# Controversy over certain wars and conflicts



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 5, 2020)

In my sci-fi  urban fantasy story, I might have missions  Take place during the Gulf war and Iraqi invasion Freedom conflict. Will this be an issue?


----------



## indianroads (Mar 5, 2020)

I don't see why it would... if written authentically.


----------



## hvysmker (Mar 5, 2020)

Shouldn't be. Do your research though.


----------



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 5, 2020)

Ok. I did some research and there were some secret missions during and aftermath the Gulf War like Operation Comfort and the one involving the SAS ops. I could have my soldier going on these missions but also create fictional bad guys and secret deserts right? Even having a secret island off the coast of the Gulf where they were holding hostages can work? What should I avoid having that would be considered controversial during the Gulf War?

And what's a good way to set a fictional story with sci-fi and fantasy elements set during the Iraq Invasion and the on going war on terror conflicts set in the 2000's and 2010's?


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 5, 2020)

I'm a Desert Storm veteran, and spent time with Special Forces. I know we weren't thrilled with the Black Water folks, but at times, they were.... _useful._ Secret prisons, etc are probably not too far-fetched, but I'd still be real careful. The whole region is so complex. All the different branches of Islam, plus infighting between families that goes back a century, and the very common philosophy: "Me against my brother. My brother and me against our father." Extrapolate that out to families against families, then tribes against other tribes, sects and whole geographies..... It gets real complex, real quick.


----------



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 5, 2020)

Thank you for your service!

So maybe it's best that I avoid using the Gulf War or aftermath in my stories because I don't wanna take any bad chances in depicting something the wrong way. Is this why I never here of any fictional, sci-fi and fantasy stories taking place around the Gulf War and the current wars that have happened in Syria and Iraq? I've seen plenty of fictional takes on the Soviet-Afghan war in the 80's and even Central American conflicts set during the similar time period. These feel more safe to work in fiction, why is that?

What if I made up a secret mission based around the Bering Sea near Alaska and Russia or one based around a fictional desert near Ubekistan or the Russian Ural Mountains? Do you have any knowledge of these areas and if it's ok to make up fighting fictional bad guys in these locations?

I can always save the Gulf War missions and Iraqi Freedom missions as part of his background mentioned in flashbacks of what he experienced during those times? Rather than make full fledged stories out for them.

Any information you can give me and what to let me know what i should be sensitive about the Gulf War, like what to avoid, would help greatly, thanks!


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 6, 2020)

I like the Russian angle. I know nothing of them. Uzbekistan and the Ural Mountains and the Bering Straits.... Lots of very very harsh terrain. It will take a lot of research, but holy crap, that sounds awesome!

Central America, Vietnam, the happenings in Nicaragua/Panama etc., during the late 80's/early 90's... It seems like the more time that passes between the event and the fictionalization of it, people become more tolerant. Not sure why that is... 

With the Gulf War, there was a lot of stuff that was scrubbed. For instance, on CNN, there was satellite footage that showed a convoy of trucks going from Iraq into Syria. The US goes in, and holy shit! No WMD's! Several years later, chemical weapons are deployed in Syria. "ZOMG!! Where did Assad get those chemical weapons??" Heh...... No shit, Ace! But: Just try to find the CNN footage of that convoy of trucks from Iraq into Syria. It's been absolutely scrubbed from every possible outlet. Thing is, I know at least a dozen people who _*KNOW*_ they've seen it.

I would tread carefully around topics like soldier suicide, combat PTSD, Gulf War Syndrome, etc. Just be sure to really do your homework. That's all.

I offer this example all the time, but I'd picked up a promising novel. I started reading. The author is introducing us to the family about which the novel is being written, and she pens the line, "Her brother looked so handsome in his uniform as he marched off to basic training." I slammed the book into the trash. Soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines: No one is issued uniforms until _after_ their arrival at boot, basic, or....whatever. Furthermore, no one learns how to march until they arrive at their basic military training. The most cursory of investigation on the author's part would have mitigated this stupid mistake, but my thought was that if she couldn't arsed to do some basic research, I certainly couldn't be arsed to read her book.


----------



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 6, 2020)

It is an awesome idea right? I've done some research on places like Uzbekistan/Central Asia deserts and it seems like it was a pretty abandoned place, was thinking of setting it up for a secret mission during the 90's in my story, perhaps set in the early-mid or late 90's with fictional bad guys with a made up fortress or secret base set up. And I could add all the fictional elements I wanted for the Gulf War idea I had in mind like chemical warfare zombie attacks, werewolves that come out of the sand, vampires that had tombs underground, etc. I had a lot of sci-fi and fantasy ideas I wanted to add into my story and these parts would have been set during the Gulf. But if making the same ideas for another desert terrain landscape that would be much less controversial then somewhere by the Karakum/Uzbekistan desert rather than Kuwait/Iraq desert in the 90's, then I will settle with that. 

