Full Spectrum Warrior

By Patrick Garratt Published 30 April, 2004

The most promising, least sensitive war simulation ever made. See what lots of American government money running on an Xbox looks like.

"If it's all the same to you, I'm glad I joined the f**king Air Force," says a man who just glibly told two teams of US infantry waltzing into Zekistan's capital, Zafarra, that the region they're about to occupy is 'US-friendly'. In an astonishing turn of events, he's completely wrong. Homer, Iron Man, Rabbit, Delta Boy, Bot, Nova and Crawdaddy are about to get shot at by Middle Eastern types with rocket grenades and AKs. And you are about to lay eyes on the most technically advanced, flag-waving war simulation ever made.

Zone de-fense

'Full Spectrum Warrior' Screenshot 1

Full Spectrum Warrior is as spellbinding in its sensational depiction of 'real world' conflicts as it is dumbfounding in its insensitivity. Borne of a commission from the US Army to create a 'game' to teach young American troops tactics on their 'downtime', it is the product of lots of US government money and a healthy, undisclosed dollop from publisher THQ. It uses the Havok physics engine from Half-Life 2. It runs on Xbox because it can't run on any other console. And, moral issues aside, it's so far ahead of the curve of other games of its ilk that it's practically ignored the bend entirely and has shot off into the stratosphere. At near-completion stage, we can safely say that it's "a bit good".

Seeing the game today demonstrated by THQ in London, the amount of work piped into the project since its first showing at E3 last year has generated what will almost certainly become an instant classic, and a benchmark. From a gameplay perspective, Full Spectrum Warrior is as fresh as the gilding on Saddam's toilet taps, combining the immediacy of in-your-face combat with the methodical strategy of a God game. There's no turkey shoot. You move cursors around on the floor of the fictional city and place your units, switch between alpha and beta teams and set up fire zones with ridiculous ease. You don't point and shoot. This is a superior war game: targets are best left to poorer fare, such as Conflict Desert Storm.

Live from the scene

'Full Spectrum Warrior' Screenshot 2

The missions we see involve teams - each including a grenadier, an automatic rifle, a normal rifle and a team leader - covering each other as they move through cities shooting people in the head. And getting shot in the head. When your boys do the killing, it's with gung-ho explosions and bodies flying through the seared air. When a soldier gets capped, it's in full slow motion with groaning, close-up, claret-spilling, tear jerking, heartstring-pulling, hawk-loving sincerity. It's that kind of game. Really PC. Not.

Mission objectives include rescuing fallen soldiers and pulling them out of hotzones (dude) and taking airports. The realism is incredible. When the camera moves it jiggles as if on the shoulder of a newsman, giving the authentic CNN feel. The music sounds Middle Eastern (we told you it was less than sensitive) and American soldiers shout "wooha" when people die. Can't see the snipers? Call in a chopper and it'll scout the area and update your GPRS system to give their location. In the middle of sandstorm? No choppers, no help, no backup. Shoot to kill, Crawdaddy. Horrible? Yes. Thrilling? Damn straight.

Then there's the fog of war. Basically, everywhere your team isn't looking is a blurry mess, representing the fact that legions of evil types could be sitting with guns trained actually up your backside and you wouldn't know. You can turn soldiers round one by one, so, like, you don't end up in the great cinematic slow-motion death grave in the sky. It's just another example of how while Full Spectrum Warrior is a game, it was originally designed to train troops. You know what happens if you all look one way? You die. You learn this very quickly.

And while the gameplay looks tantalising in the extreme, the technical aspects of the game almost, almost made us sign up to go and see smoke grenades and trees waving in desert storms ourselves. Havok, to employ the vernacular, KICKS ASS. Splash damage from grenades blows car doors around and bodies rag-doll against walls as AKs tear away in a separate direction, none of it scripted. Smoke drifting in the wind as cover as you push your teams further against the insurgents sets an atmosphere that will have you grabbing for the controller like a despot for an oil can. Or should that be... never mind.

Tac-net

'Full Spectrum Warrior' Screenshot 3

Then, obviously, there's Xbox Live play. Full co-op throughout the whole game will let you take control of one patrol while the other is played by someone else, with you talking through headsets. You must play this in full camo gear, develop a thousand-yard stare and put your feet in a bowl of leeches in front of your Xbox. And shout very loudly, loud enough for your terrified mother/sister/wife to hear from where she's cowering in the kitchen. Like Rainbow Six 3, Full Spectrum Warrior with a headset one will turn you into a raging male hormone. Be sure to wear tight pants to avoid embarrassment.

More Live stuff: you can upload replays of your missions as well as scenarios for other players, such as "you're in the middle of a desert, you've got three rounds of ammo, your commander is bleeding to death and you've got a nasty rash. GET OUT OF THAT." Xbox fans are going to love it.

Morally minded people won't. That's all we're going to say on the subject now, but expect this to cause more than a few raised eyebrows from the media this June. For the purist, however, Full Spectrum Warrior is likely to demonstrate quite what a huge budget given to a Western game can achieve.

Right, we're off to shout "firezone!" and "man down!" in the mirror. It must be the shellshock...

Picture of Patrick.

About Patrick Garratt

Read more articles from Patrick by visiting the Patrick Garratt archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (119) Latest comment 8 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • phAge #1 8 years ago

    YAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRR!!! *Ahem*

  • ssuellid #2 8 years ago

    Sounds a bit good.

  • pjmaybe #3 8 years ago

    I'll just wait for the "let's take stupid photos of Iraqi prisoners" add-on pack then.

    Peej

  • jiroczech #4 8 years ago

    Gagging on it.

  • Errol #5 8 years ago

    This is the kind of game that gives Bin Laden a reason to exist.

  • Wobbler #6 8 years ago

    I *really* want this game. I wanted it before, when I happened on the long (about 10-min) E3 (?) demo movie last year, and I want it even more now.

    The only thing that I think might put me off is too much 'Americanism'. If it's played straight, then fine, but if it's "stars & bars, apple pie back home" stuff, you can stick it. I'll wait for the PC version (I assume there will be a PC version), and get the "Dog Soldiers style British Squaddies" mod :)

  • Shivoa #7 8 years ago

    Sounds cool.

    /adds to buy list.

  • Whizzo #8 8 years ago

    That really long video about how it plays convinced me to get this as soon as it hits the shelves.

    Two player co-op sounds excellent.

  • Errol #9 8 years ago

    Will it ever be seen on PC ?

  • Whizzo #10 8 years ago

    get the "Dog Soldiers style British Squaddies" mod

    With or without werewolves or just sarky, sweary squaddies?

