Rather unethical warfare

[Tonci87 163]

When you're fighting a war on and for your land, you probably won't hold back on the measures employed.

Just to add to the chemical warfare part, I find the depiction of white phosphorus in Arma 2 somewhat subpar. Sure, it makes some smoke and hurts units in the blast zone and it's even toxic in ACE 2, but it lacks the range of incendiary effects to go with it. I don't know just how realistic

is, but it sure looks the part.

Wow I think I have to play this game. A modern shooter without the "´merica fuck yeah lets kill everything and celebrate it" attitude.

[onlyrazor 11]

Wow I think I have to play this game. A modern shooter without the "´merica fuck yeah lets kill everything and celebrate it" attitude.

In consideration of those like you, I'll edit the post to reflect on the spoilers.

[rye1 22]

Well if we're specifically talking Iran, they have already used mustard gas during the Iran-Iraq war and are increasingly improving their ballistic missile boundaries with the help of other countries. *Cough* Hi Russia *Cough*. To use such a weapon in open warfare against one of the West is suicide because everyone would jump on your case; including the UN and the Hague. If it was a global war then it would be part and parcel of the conflict.

They have many copies of weapons from the West (and even China) including surface-to-air, man portable missile systems which have the technology and are designed around beating specific flares (burning at a higher temperature than the engine) and being all-aspect missiles capable from targeting from any angle and destroying the target. You know when you're fighting someone with those capabilities it puts a perspective on real open, conventional warfare. When a missile has a super-cooling seeker and locks onto the primary heat-source, distinguishing away from flares and defeating known counter-measures then prepare for a big jump in war-fighting technology and a race for better equipment or the exposure of already advanced equipment we don't know about.

When you talk about a 60 percent kill rate during the Russia-Afghanistan war then think about the technological advances since then. Russia has already sent such to Iran, as per sources, and Iran has even sent some to Iraq during the conflict there which were confirmed on the ground and a few aircraft, including US, were destroyed. There is no ethical morality behind that, only what can destroy what more effectively. If it is truly a global conflict then it's going to be less publicized and more limited of exposure, with a heap of propaganda... away from the likes of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as examples. If you think about the Iraq war, guerrilla war essentially post-invasion and with heavy civilian involvement as comparison with two major countries clashing heads on a small but strategic island then it's more of a staging point on which to support and reinforce other positions such as to capture or prevent a more effective capture of the Dardanelles or do whatever the campaign storyline plans. It sounds to me more like a staging point in which the British/probably joint operations with USSF are sent to gather intelligence, maybe for an attack of the island or based on whatever they find/the storyline depicts.

The international requirements on global conflict get a big shock to the system with this kind of warfare. It's a breeding ground for methods, equipment, philosophy and tactics around warfare - which will include unethical warfare components. Think Iraq. Guerrilla war. But any war will pull under the covers when they've been invaded or surrounded is not such the case I believe in ARMA 3's concept. There are weapons and people with capabilities and wishes to prolong suffering or create fear among a populace, that is said even if they are civilian AND I'm sure you'll find those groups in all parts of society such as in Limnos to control the island itself. Iran is structured as such so if what happened to Iraq happened to Iran they can instantly jump into a state of guerrilla warfare, and they are also advancing around the philosophy of being invaded, repelling or at least declining the success of an invasion and being able to hit other countries from very far away, so that said they'd be pretty up to par for defending an island, including their nuclear capabilities and even suitcase nuclear devices also known as compact nuclear devices - an ex-Russian KGB member (now oligarch) confirmed Russia had made many suitcase nukes to the point of simply a warhead packed in a suitcase housing to more sophisticated methods; U.S. Congressman Curt Weldon even expressed his fear for them, especially the "missing" ones. I think that would fit in well with such a storyline.

As ARMA3.com put it:

"Tensions rise as NATO and Iranian forces stand-off in the Aegean: the strategic fault-line between crumbling European influence and a powerful, resurgent East. But when a key radar facility drops off the grid, a Greek flashpoint risks escalating into global conflict.

Caught up in a situation beyond their control, a botched withdrawal traps men of the US 7th Infantry Division and a clandestine group of UKSF operators in a fight for survival. With only a crippled local resistance to turn to, they must rapidly adapt to overcome an unforgiving environment and defeat a brutal enemy."

So it could come down to protecting allies, preventing global war or the start of such. But at the end of the day a storyline can go anyway, it may become more villainous than what was publicized. But obviously as stated in Scott Miller's bio: "he was transferred from active service until drafted to the newly formed Combat Technology Research Group – a small NATO taskforce established to gather the intelligence on the opposing forces’ advanced weapons technologies", it begins to look more and more likely.

