I've played it after I commented the other day.. it's a game.. my opinion hasn't changed.. virtually all war games that are based on actual areas and conflicts are propaganda based.. but I realize it's still a game.
No one argued that this is not a game. But the concept and handling of the "reality" part is dealt with differently here. However, it is totally valid, that you experience this differently than others. One could also walk around in the game and only perceive its surface texture, its "colours" or count the polygons. 'tis a free world.
I fully understand how you perceive it and I'm not at all trying to be mean or insensitive, I'm just reminding that it's an interpretation and it very well may be slighted .. but at the end of the day, it's just a digital construct of nothingness.. it's not the reality of the situation, just someone's representation as flawed as it may be.. I remember when there was a russian version of an american war game like this .. it was quite interesting to see the "propaganda" and how things were presented.. but I definitely didn't take it beyond face value..
The gameplay was still interesting.. but that's me, I'm able to ignore those influences and just accept the game as a game.. I think perhaps the fact I'm a software developer myself ( not a game developer ) .. helps me look at things more analytically / logically .. could be a fault sometimes I suppose..
But I do hope you didn't get offended by me... I come here to enjoy the development work of those that aren't big studio people, just to see what they come up with.. they are influenced by their experiences, and every experience has an angle and not every angle is the same.. so in that, I find the beauty of exploring.. I also just know how to not take it beyond face value.