Sid was raised during the Vietnam war and lived through the protests and civil disorder as did many of us. I believe this left a false impression on him that has carried through to ever one of the Civ games since, that citizens are intristicly against all war. Just the opposite has been the case throughout history. In recent history the Falklands war propped up the Argentine dictatorship and the support the aggression translated directly into support for the regime. In England there was also support for the war. When the troops left these countries the people did not go into disorder, though if they hadn't left there might have been revolution in Argentina and disorder in Britain. The government of Argentina had to fight to survive, which worked for a while until they lost. The government of Britain had to fight or face citizens who weren't going to put up w/ the invasion.
There are other cases, such as the attack on the WTC. If Bush hadn't reacted I'd be in civil unrest.
In WW1 and WW2 the populations supported the war, except in Italy of course.
I propose that Civ be changed, that LESS troops should have to remain in cities to maintain order during wartime.
Regarding Vietnam, just forget it. How many times in history has a government been so bone headed about fighting a war? Well...there was the Russians and Afghanistan...but still...fairly rare.
'Ol Sid and Civ team...the war is over guys, forget it.
Great game btw, I can't stop playing it. Really. Someone, anyone...HELP!
I'm in love again, what am I to doooo