 |
| |
|
|
M. le Comte
|
 |
Last Aristocrat in Paris
Aug 2001
time: 06:21
|
|
In the real world, I DO NOT support Bin Laden. By the way, in the real life, I do not think States should wage war as soon as they want to extend their borders, I do not favor hereditarian dictorships, I do not support neither the siege of cities nor the starvation of people who are - culturally speaking - strangers to my civilization, I even don't believe in the irreductable character of civilizations (I think Huntington is a dangerous perenialist non-thinker who might well be responsible for the contemporary international disorder as his theory is self-realizing...).
But since I can already wage war when I want in Civ, since I can already manipulate poor foreign diplomats in Civ, since I can already, in Civ, make people die under my bloody iron swords or my nuclear ICBMs, I ask for the right, as well,
to implement terrorist devices in my opponents' cities
'cause that'll be fun !
|
|
| |
|
|
|
playshogi
|
|
Blow up building? ---- OUT
Poison water supply? ------ OUT
Raze size 24 city? ---- IN
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wrylachlan
|
|
Personally I have no desire to see Terrorism implemented, mainly because on the scale we're talking about individual acts of terrorism are insignificant, and the overall effects of terrorism are generally modelled by citizen unhappiness, culture, etc.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
vovan
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ninot
and in the game, why would you hire a suicide bomber to kill 20 people in a bus somewhere (which cant be representable at all), when you could declare war and drop a bomb and take out the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of lives? |
But you could poison the water supply to take the city down one pop, which might knock the city size down one category and thus decrease the defensive bonuses the troops in it get. (If such concepts as city defense bonuses and different city size categories still exist, of course.)
Then again, that'd be most useful in an all out war, and there, bombarding the city would do the trick just as well.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
M. le Comte
|
|
Last Aristocrat in Paris
Aug 2001
time: 06:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ninot
and in the game, why would you hire a suicide bomber to kill 20 people in a bus somewhere (which cant be representable at all), when you could declare war and drop a bomb and take out the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of lives?
if a country commited something like 9/11, it would be an act of war, obviously. And personally, I rather advance my troops over a border and bomb that city than waste an aircraft like that.
There is little point for the game to have independant terrorists like Al Qaeda, and it would be futile for it to have state sponsored terrorism, IMHO. |
I don't agree with you. 
Didn't Taliban Afghanistan use to sponsor Al Qaeda (before being crushed by the coalition) ?
French partisans did commit terrorist attacks against the occupying Wehrmacht during WW2. It is said that it helped a bit the Allied.
And what about the (military) support Contras gained from the United States when they were fighting the Nicaraguan Govt ? Nothing of importance ?
And Great Britain, which organised terrorism against German basis in Arabia (Lawrence and his fedaykins).
And Khadafi and his hobby of destroying commercial flights...
And not to seem too partial, France bombing Tunisian innocents village during the Algerian independance.
And because I am French, I'll recall the murder of president Allende of Chile planned, maybe hmm, by the CIA ? The consequence wasn't war.
I mean it. Terrorism has, and has ever had, a big impact on inter-STATE relationships. Inside or outside war periods.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-05-2005 23:09
|