Slashdot Mirror
Iraq War Veterans Protest America's Army Title
Via GamePolitics, a story reported by the St. Lois Post-Dispatch of frustrated war veterans protesting America's Army . Roughly 100 veterans of the Iraq war marched near an elaborate demonstration of the military-funded game, outside of an expo center in Missouri. Their shouts of 'war is not a game' must have contrasted sharply with the elaborate simulator the Army had set up to publicize their (already very popular) FPS title.
FTA:
One onlooker told the protesters they should support their country. Another passer-by snapped back at him: "That's exactly what she's doing."
That might be the most embiggening thing about the entire episode... that people (who are not just typing it on their blog) are starting to realize that.
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
It's my position, and one that I see echoed in many online communities, that games don't impact actual behavior. That laws seeking to limit or restrict games based on content are out of line. That lawsuits blaming violence on games are completely out of line. So - while I understand the emotions driving these folks, from a logical stand point, I think they are wasting their time and the army is wasting money.
If someone would like to argue that the game preps youth for war and predisposes them to join the army, then they would seem to be arguing that gta prepares and predisposes players to crime and violence, etc.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
They're well within their rights to protest the game as far as I'm concerned, the VA and/or local commanders may have other views. I however, do not agree with them and believe part of making an informed decision about joining the military should not in the least be influenced by playing an "Army Simulation". Get information from every source you can about joining BEFORE your sign up, choose a path that suits you and your talents and go from there. War is not a game, it's not a joke, but it exists regardless of whether you want it to or not. The game exists and whether or not it is designed to be a "simulator" which with today's technology could only loosely be called a "simulation", or just a game for fun's sake, is beside point. I say let it go...
Any time America's Army comes up, I always think about how insane it is that on the one hand many people and politicians in the U.S. are hysterical about video games supposedly causing violent behavior, while at the same time I hear no real objections from these people to their tax dollars being used to develop a game whose explicit point, AFAIK, is to persuade kids to take part in actual violence (by becoming soldiers).
I am not a pacifist, and I don't object to people serving in the military. My father served in the military and so did his father. I think that, whatever the realities, there are some good, noble reasons to become a soldier. I just don't think that "killing people is fun" is one of them.
I also don't really think (in the absence of convincing evidence) that video games generally lead to violent behavior. I do think, though, that a game put out by the Army that touts its realism can shape the ideas of what combat is like in impressionable minds, so I definitely have an ethical problem with them using it as part of a recruiting effort with people who are just coming into adulthood.
"You call it a new way of thinking; I call it regression to ignorance!" -- Operation Ivy
According to this ad for the army, the army seems to think that war is just another game on another level. sickening.
> Of course when there is a war you're expected to go fight.
Forever. Until you die or go crazy. None of this "limited tours of duty" crap that we did with WW2, no sir. It's Warhammer 40K in the corps: life is war, war is life, venerate the immortal emperor.
That's what joining the army now means. Army Strong means huddling in a corner when someone drops a book behind you.
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
They say America was formed through descent[sic]. That is not true. America was founded on revolution, not protests.
I suppose it depends on what aspect of America you mean. The people who emigrated to the colonies in 1650-1750 were dissenters of the Church of England, the arbitrary rule of the European monarchies, and the rigid social hierarchy or their mother countries.
They regularly protested excessive taxation, trade restrictions, and various other laws. The Revolution was a long time coming.
The people have not given up their protests, either. We have protested the keeping of slaves, the consumption of alcohol, the prohibition of alcohol, denying women a voice in government, every war ever fought, and the periodic failure of various government institutions to serve their purpose.
If there is one idea that our country holds above all else it is that "Everyone is entitled to his opinion." Everything after that is an attempt to reconcile the valid opinions of occasional wack-o's against the popular opinions of the rest of the sheep. Everything after that is an attempt to prevent dissent and protest from building up to a second Revolution.
Lying to recruits about the realities of what they're going to be asked to do once they join up is dishonest. If the Army is unable to recruit, perhaps it should reexamine what it does with its recruits? Or perhaps it should take the money used to pay the America's Army contractors (I know one; they're paid *handsomely*) and add it to Pvt. Smith's signing bonus?
Furthermore, I think you confuse "opposing America" with "opposing the current use of America's armed forces". There's a whole hell of a lot more to this country than the military.
Well, as a Bush supporter, I see it as the opposite. Democrats, or more accurately, the left wing, have convinced their followers that opposing America is somehow patriotic.
And since what they're actually opposing are the policies of the President, you have proven that Bush supporters have been convinced that opposing George Bush is the same as opposing America, and that supporting George Bush is supporting America.
Just like every time in the last six years somebody has said "support our troops!" what they actually meant is "stop questioning George Bush!"
Here's a hint: George W. Bush is not America. If I'm against how Bush's policies because they are ruining America, it's because I'm for America. If I'm against how Bush is wasting our soldiers' lives, it's because I'm deeply concerned about our troops.
Oh, and I think the fact that AA is a recruiting tool disguised as a game is part of their complaint.
The enemies of Democracy are
Well, as a some-time student of American history, it seems to me that actively questioning the government's policies and actions is even more American than apple pie. As an American citizen who trusts the government about as far as I can throw it, I've seen both sides of the aisle claim that if you don't blindly follow their Party line then you are un-American. And as a former soldier from back in the day when we sent troops to the jungle rather than the sandbox, I say that you, sir, still need to get over it. At least you didn't get spit on in airports when you came home wearing your uniform, and you never got portrayed as 'the bad guy' in just about every Hollyweird movie & tv program of the era.
Don't kid yourself, 'America's Army' is a propagandising tool disguised as a video game.
And is not revolution just the extreme case of dissent?
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.