I really don't know enough about what went on in the Gulf War and making up a secret mission with deserts and underground places might not be a good idea if I can do this in a safer location where the Aral Sea used to exist by Uzbekistan, they have some pretty intriguing territory to work with maybe 

Bering/Alaskan region used to be a hotspot during the Cold War from the late 40's through the 80's with the DEW line set up for fear of Soviets ever invading or attacking. The DEW line I think was shut down in the early 90's. So it would be an easy set up for fictional bad guys to occupy such a deserted area I'm guessing? What about the Congo and Niger region? Make for some corrupted military base scene with jungles surrounding the area and a bunch of mean mercenaries guarding the area with nuclear tanks, missiles and lycan, vampire projects being all set up? Do you like this idea? Does any of these places seem plausible for being set in the 90's? The Ural Mountains in Russia I was planning for having during the 60's in my story where secret nuke weapons were being tested. Does this seem ok?

I haven't yet found that footage with the convoy trucks from Iraq into Syria  and I was going to use the Gulf War Syndrome that they used as a cover up for them for trying to test this new zombie weapon on their soldiers but it failed. Should this be avoided? And if I was to use the Gulf War setting, I was going to set this part of the story that takes place after the Gulf War, set on some secret island which was located near the persian Gulf between Iraq and Kuwait while the flames of Kuwait were burning by the oil fields for months. This would of been a cover up for bad guys to distract their secret island from being detected which they would of taken that island at a perfect timing, this would of been set up around March and April '91, when the Kawaiti oil fires still took place. I was going to call this secret island off the coast of the persian Gulf the World Gulf or something. Still controversial?

Well that I can understand! Uniform is always after basic training right? I still have a lot to learn about how things work in the military, but I can promise you I'd do my extensive research on how basic training and qualifications work!


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 6, 2020)

Breadcrumbs11722 said:


> It is an awesome idea right? I've done some research on places like Uzbekistan/Central Asia deserts and it seems like it was a pretty abandoned place, was thinking of setting it up for a secret mission during the 90's in my story, perhaps set in the early-mid or late 90's with fictional bad guys with a made up fortress or secret base set up. And I could add all the fictional elements I wanted for the Gulf War idea I had in mind like chemical warfare zombie attacks, werewolves that come out of the sand, vampires that had tombs underground, etc. I had a lot of sci-fi and fantasy ideas I wanted to add into my story and these parts would have been set during the Gulf. But if making the same ideas for another desert terrain landscape that would be much less controversial then somewhere by the Karakum/Uzbekistan desert rather than Kuwait/Iraq desert in the 90's, then I will settle with that.



Either one. Prior to going to Saudi, we had a whole battery of vaccinations we had to get. Everything from Anthrax to Typhoid. This could be an angle. I suspect that this may be part of Gulf War Syndrome, but the government is only going to deny it. Might be a good angle to pursue. Vaccine gone wrong... Vaccine interaction?




> I really don't know enough about what went on in the Gulf War and making up a secret mission with deserts and underground places might not be a good idea if i can do this in a safer location where the Aral Sea used to exist by Uzbekistan, they have some pretty intriguing territory to work with maybe



Sounds awesome!



> Bering/Alaskan region used to be a hotspot during the Cold War from the late 40's through the 80's with the DEW line set up for fear of Soviets ever invading or attacking. The DEW I think was shut down in the early 90's. So it would be an easy set up for fictional bad guys to occupy such a deserted area I'm guessing? What about the Congo and Niger region? Make for some corrupted military base scene with jungles surrounding the area and a bunch of mean mercenaries guarding the area with nuclear tanks, missiles and lycan, vampire projects? Do you like this idea? Does any of these places seem plausible for being set in the 90's? The Ural Mountains in Russia I was planning for having during the 60's in my story where secret nuke weapons were being tested. Is this seem ok?



Any of those scenarios sounds great!



> I haven't found that footage with the convoy trucks from Iraq into Syria  and I was going to use the Gulf War Syndrome that they used as a cover up for them for trying to test this new zombie weapon on their soldiers but it failed. Should this be avoided? And if I was to use the Gulf War setting, I was going to set this part of the story that takes place after the Gulf War, set on some secret island which was located near the persian Gulf between Iraq and Kuwait while the flames of Kuwait were burning by the oil fields for months. This would of been a cover up for bad guys to distract their secret island from being detected which they would of taken that island at a perfect timing, this would of been set up around March and April '91, when the Kawaiti oil fires still took place. I was going to call this secret island off the coast of the persian Gulf the World Gulf or something. Still controversial?



Nope! I think it's an excellent premise. This is what I was saying: That video doesn't exist anymore. It's been scrubbed from every site.



> Well that I can understand! Uniform is always after basic training right? I still have a lot to learn about how things work in the military, but I can promise you I'd do my extensive research on how basic training and qualifications work!



Yep. Uniforms are issued upon arrival. Learning to march is part of Drill and Ceremonies, and happens as one of the very first things that's taught.


----------



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 6, 2020)

Amnesiac said:


> Either one. Prior to going to Saudi, we had a whole battery of vaccinations we had to get. Everything from Anthrax to Typhoid. This could be an angle. I suspect that this may be part of Gulf War Syndrome, but the government is only going to deny it. Might be a good angle to pursue. Vaccine gone wrong... Vaccine interaction?




This I was going to use to incorporate into my fictional work. The use of
 Whatever injections they were using on their soldiers would be kept top secret, saying it was just anthrax and the use of the Gulf War Syndrome, which was really a cover up to enhance their soldiers from these vampire and werewolf genes made into their own serum, considering the strengths and reflexes these urban legend beings would carry so they figured they could put it into their soldiers (my story has a whole history with werewolves and vampires going back to WWII) but it would of failed, causing the Gulf Syndrome and some even became zombies, also the chemical weapons the Iraqi Republican Army used, even using on their soldiers. Even those who became zombies were kept secret and had to be covered up. This won't be controversial if I do this right?




