Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rackhir" data-source="post: 1607481" data-attributes="member: 149">Yes, we should find that bombing implausible, remember the bombing of that that kicked off Desert Storm II and several other attempts to "get" Saddam which included bombing a "command bunker" that didn't even exist. They were based on "intelligence information" as well. My point is that while it makes for a nice fantasy it's never that easy in the real world. While the US might not have an offical policy of trying to kill enemy leaders, anyone who is running a country that's involved in a shooting war with the US would have to be pretty stupid not to make some serious efforts to hide their location.See my post just above.Actually, I said " ...Wait was that the one with the "Bomb the Evil Leader fantasy". It had slipped my mind that I had read the book and I was unsure of the title.I will confess I've never read any of the John Clark books. However if that's the sum total of the bad things that's happened to Jack Ryan over the course of 10 books. I'd say a serious wounding (with a full recovery) and a smear campaign are pretty much nothing. The wiping out of the US gov put Jack Ryan in the President's office, which can't be a bad thing given that he has the strength of 10 men because his heart is pure. Besides they were all politicians who are corrupt, venial and self serving because they aren't Jack Ryan.And getting on to nitpicking statement, the JAL pilot wasn't mad in any sense of the word. He was quite calm and followed a classicly japanese method of avenging a wrong (from their point of view). Ah, I had forgotten the details of his campaign. Of course Jack is so true and honorable, how could anyone oppose him. I don't belive that being wealthy inherently makes people evil. However, happy laid back people are rarely interested in doing the kinds of things that make people rich. Also getting rich is noticably easier if you are ruthless, corrupt and put your own interests ahead of anyone elses. So there is a strong tendency in that direction. Very few people have gotten rich simply because they are a nice guy. Steve Wozniac is about the only one I can think of and he blew a lot of his money helping out other people. My point was in any case that simply being wealthy hardly makes people immune to temptation or corruption. As Clancy was clearly stating it was one reason why they were immune to corruption. People who have accumulated vast amounts of wealth, obviously are willing to do things that will earn vast amounts of wealth.You need to read some better books on the topic then. Our Founding Fathers, assumed that the people who followed them would be corrupt, self serving and power hungry. One of their main goals in crafting the Constitution and Bill of Rights was to contain and if possible neutralize these tendencies. It is specifically why our government is built around a division of powers. So that there would be other forces in government that could block or moderate the actions of the highly imperfect humans.Actually I don't like those shows either. I dislike simplistic one dimesional characters, knocking over cardboard villians. In fact it's gotten to be one of my major complaints with some of my favorite authors who have been getting rather sloppy in that area.</blockquote>

Verification