If you want crazier than the gay bomb: http://www.cracked.com/article_15983_the-10-most-bizarre-military-experiments.html ... For any experiment or idea that went wrong there is always a counter-part or successor, something that is thought of from that idea or failing. For example the "Pain Ray" is now known as the LRAD and it was successful. Anything like that, that is created for warfare can and will be able to have more sinister effects and would certainly be developed for such a purpose during world conflict. Anything is possible in this world but half of it won't be seen in ARMA 3... although maybe the storyline of the campaign will allow for such said happenings. The best you're looking at in game I believe will be the likes of WP and other such mentioned features. If not then... mods!

[arrow 1]

Iran has not used mustard gas, they did not even during the Iran-Iraq war.. they beat them with conventional superiority.

Edited October 28, 2012 by Rellikki
Unnecessary quote

[Tonci87 163]

OMG military scientists are crazy...

[Desert1 1]

I thought Iran had used nerve gas? And, common unethical weapons would be things like IEDs that have bags full of nails and other sharp, rusty objects in them. There is a large possibility that a civilian could step on one (if they are introduced into arma 3) or, get hit by stray shrapnel if they happen to be near one when it goes off.

[Kamov 1]

I thought Iran had used nerve gas? And, common unethical weapons would be things like IEDs that have bags full of nails and other sharp, rusty objects in them. There is a large possibility that a civilian could step on one (if they are introduced into arma 3) or, get hit by stray shrapnel if they happen to be near one when it goes off.

Im pretty sure that was Saddam that used nerve gas.

They protected themselves from it though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War

[kilroy the nerd 14]

Why would any scientist try to make that? The gay bomb that is. That must make a heckuva distraction!

At any rate, I hope placing IEDs will be easier. I want to spawn more insurgent bombers, but right now it's a pain it seems if you wanna do it without scripts.

Working SCUD missiles. I'm sure Iran captured some al-Husseins in the Iran-Iraqi war, maybe upgraded their own arsenal with similar weapons to SCUDs, it is 2035 after all.

At least some kind of unconventional weaponry, please. Something besides IEDs (and the existing IEDs having more variety in setup and being easier to do in editor).

---------- Post added at 11:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:09 AM ----------

There is no such thing as "ethical" warfare to begin with. Certain weapons have been banned because of their impact on innocent bystanders, not active participants of the conflict per se.

In a total war scenario, pretty much everything is fair game. Political correctness and Humanitarian concerns will go right out of the window once the war arrives at the homefront. Unless it´s a political warfare scenario a la vietnam, obvsly.

You're right. For example, because of how we never cleaned up after WWII, and in North Africa, lots of locals driving around the area get killed by landmines which were never removed, so the Ohio Treaty was made, basically meaning a ban on sensory landmines, like the bouncing betty. However, some countries still haven't signed it, such as the United States and Russia. Oddly enough, to still comply with it, we have remotely detonated claymores, which you must watch to blow up.

[Desert1 1]

Apparently though when they first used it it killed 20,000 troops instantly, I think gas is the most unethical thing possible, as even if you do survive, your life is pretty much ruined and you have to get treatment for the rest of your life. I suppose another unethical weapon would be the S-Mine (bouncing betty), it was never actually intended to kill people, but to maim and injure the unlucky chap. It was designed to maim mainly the genitals and lower legs to cause the most pain and to make the person immobile without others having to tend to them. Now if you ask me that is pretty scary, and that is probably something Iran would use as it is more of a sophisticated IED to a regular one. Use it ingame? Not unless you have some sort of gore mod or if BIS put gore into the game, which I don't think is very likely.

[Kamov 1]

Even more unethical then a tactical nuke?

[liquidpinky 11]

Even more unethical then a tactical nuke?

This.

Nothing more unethical than dropping a bomb the size of a small car that collides atoms together with the resulting explosing killing hundreds of thousands of people within seconds, destroying others who do survive health permanently and leaving the land uninhabitable for decades afterwards.

[Kamov 1]

This.

Nothing more unethical than dropping a bomb the size of a small car that collides atoms together with the resulting explosing killing hundreds of thousands of people within seconds, destroying others who do survive health permanently and leaving the land uninhabitable for decades afterwards.

Nuclear bombs don't make land uninhabitable. Take Hiroshima and Nagasaki for example.

[Desert1 1]

Nuclear bombs don't make land uninhabitable. Take Hiroshima and Nagasaki for example.

agreed, only an explosion on the scale of a nuclear reactor (Chernobyl, Fukushima) that continues to burn and smoulder inside the core to this day, could contaminate land for decades.