> Sounds awesome!



Great! Does Uzbekistan desert sound more plausible set in the 90's? Or 2000's? Or just have it in the future?





> Any of those scenarios sounds great!



Awesome!





> Nope! I think it's an excellent premise. This is what I was saying: That video doesn't exist anymore. It's been scrubbed from every site.



Too bad for the video 
Should I avoid having any of these bad guys being Iraqi like Iraqi Republican soldiers? Or just stick with only rogue soldiers, agents, mercenaries, etc?





> Yep. Uniforms are issued upon arrival. Learning to march is part of Drill and Ceremonies, and happens as one of the very first things that's taught.



Thank you so much for this insight


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 7, 2020)

Bad guys could be mercenaries or other foreign fighters. Iraqi Republican Army is a good candidate.

If the Soviets are the bad guys, then it needs to happen before the fall of the USSR, so yeah: c. mid-90s. 

I really like all of the ideas you've got about the vaccines and the cover-up. Good stuff! Good luck with it!


----------



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 7, 2020)

Ok great! I was told before that making bad Iraqi soldiers during the Gulf War could still be offensive. Why is that? Haven't they been used in media or fictional stories before as bad guys? If this is set during the Gulf War or early 90's, like the mission when special op soldiers were helping free kurdish civilians from Iraqi Republican Armies, they would of been one of the "bad guys" at the time then with no problem right?

Yep! This makes complete sense, the Soviets would be set in my story during the early through mid 60's, not so much the 70's, then in the 80's they would, and would of died down in the 90's so a former Soviet state in the mid-90's taken up by some rogue bad guys should work?

Why have I been told it would be offensive to also have some Nicaraguan bad guys set in the 80's? Central America was a hot spot for special war activities going on there and it was a big part of the Cold War, along with the Soviets and Angola.

What about Serbians as bad guys set in the mid-90's as well? Like the Bosnian War? Would any of this be controversial?

Thanks, I appreciate it! Even the Bering Sea/Alaska is good for the 90's right? Or more like the 70's? My first impression was the 2000's when the DEW line was long gone.

Oh one last question, is there anything wrong with having bad Iraqis, Afghans, Syrians, Yemen and other middle eastern nations set in the 2000's-2010's? Since the timing is set during the global war on terror? And I'd still have American bad guys.

Thanks for any feedback you have.


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 7, 2020)

Well, I don't think any of that would be necessarily offensive. Just make sure, in something with that kind of epic scope, that you really do your homework and research. Lots of stuff happening, in there. The Bosnia thing was such a complex bowl of soup... Little, if any of it, made sense. We were only trying to stop a genocide, there. Central America was pretty crazy, too.

Good luck with all of your research!


----------



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 7, 2020)

Ok thanks! And if it worked in fiction like the Marvel series and Wolverine series then it should be just fine?

Who were the US fighting against in Bosnia? I think it was the Serbians against the Bosniaks if I'm correct? Was there really no good side? I could just make up a fictional mission in Bosnia at the time with fictional bad guys to stop them from planning not just genocide but using some kind of zombie vampire outbreak?

I know no matter what I do it will be somewhat offensive.


----------



## Ma'am (Mar 7, 2020)

I don't understand why in this thread and another one, you seem to focus on not being "offensive." The larger issue seems to me more just not being "inaccurate." So I'm kinda scratching my head here.

For example, what would you think if you read a story set in your real life town but the author portrayed it as on a snowy mountain when it's really in a flat desert? Or if they included a local restaurant you go to but portrayed it as Chinese when it's really Italian? Or... if they portrayed the Native Americans on a nearby reservation as wearing feathered headdresses at all times and greeting everyone with "How," rather than how they really live?

You'd probably be annoyed at all three inaccuracies listed above. So framing it only in terms of not being offensive sounds like the only issue is tiptoeing around "sensitive snowflakes." But the issue is really knowing what you are writing about all-around, yes?

So, I'd either:

1) Research the real life events and people you are including, thoroughly enough that you do portray them reasonably accurately, and therefore _also_ already know if something is likely to be considered offensive- and why. (To me, this much research would be too much of a derail from my main goal of finishing a story, unless the real life events and people were ones that I was very interested in anyway).

2) Stick to events and people who you are more familiar with instead.

3) Just omit the real life conflicts/wars and use made up ones, since it's a fantasy story anyway. (Combining real life events/people with fiction can get sticky anyway).

Hope that helps. Unless I just missed the point...


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 7, 2020)

Being inaccurate is basically synonymous with being offensive. Certainly that's true if the inaccuracy is because of perceived indifference to the truth. The vast majority of what gets deemed offensive is because of people resorting to lazy or unfounded stereotypes or talking points rather than because people are intentionally wanting to hurt others.

 The problem is, there's not a clear moral difference between offense due to negligence and offense due to malice. There isn't a clear difference between creating offense and serving as a useful idiot to perpetuate it. I mean, in a situation where there was a means by which to avoid 'helping' the propagation of a falsehood (i.e where the information was available and the person mentally competent enough to locate it) and that doesn't happen, that's not massively different to actually creating the falsehood itself. You could split hairs, of course, but these days most people aren't going to credit it. 