    FSW crossed with Xcom would be game of the decade.

  • Whizzo #11 8 years ago

    Will it ever be seen on PC ?

    Yes but Xbox is first release.

  • phAge #12 8 years ago

    "This is the kind of game that gives Bin Laden a reason to exist."

    Actually, no. Bin Laden is the reason this kind of game exists...

    I really hope that the sim-part of the game wonīt be overshadowed by the flaf-waving, though.

    phAge

  • WoodenSpoon #13 8 years ago

    One thing:

    The US army has 'Americas Army' to teach kids about fighting already, they were going to release that on Xbox weren't they?

    Do they really need two?

    Either way,

    /Erection

  • Wobbler #14 8 years ago

    Have to agree Whizzo, I think FSW/XCom crossover would be cool. But I was originally refering to just the 'sarky, sweary squaddies' style, rather than the "berets and diplomacy" of the UK deployment in Basra.

    And that's the crux of the moral issue, isn't it, really. Handling Basra they way we are doing - i.e. not being gung-ho about it, seems to be the best way of doing it, IMHO. But that isn't as much fun in a game as running around shouting "firezone!" and "man down!" :\

  • Kami #15 8 years ago

    Dog Soldiers pack would HAVE to have werewolves.

    I want a game about werewolves anyway... long overdue.

    Oh, US Government money that they could spend reducing taxes being spent on a videogame...

    Well. It's looking OK, so they might be onto something here...

  • max #16 8 years ago

    The US army has 'Americas Army' to teach kids about fighting already, they were going to release that on Xbox weren't they?

    I read an interview with someone about that actually; America's Army is a recruitment program, designed to encourage people to sign up, but FSW was actually developed to be used by squaddies. They've also got Full Spectrum Commander, where you control hundreds of squads I think, but that's not for public consumption.

    This game looks very sweet indeed. I had no idea it was going to have Live coop either - very nice!

    Max

  • bungalooBunny #17 8 years ago

    Not usually into militay games. But might give this one a peek. Looks impressive.

  • Green Hornet #18 8 years ago

    A Google for Full Spectrum Warrior brings up the first textad "Full spectrum light bulbs".

    Just saw the demo video though. Looks very impressive. Not sure if I should get an Xbox for it, or play it on my aging PC. The game looks like it's quite specifically designed with the Xbox's thumbsticks in mind.

  • Freek #19 8 years ago

    It's not so much propaganda, it was designed as a training tool for the US army. Pandemic Studios smelled money so it created a game version aswell.

  • Kami #20 8 years ago

    What better way of making back a deficit of billions than making video games? If you don't make money, at least you keep the youth of America happy for a couple of months.

    Politically, in some respects, a quite clever move...

  • beep #21 8 years ago

    Yet more digital propaganda to brainwash the masses with.

  • TipTop #22 8 years ago

    Man, I don't condone the Iraq war, I think Bush is a monkey and war in real life probably aint fun. BUT get off your frigging horses those who think this is 'morally' wrong. Games have been always been made about the realism of war. I will listen to objections from only people who have not played Delta Force, Commandos, Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6, Battlefield 1942, Operation Flashpoint, Freedom Force ( :) ) etc. The list goes on and on, even back to Rambo on the C64 (best music ever). It's a little late to start going on about war and computer games....

  • WoodenSpoon #23 8 years ago

    Thanks Max!


    Assuming this was meant to train the troops it should be pretty bloody accurate.
    Edited by 1 at 01/05/04 @ 11:46

  • beep #24 8 years ago

    Good game or not, I'm sick of all these titles glorifying one side and one side only.

  • Kami #25 8 years ago

    As long as your sensible enough to realise the game IS one-sided and is pretty much shamelessly so... then I can't see the problem. We're all smart enough to know that by now... so we'll just have to see if it's that one-sided unbalanced view which spoils the game.

  • Feanor #26 8 years ago

    A lot of you people are totally nuts.

  • Tipsy #27 8 years ago

    This is the kind of game that gives Bin Laden a reason to exist.

    Nice insight from the guy who compares certain groups of game players to the Nazis. Maybe you should read and learn things before spouting predictably meaningless faeces?

  • Errol #28 8 years ago

    Actually that is a good point.

    I trust that we have the opportunity to play the arab (if indeed they are arab) insurgents as well ?

    I would much rather kill the American filth, then play as them.

  • AtomicBanana #29 8 years ago

    'I trust that we have the opportunity to play the arab (if indeed they are arab) insurgents as well ? '

    Woaaah.. I doubt it, the americans won't allow it :|

  • Errol #30 8 years ago

    Yankee idiots. All running around with M60s no doubt.

  • Errol #31 8 years ago

    Clearly though, if the game does not even give you the chance to play as 'the other side', there is something badly wrong.

  • Taximan #32 8 years ago

    I think it should at least be observed that the project was started four years ago. That would be before anyone thought of deliberately slamming a passenger jet into a skyscraper or government building.

  • Errol #33 8 years ago

    That would be before anyone thought of deliberately slamming a passenger jet into a skyscraper or government building.

    Well we all know that it was the American government that planned and carried out the Sept. 11 attacks. Their 'New World Order' plan is well under way at this point.
    Edited by 1 at 02/05/04 @ 10:59

  • phAge #34 8 years ago

    Before reading this thread, I had trouble understanding just why people on the forum were giving Errol such a hard time. Thanx for showing me, Errol.

    Moron.





  • Taximan #35 8 years ago

    [edit: Oh, look... he deleted his post. Something about regretting his nation saving "eurotrash" in a certain conflict 60 years ago and how none of us know anything about what the real FSW stuff is.]

    That's alright, the Soviets still got to Berlin first anyhow...

    Some are just flamebaiting, hoping to bag themselves a jingoistic W.A.S.P. die-hard "ameritard" so that they can dance around and post quotes on the forums. It's a bit like fishing, y'see?
    Edited by 1 at 02/05/04 @ 20:34

  • Tiger_Walts #36 8 years ago

    Erm, I hope Mr Gollatz realises there was a little incident called Dunkirk, I hardly call that, "Defending our borders".

  • WoodenSpoon #37 8 years ago

    Edit: As said above, post deleted, comment makes no sense now.

    Americas Army is a recruiting tool, to encourage kids to join the army.

    Sorry, I was the one that mentioned Americas Army, and I do know what it is for, or at least, I know the way they word it on the site.