[mrcash2009 0]

Nuclear bombs don't make land uninhabitable. Take Hiroshima and Nagasaki for example.

All depends on your take and angle of long term effects and, well, if you live there of course.

[kklownboy 43]

And they removed the top layer , debris and rubble ...

[Covert_Death 11]

you know i was thinking and i think it would be VERRRRRY interesting to have civilians in the game, and if they are then also introduce terrorists. if would be pretty insane if you clearing a village and find 4 civi's, you job to protect them but once then get behind you you discover one is a terrorist and blows up a portion of your squad

[Desert1 1]

you know i was thinking and i think it would be VERRRRRY interesting to have civilians in the game, and if they are then also introduce terrorists. if would be pretty insane if you clearing a village and find 4 civi's, you job to protect them but once then get behind you you discover one is a terrorist and blows up a portion of your squad

wow powerful tactic there o_O I could see scripts being written where someone is scripted to be a suicide bomber (mp) and they are shown to look like a civilian, and do exactly what you just said there. That would be doing anything to win.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Well guys it already exists in ArmA2.

[Desert1 1]

yes, but you can see the bombs strapped to the person.

---------- Post added at 18:05 ---------- Previous post was at 18:04 ----------

And what about possible green on blue incidents?

[instagoat 133]

"Ethical" in the context of warfare means that it should not cause "inhuman" wounds and suffering, should not be indiscriminate by design (this is important) and not be used to cause mass civilian casualties in an instant or very short timeframe.

However, warfare is not as clean as games make it out to be... I am repeating myself, but it bears repeating. People don´t just fall over like in Arma. There is lots of blood, screaming, bodily waste and shards of human beings involved. Incredible amounts of fear. If you watched the videos from Syria and Lybia (especially the Urban ones) you know what I am talking about.

Arma is not designed to do this realistically. If it were, it would be the only Saving Private Ryan style Anti-War Shooter ever. War should not be glorified, like it is in COD, or even approached in a neutral fashion like with prior Armas.

It should be a painful experience that should leave you sweating in your seat, with every emotion but joy or satisfaction.

[Double Doppler 10]

Well if we're specifically talking Iran, they have already used mustard gas during the Iran-Iraq war

Where did you hear about that? AFAIK it was Iraqi forces who used it on Iranian troops during that war.

[ProfTournesol 956]

Where did you hear about that? AFAIK it was Iraqi forces who used it on Iranian troops during that war.

True, Iran was only sending kids on the minefields.

[onlyrazor 11]

True, Iran was only sending kids on the minefields.

I think those incidents, while really quite dirty tricks, were exagerrated somewhat. I don't know, maybe the Wikipedia article had been edited by Iran-friendly vandals when I was reading it.

[froggyluv 2136]

Arma is not designed to do this realistically. If it were, it would be the only Saving Private Ryan style Anti-War Shooter ever. War should not be glorified, like it is in COD, or even approached in a neutral fashion like with prior Armas.

It should be a painful experience that should leave you sweating in your seat, with every emotion but joy or satisfaction.

So are you saying Arma III should attempt to do this? To effectively strip all levels of joy and satisfaction? If so, I strongly disagree. Perhaps that would be better suited for a functional military training tool aka VBS series, but not for a game. I don't want a game that I play for tactical satisfaction of well planned & executed strategy or even simple venegeful joy to be devoid of all gaming bliss in favor of "War is Hell and youre gonna feel like Hell playing it!" -emosim.

I'm certainly not one to minimize real war atrocities on any level -quite the contrary (annoyingly so to my warbent conservative friends) but there is a time, place and proper venue to express as such.

[onlyrazor 11]

So are you saying Arma III should attempt to do this? To effectively strip all levels of joy and satisfaction? If so, I strongly disagree. Perhaps that would be better suited for a functional military training tool aka VBS series, but not for a game. I don't want a game that I play for tactical satisfaction of well planned & executed strategy or even simple venegeful joy to be devoid of all gaming bliss in favor of "War is Hell and youre gonna feel like Hell playing it!" -emosim.

I'm certainly not one to minimize real war atrocities on any level -quite the contrary (annoyingly so to my warbent conservative friends) but there is a time, place and proper venue to express as such.

The way I see it, Arma pulls off the 'war is hell' approach quite nicely without hamfisting it. Think about it - You march for 25 minutes through a seemingly empty forest before trying to take back a city. You get shot, a new helicopter arrives and the losses are replaced.

Arma - You are replaceable