In terms of war? Most modern-era wars aren't particularly polarizing. Iraq was probably the last where there was a certain degree of contention over the moral case, and even then...I don't think people gave as much of a shit as we like to believe. The controversy was less over the matter of killing Iraqis and more over the fact that the U.S and U.K governments lied through their teeth. You would probably have to go back to Vietnam to find a war that was sufficiently controversial _as a war..._ and that's not a big thing in most people's living memory, and almost inconsequential outside of America (and Vietnam itself). World War Two, similarly, is a dying ember.

But yeah, you have to try to be accurate, and so long as you are at least making a good faith effort I can't imagine there being a problem. The biggest problem when fictional stories try to mess with actual history is not offense but simple credibility. If people can detect an exceptionally weak grasp on history and/or geopolitics, it's going to probably hurt the impact of your work. It's not that they're 'offended', it's just that it all starts to feel very juvenile. Hackish.


----------



## CyberWar (Mar 9, 2020)

Breadcrumbs11722 said:


> Ok thanks! And if it worked in fiction like the Marvel series and Wolverine series then it should be just fine?
> 
> Who were the US fighting against in Bosnia? I think it was the Serbians against the Bosniaks if I'm correct? Was there really no good side? I could just make up a fictional mission in Bosnia at the time with fictional bad guys to stop them from planning not just genocide but using some kind of zombie vampire outbreak?
> 
> I know no matter what I do it will be somewhat offensive.



The Yugoslav Wars were basically a free-for-all between the former Yugoslav republics. The whole fuss started over the break-up of Yugoslavia that left behind a very ethnically-diverse and fragmented population divided between multiple new nations. There were ethnic Serb enclaves in Bosnia and Croatia, there were Bosniak enclaves in Serbia, there were likewise Croatian enclaves in Serbia and Bosnia. These areas would become the hotbeds of unrest that eventually devolved into war, ethnic pogroms and massacres. One could arguably portray the Serbs as the nominal bad guys, seeing how the war was chiefly about Serbian efforts to claim all Serb-majority lands in Yugoslavia and expel non-Serbian populations, but that is a simplistic view - the feuds between Yugoslav nations go back way before the 90's, and historically the Serbs have received just as much, if not more abuse from their neighbors as they doled it out during the war. Long story short, there's no love lost between the Yugoslav nations, and for quite many more reasons than just the recent bad history.

The US intervened later, during the Kosovo War, which is considered distinct from the main conflicts of 1991-1995. This was done in reprisal of massacres perpetrated by Serb militants against Kosovar Albanians. The intervention was largely limited to airstrikes against Serb targets and the deployment of a NATO peacekeeping force in Kosovo. Interestingly, the Serbs managed to shoot down an American stealth bomber during this time, exploiting a design oversight that allowed stealth bombers to be tracked by older radars using different wavelengths no longer in common military use. All in all, though, the NATO campaign was a success, forcing Serbs to withdraw from Kosovo and eventually enabling Kosovo to proclaim independence.

In the Yugoslav War setting, your bad guys could be a paramilitary of Serb ultranationalists seeking to undermine their foes by exploiting some kind of undead virus. Seeing how the local folklore is rich with undead myths and the belief in vampires, your story could have those myths grounded in the existence of an actual virus or parasite found in the vast karst caves that are common throughout the Balkans. The militants could have extracted it by following local legends to a forbidden cave long believed to be cursed (perhaps after learning of the place from a former scientist who studied the place for a secret government weapons program during the Cold War), and planning to either unleash it upon their enemies, or simply intending to sell the pathogen to the highest bidder in order to fund their cause. In the latter case, the outbreak could be the result of a potential customer demanding a demonstration.

Alternatively, the bad guys could be just an international outfit of mercenaries from the former Soviet bloc nations coming to capitalize on the war (there being quite a few foreign mercs fighting on all sides in the Yugoslav Wars). Having ties with the Russian mafia, they could learn of the existence of a vampire/zombie virus in the local caves much like described before and use their mafia contacts to organize a recovery expedition and sell it to paying customers (international terrorists and rogue states, no doubt). And, as always happens in fiction, things would go south from there on.

---

And my advice - stop worrying about being offensive. Your job is to write a story that the average Joe will find exciting, not to please every self-entitled special snowflake and crybaby out there, who could frankly use a hefty dose of "offensive" just to remind them that the world does not revolve around their feelings. Political correctness is the very reason why there's barely any watchable action movies coming out of Hollywood anymore. An exciting action tale is all about guns, explosions, car chases, snarky one-liners and the macho tough-guy protagonist kicking ass, saving the world and getting the damsel in distress. It's how Rambo found fans even in the nations portrayed as the bad guys throughout the movies.


----------



## RWK (Mar 9, 2020)

Breadcrumbs11722 said:


> Ok. I did some research and there were some secret missions during and aftermath the Gulf War like Operation Comfort and the one involving the SAS ops. I could have my soldier going on these missions but also create fictional bad guys and secret deserts right? Even having a secret island off the coast of the Gulf where they were holding hostages can work? What should I avoid having that would be considered controversial during the Gulf War?
> 
> And what's a good way to set a fictional story with sci-fi and fantasy elements set during the Iraq Invasion and the on going war on terror conflicts set in the 2000's and 2010's?



