WOULD YOU GIVE the story of Benghazi to the producer of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? Someone did. The result is the new film directed by Michael Bay, 13 Hours, which makes Rambo look like War and Peace.
In 13 Hours, Bay displays a fetish for fake blood and heads that explode like watermelons when waves of bad guys are given the tap-tap of eternal sleep from the hot barrels of American assault rifles. Are the repetitive scenes of mowed-down attackers a job-creation program for the hundreds of dark-haired extras dressed as ready-for-paradise militiamen? Was Bay suffering from the delusion that every attacker killed on screen would translate into a vote for an Oscar? The true story of 13 Hours, in Bay-worthy broad strokes, is this: Six private military contractors who work for the CIA try to stave off attacks by Libyan militants on two U.S. compounds in Benghazi in 2012. Yet Bay’s movie feels like a hybrid war/zombie film, The Green Berets meets Night of the Living Dead.
I went into the screening with the distinct premonition that I would emerge in anger after seeing another maddeningly effective piece of Hollywood war propaganda. That’s how I felt last year after seeing American Sniper, a surprise blockbuster directed by Clint Eastwood and starring Bradley Cooper in the role of Navy sniper Chris Kyle. In American Sniper, no one asked why Iraqis were shooting at Kyle and the rest of the U.S. military in the first place (hint: we invaded and occupied their country and tortured some of them at prisons like Abu Ghraib). Despite such errors of context, American Sniper was a formidable movie. It was really human and stuck with the audience. Much credit goes to Eastwood, a skilled director, and Cooper, a charismatic actor. His thespian counterpart in 13 Hours is John Krasinski, the nice guy from The Office. As it turns out, Krasinski wields a stapler and a pun far more convincingly than an M-4.
As far as propaganda goes, 13 Hours is mercifully thin. If we are lucky, it will fade away as quickly as the fake smoke from one of its many explosions. But the film is getting a big publicity push and might accidentally be taken seriously. Bay’s team is trying to work the behind-the-scenes alchemy that makes reviews by recovering war correspondents like me utterly irrelevant, not to mention film critics who don’t know an IED from LAX. 13 Hours is lining up endorsements from the taste-makers who really count, celebrities like Carmelo Anthony and Tiger Woods, who are among the sports figures who have attended advance screenings and tweeted about it. (Take that, Pauline Kael.)
13 Hours has a number of political problems that go beyond the one most people are likely to notice — the question of whether Hillary Clinton, secretary of state at the time, should be blamed for what happened in Benghazi. The film doesn’t actually mention Clinton by name. The short answer to the Clinton question is that everyone in the government should be blamed for what happened, including the Republicans who for years have bled the State Department of the funds it needs to provide proper security for its overseas facilities.
John Krasinski, James Badge Dale, and director Michael Bay on the set of “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi.”
Photo: Christian Black/Paramount Pictures
13 Hours, like American Sniper, is allergic to context. American Sniper presented Iraqis as sub-human, and that’s pretty much the same treatment Libyans get in 13 Hours, which includes the now-obligatory shot of Muslim fighters praying next to their AK-47s. Yet Bay’s film makes an additional error — it depicts private military contractors as heroes. In the very particular case of what happened in Benghazi in 2012 on September 11 and 12, that’s correct — the men who fought to save Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who died in the attacks along with a mid-level State Department employee, were brave. Two of the military contractors died in combat that night.
The deeper truth — which doesn’t diminish the real-life efforts of the men portrayed in the film — is that private military contractors have been a pox on America’s post-9/11 warfare. Particularly in Iraq, mercenaries hired by the U.S. government operated with near impunity, shooting and killing civilians, and engendered hatred on all sides. Even U.S. troops were fed up with them. A number of times, when I was embedded in Iraq, U.S. soldiers criticized the highly paid mercenaries as irresponsible troublemakers whose excesses further diminished the reputation of all U.S. forces. The most notorious example was the killings at Nisour Square in 2007, when gunmen working for Blackwater killed 17 civilians and injured 24.
Outsourcing warfare to mercenaries leads to all kinds of perverse outcomes. This was true in Benghazi too, though that story is not told in 13 Hours or the book it’s based on. For instance, one of the contractors killed in Libya, Glen Doherty, was working for the CIA on a short-term contract as a “direct independent contractor.” He had formed his own company for this purpose, called Icarus, Inc., and had been required by the CIA to buy an insurance policy. But according to a lawsuit filed by his mother and other relatives (settled last year in a confidential agreement), the policy, bought from an insurer recommended by the CIA, was nearly worthless and the insurer refused to pay death benefits because Doherty had no children or spouse. Even the contractors are cheated in the new American way of war.
