Tweet
Originally posted by asdfboo
I have to agree with the poster above me that the actions of one individual soldier shouldn't reflect on the whole. In every industry, there are people who aren't right in the head. This isn't a result of their training, or their job. Some people are just insane. I've seen other incidents like this, and while it is always a tragic thing, it is not a result of their training. Your logic that "If one does it, more will follow" has no base in reality.
As for your thought that nuclear arms render all convential forces null and void, I believe this is also flawed. I cannot honestly see and of the leaders of the countries you mentioned launching nuclear weapons. The leaders are simply too intelligent to unleash such a devastating weapon upon the world, unless it would do more to save lives than end them. WWII showed us the devastation of nuclear war, and I don't think any leader would want to see that happen again.
As for the soldiers; I can't say that I approve of the marine putting the American flag on Saddam's statue. That was an insensitive thing to do. However, you may not know it, but many of the leaders in Iraq aren't idiots. They don't let their soldiers drive around with American flags flying from their humvees. As with your last argument, because one soldier does something does not mean others will follow in suit. I would caution you from saying American soldiers lack common sense. Did you not see the scene in Najaf, where soldiers, when trying to meet with a local Sheik, were confronted by locals who were afraid they were going to defile the local Mosque. Did they start firing wildly? No. Did they start shouting, and enflame the crowd? No. The Colonel had his men kneel, and lower their weapons. When the crowd still refused to let them through, he told his men to go on and turn around, and leave.
Does that sound to you like an inexperienced group of soldiers, with no common sense? Maybe you should see the other half of the picture before you stereotype the whole American Army.
I have to agree with the poster above me that the actions of one individual soldier shouldn't reflect on the whole. In every industry, there are people who aren't right in the head. This isn't a result of their training, or their job. Some people are just insane. I've seen other incidents like this, and while it is always a tragic thing, it is not a result of their training. Your logic that "If one does it, more will follow" has no base in reality.
As for your thought that nuclear arms render all convential forces null and void, I believe this is also flawed. I cannot honestly see and of the leaders of the countries you mentioned launching nuclear weapons. The leaders are simply too intelligent to unleash such a devastating weapon upon the world, unless it would do more to save lives than end them. WWII showed us the devastation of nuclear war, and I don't think any leader would want to see that happen again.
As for the soldiers; I can't say that I approve of the marine putting the American flag on Saddam's statue. That was an insensitive thing to do. However, you may not know it, but many of the leaders in Iraq aren't idiots. They don't let their soldiers drive around with American flags flying from their humvees. As with your last argument, because one soldier does something does not mean others will follow in suit. I would caution you from saying American soldiers lack common sense. Did you not see the scene in Najaf, where soldiers, when trying to meet with a local Sheik, were confronted by locals who were afraid they were going to defile the local Mosque. Did they start firing wildly? No. Did they start shouting, and enflame the crowd? No. The Colonel had his men kneel, and lower their weapons. When the crowd still refused to let them through, he told his men to go on and turn around, and leave.
Does that sound to you like an inexperienced group of soldiers, with no common sense? Maybe you should see the other half of the picture before you stereotype the whole American Army.
A single soldiers actions shouldn't reflect on the entire army, however the USA has a dispraportionally large amount of these incidents. How often do you let a 2 year old drive a car? Not often? Simply because they aren't mentally stable enough. This same sort of logic should apply to enrollment in the USA's armed forces. Someone must have picked up a difference in this persons attitude and personality.
Yes, if a nations sovereignty was invaded to such an extent that a country was hanging on a limb, they would launch all their nuclear weapons. The argument that they wont is complete nonsense. Otherwise, why would anyone have nuclear weapons if nations "cannot honestly see any of the leaders of the countries I mentioned launching nuclear weapons"?
Driving around Iraq in humvees with American flags on? I've seen plenty of it personally.
Soldiers lack common sense? Well, I'd say that some of them do. And when you say "some" in reference to over 1,000,000, that's a lot of people without proper common sense. Note that the colonel ordered them to do that, the soldiers didn't use their own initiative.
I have seen the entire picture of the American army, reading first hand reports, both good and bad, of the equipment, training and actions of the American armed forces. I have seen enough to make a judgement.
) civilisations, it was a colony of a civilisation that is already represented in the game. Now, if Rise of Nations had nations which could branch off into something else, (eg Europeans conquering North America/Canada/Australia = end of Native North American/Native Canadian/Aboriginal nations, Spanish conquering South America = end of Native South American nations, etc) then the inclusion of America would work, but Rise of Nations doesn't do offer any such feature. Maybe RoN2 will, but I don't see the game being transformed this much for an expansion.
Comment