Write what you know. If you've never served, avoid writing from a military standpoint, because it will ring like a plastic bell. Look into a civilian angle, such as a reporter, etc.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 9, 2020)

RWK said:


> Write what you know. If you've never served, avoid writing from a military standpoint, because it will ring like a plastic bell. Look into a civilian angle, such as a reporter, etc.



Well that’s just empirically false. Plenty of highly-rated military fiction writers never served. Tom Clancy, for example. Stephen Ambrose never served in the military or World War Two and yet was able to capture the experience so accurately he brought the veterans he was writing about to tears. 

“Write what you know” is not to be taken literally. Blending the common, human experience with a lot of good research and care goes a long way to making any kind of story possible for any writer to tell.


----------



## RWK (Mar 9, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> Well that’s just empirically false. Plenty of highly-rated military fiction writers never served. Tom Clancy, for example. Stephen Ambrose never served in the military or World War Two and yet was able to capture the experience so accurately he brought the veterans he was writing about to tears.
> 
> “Write what you know” is not to be taken literally. Blending the common, human experience with a lot of good research and care goes a long way to making any kind of story possible for any writer to tell.



Clancy was a successful author, but he fooled no one as to his experience. Ambrose was an excellent interviewer, but when he wanders too far from relating what he was told, his material is leaden.

A writer who has not lived an experience or a sub-culture will only appeal to those who are at least as ignorant as he is.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 9, 2020)

RWK said:


> Clancy was a successful author, but he fooled no one as to his experience. Ambrose was an excellent interviewer, but when he wanders too far from relating what he was told, his material is leaden.
> 
> A writer who has not lived an experience or a sub-culture will only appeal to those who are at least as ignorant as he is.



So assuming you are right in your assessment (I don’t think you are, but for arguments sake) that means a writer of military fiction who has not served in the military can expect to - at minimum - appeal to all of the “ignorant” readers who enjoy military fiction but have not served in the military, while not being as successful with those who have served.

Given that less than 1% of Americans are in the military, why does it matter?


----------



## RWK (Mar 9, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> So assuming you are right in your assessment (I don’t think you are, but for arguments sake) that means a writer of military fiction who has not served in the military can expect to - at minimum - appeal to all of the “ignorant” readers who enjoy military fiction but have not served in the military, while not being as successful with those who have served.
> 
> Given that less than 1% of Americans are in the military, why does it matter?



Either accuracy matters, or it does not.

Some writers put more value on accolades, others on substance. 

Clancy was a phony who played Harpoon; Hemingway wrote what he knew, saw, felt, and tasted.

Every writer has to choose what matters to them.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 9, 2020)

RWK said:


> Either accuracy matters, or it does not.
> 
> Some writers put more value on accolades, others on substance.
> 
> ...



War is not some single faceted thing. Of the people who do serve in the military, a tiny minority ever go anywhere near any kind of combat zone, and a tinier still percentage of those would have an experience that would fuel good writing. Is somebody who drives a truck around Fort Bragg somehow better equipped to be “accurate” than somebody who has spend countless hours painstaking researching and speaking with veterans, as Clancy and Ambrose did? 

I see this as one of those gatekeeping exercises that sounds good in theory but doesn’t really work. We don’t have this standard for any other genre. Some of the best science fiction authors weren’t scientists, Plenty of good gay romance authors are straight women. Isn’t the acid test of whether something works whether the reader perceived it as working? If you don’t agree with that premise, I don’t suppose we will agree on much. 

It’s ironic you mention Hemingway. Hemingway didn’t serve in the military either. He worked for the Red Cross and as a journalist covering the Spanish Civil War. He “saw war” but his observations and claims have been called into question, particularly his understanding of Spanish geopolitics in “For Whom The Bell Tolls”. So, if accuracy “either matters or it doesn’t” I’m not sure if he’s a great example...


----------



## RWK (Mar 9, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> War is not some single faceted thing. Of the people who do serve in the military, a tiny minority ever go anywhere near any kind of combat zone, and a tinier still percentage of those would have an experience that would fuel good writing. Is somebody who drives a truck around Fort Bragg somehow better equipped to be “accurate” than somebody who has spend countless hours painstaking researching and speaking with veterans, as Clancy and Ambrose did?



In a word, yes.

Because one has experience, the other, assumptions. The difference is instantly recognizable to someone who knows the difference.

A virgin writing porn will only fool other virgins.

But I digress, and detract from the thread topic, so I'll depart. My love of a debate can lead me far afield...


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 10, 2020)

RWK said:


> In a word, yes.
> 
> Because one has experience, the other, assumptions. The difference is instantly recognizable to someone who knows the difference.
> 
> ...



But I already pointed out that this is about reader judgment and the number of readers of any given military thriller who are military personnel, much less combat veterans is tiny, and therefore it's a non-issue IF the goal is reader satisfaction. Whether individuals feel a piece accurately captures warfare is an open question and entirely subjective -- no book can capture war with total accuracy, just like no painting can capture a sunset with total accuracy. 

