Plot Holes [Possible Spoilers!]

[Tdc2182]

For example, I don't understand fully why Shepard betrayed Task Force 141 in CoDMW2. I know it was to increase recruits and nationalism, but why did he kill British soldiers?

Can someone explain this to me?

Spoiler

Shepard was behind the whole fiasco: he leaked the intel on the undercover operative in the mission 'No Russian' (airport shooting), he was the mastermind who laid the groundwork for the war and provided the opening spark. Task Force 141 was getting close to uncovering this, and in fact did (albeit around 5 minutes too late). Shepard could not allow the knowledge of his actions, along with the necessary proof, to reach the ears of any high-ranking officer: that would have screwed over his entire plan, as he would not have become the praised war-hero. The fastest and easiest way for Shepard that guaranteed the USA high-command would never hear of his duplicity was to kill off the members of Task Force 141 the way he did: go in, execute them, make up a story of coming in too late to save them, say a few nice words and everyone will say they are sorry you just lost such a good bunch of soldiers.

Thank you, I have been wondering that.

Spoiler

So your saying that shepard planned the No Russian mission and made sure that allen got killed to start the war?

here's a new hole in the patch of the hole:

Spoiler: MW2 spoiler

why was he, a man whom's main force was annihilated in the blink of a eye, something that could easily (and did) warp one's mind even put in charge of the two most badass BRITISH soldiers evar whom failed by a short period of time to give intel that would have saved HIS men...
and really, why would be become the national hero? wouldn't the commander of the national guard shine here, or more likely, the brave commander(s) whom would have rose above and beyond the call of duty in the extraordinary situation..?
he couldn't be any more a hero than Teddy Roosevelt...shit, wait, teddy's fucking badass though, Sheppard's got nothing on him.

I don't think he let it show that he was crazy, except his men thought he didn't care about danger. History remembers the leaders (troy) more than th men who made a difference.

But that is interesting to think that the two people who didn't get the intel in time were put under his command. Maybe thats another reason why he betrayed them.

 

[nezroy]

Since this is the best thought out of the freaking 5 responses I got to my D-9 comment, I'll respond to this one (wow, people love that movie). Alright, I suppose I can accept your explanation, but then that would just change my opinion from this being a "plot hole" to just being a pretty shitty story, and then my biggest question would be how did all the intelligent aliens die? But my biggest problem I have with that response is that so many people praise D-9 because of its "deeper meaning" and social commentary on apartheid - and how is this conveyed? By using a bunch of idiotic alien drones as the substitute for the actual human beings who suffered in the past. Wow, how profound.

Which is why the best way to think of it is to simply accept that the aliens are normal, intelligent creatures, and then turn your question on its head and ask why the "plot hole" exists in real life that so many rational, intelligent humans put up with horrific conditions in refugee camps throughout history, and rarely rise up in organized resistance to overthrow their "oppressors"? The very fact that you used the word oppressor there is an indication that you may be missing important elements of the D-9 story.

Also, to counter the idea that the aliens had access to advanced technology, whereas modern human refugees don't, remember that all of their technology requires a power source that they no longer have ready access to. Many of the weapons would have worked for a short time, but once out of fuel/energy/ammo, what then? Any alien belligerence would have been a very short-lived movement, in other words.

 

[SonicKoala]

Since this is the best thought out of the freaking 5 responses I got to my D-9 comment, I'll respond to this one (wow, people love that movie). Alright, I suppose I can accept your explanation, but then that would just change my opinion from this being a "plot hole" to just being a pretty shitty story, and then my biggest question would be how did all the intelligent aliens die? But my biggest problem I have with that response is that so many people praise D-9 because of its "deeper meaning" and social commentary on apartheid - and how is this conveyed? By using a bunch of idiotic alien drones as the substitute for the actual human beings who suffered in the past. Wow, how profound.

Which is why the best way to think of it is to simply accept that the aliens are normal, intelligent creatures, and then turn your question on its head and ask why the "plot hole" exists in real life that so many rational, intelligent humans put up with horrific conditions in refugee camps throughout history, and rarely rise up in organized resistance to overthrow their "oppressors"? The very fact that you used the word oppressor there is an indication that you may be missing important elements of the D-9 story.

Also, to counter the idea that the aliens had access to advanced technology, whereas modern human refugees don't, remember that all of their technology requires a power source that they no longer have ready access to. Many of the weapons would have worked for a short time, but once out of fuel/energy/ammo, what then? Any alien belligerence would have been a very short-lived movement, in other words.

Alright, so it isn't that big of a plot-hole.... i guess, kinda sorta. I still don't like the movie though, but I suppose that's beside the point =D

 

[nezroy]

Alright, so it isn't that big of a plot-hole.... i guess, kinda sorta. I still don't like the movie though, but I suppose that's beside the point =D

Yeah... honestly, neither did I It started OK but really kind of fizzled out I thought...

 

[The_Healer]

1. They made note of that (right near the beginning), claimed that the vast ammount of neutrinos were somehow forming a new particle or wave, which acted as a microwave.

Yes but even that didn't make sense. If they were heating the liquid core of the earth which is very very dense, what stopped them from just cooking all the people or evaporating the oceans which later caused so much destruction?

2. The Continental drift would have lowered the height of the Himalayas, also, the wave didn't envelope everest, instead it went around the sides of most of it.

Would it? There was no evidence given of continental expansion, which a flattening of the mountains would no doubt cause. Rather just a continental shift was shown. Regardless, the distinguishable base of Everest is already at 5000 meters which is already well above the span of the water.

3. The ice caps would have been heated by the new particle/wave, then this new mass of water would be released by the large earthquakes.

Yes I accept that there would be more water but there is not that much more frozen in icecaps. Gotta remember that water expands when it freezes as well.