In Congress, Rep. Kucinich Argues Against Army's Video Game-Fueled Recruiting Road Show
In Congress, Rep. Kucinich Argues Against Army's Video Game-Fueled Recruiting Road Show
June 25, 2009
Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is no fan of the controversial Virtual Army Experience, a traveling, high-tech, video game-driven military recruiting program.
As GamePolitics reported in March, Kucinich urged the House Armed Services committee to eliminate funding for the project, charging that it "give[s] participants as young as 13 years old a naïve and unrealistic glimpse into the world of soldiering..."
In addition, Kucinich has taken the debate over the VAE to the floor of Congress. A C-SPAN video posted yesterday on YouTube shows the former presidential hopeful once again expressing concern over the recruiting program. Engaging in a colloquy with House Armed Services Committee chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO). Kucinich said:
Children as young as 13-years-old are participating in the Virtual Army Experience, which paints an innaccurate picture of war by glorifying it while sanitizing the real effects. More than a mere video game, it includes interactions with real veterans, who appear to be in perfect health. It also requires that the user, regardless of age, share personal information as a condition of participation...
I think we can agree that the Virtual Army Experience video game must be revalidated to ensure that its age-appropriate rating is accurate in the context of how it's being employed; that the Virtual Army Experience content should be reviewed to ensure it accurately reflects the consequences of war; and that there must be increased transparency with regard to how the personal information of the participants, collected during participation, will be used by the Army.
Skelton's response is of interest in that he didn't exactly disagree with Kucinich:
I support the VAE. At the same time, I know it can be improved. And I would be happy, of course, to work with this gentleman to address the issues that you have so aptly raised.
GP: At this point we're not entirely sure when Kucinich made the remarks in the House; given that they just hit YouTube, we assume that they are recent. Any GamePolitics reader input on the timing of Kucinich's comments will be gratefully accepted.
Thanks to: GP correspondent Andrew Eisen...
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGIN / REGISTER
Crispy Gamer
GamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:07pm
JDKJ: No, I did you the favor and said it for you.
JDKJ: No, I did you the favor and said it for you.
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:06pm
Valdearg: What I said was while I may have implied long term accuraccy, and that might have been incorrect, my greater point that the CBO report calculated reduced deficits, expanded coverage, and lower costs is still 100% accurate. :D
Valdearg: What I said was while I may have implied long term accuraccy, and that might have been incorrect, my greater point that the CBO report calculated reduced deficits, expanded coverage, and lower costs is still 100% accurate. :D
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:06pm
Valdearg: Like any good politician, I don't believe I said "I was incorrect." :P
Valdearg: Like any good politician, I don't believe I said "I was incorrect." :P
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:02pm
JDKJ: If you'd said "I was incorrect" 10 shouts ago, I'd have quit twisting your arm to get you see the obvious 10 shouts ago.
JDKJ: If you'd said "I was incorrect" 10 shouts ago, I'd have quit twisting your arm to get you see the obvious 10 shouts ago.
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:00pm
JDKJ: You were they one assuming 100% accuracy. In all caps, no less.
JDKJ: You were they one assuming 100% accuracy. In all caps, no less.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:59am
Valdearg: Yes, my implication that the long term estimates were facts was incorrect, but the short term calculations are absolutely facts, and even the long term estimates are still useful in attempting to determine exactly what will happen with the bill.
Valdearg: Yes, my implication that the long term estimates were facts was incorrect, but the short term calculations are absolutely facts, and even the long term estimates are still useful in attempting to determine exactly what will happen with the bill.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:58am
Valdearg: I do. The Short term costs are actually calculated facts. The long term estimates aren't necessarily 100% accurate, but to assume that they can't possibly be accurate because someone said they might not be 100% accurate is also wrong.
Valdearg: I do. The Short term costs are actually calculated facts. The long term estimates aren't necessarily 100% accurate, but to assume that they can't possibly be accurate because someone said they might not be 100% accurate is also wrong.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:57am
JDKJ: When someone says, "I could be wrong but, as best as I can tell, X," X ain't a fact.
JDKJ: When someone says, "I could be wrong but, as best as I can tell, X," X ain't a fact.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:53am
JDKJ: It's too early in the morning for you to be deaf, blind, and dumb drunk. A "my best guestimate" can't be a fact. Don't you understand the difference between the two?
JDKJ: It's too early in the morning for you to be deaf, blind, and dumb drunk. A "my best guestimate" can't be a fact. Don't you understand the difference between the two?
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:41am
Valdearg: By how much depends on variables that can't necessarily be predicted at this point in time. And yes, those Facts are accurate only so far into the future, but those estimates can certainly be used to support this measure.