I'm no fan of Clancy's but there's no disputing the man was a stickler for detail. He had an incredible passion for detail when it came to warfare and geopolitics more broadly, if not the ground-zero experience of combat personnel (I have no idea how accurate he is there, and unless you are a veteran who saw combat in one of his fictionalized accounts I don't think you do either). What I do know is that he not only predicted to a startling degree of accuracy a number of events that later happened (September 11th, for instance) and that plenty of veterans (particularly ones who later became novelists) found him an inspiration. I'm not willing to call him ignorant.

The virgin analogy is self-evidently flawed.



Biro said:


> This may be truer now LS but in the World wars and conflicts in Yugoslavia quite a large amount of participants were exposed to some kind of action regularly.  I think being on the 'winning' side usually means only a small percentage see combat.  But your opponents who one of your successful actions is to attack their supply, stores and defensive capabilities, means that a large proportion of their service men see action.
> 
> Of course civil wars means there are no rules and you just kill anything and everything on sight regardless.  So all of either side will see action.



Virtually all the World War Two veterans are dead and all of the World War One veterans are, so if the position is that veterans of those wars are a source for good fiction, that's going to result in a fairly barren field.

Post-Vietnam, the number of (American) servicemen and servicewomen who have seen combat is tiny. Statistically, 1% of the population of the US serve in the military (3,270,000 people). 1% of the military is combat arms (32,700 people) and only 10% of those in combat arms see combat (3,270 people). Taking into account that 'combat' is an incredibly ambiguous term and that 'combat' in 2020 is very different to World War Two (far less dangerous, usually) and that 'combat' is likely to mean a conflict which the OP is not writing about, and you're quite literally looking at a possible readership of 'this isn't realistic enough for me' of, what, maybe a few hundred? Maybe a couple thousand if you want to factor in all the retired vets -- most of whom probably won't read the book (gritty military fiction tends to be less popular among combat veterans, for obvious reasons). It's not a real problem. 

Granted, accuracy is an issue and I said as much, but the whole 'if you aren't a veteran you shouldn't write about war' makes no sense. You have the absolute right as a writer to write about anything you want. Let the reader decide if it works.


----------



## RWK (Mar 10, 2020)

Biro said:


> This may be truer now LS but in the World wars and conflicts in Yugoslavia quite a large amount of participants were exposed to some kind of action regularly.  I think being on the 'winning' side usually means only a small percentage see combat.  But your opponents who one of your successful actions is to attack their supply, stores and defensive capabilities, means that a large proportion of their service men see action.
> 
> Of course civil wars means there are no rules and you just kill anything and everything on sight regardless.  So all of either side will see action.



True.

Although it is not just seeing action. The military is a sub-culture, with its own terminology, logic, slang, rituals, and traditions. Each nation's military is different, each branch is different, each individual unit develops its own character. But there are shared values and concepts.

Someone who has never experienced that sub-culture will never get the feel of it down on paper. He (or she) will not be able to convey the relationships, rhythms, values, speech. Clancy wrote about machines, clean and sterile, because his only understanding of the military came from a game of dice and paper which pitted system against system, with the crews being a dehumanized part of the system. He was great on the technical aspect, but he never grasped the Human side.

Generation Kill is an excellent example of how it is done right: the author did not pretend to be a Marine. But he rode with them, he learned a great deal, he interviewed well, and he was open in admitting what he did not now.

Always write what you know, unless it is on a subject no one knows.

This is my last post on the subject. Seriously. I can quit any time I want.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 10, 2020)

RWK said:


> True.<br>
> <br>
> Although it is not just seeing action. The military is a sub-culture, with its own terminology, logic, slang, rituals, and traditions. Each nation's military is different, each branch is different, each individual unit develops its own character. But there are shared values and concepts.<br>
> <br>
> ...


<br>
<br>

You started out saying that any writer who tries to write from a military perspective is destined for failure ('plastic bell'). You now seem to be saying that writing from a military perspective competently is possible if the writer is willing to put in the time to learn as much as possible from first-hand sources -- you mentioned Hemingway, who was not in the military, and you mention Generation Kill, whose author was not in the military. How many good books about the military by people who are not in the military will you tolerate before allowing that, actually, its the story and the substantive messaging that matters in most kinds of books to most kinds of readers, not miscellaneous items like "terminology, logic, slang, rituals, and traditions"? It's not like a lot of those things aren't learnable. Generation Kill did a pretty good job?

I understand as a veteran you may have a unique perspective on what constitutes accurate military fiction and I respect that and won't say that unique perspective doesn't help. However, I also think you need to respect that 'accuracy' in fiction is not a binary either/or, that it is possible to be generally 'accurate' without getting all the details right, and that for many of us it is sufficient simply to make a story engaging. Because it's fiction. If this was non-fiction, that would be absolutely different, but fiction by its very definition does not demand real-world adherence. Therefore advice like "if you have not served, stay away" makes no sense. 

Have you ever murdered anybody with a battleaxe? No? Well then you can't possibly write about characters who murder people with battleaxes, because you don't get 'the human side' of murdering people with battleaxes -- you don't know how it feels when an ax caves in a chest, you don't know the look of fear in the Orc's eyes as his heart explodes, etc. As far as I know, zero science fiction authors have been to space -- so should science fiction be left to the astronauts? Can a NASA astrophysicist who maybe spends some time in a vomit-comet not achieve sufficient understanding to emulate a similar degree of knowledge? If not, why not? Remember...it's fiction. I see no significant difference here, and none that cannot be traversed through extensive research and, yes, some imagination too.