    Anyway, I'm not getting in to another argument about America or the Bush administration or anything like that, it's pointless.
    Edited by 1 at 02/05/04 @ 20:39

  • Diomedes #38 8 years ago

    I think we should have the opportunity to play the two forces .If you are the type of guy who loved "Black Hawk Down " and still think the Pentagon orders are for a better world for everyone (bwah-bwah-ha-ha !!) you may like to play the american commando ,plus all the neat technology and all that ....and if you dont belive in all that garbage you should have the opportunity to play as the iraqui (or whatever country it is based ) resistance against the invasor who wants to seize your country and put you into the hands of Halliburton and a vassels regime controled by Jhon NEgroponte (infamous man after the nicaraguan Contra ).....

    I would like to have both parties to play with ,although I would be more time playing the resistance forces and killing the colonial scum ..

  • WoodenSpoon #39 8 years ago

    The game's meant for US soldiers though right?

    Chances of them letting you kill Americans - 0.

  • Freek #40 8 years ago

    No, it's meant for us, it's based on an aplication designed for US soldiers.

  • WoodenSpoon #41 8 years ago

    I see.

    Chances of them letting you kill Americans - 0.

    ;)

  • Errol #42 8 years ago

    Do you get to capture the 'insurgents' and torture them back at base in this game as well ?

    Is there a 'cool' camera option where you can take photos of the torture to store on your Xbox hard-drive to share with friends ?

  • phAge #43 8 years ago

    Errol - get a fucking life. The US, Brits and just about every nation involved in WWII commited warcrimes that makes the stuff going on in Iraq right now seem like a fully paid vacation at the N.Y Hilton. Why arenīt you out protesting against every WWII game ever made?


    The horrible acts done by coalition soldiers are just that - horible, but your weak-ass jumping on the anti-US bandwagon is pathetic, and VERY transparent.

    phAge
    Edited by 1 at 02/05/04 @ 23:35

  • SanktePer #44 8 years ago

    I believe this discussion is taken a tad to seriously by some users.

    But hey, what do I know?
    Edited by 1 at 03/05/04 @ 01:41

  • Ringers #45 8 years ago

    Any idea on release date? I have seen the demo and it looks very nice indeed.

  • TheRealBadabing #46 8 years ago

    In Americas Army, no matter what side you played you were the "good guy." It's a pity so few people see the irony in that.

    FSW looks like a great game but as a training tool it is a bit lacking if it doesn't let you play as the enemy. (Insert random Sun Tsu quote here)
    Edited by 1 at 03/05/04 @ 05:12

  • 3william56 #47 8 years ago

    "dumbfounding in it's insensitivity"

    Understatement of the decade there, Pat, though nicely put. Though I was a bit concerned that "Xbox fans will love it... moral minded people won't" - always thought there was something suss about Microsoft customers.

    And for all you lot in the "it's only a game / adverts don't affect me" school of delusion, even the US Army don't spend $10m on nothing, just as McDonalds don't spend zillions on an irritating clown for the fun of it.

    Sad as it is, this sort of media based propaganda actually works. Of course it's always been around in one form or another, it's just with America's Army and now FSW, it's never been so blatant and so obviously targeted at the young.

    Make your own moral choice. Mine is that I'll get my havoc physics from Half Life 2, thank you very much. At least until the Full Spectrum Terrorist mod is released...

  • WoodenSpoon #48 8 years ago

    LOL, TheRealBadabing, I'd actually never thought of it like that myself!

  • Errol #49 8 years ago

    Another thing. Do you get to use 'extreme' force against the towns where the insurgents are hiding out ? I was thinking of something along the lines of using tanks, AC130 gunships, Apache hleicopters and artillery to blast those insurgents (and their families/friends/pets/stuff) sky high.

    I mean, who cares about the loss of civilian or innocent life ?

  • phAge #50 8 years ago

    No, no, and no.

    The inability to play as the Iraqi/Afghans/Albanians/whoever the US is fighting at the mo, is NOT a "flaw" or "propaganda stunt". Just as M1A2 Abrams simulators donīt let you drive T90īs, or Longbow sims donīt let you fly Hinds or Havocs, there is no need for the common GI to experience what "the other side is seeing". It is simply not a pratical or useful thing to do. (And keep in mind that Iīm talking about REAL military sims, not PC games here...).
    Sun Tsu said "know you enemy" - not "BE your enemy".

    Battlefield 1942/Vietnam dont bother you people in the least, but this game has everyone competing to be Anti War Gamer of the Year - why?
    Iīm inclined to believe that it has more to do with the political orientations of most people here, than any real moral objections.
    FSW is an infantry training program - NOT a propaganda stunt. The fact that the soldiers curse, bleed and die in a highly realistic manner should be ample proof of this.

    I gotta be honest and say that this is one moral high horse that should be dropped off at the soap factory ASAP.

    phAge

  • WoodenSpoon #51 8 years ago

    phAge just ignore him mate, you get used to constant shit spouting eventually.

    ;)

  • phAge #52 8 years ago

    WoodenSpoon,

    I know - and to think I actually felt sorry for him for some of the abuse certain (all...?) forumites were throwing his way... Is strongly considering letting Errol be the first member of my "ignore" list, but I need to let some steam off once in a while, and Errol is a nice, big target...

    phAge

  • WoodenSpoon #53 8 years ago

    Errol always does this, he always has, and, judging by his 10,000+ posts (alot of which were gained through some sort of spammyness that meant he could make hundreds of posts in minutes) always will.

  • Errol #54 8 years ago

    Always does what ?

  • Errol #55 8 years ago

    Bush To Iraqi Militants: 'Please Stop Bringing It On'

    WASHINGTON, DC—In an internationally televised statement Monday, President Bush modified a July 2003 challenge to Iraqi militants attacking U.S. forces. "Terrorists, Saddam loyalists, and anti-American insurgents: Please stop bringing it on now," Bush said at a Monday press conference. "Nine months and 500 U.S. casualties ago, I may have invited y'all to bring it on, but as of today, I formally rescind that statement. I would officially like for you to step back." The president added that the "it" Iraqis should stop bringing includes gunfire, bombings, grenade attacks, and suicide missions of all types.

  • brutal #56 8 years ago

    hmmm.. oniony ;)

  • lordofdeadside #57 8 years ago

    its funny that gamers are outraged at this, and quite happily (morally at least) play manhunt and gta etc, where your encouraged to kill innocent people.

  • Errol #58 8 years ago

    Who said anyone was morally outraged ?

  • inpHilltr8r #59 8 years ago

    Action Man! Now with eagle eyes, and national service draft orders.

  • WoodenSpoon #60 8 years ago

    " Always does what ?"

