Isn't it prostitution?
While I enjoyed the odd tom clancy movie, and Rainbow6 and Splinter Cell were good, the novels thenselves have never had much of a reputation to be squandered.
He dosen't even write all the novels himself now, right?
Its pretty clear that he was only ever in it for the cash, not for some great love of his (ever expanding) franchises.... so i don't think he's too upset over it.
I imagine he's happy in his mansion with his pool full of cash and models, and doesn't lose much sleep over the prostitution of his name.

Having 200 rockets doesn't mean it's less fun to blow stuff up and Clancy his contribution to the history of literature is a fairly subjective affair, hence..does it really matter in the end?
If he approved, then good for him. There are worse ways to earn a quick buck.
If the game is fun, its good for us
If the game blows...then boho to the creators and give them a good kick to make sure they try harder next time.
So i see no reason to make a fuss about the title

The acronym for HAWX is so cheesy. "High Altitude Warfare eXperimental squadron"? Honestly, even the nineties held better names than that.

Yeah well, you Aussie probably prefer the Matthew Reilly novels instead of some patriotic --wait, they're all about American dudes.

Really the last "true" Tom Clancy game was the original Ghost Recon series. Ghost Recon 2 was when everything really went console-ish. I believe this all about the same time Ubisoft bought Redstorm. Although, personally I've had more fun with the more recent Clancy games than with most the older ones outside of the original Rainbow Six.

Russians: Evil!!!
Europeans: Irrelavent, quaint at best
South Americans: Evil!!!
Americans: Gods among men
thats more or less the impression i get of Tom Clancys world view judging from his books so i wouldnt feel too bad about awful games being made in his name. He is likely to ok anything that makes the americans look good and everyone else a bit rubbish.
I would agree that HAWX (i propose the new title OMGHAWX!!!!111!!!2) is a bit of a departure from the more 'realistic' nature of past Clancy games but then so was R6:V. And I still found that game a hell of a lot of fun (suprisingly so, i expected to hate it). I suppose it was easier to kid yourself that R6:V was realistic than it is when your viewing a fighter plane loaded with 200 odd sidewinders from a third person perspective in OMGHAWX!!!!111!!!2 .

Sorry, I try not to do this to others, but British English is allegedly your native language. Here is the exact definition of "veto" from the Oxford English Dictionary (your side of the pond). I added the emphasis.
veto
/veeto/
• noun (pl. vetoes) 1 a constitutional right to reject a decision or proposal made by a law-making body. 2 any prohibition.
• verb (vetoes, vetoed) exercise a veto against.
— ORIGIN from Latin, ‘I forbid’, used by Roman tribunes of the people when opposing measures of the Senate.
If Tom Clancy vetoes a game to be produced with his name on it, he has forbidden it.
1. "He chooses not to veto anything that goes out with his name on it." = He allows everything to go out with his name on it.
2. "He vetoes everything that may go out with his name on it." = He forbids it, but it goes out anyway.
I believe your intent was sentence 1, but what you actually said is sentence 2.

You forgot to add Asians and Iraqis but besides that I can not help but agree. That's the gist of what I get from his work as well.

Well, I haven't been able to get the demo yet, but from what people have been saying, it sounds like a Crimson Skies: High Road to Revenge-type game, just with modern planes. In that case, I am very interested.

God I was pissed when that game came out X-Box exclusive. Oh well, from what I played of it at a friend's house it wasn't actually a sequel to the original, just a completely unconnected story with the same main characters and some dumbing down for the console.

Yes but in vegas you still had to do things in a quasi tactical way. Sure you could go rambo and burst in shooting and shouting action movie one liners but you'd not do the job anything like as well and may well end up dead. by contrast, OMGHAWX!!!!111!!!2 seems to be pretty much pure twitch gaming.

Blah blah consolisation blah. I've grown tired of that argument. Besides, GRAW (on PC) is the most needlessly over-complex tactical shooter I've ever played. If that's dumbed down, then I'm dumber than I thought.
And Aliasalpha is correct, Vegas was most definitely tactical. It's not how I like my Rainbow Six*, and I have to admit it disappointed me a lot after all the talk of it being a 'return to form,' but it's definitely a thinking person's game.
However, its story is definitely dumb. I think the greatest moment of storyline idiocy was pointed out in the Eurogamer review: "Despite Vegas being an incredible setting for a videogame, the atmosphere suffers from this confusion of priorities. For example, take the first mission in sin city, where your initial task is to blow a hole in the wall to avoid the main entrance, which is "too heavily defended". To get to this wall you have to make your way up the strip in a firefight against literally dozens of terrorists. Right. How more heavily defended can this other entrance be? Do they have enormo-robots? The Incredible Hulk? All the accurately rendered weapons in the world can't hide that this is no longer a realistic game in any sense of the word."
*in the classic games, I'd never even take part in the action, relying instead on making plans that the AI could carry out

well yes there is that. There's also the "Teamwork, teamwork, teamwork, teamwork, teamwork, I've gotta do this alone!" ending to #2
And the fact that when combined, a mate and I calculated that we'd managed to kill at least 1 full DIVISION of terrorists. If they can sneak that many armed troops into vegas then america is truly fucked...

If the enemy even SAW you in the original Rainbow 6 games then you were probably dead.
That said, without the rose tinted spectacles, they did have quite a lot of rough edges. "consolisation" (or mainstreaming if you prefer) has definitely resulted in much more polished products than what we used to get on the PC.
I do roughtly remember the last mission of the first Rainbow 6 taking place in some form of high-tec star trek/james bond biosphere. :-o
--
Going off topic, but i always wanted a Shadowrun game based on the original Rainbow 6.
Choose your team of mercs. Equip them with (high-tec) weapons and equipment. Have your runners hack into the building plans/cameras to allow you to plan your attack. Etc..

Well the end of the R6 novel was in a high tech bunker so it seems only fair to set the end of the game there too.
I'd like most any game where you had to do that detailed level of planning. Hell I'd play it even if you only watched the execution of the missions rather than played them, like a football manager type game only with less soccer and even more violence.

Yes, exactly Aliasalpha - it's a market that's totally untapped. I understand it would be expensive to do a 'modern version' of a classic R6 game, and the target market simply wouldn't be big enough to support this (first-person view requires a lot of graphical detail), but to do a game that simply imitates the planning phase and then lets you watch the plan being carried out from a similar viewpoint... I reckon that's doable for a smaller company, and I'd definitely buy it.