Moore speaks about Bush

ryosnk

CAGiversary!
Feedback
14 (100%)
Check it out :)
_________________________________________________________

Friday, November 5th, 2004
17 Reasons Not to Slit Your Wrists...by Michael Moore

Dear Friends,

Ok, it sucks. Really sucks. But before you go and cash it all in, let's, in the words of Monty Python, “always look on the bright side of life!” There IS some good news from Tuesday's election.

Here are 17 reasons not to slit your wrists:

1. It is against the law for George W. Bush to run for president again.

2. Bush's victory was the NARROWEST win for a sitting president since Woodrow Wilson in 1916.

3. The only age group in which the majority voted for Kerry was young adults (Kerry: 54%, Bush: 44%), proving once again that your parents are always wrong and you should never listen to them.

4. In spite of Bush's win, the majority of Americans still think the country is headed in the wrong direction (56%), think the war wasn't worth fighting (51%), and don’t approve of the job George W. Bush is doing (52%). (Note to foreigners: Don't try to figure this one out. It's an American thing, like Pop Tarts.)

5. The Republicans will not have a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the Senate. If the Democrats do their job, Bush won't be able to pack the Supreme Court with right-wing ideologues. Did I say "if the Democrats do their job?" Um, maybe better to scratch this one.

6. Michigan voted for Kerry! So did the entire Northeast, the birthplace of our democracy. So did 6 of the 8 Great Lakes States. And the whole West Coast! Plus Hawaii. Ok, that's a start. We've got most of the fresh water, all of Broadway, and Mt. St. Helens. We can dehydrate them or bury them in lava. And no more show tunes!

7. Once again we are reminded that the buckeye is a nut, and not just any old nut -- a poisonous nut. A great nation was felled by a poisonous nut. May Ohio State pay dearly this Saturday when it faces Michigan.

8. 88% of Bush's support came from white voters. In 50 years, America will no longer have a white majority. Hey, 50 years isn't such a long time! If you're ten years old and reading this, your golden years will be truly golden and you will be well cared for in your old age.

9. Gays, thanks to the ballot measures passed on Tuesday, cannot get married in 11 new states. Thank God. Just think of all those wedding gifts we won't have to buy now.

10. Five more African Americans were elected as members of Congress, including the return of Cynthia McKinney of Georgia. It's always good to have more blacks in there fighting for us and doing the job our candidates can't.

11. The CEO of Coors was defeated for Senate in Colorado. Drink up!

12. Admit it: We like the Bush twins and we don't want them to go away.

13. At the state legislative level, Democrats picked up a net of at least 3 chambers in Tuesday's elections. Of the 98 partisan-controlled state legislative chambers (house/assembly and senate), Democrats went into the 2004 elections in control of 44 chambers, Republicans controlled 53 chambers, and 1 chamber was tied. After Tuesday, Democrats now control 47 chambers, Republicans control 49 chambers, 1 chamber is tied and 1 chamber (Montana House) is still undecided.

14. Bush is now a lame duck president. He will have no greater moment than the one he's having this week. It's all downhill for him from here on out -- and, more significantly, he's just not going to want to do all the hard work that will be expected of him. It'll be like everyone's last month in 12th grade -- you've already made it, so it's party time! Perhaps he'll treat the next four years like a permanent Friday, spending even more time at the ranch or in Kennebunkport. And why shouldn't he? He's already proved his point, avenged his father and kicked our ass.

15. Should Bush decide to show up to work and take this country down a very dark road, it is also just as likely that either of the following two scenarios will happen: a) Now that he doesn't ever need to pander to the Christian conservatives again to get elected, someone may whisper in his ear that he should spend these last four years building "a legacy" so that history will render a kinder verdict on him and thus he will not push for too aggressive a right-wing agenda; or b) He will become so cocky and arrogant -- and thus, reckless -- that he will commit a blunder of such major proportions that even his own party will have to remove him from office.

16. There are nearly 300 million Americans -- 200 million of them of voting age. We only lost by three and a half million! That's not a landslide -- it means we're almost there. Imagine losing by 20 million. If you had 58 yards to go before you reached the goal line and then you barreled down 55 of those yards, would you stop on the three yard line, pick up the ball and go home crying -- especially when you get to start the next down on the three yard line? Of course not! Buck up! Have hope! More sports analogies are coming!!!

17. Finally and most importantly, over 55 million Americans voted for the candidate dubbed "The #1 Liberal in the Senate." That's more than the total number of voters who voted for either Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Gore. Again, more people voted for Kerry than Reagan. If the media are looking for a trend it should be this -- that so many Americans were, for the first time since Kennedy, willing to vote for an out-and-out liberal. The country has always been filled with evangelicals -- that is not news. What IS news is that so many people have shifted toward a Massachusetts liberal. In fact, that's BIG news. Which means, don't expect the mainstream media, the ones who brought you the Iraq War, to ever report the real truth about November 2, 2004. In fact, it's better that they don't. We'll need the element of surprise in 2008.