    You always post random shit that generally gets people angry.

  • WoodenSpoon #61 8 years ago

    Sorry, but that is kinda lol worthy. (The post, not the War Crimes, obviously)

  • phAge #62 8 years ago

    Perfume V:

    No - and if you read my posts, youīd see that I am disgusted by the acts commited by the UK and US soldiers. However, this game isnīt about torture or abuse - it is about war. What I find pretty amazing (like I said...) is that there are people who will happily play Battlefield 1942/Vietnam, and not bat a moral eyelash, but as soon as the game is staged in Iraq, a lot of the posters here canīt distance themselves from this fast enough.

    What is the difference between FSW and BF:1942/Vietnam?

    IMHO, only people who refuse to play ANY kind of wargame have ANY right question the moral integrity of FSW-players.

    phAge

  • Diomedes #63 8 years ago

    Well ,I havaent played the Vietnam game ,but I suppose you get to fight vietcong fighters in a jungle battleground with stealth and tactics missions .If it doesnt let you play its an error ,an not only from a ideological-propagandistic point of view ,but because it does offer less ways of playing .

    The true problem here is that you dont get outraged to kill ancient greeks or germans or barbarians y Age of Empires or Empire Earth ,and you dont get outraged at doing so in Medal of Honour because nazis were obviously evil and hell its nearly 60 years since that conflict.Vietnam is starting to become a distant conflict not so many people are concerned .How much time has passed since a war-tragedy is important while designing and playing a videogame ...and afghanistan and Irak conflicts are at full rage now (especially Irak ) ,with also Israel doing whatever Sharon wants in the occupied territories .....these conflicts are too much in the spotlight and affect too many people in the actual days to trivialize them with a fascist-imperialist game .If the game is done ,at least let the gamer play the contrary point of view as in Counterstrike ...but this game in this moment designed as it is isnt simply a good idea ...only thinking into going home after home in the center of an Irak city aiming at the civil population and maybe even torturing a bit them to get information about terrorist activities (dont think the rape and hard torture will be included in the game ) ,or to fight with high octane weapons in mid-street killing innocents int eh proccess gives me envy to vomit .....especially if I cant do the other way (that would be also horrible but the possibility would at least create a disbelief state that would make it easier to swallow ) ...



    Fantastic as it looks ,this is a game I wont buy EVER ...unless they include the resistance mode (in that case I would have to think about it )

  • bzzct #64 8 years ago

    Diomedes: are you honestly saying it's more morally acceptable to make games about wars that happened longer ago than more recent ones?

    If you see making a videogame about something as 'trivialising' it, then how can you think it's acceptable to do this about a war just because it's happened longer ago?

  • WoodenSpoon #65 8 years ago

    This is all bullshit, if it's a good game I'll play it, I can seperate reality from a video game, and so should everyone else.

  • Freek #66 8 years ago

    Come on, it's just a game. A game that simulates US army operations, a game that presents things as realisitc as possible and detailed as possible, naturally it would focus on US soldiers, that's what the game is about.
    WW2 multiplayer games obviously offer the other side aswell, it would be incomplete otherwise, (it's a WW2 game not a game called "The 101st airborne";) but FSW isn't about the inner workings of a terrorist cell or the finer points of strategy the Iraqy army uses. In the first place it's a strategy game about the US army, the developer putt all it's time into craeting the most real experience you can get, you wanna play terrorist? Fine, whip out Counterstrike (More sides, more models, but is it as realistic? Not even close).
    You want a game about the strategies and weapons used by middel eastern armies? You'll have to wait for another game, chances are that if that game will be made US soliders will not be playable aswell since the developer will putt all it's time into recreating the middel eastern side as realisitcly as possible. Just take this for what it is: a team bassed strategie game, not a political statement.
    The conflict the game putts you in is fictional aswell.

    Besides the rather obviouse point that it is by no means a rule that a game must have both sides availebel to play with, doesn't make it any less of a good game.
    A bitt like buying a game called Ferrari Challenge and then complaining about the fact that there's no Porsches in the game.
    Edited by 2 at 03/05/04 @ 22:50

  • barchetta #67 8 years ago

    Well, as the thread shows, this is gonna make the stink over GTA and Hitman2 look like very small beer indeed...

    I am looking forward to this but not sure if I'll make a purchase yet - it IS a morally dubious scenario but you not find a more prescient time to release the game. It's an ad mans wet dream surely.

    The whole manner of play intrigues me - more like chess than game and wrapped up in the sort of engine that made me buy an Xbox. I guess the nature of the games inception results in the scenario but it does stick in my craw a bit. Then again, a sci-fi background wouldn't resonate half as much.

    I wonder how much coverage Guerilla's Vietnam game will warrant with this making an appearance too. By the looks, that game has mixed 'gritty' with 'sensationalised' violence; this looks plain 'gritty' from what I have seen so far (no movies).

    It's a shame that such an inventive interface and challenging (morally and ludologically-!??) videogame that may show an adult side to gaming to challenge movies and literature could drown in a media frenzy come release.

    Maybe a sci-fi based sequel isn't such a bad idea after all.

  • TheRealBadabing #68 8 years ago

    GTA and Hitman were sensationalised by blunt-edged marketing, supported by tabloids. The subject matter will not in any way be controversial, considering the state of our media.

    In fact, I would not be at all suprised if it is lauded as a game to "teach those anti-war hippies what our boys are going through for your FREEDOM!"

    /cue patriotic music

  • sir_tripod #69 8 years ago

    /wonders if you get to bomb chemical plants which turn out to be hospitals.

  • Diomedes #70 8 years ago

    Well ,the time since the conflict is an issue .I dont mind playing a FPS in the future ,in the XVII century or in the ancient world battling Persian hordes and slashing Carthago forces with a blade WWII is allright also ...but a ultrarealistic game putting me in present time in the role of a Israel army commando entering house by house and aiming at the civil population or an american command doing the same or something similar or using heavy firepower in a street full of civilians I think it is too much .....

    The ability to play the other side at least gives you a alternative and puts you in a certain disbelief state seeing how the things can go the other way and reminds you more this is a game and not a political propaganda vehicle .I for one find it more interesting having to stelath from the occupation forces ,ideate communication systems inmune to the invasors and striking with hit and run tactics with your escape route and steps covered in advance by intelligent preparing time ...

  • beep #71 8 years ago

    Everyone likes to go on about how "it's just a game", but wouldn't it be more a complete game if it did offer the choice of being the opposition? Aren't games about escapism anyway?