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 10, 2020)

One of my favorite authors, Lee Child, occasionally gets it wrong. In one of his Jack Reacher books, because Reacher is a supposedly retired Major from an MP company, he has him just walking onto a military base, strolling into basically a G-3 office, (fairly tight security) in order to borrow one of their computers, and... apparently, they just let him and he's never challenged by anyone; not the gate guard, not anyone he encounters on the base, not anyone in the AO, and no one questions why an apparent civilian with no security clearance, is accessing a DoD computer. So....... That one strained credibility. I forgot the title.


----------



## luckyscars (Mar 10, 2020)

Amnesiac said:


> One of my favorite authors, Lee Child, occasionally gets it wrong. In one of his Jack Reacher books, because Reacher is a supposedly retired Major from an MP company, he has him just walking onto a military base, strolling into basically a G-3 office, (fairly tight security) in order to borrow one of their computers, and... apparently, they just let him and he's never challenged by anyone; not the gate guard, not anyone he encounters on the base, not anyone in the AO, and no one questions why an apparent civilian with no security clearance, is accessing a DoD computer. So....... That one strained credibility. I forgot the title.



Yeah, that definitely happens a lot, especially in Jack Reacher type books (he’s a fairly unrealistic character across the board, I feel). James Bond is similarly ridiculous.

But on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being “It made no difference at all” and 10 being “It ruined the book and I could no longer take any of it seriously”, how big a deal would you say that error was?


----------



## Amnesiac (Mar 11, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> Yeah, that definitely happens a lot, especially in Jack Reacher type books (he’s a fairly unrealistic character across the board, I feel). James Bond is similarly ridiculous.
> 
> But on a scale of 1-10, with 1 being “It made no difference at all” and 10 being “It ruined the book and I could no longer take any of it seriously”, how big a deal would you say that error was?



It didn't make _that_ big of a deal. The Jack Reacher novels are a guilty pleasure. I don't read them for high-brow literature, after all. I still chuckled at it, and it was enough to momentarily throw me out of the story. That's all. Plus, Lee Child is a good author, so when he popped out with that particular scene, it was jarring.


----------



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 11, 2020)

@Ma'am I think 1) and 3) I can manage. In terms of combining both fantasy with made up missions and a few made up locations and combining with researching real events can be done if I put in the effort and work for it. I'll try them out and see what comes of it. 

I appreciate your advice.

@luckyscars I'll do my best to be as accurate as I can and thoroughly research the proper meanings and military events. Thanks.


----------



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 11, 2020)

CyberWar said:


> The US intervened later, during the Kosovo War, which is considered distinct from the main conflicts of 1991-1995. This was done in reprisal of massacres perpetrated by Serb militants against Kosovar Albanians. The intervention was largely limited to airstrikes against Serb targets and the deployment of a NATO peacekeeping force in Kosovo. Interestingly, the Serbs managed to shoot down an American stealth bomber during this time, exploiting a design oversight that allowed stealth bombers to be tracked by older radars using different wavelengths no longer in common military use. All in all, though, the NATO campaign was a success, forcing Serbs to withdraw from Kosovo and eventually enabling Kosovo to proclaim independence.



So it was more so the Kosovo War 1998-1999 with US involvement rather than the Bosnian War from 1991-1995? Was this also part of the genocide being committed? I also heard US involvement in the Bosnian War as well could of easily took place.



> In the Yugoslav War setting, your bad guys could be a paramilitary of Serb ultranationalists seeking to undermine their foes by exploiting some kind of undead virus. Seeing how the local folklore is rich with undead myths and the belief in vampires, your story could have those myths grounded in the existence of an actual virus or parasite found in the vast karst caves that are common throughout the Balkans. The militants could have extracted it by following local legends to a forbidden cave long believed to be cursed (perhaps after learning of the place from a former scientist who studied the place for a secret government weapons program during the Cold War), and planning to either unleash it upon their enemies, or simply intending to sell the pathogen to the highest bidder in order to fund their cause. In the latter case, the outbreak could be the result of a potential customer demanding a demonstration.



I like this! This seems more fitting for taking place during the Bosnian conflict no? Or more Kosovo? The Karst caves were closer in the region of Bosnia and Herzegovina I think? Correct me if I'm wrong. Would this be more plausible set in the mid-90s, like 1993 or 1995? Or have a better setting in late-90s like 1999?



> Alternatively, the bad guys could be just an international outfit of mercenaries from the former Soviet bloc nations coming to capitalize on the war (there being quite a few foreign mercs fighting on all sides in the Yugoslav Wars). Having ties with the Russian mafia, they could learn of the existence of a vampire/zombie virus in the local caves much like described before and use their mafia contacts to organize a recovery expedition and sell it to paying customers (international terrorists and rogue states, no doubt). And, as always happens in fiction, things would go south from there on.



I have no problem with this. Might make it easier so no side is taken as who are the bad guys (e.g - Serbs or Croatians, Bosniaks). And Russian mafia angle can tie in somehow. If I had good soldier (hero of this part of the story) and he meets a woman and falls in love and having child, could she be a paramilitary Serb soldier that defected from the Serbian military? Or better off making her a different Yugoslav background?