Feeling better? I hope so. As my friend Mort wrote me yesterday, "My Romanian grandfather used to say to me, 'Remember, Morton, this is such a wonderful country -- it doesn't even need a president!'"

But it needs us. Rest up, I'll write you again tomorrow.

Yours,

Michael Moore
[email protected]
www.michaelmoore.com
 
Don't we have a politcal forum? Oh yeah, we do.

And lets start listing babies democrats allowed to die (abortion) and then compare notes if he really wants to be a dicknut.
 
[quote name='Michael Moore']5. The Republicans will not have a filibuster-proof 60-seat majority in the Senate. If the Democrats do their job, Bush won't be able to pack the Supreme Court with right-wing ideologues. Did I say "if the Democrats do their job?" Um, maybe better to scratch this one. [/quote]
:rofl:
 
So I take it some of the men here aint gonna be having an abortion anytime soon. Its really good too cause we shouldnt be able to make decisions that women should be allowed to make about their own bodies. Ah well, I guess we dont live in the future, its gotta still be the middle ages.
 
[quote name='Cornfedwb']Don't we have a politcal forum? Oh yeah, we do.

And lets start listing babies democrats allowed to die (abortion) and then compare notes if he really wants to be a dicknut.[/quote]

Your right, bringing an unwanted child into this world to live in 3rd world conditions right here in our own country is better. Or forcing a teenage girl to raise her fathers child after being sexually abused, that sounds about right. Or having one of the unwanted children bounce from foster home to foster home being abused and degrated until they murder your daughter for the $30 in her purse, but then you will be begging for the death penalty.

Republicans: Anti Abortion but Pro Death Penalty, this tells me they only want to murder you when they can see the look on your face, that way they have something to think about when they pleasure themselves since they have censored everything else, except for the violence.

Sorry about the rant, I think I just let out much of the frustration that has been building since Wednesday morning.
 
[quote name='Othergods']You're right, bringing an unwanted child into this world to live in 3rd world conditions right here in our own country is better. Or forcing a teenage girl to raise her fathers child after being sexually abused, that sounds about right. Or having one of the unwanted children bounce from foster home to foster home being abused and degrated until they murder your daughter for the $30 in her purse, but then you will be begging for the death penalty.

Republicans: Anti Abortion but Pro Death Penalty, this tells me they only want to murder you when they can see the look on your face, that way they have something to think about when they pleasure themselves since they have censored everything else, except for the violence.[/quote]

:shock: :applause:
 
Man,

Sounds like you've got some serious problems you need to deal with. Get some adjustment, get some direction, but first get some common sense.

[quote name='Othergods']
Republicans: Anti Abortion but Pro Death Penalty, this tells me they only want to murder you when they can see the look on your face, that way they have something to think about when they pleasure themselves since they have censored everything else, except for the violence.

[/quote]
 
Did someone say Michael Moore? Here's a small emoticon-type thingy (imagine, something small dealing with Michael Moore!)

moore3.gif


AND

turkeymoore.jpg
 
[quote name='Othergods']

Republicans: Anti Abortion but Pro Death Penalty, this tells me they only want to murder you when they can see the look on your face, that way they have something to think about when they pleasure themselves since they have censored everything else, except for the violence.

[/quote]

Or maybe, if you use just the smallest bit of logic, it would tell you that the only people who should be killed are those who have done something to deserve it. What could make more sense?!?! Liberals need to learn a little common sense and logic, it would make arguing with them a little more of a challenge.
 
[quote name='Othergods'][quote name='Cornfedwb']Don't we have a politcal forum? Oh yeah, we do.

And lets start listing babies democrats allowed to die (abortion) and then compare notes if he really wants to be a dicknut.[/quote]

Your right, bringing an unwanted child into this world to live in 3rd world conditions right here in our own country is better. Or forcing a teenage girl to raise her fathers child after being sexually abused, that sounds about right. Or having one of the unwanted children bounce from foster home to foster home being abused and degrated until they murder your daughter for the $30 in her purse, but then you will be begging for the death penalty.

Republicans: Anti Abortion but Pro Death Penalty, this tells me they only want to murder you when they can see the look on your face, that way they have something to think about when they pleasure themselves since they have censored everything else, except for the violence.