    Limiting choice in a "game", based on real world scenarios, from such a one eyed view seems more like propaganda to me.

  • KyuZo #72 8 years ago

    "Diomedes: are you honestly saying it's more morally acceptable to make games about wars that happened longer ago than more recent ones?

    If you see making a videogame about something as 'trivialising' it, then how can you think it's acceptable to do this about a war just because it's happened longer ago?"

    It does make a difference if a war happened long ago in the past. The reason that killing the romans seems less objectionable now is that it's not happening right now.

    The war in Iraq is happening right now. Americans are doing rather unpleasant things in Iraq. So when they make a game that's intended to incite simpathy for the american 'cause' in Iraq, some people feel a little uneasy giving money to expose themselves to that game.

  • brokenkey #73 8 years ago

    GPS system, not GRPS. Unless they are all using mobile phones or something.

  • phAge #74 8 years ago

    What rhythm said.

    No - seriously - why is FSW "propaganda" any more than DF: Blackhawk Down, Conflict Desert Storm II, or any other wargame that features a modern war? Forget WWII - 53 million dead obviously arenīt *that* important - it happened more than 50 years ago - but WHY wasnīt this discussion brought up when the first Gulf War/Somalia/Afghanistan games turned up?

    Like I said - this has more to do with the POLITICAL orientations or people here, than some hollow moral objections. Iīll be damned if Iīm gonna take someone who has just finished plowing through a bunch of Somalis with a .50 cal HMG in BHD seriously, when they tell me that FSW is "bad propaganda".

    I hate what the US are doing in Iraq (torture and abuse-wise, not the actual invasion), but I have enough common sense not to get on some moral high-ground that I have *no* right to claim. Donīt buy FSW if you feel that it will "contaminate" your home with US propaganda, but please donīt try to tell me that the game is any more propagandistic than ANY realistic war-sim/FPS that has been released in the past 5 years.

    phAge

  • Henrik #75 8 years ago

    Won't somone please think of the CHILDREN?

  • KyuZo #76 8 years ago

    Michael Jackson thinks of the children enough for all of us...

  • Errol #77 8 years ago

    YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWN....

    Said Jacko.

  • Errol #78 8 years ago

    To his young companion.

  • Henrik #79 8 years ago

    What does Michael Jackson do in the bathtub?

    Blow Bubbles.
    Edited by 1 at 04/05/04 @ 15:44

  • Errol #80 8 years ago

    I agree.

  • kincaide #81 8 years ago

    Captain Anti-America - you are joking right?

  • mingster #82 8 years ago

    Ok i think we all realise this game probably could be seen as a vehicle for pro-usa propoganda.
    BUT as long as it's a good game i'm sure none of us really care to be honest.
    We just like playing games whether they are war games or whatever.
    BUT you do have to be wary about any game that only lets you play as the americans and has been paid for by the military.
    Just take the message with a pinch of salt and enjoy the high production values.

  • bzzct #83 8 years ago

    Why do people keep complaining about not being able to play the other side in this game when we never hear anything about it for other games? Short of people wishing for the novelty value eg "wouldn't it be really cool if you could play as the Covenant" etc, no-one seems to care that you can't play as 'the other side' in most other games (I avoid saying 'any' as I'm sure there are a few exceptions, but speaking generally a game gives you one side to play on).

    Also, people seem confused about the whole 'funded by the American government' thing. The army comissioned Pandemic to make them a training simulator, and then Pandemic, with THQ, decided that with a bit of interface tweaking etc they could release it commercially also. I could be mistaken but as far as I'm aware from the numerous articles I've read about the game at no point did the American government ever set out to make a videogame; they made a training simulator, which has since been converted into a videogame.

    Concerning the people who argue that it IS more acceptable to make games about 'terrible things' (maybe not a commonly used term, but you get my drift, as this not only applies to 'wars' as such) that happened longer ago, this is just absurd. If you were at someone else's house playing 'insert name of any WWII game here' and their granddad walked into the room, and complained about how terrible he thought it was that someone has made a game about a war a load of his mates had died in what would you say, "ah get over it, it happened nearly sixty years ago"? I think not, and to say that it's allright then to create games about wars that no-one has any living memory of, but not games about wars that are recent enough for there to be people alive who can remember (this being something I've heard people argue in the past against a similar argument) is supremely disrespectful and is basically tantamount to saying what the hell, they don't matter cos they're dead.

    Personally I don't have a problem with games about any wars, and I can see why some people would object to any games about any wars, but it confuses me how people can object to games about some wars, and not care about others, just because they happened longer ago.

    Lastly, why do many people seem to think this game is set in Iraq, let alone in the current Iraqi conflict?

  • Stevas mkII #84 8 years ago

    Now, I'm no expert on these matters, but even I can see that Captain AntiAmerica's mathematics might be a little, shall we say, 'fudged'.

  • Thorbar #85 8 years ago

    "It uses the Havok physics engine from Half-Life 2."

    The havok engine isn't from Half-life 2, it was developed by an irish company called Havok funnily enough. http://www.havok.com/

  • Henrik #86 8 years ago

    I'm amazed at how much the Bush administration has managed to tarnish the US image abroad within the space of a few years. It so sad and ironic how they set out to make the US safer from terrorism and through their actions actually fan the flames more than anything. Has al-Qaeda ever had a larger recruiting base? The unilateral invasion of Iraq combined with the open support for Sharon must have been just about the dumbest moves they possibly could've made. Is Osama calling Bush pretending to be Karl Rove or what's going on? I'm just waiting for Bush to appear live on Al-Jazeera shouting "I hate towel-heads! U-S-A! U-S-A!". It's only a matter of time...

    Seems like a good game though.

  • WoodenSpoon #87 8 years ago

    Isn't it great, you know, in an argument where half of the participants haven't a clue what they are talking about!

  • WoodenSpoon #88 8 years ago

    See?

  • bzzct #89 8 years ago

    "It uses the Havok physics engine from Half-Life 2."

    The havok engine isn't from Half-life 2, it was developed by an irish company called Havok funnily enough. http://www.havok.com/    < br />
    Yeah, this had confused me slightly too, it's not even as if Half-Life 2 is the first game to use it. 'Tis the most high profile I guess though, maybe they felt just saying 'uses the Havok physics engine' wouldn't mean a lot to most people. One would suggest in one's wisdom that maybe something along the lines of 'the Havok physics engine, as seen in Half-Life 2' would have fitted more suitably.

