From: wbarnes@sura.net (Bill Barnes)
Subject: The Last(?) Word on "Why didn't they leave someone else on the Sulaco?"
Organization: SURAnet, College Park, MD, USA, NA, Earth, Milky Way
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:45:23 GMT

OK, gonna post my two bits on this topic.  I'm bored and have nothing
better to do right now.  And maybe this will be the last post we'll see
on the matter.  Not bloody likely, but what the hell...

First off, I agree that the military would arrange to have a backup;
if something goes wrong, you want some way of getting your ass hauled
out of the fire.  However, the marines did have one, namely the remote
transmitter for bringing the other dropship down from the Sulaco.
Anyone who says, "They should've radioed someone on the ship for
pickup," misses the obvious - namely, the same reason why they
couldn't pilot the ship down was why they wouldn't be able to CALL
anyone up there to come pick them up.  The APC and dropship were
destroyed.  Any communications gear that could contact the Sulaco
would have been on one of these (unless you want to argue those little
radio headsets of theirs had enough power to reach orbit - I'm not a
radio expert - but it seems to me pretty unlikely).  Therefore, when
they got toasted, there was no way to contact the ship.

Now, if you ask why they didn't have a backup on board the Sulaco who
could've monitored them and realized, "Sh!t!  The dropship and APC's
been toasted!"  I'll agree, this is a flaw, or at least an oversight.
I find it hard to believe that any military would be stupid enough to
send these Marines out across the depths of space without sending a
backup team - or at least an emergency dropshop pilot - along to bail
them out if all else fails.  On the other hand, the military has done
some pretty stupid things in real life as well (and I'm not talking
about paying $250 for a hammer - that's a DIFFERENT sort of stupidity).

For instance, during Desert Shield, I seem to remember hearing
somewhere that the military had insufficient transport planes to get
its men and machines over there, so they had to rent(?)  commerical
transports to get the job done.  I think it's incredibly stupid that
no one sat down and figured out, "Hey, if we want to be able to move x
amount of equipment, we'd better buy y number of transports!"  And
yet, apparently no one did.  History is replete with examples of the
military doing things that in hindsight - and probably in foresight
too, had someone bothered to think about it - look incredibly stupid -
and yet they actually did them.  I'll let any military history buffs
out there come up with specific examples.  The point is that, if not
sending a backup along with the main Marine team was stupid, well, the
military had already set a precident for stupidity a loooong time ago...

As for landing the dropship in hostile territory: Gorman had declared
"the area's secure."  I'm not a military buff, but it would seem to my
layman's ears that Gorman deemed the place safe.  Ripley obviously
disagreed, but Gorman's played it by the book; he sent the troops in,
they did their sweep, they came up empty, therefore as far as he was
concerned, the area was secure.  All throughout the movie, Gorman was
portrayed as an inexperienced and, despite his efforts, incompetant
officer; as soon as the situation went beyond his control and careful,
by-the-book (or script?  8-) orders, he lost it completely and froze
up.  Why, then, should his decision about saying "the area's secure"
be any more intelligent?  Nothing he does in this movie happens the
way he plans it.  He couldn't even stop Burke from running off, easily
sidetracked by the line, "DO SOMETHING, GORMAN!"  Admittedly, he had
good reason then...  But anyway, the point is, Gorman thought it was
safe for the dropship to land there.  He turned out to be wrong, like
he was wrong about a lot of things.  Why does it suddenly become a plot
flaw when it's more critical to the plot?

As for the dropship hitting the APC, that was just a convenient plot
device, the one-in-a-million chance that makes the script work better...8->

Well, I've said all I'm liable to say about this particular facet of the
movie.  Argue with me, flame me, I don't care.  But can we beat some other
part of this movie to death now?  8->
-- 
Bill "Whassamatter?!  Can't you take a joke?!" Barnes   wbarnes@sura.net
Disclaimer:  The author apologizes for any thought-provoking material he may
	     have accidentally included and promises not to do it again.
Datclaimer:  My employers wouldn't WANT to share some of my opinions.