Sorry about the rant, I think I just let out much of the frustration that has been building since Wednesday morning.[/quote]

Yes, letting women decide what to do with their own bodies is bad, bad, bad. It's much better to have them barefoot and pregnant, preferably with babies of the male variety. If you let them control their own bodies today, next thing you know they'll want to vote, receive equal pay, etc. Better to keep them in their place, barefoot and pregnant as the almighty originally intended.
 
[quote name='Cornfedwb']Don't we have a politcal forum? Oh yeah, we do.

And lets start listing babies democrats allowed to die (abortion) and then compare notes if he really wants to be a dicknut.[/quote]

Well put!
 
Really though, can one ever kill enough babies?

I don't think so, and darned if I haven't tried. They make good eatin'.
 
[quote name='organicow'][quote name='Othergods']You're right, bringing an unwanted child into this world to live in 3rd world conditions right here in our own country is better. Or forcing a teenage girl to raise her fathers child after being sexually abused, that sounds about right. Or having one of the unwanted children bounce from foster home to foster home being abused and degrated until they murder your daughter for the $30 in her purse, but then you will be begging for the death penalty.

Republicans: Anti Abortion but Pro Death Penalty, this tells me they only want to murder you when they can see the look on your face, that way they have something to think about when they pleasure themselves since they have censored everything else, except for the violence.[/quote]

:shock: :applause:[/quote]

Great rant. Reminds me of old-school Dennis Miller, before he went senile.
 
[quote name='gashlycrumb']Really though, can one ever kill enough babies?

I don't think so, and darned if I haven't tried. They make good eatin'.[/quote]

:lol: That makes me think of the South Park where Kenny Dies for real and Cartman is selling fetus's and they show Christopher Reeves drinking the stem cells from the babies necks.

Thanks for making me smile again
 
Mister Moore's little movie release and his "strategic DVD release" just before the election seems to have backfired. His little plan to propagate all Americans against the President has failed. Just shows what he knows. He should take his editing skills and stick to non-political movies where he might actually be able to use it for some good. I am not so much for Bush as I am for someone NOT to divide our country by producing a suspiciously edited, false info, full of holes, propaganda film. I AM impressed that he actually made the film, got away with it, was on every talk show on TV, and that nothing happened to him except he became more of a celebrity. This just proves to me that America is truly FREE because in any other country he would have been killed by authorities or lynched by the public. Only in America.
 
[quote name='Goodtone']...This just proves to me that America is truly FREE because in any other country he would have been killed by authorities or lynched by the public. Only in America.[/quote]

Yeah, Michael Moore is REALLY hated in Europe :roll:
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='Goodtone']...This just proves to me that America is truly FREE because in any other country he would have been killed by authorities or lynched by the public. Only in America.[/quote]

Yeah, Michael Moore is REALLY hated in Europe :roll:[/quote]

You seem to have really missed the point.
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='Goodtone']...This just proves to me that America is truly FREE because in any other country he would have been killed by authorities or lynched by the public. Only in America.[/quote]

Yeah, Michael Moore is REALLY hated in Europe :roll:[/quote]

You seem to have really missed the point.[/quote]

... The point being that we should be grateful that mobs aren't legally allowed to lynch people for unpopular views and that the authorities still allow freedom of speech? Yeah, thanks for not taking away a fundamental right that Americans have had for 200+ years. Really progressive.
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='Goodtone']...This just proves to me that America is truly FREE because in any other country he would have been killed by authorities or lynched by the public. Only in America.[/quote]

Yeah, Michael Moore is REALLY hated in Europe :roll:[/quote]

You seem to have really missed the point.[/quote]

... The point being that we should be grateful that mobs aren't legally allowed to lynch people for unpopular views and that the authorities still allow freedom of speech? Yeah, thanks for not taking away a fundamental right that Americans have had for 200+ years. Really progressive.[/quote]

Ok, maybe you did get the point ... but your initial response doesn't show it.
 
Michael Moore cause controversy. It is what he does best and no one can deny that. By posting all your hate about him, another person has a chance to read it and research it, and therefore he gains popularity, so all you haters are just helping him, so either deal with it and shut up, or post something useful.

Posting pictures of him and turkey is not funny, and not useful.

For the record I don't care for Michael Moore but I think he is a good entertainment, I enjoy watching his movies because they are entertaining, and thats all that matters.
 
[quote name='xzafixz']Michael Moore cause controversy. It is what he does best and no one can deny that. By posting all your hate about him, another person has a chance to read it and research it, and therefore he gains popularity, so all you haters are just helping him, so either deal with it and shut up, or post something useful.[/quote]

Exactly. Its like the churches who hold anti-Marilyn Manson rallies. I feel like smacking them and screaming "You idiots! All you just did was help him sell another 50,000 albums! You couldn't do a better job publicizing him if he was fucking paying you!"

