Stop This Event!....Please Read

[Pickle]

Many scenarios are based on fantasy themes. Many people here have missed a big point I think. The comparison to WWI, WWII and WTC are apples and oranges. Unlike WTC. WWI and WWII were world wars fought on massive scale. WTC was a wholesale slaughter of 3000+ people and not a war. America's largest homicide. Now it did start a war so it could be argued that it was part of war. As such, if you truly believe there is nothing wrong with having or participating in a WTC scenario such as this than see what kind of reaction you get when you try to have a Dachau or Auschwitz scenario. Both of which are also wholesale slaughter of thousands (6 million actually ) of people. No, I do not think that WTC is comparable to Nazi deathcamps but you get my illustration.

WWI and WWII scenarios, I think, are accepted now because the majority of people view it as the last war of good vs. evil. WWII is also not being fought as we speak. Our countrymen are not dying as they are in Iraq right now. Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan are no longer our enemies. Some Iraqi's, many Muslims, and all terrorists are currently actively participating in hostilities against our country. Against our people, our children, our brothers, our family and way of life.

This should not be a debate about, "well if they can have a D-day scenario why not a WTC one." This should be about, "Hey 3000+ people died less than 3 years ago. We should have some respect."

[MagAl]

The problem I see with this is that they could have easily left 9/11 and all of the other b/s that they added in OUT, without hurting the experience of a fun day of scenario play.

[SlartyBartFast]

"Hey 3000+ people died less than 3 years ago. We should have some respect."

The passage of time should heal the wounds, but NEVER lower the respect deserved.

[Pickle]

The passage of time should heal the wounds, but NEVER lower the respect deserved.

I agree

[-=Squid=-]

I think you guys are missing the point why this is so dam wrong.

Scernario games based on warfare combants offer historical perspectives for younger gens whom do not understand the absolutle loss of life that happned durring world wide conflict. Paintball does a fine job of illestrating that. The difference is the combat was bewteen trained armies and not innocent civlians, police and fire departments.


I can see a generic terroist V. whatever but not something as specific as WTC.

I dont think ive ever seen a post by you with so many spelling errors and typos

Anyways... Here is what I think about it. Oh wait, I dont. Didnt think for more than a second. Who cares, really. If you dont like it, dont go. To me, its not offensive, even in the slightest.

Half the people who post here being "disgusted" probably dont care anyways. I mean, sure, it was a tragedy, but does that mean we cant talk about it, or use it for purposes other than teachings? How is this any different than reenacting World War II? Oh ya, it isn't.

EDIT - Personman, in all proposed situations in which both sides were "armed," they werent. You think that everybody who died in WWII was armed? Ready to fight? Hell no they weren't.

Im not supporting this scenario, hell, I dont support ANY scenario, but am simply stating that its being blown way out of proportion here.

[SlartyBartFast]

How is this any different than reenacting World War II? Oh ya, it isn't.

OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!

SQUID and I Agree on Something!

[-=Squid=-]

OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!

SQUID and I Agree on Something!

Man, I get that way to much.

[brianlojeck]

Someone a few posts up (and others agreed silently, I'm sure) said 9/11 and WWII were not the same, because the civilian casualities were not armed in 9/11.

Try to make that distinction to a 90 year old Japanese man.

Try to tell a Korean man that you have no problem simulating the korean war because it was a "war" and not an "attack", and no unarmed civilians were hurt. (oh, wait, you mean their is such a thing as a civilian on the other side?)

It is shallow and self-serving for you to say you are offended by simulating a "bad" combat situation, but don't mind "educating" our youth by simulating a "good" combat situation.

War is war, war is hell, and to pretend some wars were good and some wars were bad is outrageous.

I'm not even a big fan of "americans vs germans" scenario games, but you won't see me trying to shut them down. I'll leave the moral outrage to those who can't see past their own borders.

[personman]

EDIT - Personman, in all proposed situations in which both sides were "armed," they werent. You think that everybody who died in WWII was armed? Ready to fight? Hell no they weren't.

Well, I shouldnt have said World War 2 scenario because that would include things like concentration camps and japenese bombings.
What I really meant to say was D-Day. Thats what you guys seem to be comparing to the 9/11 tragedy and thats just not right.

[Pickle]

Brian, tsk tsk you are missing the point.