13 Hours also fails to mention one of the strange reasons why the CIA contractors in Benghazi were called into combat. The defense of a State Department diplomatic compound in the city had been outsourced to a little-known military contractor, Blue Mountain Group, which had hired a small number of underpaid and ill-trained Libyans. When the attack began, the Libyan contractors mostly disappeared, along with the local militia that was supposed to provide another layer of protection. The bizarre upshot: A group of contractors hired by the CIA was called in to save the day partly because a group of contractors hired by the State Department had run away. It’s a bizarre twist. Maybe someone will make a movie about it one day.
Related:
- How Clint Eastwood Ignores History in ‘American Sniper’
- Oscars Make History, so Hollywood’s War Stories Need to Be True
- Benghazi Film by Michael Bay Could Be Next “American Sniper” But Let’s Hope Not
- How the Makers of “Zero Dark Thirty” Seduced the CIA With Fake Earrings
- The CIA and the Myths of the Bin Laden Raid
Are you auditioning for a job with Hillary’s campaign?
Pete
You must be a butt pirate who sucks up everything Obama and Hillary put out
Peter, why don’t you just announce that you are a committed Liberal Democrat and Obama/Hillary supporter so that we all know the lens you see the world in your writings.
I’m usually impressed by most of The Intercept’s reporting, but this article barely makes sense. Yes, Michael Bay is known for directing crappy movies like “Ninja Turtles” and “Transformers.” Those movies are nowhere near the quality of “13 Hours.”
Also, how exactly did “American Sniper” miss its context? This is a common criticism of the film that I still don’t understand. The movie is about Kyle’s war experience, not about the war’s politics.
Maass also writes that depicting military contractors as heroes is an “error.” Uh, why exactly? He also automatically assumes that just because Blackwater has a reputation for being trigger-happy automatically means all PMCs are. Contractors are not mercenaries, and PMCs hired by the US are used strictly for security roles, not offensive roles. And the vast majority of these contractors are actually vetted locals, not American ex-military types.
Jeez, at least try to be a little objective here, OK? That’s why I come to this site in the first place.
Jesus, what a hash of meandering nonsense. The movie focused on the bravery and skill of the warriors who kept Ansar Al Sharia fighters from killing everyone at the consulate and then moving on to slaughter the 24 Americans at the CIA annex. It did not attempt to make a bigger point than the glaring fact that despite the availability of many resources, none were sent to help them. That’s it. And guess what, you frikkin’ hack? They did shoot a lot of the Ansar Al Sharia fighters. You see, dingbat, these fighters get little to no actual combat training and many barely know how to put a round on a target 75 yards away. Rangers, SEALS and Marines are elite experts in such tactics and skills and are able to kill many of these types of fighters when they face them. You may not like that truth but showing that truth doesn’t make it a “zombie” film. What a juvenile thing to say.
Instead you choose to focus on contractors, when there is another much more important story to tell. Of course, it’s only been investigated by the right so you ignore it. But what seems to have been going on is that we were facilitating the transshipment of weapons through intermediaries in Turkey to arm Syrian fighters against Assad. We couldn’t do so through official channels as the end recipients were on terrorist watch lists, so the State Dept and CIA were using Bengazi as a transfer point.
That’s why Chris Stephens was in Bengazi in all likelihood. That’s why we had a senior station chief there. This is the real story. And guess what? Hillary and Obama didn’t want that known, so they decided to simply try and keep a low profile and cover story about a video – fyi, this is an actual story versus the fevered meanderings you puked up on this page.
How sad. This site is a cesspit of aimless, feral loathing and preening. What a joke.
Interesting that the author uses the word propaganda so many times in a propaganda article.
I didn’t know what to expect in this movie, but interestingly enough, this movie kept me awake cheering for the contractors and tearing up for their emotions, and at the end it made me upset at the government. But in the end it was entertaining, and we all know as Democrats this movie was a lie.