Moore live on controversy. He thrives on controversy, more so than any mere turkey. Everything he does, he does because he knows that it'll cause controversy and gain him even more fame and television face-time. I'll tell you the secret of dealing with Moore, and anyone like him: if you ignore him, he goes away
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='Goodtone']...This just proves to me that America is truly FREE because in any other country he would have been killed by authorities or lynched by the public. Only in America.[/quote]

Yeah, Michael Moore is REALLY hated in Europe :roll:[/quote]

You seem to have really missed the point.[/quote]

... The point being that we should be grateful that mobs aren't legally allowed to lynch people for unpopular views and that the authorities still allow freedom of speech? Yeah, thanks for not taking away a fundamental right that Americans have had for 200+ years. Really progressive.[/quote]

Actually his view is quite popular, but not popular enough to sway everyone to vote for Kerry. The voting numbers show this. A lot of people were persuaded by his film which is what he wanted, but alot of other people were smart enough to see that it was trick editing and very close to a propaganda film. They saw right through it or were just so pro Bush that they refused to watch it or let it influence them. I think it backfired a little, because people are not as dumb as he expected. It is a very entertaining film, but his very biased editing techniques showed me what he was trying to do. I look at it more as a comedy film really. I am just saying that it is amazing that he was able to make this film, get everyone to watch it, sell millions of tickets and DVD's, get lot's of praise and criticism for it, become a huge star on every talk show on television, and he walked away to spend his millions.. He was more popular than J-Lo or Britney for a little while there and he is butt fugly. I am glad he is able to make films like this because it just shows what a free country America is and just ensures creative artistic freedom for all Americans wanting to express how they feel about things. Can you imagine what would have happened to him if this had happened in Russia or China? They would have tortured him beyond recognition and fed his remains to the dogs. Does that explain what I was trying to say better? Only in America..
 
[quote name='Goodtone'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='Goodtone']...This just proves to me that America is truly FREE because in any other country he would have been killed by authorities or lynched by the public. Only in America.[/quote]

Yeah, Michael Moore is REALLY hated in Europe :roll:[/quote]

You seem to have really missed the point.[/quote]

... The point being that we should be grateful that mobs aren't legally allowed to lynch people for unpopular views and that the authorities still allow freedom of speech? Yeah, thanks for not taking away a fundamental right that Americans have had for 200+ years. Really progressive.[/quote]

Actually his view is quite popular, but not popular enough to sway everyone to vote for Kerry. The voting numbers show this. A lot of people were persuaded by his film which is what he wanted, but alot of other people were smart enough to see that it was trick editing and very close to a propaganda film. They saw right through it or were just so pro Bush that they refused to watch it or let it influence them. I think it backfired a little, because people are not as dumb as he expected. It is a very entertaining film, but his very biased editing techniques showed me what he was trying to do. I look at it more as a comedy film really. I am just saying that it is amazing that he was able to make this film, get everyone to watch it, sell millions of tickets and DVD's, get lot's of praise and criticism for it, become a huge star on every talk show on television, and he walked away to spend his millions.. He was more popular than J-Lo or Britney for a little while there and he is butt fugly. I am glad he is able to make films like this because it just shows what a free country America is and just ensures creative artistic freedom for all Americans wanting to express how they feel about things. Can you imagine what would have happened to him if this had happened in Russia or China? They would have tortured him beyond recognition and fed his remains to the dogs. Does that explain what I was trying to say better? Only in America..[/quote]

Yeah freedom of speech is great. And if you compare our leaders to Mao Tse-Tung's administration, they are pretty darn permissive. Even of a liberal point of view!! :shock:

Some day, they may even let teenagers watch a movie about a real war before they turn old enough to fight in one (Fahrenheit got an R rating, you can enlist at 18) Hey, a boy can dream...
 
[quote name='xzafixz']Posting pictures of him and turkey is not funny, and not useful.[/quote]

I can't claim it was useful, but damn if I don't get a chuckle out of it. Pray that he does not bring the Cheeseburger Infantry Division...
 
[quote name='camoor']I typed 18 but it came out as the sunglasses dude[/quote]

actually it was the ) behind the 8 that created the emoticon. You can probably disable them, but I usually just type it like this 18 ).

And for the record, you only have to be 17 to get into an R rated film. Therefore you can watch a war movie before you have to fight in one.
 
Eh... of course Moore assumes Kerry supporters are suicidal cowards..god this is great
Othergods: Hey, at least you admit abortion is a form of murder. Kudos.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']And for the record, you only have to be 17 to get into an R rated film. Therefore you can watch a war movie before you have to fight in one.[/quote]

And yet all ages can download the official US Army video game, "America's Army"

:twoguns: Cmon kids, blow up those evil Arabs! While groovin to the some cool rock and roll! Go Army!!!

