More Trektardism

[Aratech]

There's always movie Starship Troopers...

While just as incompetent as redshirts, I think automatic rifles and man portable tacnukes are just a weee bit more dangerous than Federation phasers.

[Batman]

There's always movie Starship Troopers...

While just as incompetent as redshirts, I think automatic rifles and man portable tacnukes are just a weee bit more dangerous than Federation phasers.

We're talking about a military that actually DID use air support to obliterate enemy forces by the truckload and then apparently thought 'How unsporting. Let's NOT do that ever again.' and parks their orbiting starships close enough together for even minuscule course alterations to make them collide. When they have a couple gazillion cubic kilometres to park them in.
Besides, from what I can remember movie MI are even more lousy shots than redshirts are.

[Ryushikaze]

There's always movie Starship Troopers...

While just as incompetent as redshirts, I think automatic rifles and man portable tacnukes are just a weee bit more dangerous than Federation phasers.

We're talking about a military that actually DID use air support to obliterate enemy forces by the truckload and then apparently thought 'How unsporting. Let's NOT do that ever again.' and parks their orbiting starships close enough together for even minuscule course alterations to make them collide. When they have a couple gazillion cubic kilometres to park them in.
Besides, from what I can remember movie MI are even more lousy shots than redshirts are.

Yes, but in their case, their incompetence was deliberate, since the entire point of the bugs was to be a threat the government could milk forever to keep the general populace in line, and if they were too easy to wipe out, that wouldn't work.

It does make what we see any less stupid, but it does give an in universe reason for people to be so dumb.

[Batman]

Yes, but in their case, their incompetence was deliberate, since the entire point of the bugs was to be a threat the government could milk forever to keep the general populace in line, and if they were too easy to wipe out, that wouldn't work.
It does make what we see any less stupid, but it does give an in universe reason for people to be so dumb.

While that would be perfectly in line with my theory of the Terran Federation (or whatever the hell they were called in the movie) using the MI to fix their overpopulation problem I don't recall any of that from the movie. They were just incompetent beyond comprehension.

[Wyrm]

Star Trek might actually be able to beat Gundam.

Maybe.

[Batman]

Star Trek should be reasonably easily capable of beating BattleTech in space at any rate.

[Peptuck]

Besides, from what I can remember movie MI are even more lousy shots than redshirts are.

Havig just recently watched it, I can actually attest that the MI in the movie were really good shots. Its just that the bugs encountered at first were taking hundreds of rounds from multiple rifles to bring down. But as th movie progressed, they went from taking hundreds to taking dozens to individual MI mowing down legions of bugs all on their lonesome.

No apparent explanation for why the Bugs were suddenly being made of paper.

That said, I'm exceptionally annoyed at how the MI troops had tacnuke rockets in the bug siege yet didn't use them at all, even when they saw the sheer numbers of Bugs charging them, massed together.

[Peptuck]

Ghetto edit: correction: the MI in the movie were decent shots. Not "really good" shots.

[Darth Ruinus]

Maybe they switched to higher caliber bullets or whatever, when they saw their present rounds werent doing anything?

Also, why would they use tac nukes right ouside their own base? (I am assuming you are talking about Whiskey Outpost right?)

[Darth Nostril]

Well they could have used them at extreme range to thin the herd a little .... but that would have ruined the "OMG!!! are they gonna make it" atmosphere, as well as deprived us of a totally needless heroic death or two

I prefer to stick with the original novel, a little sexist maybe but rather more enjoyable than Showgirls in Space

[Illuminatus Primus]

Dude, those were some nice titties. You're definitely wrong.

[Darth Hoth]

Ghetto edit: correction: the MI in the movie were decent shots. Not "really good" shots.

Yes, a score of troopers first surrounding a bug, then firing armour-piercing at point-blank range with automatics is a really great idea...

Kriffing Sailor Moon could beat Paul Verhoeven's Starship Troopers.

[Darth Nostril]

Dude I can CG any cupsize you can imagine into existence Equal Opportunities Employer
I don't need Voerhoven massacring a sci-fi classic to do so

[Darth Nostril]

And for my next trick I shall pull a Rancor out of a hat ..... or rather after reading Conquest more along the lines of a Sithified Jaina


In stilettoes

[Darth Wong]

Dude I can CG any cupsize you can imagine into existence Equal Opportunities Employer

Real titties beat CGI ones.

I don't need Voerhoven massacring a sci-fi classic to do so

Starship Troopers is the most overrated book ever. I tried to read it once, and couldn't get past the neo-fascist preaching. Voerhoven's tongue-in-cheek satire of the right-wing military-wank genre is a gigantic improvement.

[Elfdart]

Dude, those were some nice titties. You're definitely wrong.

You can never have enough redheads in movies whipping 'em out, and you can't expect Susan Sarandon to carry the load forever.

Ditto to what Darth Wong said about Heinlen's novels. What I put in my sig about Orson Scott Tard applies in spades to Heinlen.