  • Diomedes #90 8 years ago

    If I remember it well enough ,Conflcit Deset Storm was based in the events of the first Gulf War ,some 14 years ago ...and they deserved some oposition for doing so in the actual climate .Plus they werent Pentagon-funded anyway .

    About WWII there are very few survivors for once ,second the nazis are always the evil but you have sometimes teh possibility to play them .Third ,if an old nazi finds himself upset because he considers himself and the nazi cause the right one ,then he can go to hell .Fourth ,Germany is right now a wealthyu country that has superated the conflict and whose population look at this conflcit as something terrible that happened int eh past ,something they have to learn about ,something they dont feel too comfortable with .I am obviously speaking for most population not the skinhead groups (very small percentage wise in any case ) .Havent seen the numbers of WWII games in Germany tough .

    Wars in the XIX century ,the future ,the Roman or Egyptian times are much further and you dont feel like killing real people .Plus you arent offending anyone with them .


    This FSW is offensive tough ,not only it doesnt let youy play the other side to lessen a bit the propaganda-feeling ,but it is clearly put in the arab world current conflicts most of world and european population doesnt support(presumably Irak or Afghanistan or Palestine ;if it is other then it is clear they would be refering to those ) with commando operations in civil cities (after the screenshots available ) ,funded by the Pentagon and with a supposedly ultrarrealistic environement (sure you see Saddam posters here and there )and ...may I continue ?

  • phAge #91 8 years ago

    This really isnīt going anywhere, so Iīll just repeat what Iīve previously written:

    FSW is about war. Not about torture, abuse, rape or the murder of civilians. War. This doesnīt make it ANY different that the TONS of other wargames out there, be they set in the past, present or future.

    The ONLY thing that sets FSW apart from other wargames is that it semi-portrays (it is NOT set in Iraq, just an Arab nation) a conflict that a lot of people feels is wrong.
    I personally think that the invasion of Iraq was and is a GOOD thing - itīs only the way its been done that is a catastrophe.
    This doesnīt make me pro-American, or a fascist, and it certainly doesnīt make me less of a moral being than any anti-war people here.
    However, just because YOU think that the CONFLICT is wrong, please donīt claim that any game set in that particular theatre is "morally reprehensible" or "US propaganda".

    So, think what you will of the conflict in Iraq - just donīt try to back your political opinon with hollow "moral reasons". Bet you that I can find games in all of your collections that make FSW look like a sunday-school simulator.


    (And, like Kolmar wrote, it is NOT "funded by the Pentagon" - only the Army-version is, and Pandemic/THQ have simply built on top of that).

    'Nuff said.

    phAge



  • WoodenSpoon #92 8 years ago

    I agree completely with what phAge said, apart from support of the war, but that isn't the point.

  • bzzct #93 8 years ago

    Diomedes- what makes you think supporting the Saddam regime is not similarly disgraceful to supporting the Nazi regime? The fact that the western forces are acting attrociously seems to have made people forget the horrific suffering that existed under Saddam. The regular torture of innocent people far outstripped anything that the American's have even been accused of. If you think it's ok to make the Nazis the 'evil' side in a game, because you believe they were (I'm not arguing against that, other than perhaps that most of the common soldiers probably didn't believe in the cause, just like many from the Saddam regime), then how can you not believe Saddam's forces equally 'evil'?

    Your point about the 'old nazi' is misplaced, why do you think it couldn't be an allied veteran?

    As for your repeated insistence that basically 'it's ok if it happened a really really long time ago', surely it's either acceptable to make a game about killing people, or it's not. Just because you're unable to make the connection that you're re-enacting real events when things are set long ago, doesn't make 'trivializing' (in your words) them any less immoral (if you believe any of the games to be immoral).

  • phAge #94 8 years ago

    So people piss on you, kick your teeth in, break you jaw and dump you off a moving vehicle at frat hazings?

    /cancels tickest for year abroad.

    phAge

  • WoodenSpoon #95 8 years ago

    I thought there were a number of seperate incidents involving a number of seperate groups of soldiers in both Iraq and Afghanistan being investigated?

    More then 6 anyway, but even if I'm wrong, to think that only 6 soldiers have commited every war crime in Iraq is kind of ridiculous, no?

    Anyway, I know the vast majority of troops are professional, and would never dream of doing that kind of thing, etc etc...

    I must say I haven't really been following this whole thing very attentively, since phAge's been doing a good enough job saying pretty much what I was thinking anyway.

  • Henrik #96 8 years ago

    Cancer treatment? Are they sending all Iraqi cancer patients to the US for treatment or just a cute Disney-like lady that agreed to smile for the cameras? Pardon my cynical attitude, but it sounds like the Pentagon taking a cue from Oprah to deliver a pre-packaged tear-jerker for FOX News... /end rant
    Edited by 1 at 05/05/04 @ 04:10

  • masterson #97 8 years ago

    Let's just hope there's the option to piss on your captives eh?

    You could map it to the yellow button and control your amber ray with the right analog stick...
    Edited by 1 at 05/05/04 @ 20:28

  • WoodenSpoon #98 8 years ago

    You can't kill civillians?

    I'm actually quite disappointed, from the video I saw, there were a couple of non-combatants in the streets right?

    It's only realistic that they should be caught in the cross fire on occasion, though there are, I suppose, obvious reasons not to let them die...

  • Henrik #99 8 years ago

    BG - Well, the Iraqi public seems to be delighted that you've exported your fine fraternity traditions to the Iraqi prison system, broomstick sodomy and all.

  • Henrik #100 8 years ago

    BG - No one ever said ol' Saddam was better in any way. In fact, he was a lot worse. My point is that if you aim is to bring freedom to the Iraqi people and "win hearts and minds", you're better off not shoving broomsticks upp peoples derrieres. The Bush administration and the US Army obviously realise this, since they're very upset about the whole thing. You on the other hand, seem to think of it as some kind of prank. You might want to take some time to think about what that says about you.

  • Freek #101 8 years ago

    Good, the original discusion has now degraded into flamming like little children, we can finnaly putt this to rest then.

  • WoodenSpoon #102 8 years ago

    God, so many people are so wrong in this thread!

    "why else would they create the Euro."

    lol!

    "USA is the one picking up the pieces in Iraq."

    Double LOL!

    Anyway, I think I'll leave now, since there's no chance of anything getting through to anybody, on either side of the argument.

  • WoodenSpoon #103 8 years ago

    /Returns

    Sorry, but Bin Laden and Saddam were not friends.

    Bin Laden considered Saddam a bad Muslim, now I don't know the man, but I think that's pretty strong stuff coming from the head of an Islamic terrorist organisation.