[-X But don't try and sneak into a movie that explores the moral issues about going to war until you're 17 (this goes for all graphic documentaries on war, not just Mike Moore's)
 
I am not a fan of Moore but I must say that was a good read. Personally I liked what he wrote in that it had a humorous satyrical tone vs the venomous tone of some of his other Bush rhetoric. Many of the things he wrote were actually funny...maybe now that he knows he can't hurt Bush or gain popularity from it that he has changed his tone.
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='Duo_Maxwell']And for the record, you only have to be 17 to get into an R rated film. Therefore you can watch a war movie before you have to fight in one.[/quote]

And yet all ages can download the official US Army video game, "America's Army"

:twoguns: Cmon kids, blow up those evil Arabs! While groovin to the some cool rock and roll! Go Army!!!

[-X But don't try and sneak into a movie that explores the moral issues about going to war until you're 17 (this goes for all graphic documentaries on war, not just Mike Moore's)[/quote]

No offense, but you really need to start looking these things up before you start talking. Last I checked America's Army is rated Teen, therefore technically you're not supposed to download it unless you're 13 or older. The difference can probably be atrributed to one being actual. real world events of violence and another existing purely in a virtual state that clearly is not actual reality.
 
[quote name='helava']Except, Defender, that that's what Michael Moore's tone has always been.

seppo[/quote]

So when he's screaming "THIS IS A FICTIONAL PRESIDENT RUNNING AN ILLEGAL IMMORAL WAR!" on college campuses, that's satirical?
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']
No offense, but you really need to start looking these things up before you start talking. Last I checked America's Army is rated Teen, therefore technically you're not supposed to download it unless you're 13 or older.[/quote]

No offense taken, I already knew that and found it to be fairly irrelevant.

13 - 18 = 5 years of exposure
17 - 18 = 1 year of exposure

I knew there was a rating on the video game. But you don't see that until halfway through the registration process, by which point the kid is committed to getting the game, and the parent has left the room.
At the movie, it clearly says "R" and there is a government commission (the FCC) that is committed to seeing that the movie industry enforces that R rating.

[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']
The difference can probably be atrributed to one being actual. real world events of violence and another existing purely in a virtual state that clearly is not actual reality.[/quote]

What's more dangerous,

1. Having 13 year old kids, who know little about the "real world", learning that joining the army is like a fun rock and roll video game where killing the "bad guy" always means more points and the only penalty for shooting innocents is to dock to your score or make you start again because of a "game over" (video games are awesome, I just have a problem with selling them as genuine war experience*)

OR

2. Seeing real war up close and personal, seeing the real effects of taking a life from both sides, and learning the truth about why we are at war. (Again, I am talking about any serious war documentary)

*Before you go off on me again Duo_Maxwell, I know that the official position of the Army may be that "Our videogame does not depict what war is actually like", but do you really think a 13 year old gets that, or even cares? Heck, half this country doesn't understand that someone who serves and THEN objects to the way that their country is fighting a is infinitely more honorable then a draft dodging coward.
 
[quote name='ryosnk']3. The only age group in which the majority voted for Kerry was young adults (Kerry: 54%, Bush: 44%), proving once again that your parents are always wrong and you should never listen to them. [/quote]

=D
 
[quote name='PsyClerk'][quote name='helava']Except, Defender, that that's what Michael Moore's tone has always been.

seppo[/quote]

So when he's screaming "THIS IS A FICTIONAL PRESIDENT RUNNING AN ILLEGAL IMMORAL WAR!" on college campuses, that's satirical?[/quote]

That's not at all what I meant. I said that the tone of the post at the beginning of this thread is very characteristic of Michael Moore's tone in both his writing, and his other works. He's always had the same "vibe" around his work. I suppose you'd know if you'd ever listened to him, but I suspect you haven't.

seppo
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='Duo_Maxwell']And for the record, you only have to be 17 to get into an R rated film. Therefore you can watch a war movie before you have to fight in one.[/quote]

And yet all ages can download the official US Army video game, "America's Army"

:twoguns: Cmon kids, blow up those evil Arabs! While groovin to the some cool rock and roll! Go Army!!!

[-X But don't try and sneak into a movie that explores the moral issues about going to war until you're 17 (this goes for all graphic documentaries on war, not just Mike Moore's)[/quote]

Have you played that game at all? It's much less violent then say... GTA. I'm not sure wheather the models are Arabs or not, havn't played in a while.