Valdearg: By how much depends on variables that can't necessarily be predicted at this point in time. And yes, those Facts are accurate only so far into the future, but those estimates can certainly be used to support this measure.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:40am
Valdearg: And I'm saying, as far as the CBO report goes, the facts that it does put forward are deficit reduction, reducing costs, and expanding costs. Those ARE facts.
Valdearg: And I'm saying, as far as the CBO report goes, the facts that it does put forward are deficit reduction, reducing costs, and expanding costs. Those ARE facts.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:30am
JDKJ: You were the one championing a qualified estimate as an indisputable fact. I'm merely pointing out that it's far from indisputable. So says the estimator.
JDKJ: You were the one championing a qualified estimate as an indisputable fact. I'm merely pointing out that it's far from indisputable. So says the estimator.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:27am
Valdearg: Or are you only breaking that argument out because the CBO says that this bill is a good thing for our deficit?
Valdearg: Or are you only breaking that argument out because the CBO says that this bill is a good thing for our deficit?
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:27am
JDKJ: The CBO says that, to the extent it is possible to accurately predict defict reduction over the long term, it is likely to reduce the deficit. That's your idea of "a fact that don't lie?"
JDKJ: The CBO says that, to the extent it is possible to accurately predict defict reduction over the long term, it is likely to reduce the deficit. That's your idea of "a fact that don't lie?"
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:26am
Valdearg: Would you be singing the same tune if the CBO came back saying that the bill will likely double the deficit in 20 years??
Valdearg: Would you be singing the same tune if the CBO came back saying that the bill will likely double the deficit in 20 years??
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:26am
Valdearg: @JDKJ: Just because there is a margin of error doesn't mean that the numbers aren't at least psudo-accurate.
Valdearg: @JDKJ: Just because there is a margin of error doesn't mean that the numbers aren't at least psudo-accurate.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:25am
Valdearg: The point is that the bill reduces costs, expands coverage, and reduces the deficit.
Valdearg: The point is that the bill reduces costs, expands coverage, and reduces the deficit.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:24am
JDKJ: So why are you off and running with "facts and numbers don't lie" when the very author of the facts and numbers is acknowledging that their facts and numbers could quite easily be wrong?
JDKJ: So why are you off and running with "facts and numbers don't lie" when the very author of the facts and numbers is acknowledging that their facts and numbers could quite easily be wrong?
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:23am
Valdearg: @JDKJ: Indeed, but the 10 year is also showing a deficit reduction, and that's more accurate.
Valdearg: @JDKJ: Indeed, but the 10 year is also showing a deficit reduction, and that's more accurate.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:19am
JDKJ: Val': Isn't the CBO saying at the same time that predicting the long term deficit reduction effect isn't anywhere near an exact science? And that its prediction should be taken with that understanding?
JDKJ: Val': Isn't the CBO saying at the same time that predicting the long term deficit reduction effect isn't anywhere near an exact science? And that its prediction should be taken with that understanding?
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
I don´t know what to think about people bitching about videogames, other than "publicity stunt" or "I want to be relevant talking about sh1t I don´t have any clue".
What career doesn´t use some degree of "inacurate picture" anyways for self-promotion? Just because they are using games is why he is bitching about.
The cynical side of videogames (spanish only): http://thelostlevel.blogspot.com/ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com/
The only thing in the past week on the House's Floor Debate Schedule which comes close is yesterday's entry which began consideration of H.R. 2647 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010).
While I know you gratefully accept the information, if you could express that gratitude in the form of an ECA t-shirt, key-ring, bumper sticker, or other such trinket, I'd gratefully accept that.
Isn't this the same guy who claims he saw Aliens? Dennis Kucinich is far to the left, very far but he does pick up good causes as well.
Now I am the biggest advocate against the far left anti Military and those who hate their country except when their guy is in charge and we must all blindly follow him and of course video game legislation.
What he says does have merit. Having went through Marine Corps Boot Camp I can say very fairly some people go in for the wrong reasons. As a teen and a young adult especially growing up in a safe country like America you think nothing can hurt you and everything is butterflies and green trees like your Liberal Grammar school Teacher tried to tell you the world is.
People join, and then there is a good chance of death or finding out you were not meant for this life. As an adult you do make a choice and take a risk but to train children that War is easy and you can just respawn well, I hate to break it you. War never changes and war is hell.
If anything American’s Army should also add in a story feature to it. To show the average person what a typical mission entails. Give them a powerful epic story as a well a shooter about life and the powerful feeling of what is it like to lose a comrade in battle. People who never served or lost a loved one find it hard to understand why people in the Military take TAPS so seriously. It’s simple, when your an honor guard at a Military funeral seeing a fellow friend off, it’s hard and we all go through it one way or another.