9/11 was not a war. it was the murder of 3000 people. Yes people get murdered in war too. Anyone up for a scenario of the "Rape of Nanking?". Didn't think so. The people that are comparing 9/11 to a war are off track. Anyone up for a "Columbine" scenario? Why not? Other than less casualties it was the same thing, just different idealogies.

THIS IS NOT A COMPARISON OF WARS!!

[SlartyBartFast]

What I really meant to say was D-Day. Thats what you guys seem to be comparing to the 9/11 tragedy and thats just not right.

Many civilians died on D-Day as the allied bombing destroyed villages, many more were caught in the crossfire, or killed by Allied troops as they stormed towns and buildings. Such is the gruesome reality of battle.

There is Valour and Honour in doing one's duty and doing what MUST be done. There is heroism in going beyond what you are duty bound to perform and putting others ahead of yourself. There is however no GOOD war only NECESSARY war.

You can't pick and choose the battles or the situations. D-Day had everything to do with concentration camps and attrocities. To sanitise any conflict is do do a disservice to the magnitude of the event.

[XbeasleyX]

Stop comparing WW2 to 9/11.
They are two entirely different events.
One was a war, one was an act of terrorism.
In one scenario, both forces were armed.
In the next, only one side was armed, and the other side was ruthessly slaughtered with no protection at all.
Kids have, and probably always will play war games. Cowboys and Indians, D-Day reinactments, or whatever. They shouldnt play 'lets go get in airplanes and crash into skyscraper' reinactments.

I belive this part of the quote deserves special attention "only one side was armed, and the other side was ruthessly slaughtered with no protection at all." and the reference to Cowboys and Indians, how is Cowboys and Indians ANY different than a Terrorist attack?? Think- Cowboys with repeating guns versus Indians with Bows and Arrows? It seems to me you have a very large double standard when it comes to wrong and right forms of violence and warfare. Think about what our government did to clear out indians, I'll list just two and you tell me how its different from Terrorists. The infamous Small Pox on blankets-(sounds alot like bio-terrorism), Don't forget the very much unknown "Trail Of Tears" how is it different than having Terrorist militias invading an American Embassy and forcing them to leave thier country?

[brianlojeck]

Brian, tsk tsk you are missing the point.

I think I got it pretty darn well, personally.

9/11 was not a war. it was the murder of 3000 people. Yes people get murdered in war too. Anyone up for a scenario of the "Rape of Nanking?". Didn't think so. The people that are comparing 9/11 to a war are off track. Anyone up for a "Columbine" scenario? Why not? Other than less casualties it was the same thing, just different idealogies.

Try to tell my 90 year old japanese friend that it's possible to seperate the "war" of wwII from the atrocities of wwII.

The only reason you see a difference is that we won WWII, and got our asses handed to us on 9/11. If 9/11 had been a surpise attack that wiped out the headquarters of our enemy du-jour, but also took out 3000 of their casualties, it would be celebrated and we'd get the day off of work.

(and yes, I do realize how much 9/11 meant to this country. I am a born and raised son of New York, my brother in law is an EMT in NY, and my brother and 80% of my childhood friends worked in or within 2 blocks of WTC. I still have the pre-9/11 skyline hanging on my wall in my home. I was fortunate in that nobody I know well was hurt in the attack. I try to avoid being so egocentric that I see a life of someone who happens to live within the same arbitrary, imaginary lines on a map that I do as being worth less then someone who lives within different arbitrary , imaginary lines on a map.)

[Pickle]

Try to tell my 90 year old japanese friend that it's possible to seperate the "war" of wwII from the atrocities of wwII.

Okay, tell your 90 year old Japanese friend this.

War of WWII involved soldiers of opposing governments trying to kill each other.

Atrocities of WWII involved the purposeful killing, mutilation, rape and torture of innocent civilians.

[brianlojeck]

Okay, tell your 90 year old Japanese friend this.

War of WWII involved soldiers of opposing governments trying to kill each other.

Atrocities of WWII involved the purposeful killing, mutilation, rape and torture of innocent civilians.

But they were the same event. We cannot celebrate winning WWII unless we celebrate microwaving the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, unless we celebrate decades of increased cancer rates, unless we celebrate the japanese citizens who were blinded for life when the looked out their window to see what the noise was.

All war is terrible, even if we win. You cannot say one is better then the other.