Edi:

What's more dangerous,

1. Having 13 year old kids, who know little about the "real world", learning that joining the army is like a fun rock and roll video game where killing the "bad guy" always means more points and the only penalty for shooting innocents is to dock to your score or make you start again because of a "game over" (video games are awesome, I just have a problem with selling them as genuine war experience*)

OR

2. Seeing real war up close and personal, seeing the real effects of taking a life from both sides, and learning the truth about why we are at war. (Again, I am talking about any serious war documentary)

AA is auctually very realistic. Only a shot or two takes you down regardless of side. Sure there is a medic class but you have to take a test (ala the real Army) to become certified and then you can only stop the bleeding. IIRC there are no innocents in the game (and thus you can't kill them). If you kill your teammates you're thrown in jail and basically can't play for a couple hours. It's probably the best (most realistic) FPS I've ever seen gameplay wise (yes, SOF has the exploding lims and what have you but that's different).
 
[quote name='gamefreak'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='Duo_Maxwell']And for the record, you only have to be 17 to get into an R rated film. Therefore you can watch a war movie before you have to fight in one.[/quote]

And yet all ages can download the official US Army video game, "America's Army"

:twoguns: Cmon kids, blow up those evil Arabs! While groovin to the some cool rock and roll! Go Army!!!

[-X But don't try and sneak into a movie that explores the moral issues about going to war until you're 17 (this goes for all graphic documentaries on war, not just Mike Moore's)[/quote]

Have you played that game at all? It's much less violent then say... GTA. I'm not sure wheather the models are Arabs or not, havn't played in a while.

Edi:

What's more dangerous,

1. Having 13 year old kids, who know little about the "real world", learning that joining the army is like a fun rock and roll video game where killing the "bad guy" always means more points and the only penalty for shooting innocents is to dock to your score or make you start again because of a "game over" (video games are awesome, I just have a problem with selling them as genuine war experience*)

OR

2. Seeing real war up close and personal, seeing the real effects of taking a life from both sides, and learning the truth about why we are at war. (Again, I am talking about any serious war documentary)

AA is auctually very realistic. Only a shot or two takes you down regardless of side. Sure there is a medic class but you have to take a test (ala the real Army) to become certified and then you can only stop the bleeding. IIRC there are no innocents in the game (and thus you can't kill them). If you kill your teammates you're thrown in jail and basically can't play for a couple hours. It's probably the best (most realistic) FPS I've ever seen gameplay wise (yes, SOF has the exploding lims and what have you but that's different).[/quote]

Even better.

There are no terrorists hiding behind innocents, or putting their HQ in a mosque or school for kids (as is happening in Iraq). There's no truck ambush where you get to see what really happens when a friend is burned to death while trapped in the front cab of his truck. There's no lifetime of remorse for accidentally killing your friend when he gets in your line of fire, just a 2 hour timeout*

This isn't a simulation of war. It's training teenagers to be killing machines. Granted, that's what we need, but we should also give them the reasons WHY they are being asked to kill and talk plainly about the justifications of why a war must be fought (IE it's the last resort...)

*Again, I don't know the full duration of the timeout, it may be 3 or 4 hours, but I hope you can see that this is a rather irrelevant amount of time
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='gamefreak'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='Duo_Maxwell']And for the record, you only have to be 17 to get into an R rated film. Therefore you can watch a war movie before you have to fight in one.[/quote]

And yet all ages can download the official US Army video game, "America's Army"

:twoguns: Cmon kids, blow up those evil Arabs! While groovin to the some cool rock and roll! Go Army!!!

[-X But don't try and sneak into a movie that explores the moral issues about going to war until you're 17 (this goes for all graphic documentaries on war, not just Mike Moore's)[/quote]

Have you played that game at all? It's much less violent then say... GTA. I'm not sure wheather the models are Arabs or not, havn't played in a while.

Edi:

What's more dangerous,

1. Having 13 year old kids, who know little about the "real world", learning that joining the army is like a fun rock and roll video game where killing the "bad guy" always means more points and the only penalty for shooting innocents is to dock to your score or make you start again because of a "game over" (video games are awesome, I just have a problem with selling them as genuine war experience*)

OR

2. Seeing real war up close and personal, seeing the real effects of taking a life from both sides, and learning the truth about why we are at war. (Again, I am talking about any serious war documentary)

AA is auctually very realistic. Only a shot or two takes you down regardless of side. Sure there is a medic class but you have to take a test (ala the real Army) to become certified and then you can only stop the bleeding. IIRC there are no innocents in the game (and thus you can't kill them). If you kill your teammates you're thrown in jail and basically can't play for a couple hours. It's probably the best (most realistic) FPS I've ever seen gameplay wise (yes, SOF has the exploding lims and what have you but that's different).[/quote]

Even better.

