce like rabbits so that even if you aim your missiles to kill as many as possible (ie maximizing civilian casualties), you will never kill them all
D) Terrorists simply wander around with machine guns, never doing anything except menacing buildings and looking vaguely lost
E) Arabs can spontaneously create guns out of thin air (perhaps Allah provides them?)
F) Terrorists are produced simply by being near a blast area
G) Arabs don't need/want to eat, drink, produce weapons, fuck, have kids, raise the kids, do drugs, or dance to survive. All they do is wander around and repair buildings, so it is impossible to greak their morale or destroy their food/water supplies.
H) Fuck it, I'm tired of nitpicking.
I) No, seriously, I'm done
J) No, I quit, that's it, no more list
K) This space intentionally left blank

I killed so many. Possibly the greatest game ever!

I don't like the inconsistency of the effects. You can drop a daisy-cutter right next to a terrorist walking on his own with no effect, but shou;d a civilian happen to be walking past a fruit stall collapsing from a bomb blast half the map away, then boom, loads more terrorists.

I don't like the inconsistency of the effects. You can drop a daisy-cutter right next to a terrorist walking on his own with no effect, but shou;d a civilian happen to be walking past a fruit stall collapsing from a bomb blast half the map away, then boom, loads more terrorists.
That's because when you hit the fruit stand, the detonation sent coconut shrapnel flying through the air at lethal force.

I didn't like it. The missiles came too slowly, didn't do enough damage, and the buildings were rebuilt too quickly. It made it impossible to bomb the town back into the stone age.

After I noticed this, I just started picking off the kids. If we kill all the kids, then they can't grow up to be terrorists.

Does it? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4608784.stm)

Game: Missile kills terrorist and innocents, causes anger, recruits more terrorists.

BBC News Story: Missile kills terrorist and innocents, causes mass anger across Pakistan, will almost certainly recruit more terrorists.

Frankly the game is earily prescient.
Those people were already terrorist sympathizers. They were hosting Al Qaeda members in their homes. They may have technically been civilians, but no more innocent than the civilians working in Nazi munitions factories that got bombed in WWII.

After I noticed this, I just started picking off the kids. If we kill all the kids, then they can't grow up to be terrorists.
I hit all the water sources (fountains) and fruit stands. I though if I could eliminate their water and food they'd all die out. Unfortunately they seem to live on nothing but air and anti-americanism.

I managed to turn nearly everyone on the screen into a terrorist. Came very close. Only 1 or 2 little blue dudes walkin' around left until I finally screamed "Allah Akbar!" and turned off that window, thus in effect, finalizing my jihad against the blue devils.

noone seems to get upset if you kill a dog. and i worked hard to elimkinaste that stupid dog!!:mad:

Hmm, intresting, but... the game assumes that no one will get upset if you kill a terrorist and nothing else. What about the terrorists family? Won't they view their son/daughter as a freedom fighter (if they know what they're engaged in) or simply view them as being murdered by some foreign devil.

This is a point of most religions. Hostile action always creates a negetive reaction. Someone, somewhere, has to sit there and take it and take the moral high ground. Otherwise you just end up in a vicious cycle/spiral.

Hmm, intresting, but... the game assumes that no one will get upset if you kill a terrorist and nothing else. What about the terrorists family? Won't they view their son/daughter as a freedom fighter (if they know what they're engaged in) or simply view them as being murdered by some foreign devil.

This is a point of most religions. Hostile action always creates a negetive reaction. Someone, somewhere, has to sit there and take it and take the moral high ground. Otherwise you just end up in a vicious cycle/spiral.

The second time I played the game I didn't fire a single shot. The terrorists ran around looking menacing, but nothing actually happened, and no new terrorists were created.

Anyone mind explaining to me what the point is? Is there one?

Anyone mind explaining to me what the point is? Is there one?
The point is that if we leave terrorists alone, they won't do anything other than wander in circles and look vaguely menacing. However, if you kill terrorists, then you will create more terrorists who will wander in circles and look vaguely menacing in large numbers.