[Darth Hoth]

Dude I can CG any cupsize you can imagine into existence Equal Opportunities Employer

Real titties beat CGI ones.

I don't need Voerhoven massacring a sci-fi classic to do so

Starship Troopers is the most overrated book ever. I tried to read it once, and couldn't get past the neo-fascist preaching. Voerhoven's tongue-in-cheek satire of the right-wing military-wank genre is a gigantic improvement.

Neo-fascist? How in the name of Katarn can one possibly interpret it like that? Or are you one of those people to whom any limitation in the franchise equals jackboots and ethnic cleansing?

Seriously, I would like to know. I read the book, more than once, without finding anything to support that often-made allegation (most often by people who (like yourself?) never bothered to read the book in the first place). And while I do not necessarily agree with the society posited, the novel does make some good points. Yes, it is simplistic at times, but one has to remember it was written for "young adults". And the message of communal responsibility and equality of opportunity never becomes dated.

[Darth Wong]

Seriously, I would like to know. I read the book, more than once, without finding anything to support that often-made allegation (most often by people who (like yourself?) never bothered to read the book in the first place).

I tried. I couldn't get past the militarist wankery. It's a society where, in order to have a say in the direction of society, you must be a former government employee.

And while I do not necessarily agree with the society posited, the novel does make some good points.

Such as?

Yes, it is simplistic at times, but one has to remember it was written for "young adults". And the message of communal responsibility and equality of opportunity never becomes dated.

It does when it's tied to militarism.

[Darth Hoth]

I tried. I couldn't get past the militarist wankery. It's a society where, in order to have a say in the direction of society, you must be a former government employee.

It is a society where, in order to vote, you must do your term of conscription. Not only that, it does not even require military service, but civilian work is enough. Not as liberal a democracy as the US or Canada, but not too unreasonable either.

Such as?

That one does not value what is given freely as one values what is earned. That civic responsibilities cannot be forced upon one, merely accepted (or not). That punishment must be immediate, if not necessarily harsh, to be effective. That war is a bad thing, that should be fought only by those volunteering for it knowing (as far as such is possible in advance) what it entails.

It does when it's tied to militarism.

How is it militaristic? It is stated clearly that there has not been a war for very long, that most of the population thinks the military largely unnecessary, and that serving military personnel cannot even vote! What is so militarist with having a military around, should you need it?

And regardless of whether it is wankish (which I can agree with to some extent) or militarist (which I do not really agree with, but which can be discussed), there is still nothing to make it fascist.

[Darth Ruinus]

I dont have the book right now, but I remember one of the guys in the MI commenting that usually civilian life is easier, and that civilians are usually smarter than soldiers. I cant be sure though.

[Ted C]

I think the premise of the Starship Troopers system of granting voting rights was that in order receive full voting rights, you had to prove that you were willing to put the needs of the society ahead of your own. That meant some kind of public service that could potentially get you killed, including military service.

Technically, I suppose that police and firemen are also engaged in service that would qualify if they were federal instead of local.

[Ender]

I'm trying to figure out how a realistic depiction of military service constitutes wank. Ringo's shit, where members of the military are held up as the end all be all of mankind and everyone who disagrees is a fool or a traitor, is easily wank. Starship Troopers does none of that - it shows the wide range of idiots in the service from people who bitch too much to a guy who kidnaps and kills a kid, in addition to the decent people.

The book does espouse a form of fascism, but not for the reasons people cite. Ironically most of the charges they bring up are disavowed in the novel, but the ones people never bring up are affirmed.

[Illuminatus Primus]

I tried. I couldn't get past the militarist wankery. It's a society where, in order to have a say in the direction of society, you must be a former government employee.

It is a society where, in order to vote, you must do your term of conscription. Not only that, it does not even require military service, but civilian work is enough. Not as liberal a democracy as the US or Canada, but not too unreasonable either.

You can vote if you submit to government employment requirements (maybe this automatically disqualifies gays, invalids, and other undesirables, hm?) and indoctrination. One reason Republicans love to worship America's "troops" is they'd prefer we all vote like they do - for militaristic macho man posturing and "we know what's best" crypto-authoritarianism.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Don't keep us in the dark, Ender - what are they?

[Ender]

You can vote if you submit to government employment requirements (maybe this automatically disqualifies gays, invalids, and other undesirables, hm?) and indoctrination.

Read the book. They are legally barred from turning anyone away from service, nor does service require indoctrination. Field testing equipment qualifies service. So does New Deal style labor batallions, plus the other stuff like police, R&D, etc.

One reason Republicans love to worship America's "troops" is they'd prefer we all vote like they do - for militaristic macho man posturing and "we know what's best" crypto-authoritarianism.

That manages to be the most offensive and largest oversimplification I have ever seen. Props.

Don't keep us in the dark, Ender - what are they?

Later tonight, I have a college appointment now.