---



> And my advice - stop worrying about being offensive. Your job is to write a story that the average Joe will find exciting, not to please every self-entitled special snowflake and crybaby out there, who could frankly use a hefty dose of "offensive" just to remind them that the world does not revolve around their feelings. Political correctness is the very reason why there's barely any watchable action movies coming out of Hollywood anymore. An exciting action tale is all about guns, explosions, car chases, snarky one-liners and the macho tough-guy protagonist kicking ass, saving the world and getting the damsel in distress. It's how Rambo found fans even in the nations portrayed as the bad guys throughout the movies.



I honestly agree. If I take into account and write this with care, should all go well. Thank you!


----------



## CyberWar (Mar 13, 2020)

The US and NATO were involved in the later stages of the Bosnian war as well in the form of airstrikes against Serbian forces, but these strikes were limited in scope compared to the later Kosovo War, and mostly served as reprisals for attacks on UN-designated safe zones. The Srebrenica massacre, perhaps the most notorious atrocity of the Yugoslav Wars, took place during one of these attacks, although genocidal massacres occurred throughout the war and were in fact more frequent in the early phase of the war. Airstrikes were discontinued after Serbs conceded to withdrawing heavy weaponry from the vicinity of these protected zones.

The Karst Plateau proper is actually further north, mainly in Slovenia and Croatia. Similar landforms with sinkholes and caves, however, are common throughout the Balkans wherever the geology is dominated by limestone. Besides, if you write the pathogen in question as having been studied and developed by the Yugoslav government already during the Cold War, it's original source doesn't even have to be in the territory currently controlled by the side of your villains - they might as well have stolen it from a lab, or procured by secretly infiltrating enemy territory.

As for your protagonist's potential Serbian love interest, I do not quite understand whether you mean her to have defected from the Serb forces to some other force (Bosniaks or Croats, presumably), or still fighting on the Serb side, only having changed allegiance from the government forces to the paramilitary. If the former is the case, she'd likely be a Bosnian Serb who refused to turn on her Bosniak neighbors, or was perhaps married to a Bosniak who was killed by her compatriots, leading to her change of allegiance.  In the latter case, she wouldn't really have to "defect" from the regular Serb army to one of the paramilitaries, since they fought on the same side and generally worked closely together. The Serb government in Belgrade would frequently use these militias for dirty jobs like ethnic cleansing that the official authorities did not want to be associated with. The majority of these militants were Bosnian Serbs, who were native to Bosnia and thus technically not subject to the Serbian government. While formally they tried to cast themselves as local separatists who fought for their lands to remain part of Serbia (which claimed itself as the successor of Yugoslavia), they were supplied and financed by Belgrade that also covertly directed the majority of their operations. So you could write her as either a native Bosnian Serb who was with the militia from the very beginning, or a military advisor or liaison officer sent from Belgrade. Granted, in that case she'd likely hold views quite objectionable to your (presumably Western) protagonist, or in the very least pretend to hold them and keep any reservations about Serb war crimes to herself. Then again, your protagonist would probably have to contend with extreme nationalism and hatred for one's hostile neighbors regardless of which side his mistress came from. If you want, of course, you can write her to be of any other Yugoslav nationality, though a Slovenian or Macedonian wouldn't make much sense in your setting, as their respective nations had very minimal participation in the war.


----------



## Breadcrumbs11722 (Mar 14, 2020)

So those airstrikes mostly happened in 1998 correct? The Srebrenica massacre was during the Kosovo war?

So I think I could say theYugoslav developed it from taking it from a secret lab or something but have connections coming from the Karst caves? Like one of it's original sources from the lab they stole it from or from infiltrating secret enemy territory during the Cold War.

I'm thinking of her being from Belgrade as a military advisor or liaison officer trying to keep the peace between both sides make sense? But that would make it difficult for her to become acquainted with the Westerner soldier. So it might be easier if she was a Bosniak serb in the militia but her husband was killed by one of her fellow nationals, thus forced her to switch sides and align herself with the Western soldier?


----------



## CyberWar (Mar 14, 2020)

No, Srebrenica massacre took place in 1995 and was one of a series of attacks that prompted NATO intervention. The UN's so-called "peacekeepers" proved themselves utterly useless there, idly standing by and observing rapes and murders in plain sight because they did not have the formal authorization to use deadly force and the Serb militants knew it. The Kosovo War in 1998 had it's own share of smaller massacres, except this time the Western powers actually did something about it and launched a serious air campaign against Serbia that inflicted a lot more damage than the half-assed retaliatory strikes of 1995, which were meant mainly to intimidate the Serbs.

Seeing how the Karst Plateau was part of Yugoslavia during the Cold War, there's no reason a bioweapon sourced there couldn't be located in a laboratory anywhere else in the nation that later fragmented into feuding states. If you necessarily want it close to the original source, it could be located in a lab in Croatia, which the villains could raid. Or they can just extract it from the original cave, which doesn't necessarily have to be part of the actual Karst region, there being plenty of similar landforms throughout the Balkans. Granted, the existence of such a weapon likely wouldn't have slipped notice of Western intelligence services, so your bad guys would likely have to deal with some competition from more than just local rivals.

As for the origins of the Serbian woman, I leave that part completely up to you. If your protagonist fights on the side of Bosnian Serbs, she could be either an advisor from Belgrade or a local. Up to you, really.


----------