There are no terrorists hiding behind innocents, or putting their HQ in a mosque or school for kids (as is happening in Iraq). There's no truck ambush where you get to see what really happens when a friend is burned to death while trapped in the front cab of his truck. There's no lifetime of remorse for accidentally killing your friend when he gets in your line of fire, just a 2 hour timeout*

This isn't a simulation of war. It's training teenagers to be killing machines. Granted, that's what we need, but we should also give them the reasons WHY they are being asked to kill and talk plainly about the justifications of why a war must be fought (IE it's the last resort...)

*Again, I don't know the full duration of the timeout, it may be 3 or 4 hours, but I hope you can see that this is a rather irrelevant amount of time[/quote]

Yeah, well; Pong doesn't have an option to show what happens when you beat a pro tabletennis player in the world championship and he kills himself because he needed the money.

Frankly, I believe they don't impliment civilians due to internet and technical problems; it's not exactly easy to make another set of AI, controls, etc. that would work on all computers for extra people (not to mention slowing down anyone with 56k to the point where it would probably be unplayable).

IIRC, again, not having played in a while, there are short breifing documents before the game starts with your overall objective. For example, one level puts you on a bridge either defending your side or assualting the other side. The defensive side has a mission along the lines of "We have just captured enemy documents, protect us while we get out." with the assualt team having a mission along the lines of "Secure terrorist documents before they escape". Of course, no one is allowed to play as terrorist because then you'd accuse them of training people to blow up buildings :whistle2:/
 
[quote name='gamefreak'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='gamefreak'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='Duo_Maxwell']And for the record, you only have to be 17 to get into an R rated film. Therefore you can watch a war movie before you have to fight in one.[/quote]

And yet all ages can download the official US Army video game, "America's Army"

:twoguns: Cmon kids, blow up those evil Arabs! While groovin to the some cool rock and roll! Go Army!!!

[-X But don't try and sneak into a movie that explores the moral issues about going to war until you're 17 (this goes for all graphic documentaries on war, not just Mike Moore's)[/quote]

Have you played that game at all? It's much less violent then say... GTA. I'm not sure wheather the models are Arabs or not, havn't played in a while.

Edi:

What's more dangerous,

1. Having 13 year old kids, who know little about the "real world", learning that joining the army is like a fun rock and roll video game where killing the "bad guy" always means more points and the only penalty for shooting innocents is to dock to your score or make you start again because of a "game over" (video games are awesome, I just have a problem with selling them as genuine war experience*)

OR

2. Seeing real war up close and personal, seeing the real effects of taking a life from both sides, and learning the truth about why we are at war. (Again, I am talking about any serious war documentary)

AA is auctually very realistic. Only a shot or two takes you down regardless of side. Sure there is a medic class but you have to take a test (ala the real Army) to become certified and then you can only stop the bleeding. IIRC there are no innocents in the game (and thus you can't kill them). If you kill your teammates you're thrown in jail and basically can't play for a couple hours. It's probably the best (most realistic) FPS I've ever seen gameplay wise (yes, SOF has the exploding lims and what have you but that's different).[/quote]

Even better.

There are no terrorists hiding behind innocents, or putting their HQ in a mosque or school for kids (as is happening in Iraq). There's no truck ambush where you get to see what really happens when a friend is burned to death while trapped in the front cab of his truck. There's no lifetime of remorse for accidentally killing your friend when he gets in your line of fire, just a 2 hour timeout*

This isn't a simulation of war. It's training teenagers to be killing machines. Granted, that's what we need, but we should also give them the reasons WHY they are being asked to kill and talk plainly about the justifications of why a war must be fought (IE it's the last resort...)

*Again, I don't know the full duration of the timeout, it may be 3 or 4 hours, but I hope you can see that this is a rather irrelevant amount of time[/quote]

Yeah, well; Pong doesn't have an option to show what happens when you beat a pro tabletennis player in the world championship and he kills himself because he needed the money.

Frankly, I believe they don't impliment civilians due to internet and technical problems; it's not exactly easy to make another set of AI, controls, etc. that would work on all computers for extra people (not to mention slowing down anyone with 56k to the point where it would probably be unplayable).

IIRC, again, not having played in a while, there are short breifing documents before the game starts with your overall objective. For example, one level puts you on a bridge either defending your side or assualting the other side. The defensive side has a mission along the lines of "We have just captured enemy documents, protect us while we get out." with the assualt team having a mission along the lines of "Secure terrorist documents before they escape". Of course, no one is allowed to play as terrorist because then you'd accuse them of training people to blow up buildings :whistle2:/[/quote]

OK - Here is what I'm trying to say (without a critique of this America's Army game which I'm sure is technically advanced as much as it can be and gives you fun levels where there are no terrorists etc...)

Which do you think is a more balanced version of the truth:

1. A videogame sponsored by the US Army that simulates a war with no terrorists, no innocent civilians, and no true justification of why you are fighting (beyond "protect the secret documents...")