  • Diomedes #104 8 years ago

    Well ,while nobody is saying Saddam Hussein was better you have to admit some things .The first is that the iraquis arent happy to have occidental forces around except maybe some marginal interests groups that thourough cooperation want to become the new elite .the second is that Saddam regime ,although brutal ,wasnt solely based in force ...it was a creation that had all a tribes and ethnic groups strucutre behind .The third is that without a strong governement (and strong is sometimes brutal in the repression ,and if you think otherwise try to think if 10 000 native americans with weapons declared Utah for example their territory and out of US ..you think good old Bush would do another thing that send the army and massacrate them ?)this ethnic and religious puzzle could eventually go into civil war chaos and ethnic cleansing ...and that is what can happen now that the occidental forces have alterated all the balance of forces out there .Fourth you have to remember the UK occupation of Irak since 1920 to 1940 ,20 years of occupation with the best trained colonial army out there ,and that ultimately all it managed is bloody revolts with thousdands of dead people year after year .And that what will happen now while the invasors continue there .We may like the situation there more or less ,but to pretend you can just "impose " your solution to a other culture is arrogant and just plain ignorant at how the world works .

    And fifth and more important that would be assuming US forces and intentions are to bring peace ,democracy justice etc .This is far from reality .They wanted to control a stronghold in the region ,control the petrol ,have the excuse to give ultramillionaire contracts to the weapons and related industries ,tasty contracts to companies like Exxon and Halliburton etc ....dont fool yourself they dont want democracy there as a shiite Irak is their worst nightmare ,and the peace they want to impose is the peace of the desert when all your opponents and been killed or bullied into submission (as the Tacitus note I poste before ...."And when they had created the desert ...they called it Peace ) .


    This isnt a war game .As the screenshots show you are in the middle of cities and probably will have to bully or interrogate civilians to get information,there will be civilians casualties etc .Well we will have to see the game to actually see if it is forbidden to kill civilians etc ...but for the looks of the game it is pure political propaganda .

  • WoodenSpoon #105 8 years ago

    Are they still sticking to the June (It is June isn't it? June or July anyway) date for the handover of power?

    Or at least, are they still saying thy will?

  • WoodenSpoon #106 8 years ago

    "mind you performed on terrorists"

    That depends how you define terrorists. I'm not sure what kind of prisoners they had in that jail but I was under the impression that they were Iraqis loyal to Saddam. They aren't terrorists unless they attack people with the intention of inciting terror, which, come to think of it, is quite broad a definition. They want their regime back, that is what they're fighting for, well, some of them I suppose, at least.


    "They sure as hell seem to like it"

    Where did you get that idea?
    And so far, from what I've seen, (which I stress, probably isn't the whole story :p) the people do not like the culture of democracy being forced upon them, if everyone did then there wouldn't be bombings and shooting almost every day.

    The Iraqi people don't seem overly happy with the occupation of their country anyway, so it would be hard for them to be put off it by the pictures, but then, that's generalising.

    The fact is that neither you or I know what the majority of people feel in Iraq, because we're not there, all we see is what we're allowed to, what the government allows, or the TV station, and even then, all we see is what the reporter over there sees, not what is actually happening.


    I can't see this whole thing ending any time soon, to pull out of Iraq as it is now would almost certainly lead to a civil war, maybe the return of the ba'ath party, or some other similarly oppressive regime. You can't really split a country like that in to a number of parts either, I wouldn't have thought, look at Isreal and Palastine now.
    They shouldn't have went in in the first place, if you ask me, and before you come at me with arguments about how many people died under Saddam, let me ask you, what do you see for the future of Iraq, Seriously?

    Cause I don't see a happy ending, that's for sure.

  • WoodenSpoon #107 8 years ago

    <a href= "http://www.morethings.com/log/pictures/saddam-osama.jpg">This</a> isn't actually what's going on you know.

    :p

  • phAge #108 8 years ago

    This debate has indeed gone south, but Iīd like to hear why Diomedes

    A: Thinks that it will be neccesarry to kill or bully civillians?

    B: Why the fact that there can be collateral damage makes FSW "propaganda" and "not a wargame"?

    Like I said - think what you will of the conflict in Iraq - just donīt use those political views as an instrument to attack every game featuring US soldiers - especially not one that puts so much emphasis on realism as FSW.

    There is NOTHING in FSW that hasnīt been done before - apart from the extreme realism. Any other problems people might have with the game are purely of a political nature, and as such have nothing to do with FSW, but rather the actions of a certain superpower.

    phAge

    EDIT: Actually managed to spell my name wrong. Hangover.
    Edited by 1 at 09/05/04 @ 14:44

  • Diomedes #109 8 years ago

    I never mentioned it was a racial issue the democracy-no democracy asignature .Its a cultural one ,and while Europe may have been that bloodbath all these centuries it is also know that Europe is te birthplace of the democracy ,even the concept democracy survived from the past in the Middle Age .If you knw a little bit of History you would know there has always been democratic assemblies in the villages even when the kings ruled with iron hand ,and that since at least the XIII century a continuous struggle by the Parlaments (in England ),Cortes (Spain ) to gain representative power against the kings .Things speeded up since the XVIII century with the Illustration that gave a definitive ideological strike to the Old Regime and the American war of independence that received this ideological meterial and put it to good use .The arab countries have never had a true democarcy ,but they have had their own ways of deciding ...tribal counsels ,ethnic religious authorities (that not always have been radical as some right now ) etc .....they may take our democracy but for that they have to wish so and learn willingly and slowly .Lebanon is a good example on how the arcaic structures of a society really hurts the democratic process ,read a bit about it ...to resume it ;They vote in tribal ways after what the tribal or ethnic group leader wants or says ,this way the greater tribe would always have the power and legislate for them and against the others ...to avoid this they created a systme after wich some Departments would belong forever to a ethnic group despite what the elections said int he Principal governement .....the final output is that the tribes have become strong around these departments that they use to make profit (work ,money ,contracts ) for the groups of their group while they legislate against the others .
    Latin america is also an example of many failed democracies due to the inculture of many people and the demagogy around that always seems to win the day .They may learn ,but latin america shows it is a very slow procces that has many cultural nuances .