I don’t think we need to get rid of America’s Army, maybe edit it to give it a powerful story. Let the recruit know what it is like to lose a friend and what it is like to save lives. I just think this game would be better off as a promotional tool to show how it feels to be a Solider, Airmen, and Marine and the pains they go through so you can live in la la land and not worry about the very cruel world that is out there.
..... I am.... Speechless..
For once, if you sanitize the right wing stupidity from his comments, Kefka is right..
This "Experience" doesn't really show the reality of war. It doesn't show what it is like in training, the brutal (but necessary) drills they go through, and it sure as hell doesn't show you what it is like to lose a friend or squadmate to an enemy. It also doesn't show you the mental illness that many, many servicemen and women recieve as payment for thier heroic serivce. (PTSD, if my comment was too subtle)
All this crap does is invite children, who haven't had the time to truly find something they like, play this game and go "Oh, this is cool! I want to have this Cool Job when I graduate!"
If anything, this VAE crap is intentionally misleading the teenagers of this country into taking a job that many of them probably aren't suited for, and that has high chance of resulting in them coming home in a bodybag..
Also, Kefka.. Considering this comment was actually on point, relevant, and mostly heartfelt (again, not counting the moronic right wing rhetoric), I've come to the conclusion that you, against all odds, are actually a real person.. Which, considering I had you pegged as a satirical troll for quite a while, surprises the hell out of me.
And, on that note, I now realize you actually believe everything that you type, which scares the crap out of me, considering that you prove that there actually are people out there who believe the nonsense you spout, and that they can actually vote. Which is both depressing and frightening.
Wrong post
I think we should outlaw America's Army. Not because it's falsely portraying the US Army, but because it suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucks.
---You are likely to be eaten by a Grue.
That's the most intelligent thing I've heard ANYONE say on this topic!!
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin
He's right. You know, next time I go to a job fair, I think the plumber's booth should smell like shit and mildew, the roofer's booth should have a guy in a full body cast from falling off the roof, the police booth should have a cop's widow speaking, etc. Recruiters for every job should have to highlight all the negative aspects of that line of work and emphasize how awful it is, because the sole responsibility for what job a person chooses to take obviously lies with the recruiter, not the person choosing the job.
Or wait, maybe that's only for jobs I have some political beef with. I get so confused sometimes...
I find this kind of condescending, paternalizing bullshit to be truly offensive. The VAE is supposed to attract recruits. That's what it's for. There are plenty of other places where people can read, see, and hear about the negative aspects of being in the military, if they make even a basic attempt at researching the job to see if it's right for them. People are not as stupid as this guy seems to think he is. They do not live in a vacuum where the only information they have, or can have, about being in the military comes from the VAE. They are not instantly brainwashed into believing the military is their one true dream career from the moment that joystick touches their hand. I, for one, still believe in personal responsibility, and I refuse to let shmucks like this try to shift that responsibility elsewhere. If I join the military, or take any other job, without doing any research beyond what the guy promoting that job has to say, then that's my own fault and nobody else's. It is not the recruiter's responsibility to talk me out of it.
This is where I draw the line on Military recruiters. We should all know by now, don’t believe a lick of what they say and to actually talk to Veterans where you can get mixed reviews. The Armed Forces can be the best thing to ever happen to you or your family or it can be the worst. In the Armed Forces you put yourself last and service first.
To apply Xboxes and such in recruiting stations like yeah once you get in you get all these perks? It’s not like that at all. It’s hard. But some recruiters go the extra mile and they tell people to lie when joining the Military, to just rush them through to get their numbers. Recruiters don’t get paid for each person they recruit the only perk about being a recruiter you live whoever you want, and get a free car as long as you get in your numbers.
I’ve seen a lot of people go in for the wrong reasons in the Marine Corps. I have seen a lot of people freak out in Boot Camp and end up in RSP which is still boot camp but your there for a year in boot camp. Some people get sucked in for the wrong reasons now these people are adults. They choose to join and to serve which is honorable.
But know your limits before you join. Don’t join if you can’t clean you room, make your bed, do hard labor when your parents ask because believe me you join the Marines you better know how to sow. If your like that don’t make these same mistake I made, get paid to be on vacation join the Air Force you’ll most likely get stationed in Germany,
I love our Military but I feel recruiters should be held to a high standard and forcing them to get a certain number just makes them do things and recruit people who are not well enough to serve.
I would love too see some of our great writers in the Industry who made a 1st person shooter likeBioshock have such an amazing story write for this man’s armed forces.
Most off us do not know what loss is like and what hardship is like. A writer or director can make a moving story and I think this is the best place to start when it comes to this because once your in the field you need to know how to hack it.