Bear and the Dragon.... 2006

[Fenwick]

I was rereading Tom Clancy's novel and something occured to me... China no longer has the military, or military thinking discribed in the book. Does anyone else agree?

Plus doesn't the whole "new" American weapons during the end seem waaaaay too powerful to defeat the Chinese after the first real battle?

[Lokit]

I really don't like that book. Ameri-wank if you ask me.

[CalBear]

Originally Posted by Lokit

I really don't like that book. Ameri-wank if you ask me.

Hmmm...

Tom Clancy writing an Ameri-wank book.

Shocking, simply shocking!

[Lokit]

Originally Posted by CalBear

Hmmm...

Tom Clancy writing an Ameri-wank book.

Shocking, simply shocking!

I know, I know.

Red storm was quite good on the other hand. Except for the fact that all americans were saints, while many russians were "evil".

[CalBear]

Originally Posted by Lokit

I know, I know.

Red storm was quite good on the other hand. Except for the fact that all americans were saints, while many russians were "evil".

That's because Larry Bond wrote a big chunk of the book, especially the part that was based on Harpoon (which Bond also developed).

[Floid]

Originally Posted by CalBear

That's because Larry Bond wrote a big chunk of the book, especially the part that was based on Harpoon (which Bond also developed).

Ah, Larry Bond. He's supposed to be 'helping' with the upcoming game 'World In Conflict'.

[Fenwick]

The ending always bugged me. A group of students simply walk into the chinese houses of government, with no resistance, and create a coup with no guns just computers and the dream of democracy.

My god... why does every book make China into the vile demon of the 21st century and America only needing to show her the way of Democracy. Bah!

[The Lurker]

Originally Posted by Lokit

I really don't like that book. Ameri-wank if you ask me.

Didn't like it much myself, either. Not exactly sure what all the connotations of 'Ameriwank' are, but the whole President Ryan era shtick with him just strikes me as a guy trying to write out a neocon's bedtime fantasies.

[David bar Elias]

Originally Posted by The Lurker

Didn't like it much myself, either. Not exactly sure what all the connotations of 'Ameriwank' are, but the whole President Ryan era shtick with him just strikes me as a guy trying to write out a neocon's bedtime fantasies.

Yeah....think of Jack Ryan as a far more compassionate, competent, and smart version of GWB.........

[fortyseven]

Ryan says he's pro-life but there shouldn't be one national law on abortion

[xchen08]

Well, that is generally the neocon position, its the evangelicals that want a national ban. About the book, some of it never made any sense to me. First, China would insane to invade Russia and think they won't get nuked considering the difference in strategic deterent between the two. (ie. Russia would lose a few cities, China gets wiped out) Clancy tried to get around this by having both Russia and the U.S. abolish their strategic arsenals, possibly the most ridiculous part of the entire Jack Ryan series. Also Russia joining NATO and magical american weapons that easily destroy all opposition seem impossible. The magical weapons bit is somewhat of a deux ex machina; the war was won much too easily.

[MerryPrankster]

Originally Posted by fortyseven

Ryan says he's pro-life but there shouldn't be one national law on abortion

That's probably the best constitutional position. Not to mention a federal attempt to ban abortion outright (not ban a procedure like partial-birth which I don't think used all that often) would be immensely problematic, and possibly unconstitutional (unless make a 14th Amendment case re: right to life).

[MerryPrankster]

Originally Posted by xchen08

Well, that is generally the neocon position, its the evangelicals that want a national ban. About the book, some of it never made any sense to me. First, China would insane to invade Russia and think they won't get nuked considering the difference in strategic deterent between the two. (ie. Russia would lose a few cities, China gets wiped out) Clancy tried to get around this by having both Russia and the U.S. abolish their strategic arsenals, possibly the most ridiculous part of the entire Jack Ryan series. Also Russia joining NATO and magical american weapons that easily destroy all opposition seem impossible. The magical weapons bit is somewhat of a deux ex machina; the war was won much too easily.

What magic weapons? Are you referring to the Aegis-type system that protects DC from the Chinese nuke?

[fortyseven]

Originally Posted by MerryPrankster

That's probably the best constitutional position.

I thoguht it was most sensible

[xchen08]

Originally Posted by MerryPrankster

What magic weapons? Are you referring to the Aegis-type system that protects DC from the Chinese nuke?

That too, aegis might be able to protect from Scuds, but not a real ICBM (If aegis with a software upgrade can stop ICBMs, what are we doing spending money on a theater missle defense?), but I meant the way american aircraft are able to wipe out entire armies with bombs that always work perfectly, and destroy the chinese airforce with utter impunity with perfect missles. The world doesn't work that way, it especially doesn't work that way in wars between major powers, it only works that way between major powers and third world countries that think they know how to use the weapons that they buy from somebody else.

[Hapsburg]

Originally Posted by David bar Elias

Yeah....think of Jack Ryan as a far more compassionate, competent, and smart version of GWB.........

So, basically, the polar opposite of GW?

[Strategos' Risk]

Originally Posted by Fenwick

My god... why does every book make China into the vile demon of the 21st century and America only needing to show her the way of Democracy. Bah!

That's because history has yet to show us how a Dengist commu-capitalist gov't will evolve and end.

[NFR]

Originally Posted by Fenwick

I was rereading Tom Clancy's novel and something occured to me... China no longer has the military, or military thinking discribed in the book. Does anyone else agree?

Plus doesn't the whole "new" American weapons during the end seem waaaaay too powerful to defeat the Chinese after the first real battle?

God, don't bring up that book in my presence. It is a cauldron of racism, stupidity, insultingly stupid portrayal of geopolitical and economic realities, and in general, complete and utter crap of the worse order.

[general_tiu]

You are quite too rough, last poster.

Personally, I didn't like many of the parts of this novel. Especially the political crap. Yet, I did like some of the parts, like China attempting its version of Yakutia .

[Ivan Druzhkov]

Originally Posted by NFR

God, don't bring up that book in my presence. It is a cauldron of racism, stupidity, insultingly stupid portrayal of geopolitical and economic realities, and in general, complete and utter crap of the worse order.

This is pretty much my objection to the Dale Brown oeuvre, though maybe not as harshly worded. I can't understand why in these books countries decide to turn the world order upside down for no reason other than hubris, even if such foolish policies WILL result in national destruction. Admittedly, such scenarios are cool, and they always produce some nice wreckage, but sometimes you have to wonder if every world leader is smoking crack* or something.

I also hate the fact that the Russians rarely win in these stories, especially when they are usually the awesomest bunch of badasses that ever walked the Earth, especially when compared with the American protaganists.

*Well, not Dubya. He gets high on Jesus.