    Well ,i am writing too much .You dont deserve so much .Lets only say you dont impose democracy in Irak or anywhere.In any case ...what are we talking about ?..I will believe Irak is a democracy when the shiites are in the power and have full sovereignity over their territory ....and not even a stupid moron as you believes this will happen anytime soon ,in fact it is one of current US administration worst nightmares ,

  • Diomedes #110 8 years ago

    phage ,as for your question I dont know if you are refering to the game or the reality .Things in this discussion have mixed too much

    In the reality it is obvious .The regime US is trying to impose is a vassels regime of exiliated people fidel to them ,not a true democracy .Civilians may protests ,after what we hear some of these exiliated arent any popular in Irak .To suffocate these protests the force may be used in it two acceptions ...plain old phisical represion and economic mass-media force to force people to swallow your version of events .

    If it was the game ,I think it is a certain possibility that you have to take information or interrogate civilians about insurgents activities .If you do it by the force it will be torture ,if they are always willingly to give information (each civilian you encounter ) this will be the propaganda I was speaking of as this gives the impresion the civil population are happy with the invaders forces ,something we know its not true as run-of the mill guys are dismembering the corpses of the dead soldiers and feeding them to the dogs .

  • Diomedes #111 8 years ago

    Hitler Ghost ,if we died because your actions then we would all be ghosts and invencible as you claim you are .And ,being masses of people you would be beaten for all eternity as you cant die again !Imagine a eternity receiving a whooping and constant humilliations ...that would be what you would get .So ,think again .

  • Diomedes #112 8 years ago

    I am not british .I am spanish .Well,it doenst matter I think ....you may also want to destroy Spain as we have expulsed the Franco-like Aznar ...as Franco was your buddy ..and later the buddy of the US ......speaking of that is Franco there as well ?....if he is once you kill us all I know some millions of people who are anxious to give a good beating the old ass-face ....

  • Tunnbleweed #113 8 years ago

    Silence resonates throughout the forum, penetrates their impalpable minds, manifests in a profound wisdom leaving all without words, for they now knew better, and laughed, laughed at the irony of this.

    And silence.....

    /Tumbles past

  • WoodenSpoon #114 8 years ago

    "What a bunch of Euro cry-babies!!......war games have been made and purchased for years and you all of a sudden wine about this one?
    Face it.....Islam has a cult problem...their own governments (S.Arabia, iran, etc...) oppress women, give no money or oppurtunities to their OWN people and spread hate and violence in their Mosques and Madrasses...
    "Oh...let's hide our weapons in this mosque and hid behind children and women...".."let's chat death to America at our Iraninan Congress everyday"" Let's blame the West for everything while we spawn children suicide bombers and pay their parents for it"
    A religion of peace MY ASS.......out of 87 conflicts in the world today 73 of them involve ISLAM....GET REAL...... "

    That's one of the most offensive things I've ever read here, actually.

  • WoodenSpoon #115 8 years ago

    I'm really tired, so just listen to what disc said.
    Edited by 1 at 02/06/04 @ 16:51

  • WoodenSpoon #116 8 years ago

    In fact no, fuck it, you've just re-demonstrated your extreme ignorance.

    The first two posts can be answered by telling you that EVERY religion has violent extremists.
    The US is making it's situation worse by thinking that invading a country and shooting people is the way to stop a terrorist organisation - bullshit.

    Everytime you march in to a country (Iraq, which, as it turns out, didn't have any of these WMDs that were talked about for so long, and DOES NOT harbour terrorists, is a good example of this) where you are not wanted, the terrorist groups in the region gain support.

    Had we not invaded Iraq, our (because you're not the only one with troops over there) soldiers would not be dying there. Don't give me the excuse that Saddam's once US-backed regeme was 'evil' - because there are fuck-loads of other countries that do exactly the same. If not worse. So in fact it is partially the US's fault.


    Sorry, about the incoherence of all this. Late night.

  • WoodenSpoon #117 8 years ago

    To quote myself -
    So in fact it is PARTIALLY the US's fault.


    You did nothing to deserve terrorist attacks, but what you're doing now is the wrong thing to do.
    The US is alienating the international community, which is something that, although it may not see it now, it really can't afford to do.


    Sorry about the language.

  • fug222 #118 8 years ago

    FoSsiL
    You are a ignorant fool brainwashed by American propaganda. In the second world Russia not America defeated the Nazis. In the European part of WW2 80% of all combat was between Russia and Germany. 90% of all German casualties in ww2 were inflicted by Russia. Germany had already lost the war by 1943, whit the defeat a Stalingrad and the defeat at the battle of Kursk, which was the greatest thank battle of all time. German casualties were massive and they were in retreat from then on trying to keep Russia out of Germany. If you spent more time in a library researching matters like this you would become less naive and probably some day see through the lies America fill its populous with through right wing media such as Fox news and CNN. Just to let you know i have a degree in history and maybe you should get your self educated before posting more Horse Shit.
    As for Full spectrum Warrior, Complete propaganda on a DVD, It worrying when the military are using computer games for recruitment and to give the sense and trill of killing to the masses. GTA 3 was accused of causing teenagers to complete acts of anti social behavior and even murder while the developers (Rockstar) pleaded innocent and rightly so, but This game actually glorifies murder by using real world events that are happening before our eyes. The fucking Developers have a lot to answerer for. I love to see the project manager have his kids get there brains blown all over the place by a yank sniper which has happened in Iraq many times, and see would he still then make a evil game like this. I think not. Maybe there just as ignorant as you.

  • paulioo #119 8 years ago

    I would just like to take this moment to say a few words....

    without usa, uk, france, sweden, ukraine, germany, South korea, japan and australia afghanistan would be an islamic breading ground where further attacks like sept 11th would be carried out, not only against america but europe too.
    Remember Sept 11th started all this war on terror, extreme islamic people started this brutal war, not america. If they cant handle being locked up in cuba or being blown to pieces thet should never have attacked america. They get everything they deserve.

    If it wasnt for these same countries Iraq would also be a terror state. Saddam killed millions of his own people. Iraqis lived in fear of his regime. The people planting bombs now arent iraqis, they are islamic extremists, some from iraq, some from afghanistan, some from morocco, and many other countries like pakistan. These people are coming into iraq to cause trouble. its not the iraqis who we seen waving and cheering the troops when they arrived, and pulling down the statue of saddam.

    Look at the identity of 99% of suicide bombers, they are not from iraq but are brought into the country to distablise the handover of power.

    These islamic extremists are no longer targeting usa, uk troops, they are now targeting everyday iraqi people. why?

    Because the handover of power happens in under a week. Their original cause for bombing was to remove the troops. Now that arguement is flawed because in under a week iraqis will govern themselves, and so they are now attacking iraqis.

    These people want to turn iraq into another afghanistan, a breading ground for islamic extremists. They deserve everything they get!

    Thats my 2 cents worth. Im from scotland by the way, not america.