2. All of the R rated documentaries that show actual soldiers being interviewed, actual politicians, civilians, and enemy soldiers defending their ideals, and the gruesome depiction of an actual war (complete with blood, guts, and the remorse of actually killing someone)

Now, which of these options is censored from impressionable kids younger then 17?

BTW if you're talking about the modern GTAs, they are all rated Mature (17 and up). Meaning that this America Army game should be less violent.
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='gamefreak'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='gamefreak'][quote name='camoor'][quote name='Duo_Maxwell']And for the record, you only have to be 17 to get into an R rated film. Therefore you can watch a war movie before you have to fight in one.[/quote]

And yet all ages can download the official US Army video game, "America's Army"

:twoguns: Cmon kids, blow up those evil Arabs! While groovin to the some cool rock and roll! Go Army!!!

[-X But don't try and sneak into a movie that explores the moral issues about going to war until you're 17 (this goes for all graphic documentaries on war, not just Mike Moore's)[/quote]

Have you played that game at all? It's much less violent then say... GTA. I'm not sure wheather the models are Arabs or not, havn't played in a while.

Edi:

What's more dangerous,

1. Having 13 year old kids, who know little about the "real world", learning that joining the army is like a fun rock and roll video game where killing the "bad guy" always means more points and the only penalty for shooting innocents is to dock to your score or make you start again because of a "game over" (video games are awesome, I just have a problem with selling them as genuine war experience*)

OR

2. Seeing real war up close and personal, seeing the real effects of taking a life from both sides, and learning the truth about why we are at war. (Again, I am talking about any serious war documentary)

AA is auctually very realistic. Only a shot or two takes you down regardless of side. Sure there is a medic class but you have to take a test (ala the real Army) to become certified and then you can only stop the bleeding. IIRC there are no innocents in the game (and thus you can't kill them). If you kill your teammates you're thrown in jail and basically can't play for a couple hours. It's probably the best (most realistic) FPS I've ever seen gameplay wise (yes, SOF has the exploding lims and what have you but that's different).[/quote]

Even better.

There are no terrorists hiding behind innocents, or putting their HQ in a mosque or school for kids (as is happening in Iraq). There's no truck ambush where you get to see what really happens when a friend is burned to death while trapped in the front cab of his truck. There's no lifetime of remorse for accidentally killing your friend when he gets in your line of fire, just a 2 hour timeout*

This isn't a simulation of war. It's training teenagers to be killing machines. Granted, that's what we need, but we should also give them the reasons WHY they are being asked to kill and talk plainly about the justifications of why a war must be fought (IE it's the last resort...)

*Again, I don't know the full duration of the timeout, it may be 3 or 4 hours, but I hope you can see that this is a rather irrelevant amount of time[/quote]

Yeah, well; Pong doesn't have an option to show what happens when you beat a pro tabletennis player in the world championship and he kills himself because he needed the money.

Frankly, I believe they don't impliment civilians due to internet and technical problems; it's not exactly easy to make another set of AI, controls, etc. that would work on all computers for extra people (not to mention slowing down anyone with 56k to the point where it would probably be unplayable).

IIRC, again, not having played in a while, there are short breifing documents before the game starts with your overall objective. For example, one level puts you on a bridge either defending your side or assualting the other side. The defensive side has a mission along the lines of "We have just captured enemy documents, protect us while we get out." with the assualt team having a mission along the lines of "Secure terrorist documents before they escape". Of course, no one is allowed to play as terrorist because then you'd accuse them of training people to blow up buildings :whistle2:/[/quote]

OK - Here is what I'm trying to say (without a critique of this America's Army game which I'm sure is technically advanced as much as it can be and gives you fun levels where there are no terrorists etc...)

Which do you think is a more balanced version of the truth:

1. A videogame sponsored by the US Army that simulates a war with no terrorists, no innocent civilians, and no true justification of why you are fighting (beyond "protect the secret documents...")

2. All of the R rated documentaries that show actual soldiers being interviewed, actual politicians, civilians, and enemy soldiers defending their ideals, and the gruesome depiction of an actual war (complete with blood, guts, and the remorse of actually killing someone)

Now, which of these options is censored from impressionable kids younger then 17?

BTW if you're talking about the modern GTAs, they are all rated Mature (17 and up). Meaning that this America Army game should be less violent.[/quote]

Like I said, I find AA to be a very realistic game depecting war as best they can within their limits (technical, political, etc). A documentary might have fewer limits but it's just as biased, if not more so. If the Army was to publish something with people shooting flowers out of their guns or what have you, they would be sharply critized. A private filmmaker however, doesn't really need to worry about that.
 
bread's done
Back
Top