This game shows that:
while terrorists are smart enough to walk away from areas of geocide most of the time, civillians are dumb enough to try to pray at dead bodies.
dogs are harder to kill that I thought.
the only buildings that get rebuilt are the leveled ones. Not the heavily damaged hospitals. The leveled toilets.

Anyone mind explaining to me what the point is? Is there one?
it's supposed to point out the futility of the 'war on terror' and such. you can never win.

This game shows that:
while terrorists are smart enough to walk away from areas of geocide most of the time, civillians are dumb enough to try to pray at dead bodies.
dogs are harder to kill that I thought.
the only buildings that get rebuilt are the leveled ones. Not the heavily damaged hospitals. The leveled toilets.
i chased this one dog for like ten minutes. the little fecker kept running before the missile hit.

it's supposed to point out the futility of the 'war on terror' and such. you can never win.

Heh, fair enough then - I realised that after I went to the main page and read up on it.


The point is that if we leave terrorists alone, they won't do anything other than wander in circles and look vaguely menacing. However, if you kill terrorists, then you will create more terrorists who will wander in circles and look vaguely menacing in large numbers.

lol :p

The second time I played the game I didn't fire a single shot. The terrorists ran around looking menacing, but nothing actually happened, and no new terrorists were created.
In real life new terrorists would still be created and the existing ones wouldn't just run around looking menacing, they'd fly planes into your buildings.

I tried playing this... and it seemed kind of dull... you blow people up, and they get scared and angry and arm themselves... not exactly surprising if you ask me...

then I came and read other peoples responses and realised that the whole point was that people with great big missiles were so terrified of the people with the little guns that they wanted even bigger missiles so they could wipe out all the 'guys with guns' wives and children too... and also dogs...

then I came and read other peoples responses and realised that the whole point was that people with great big missiles were so terrified of the people with the little guns that they wanted even bigger missiles so they could wipe out all the 'guys with guns' wives and children too... and also dogs...
Their dogs hate us for our freedoms.

Those people were already terrorist sympathizers. They were hosting Al Qaeda members in their homes. They may have technically been civilians, but no more innocent than the civilians working in Nazi munitions factories that got bombed in WWII.

How could you say that? They are just civilians working in factiories. They were just as innocent as workers working in munitions factories in Allied countries.

The fact that they were being ruled by a government that had done nothing but improve the economy, working conditions and unemployment, and that happened to be fighting a war with the Allies does not make them deserving of death! These people didn't even know about concerntration camps.

And as for Pakistanis having Al Qaeda members in their homes, why not? From their point of view, harbouring members of the United States Army is equally as damning.

I wanted to see if a dog came across a dead civillian, would it turn into a terrorist dog? But nothing happened, it went around like the already terrorists, then I knew...the dogs were the terrorist ringleaders! How do you think they get the guns and new clothes so fast? The dogs have educated themselves by watching Lassie over and over again to build houses, create weapons and bring clothes. Then they follow kids around so that no one suspects them

This game is a total joke, and reflects nothing of reality. I don't even particularly support or condone the war on terror, but even I can see that.

Terrorists do not magically morph, incredible-hulk style from the bodies of normal civillians upon sight of a corpse. Impressionable youths are picked up by religious nuts and brainwashed into believing that killing westerners is good and that suicide takes you to heaven.

Anti-terrorist forces are not sitting in a helicopter with some cartoon rocket launcher which they fire at men with guns. Most terrorist plots in my country are foiled by precise, non-military intelligence and law enforcement agencies. The war in Iraq is not the sum of the war on terror. The war on terror is going on all the time in western nations by trained law enforcers using conventional weapons and exclusively targeting suspected criminals.

I am fully against the way the so-called "war on terror" is being conducted, but this game is so absurdly partisan I felt I had to comment.