Time to watch ‘The Alamo’ again. Same plot.
how about the reason all this happened was that america was doing what it always does…imperialism…you go in somebody’s country and stir up trouble its gonna come back at you…these men are heroes as much as criminals after being caught defend themselves are heroes…
Um, how about for context that Libya was yet another U.S. and western European imperialist conquest. Well, not exactly a conquest as the country has been in turmoil ever since. THIS is the context and the issue that should always be raised when the U.S. military is involved. The rest of the issues, including the attack on the U.S. embassy, are minor details.
I had the opportunity to see 13 hours for free so I did. What you say is true but I saved the day by firing up Netflix when my family got home from the theatre.
I found Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown: Season 1, Episode 6 Libya. It is a total piece of propaganda about the evil Muammar but that was probably the only way Bourdain could get there to film how Libyans eat. That it is propaganda is rather easily noticed after seeing 13 hours and ample evidence is shown how NATO air power which of course is US power, resulted in Muammar saying ‘why are you doing this to me my children’ shortly before being disembowelled with bayonets.
My point was made. Tomahawk Missiles ousted Gaddafi and in the aftermath a shoestring budget was funding CIA post ‘game’ activities. Post game victory activities further hidden by mercenaries standing in for an official presence. My point was to demonstrate the context in which 13 hours was set to my family.
That Obama had fought a war in Lybia on the down-low and that almost nobody in America now even remembered it. Mainstream press had been spurious reporting on the matter when it happened and the bright colors of video mass media had moved on to brighter things. Pan African unity had been put down.
Hm, did anyone else notice that the actor chosen to play Glen Doherty, who apparently founded Icarus, Inc., is the same actor who played the villain in Die Another Day is whose evil project is named Icarus? Weird.
You have added very little to the Benghazi debate, hypothesizing about our intentions there and justifying attacks by Islamic terrorists. Using your logic, terrorist attacks here in the U.S. are justified too. To me, the bigger picture is Obama and Hillary knew these were not spontaneous “demonstrations” and that American citizens were under attack. They refused to send in help and couldn’t care less about the slaughter (maybe Obama can give one last crocodile tear). To add insult to injury, they kept pushing the narrative that an anti-Islamic amature video incited this atrocious event. Neither of these two are worthy of office and should be held accountable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9tH_GX9oHo
Clinton is extremely vulnerable on the Benghazi issue, as she should be.
I take it that the film didn’t include the part about CIA rat line, (Sy Hersh’s “The Red Line and the Rat Line”) smuggling stolen weapons from Libya into Turkey and from their into the hands of the ‘moderate’ extremists i.e. Daesh; he likely provocation for the attack on the American Embassy, (other than the fact that the US/NATO unprovoked and illegally bombed their country, tortured and killed their leader and handed it over to ruthless gangsters).
Or the part where the Embassy called for help and none was given.
Sounds like yet another cheap, self serving Hollywood propaganda flick that no one should waste their time or their money on. That makes me angry too.
I’m not disagreeing with your theory on the “rat line” but congress supposedly investigated that issue and found no evidence to support that. If you have any contradicting evidence please show.
Thank You.
“…” but congress supposedly investigated that issue and found no evidence to support that.”
And you believe them? Seriously?
The USA has been trying to destabilise Syria since 2006. Here’s a link to Seymour Hersh’s story:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
You might also like to do your own research using our trusty friend Google.
In true liberal style, this article is full of lies. The Republicans have been bleeding the State Dept for years? Well, fool, from 2006 – 2011 DEMOCRATS held the majority in both houses of Congress. From 2011-2014 DEMOCRATS held the majority in the Senate. The budget for the Department of State, under Hillary Clinton, in 2012, when Benghazi was attacked, was INCREASED.
His point is that there’s a lot of people to blame, also a lot of the people working in positions for Obama were republican, as well as congress. The bigger problem with what your mad about is the idea that party politics matters, because the only thing to talk about is how our democracy was sold out to corporations by the Supreme Court in ’76 and ’78. Party politics are a joke. It’s the public vs the money, and all most people want to do is yell at their teammates.
The entire system of government in the US is predicated on lies. It is those lies that are reinforced by the American propaganda systems that has kept the public effectively ignorant. It is hard to be hopeful that the American people will ever wake from this nightmare before it is too late. If you can get the public to believe a few big lies, then all the small lies are an easy sell.
It’s Michael Bay. What did you expect?
It is likely the reason why the CIA was even contracting for that area was that the area around the embassy was being used a staging ground for funneling confiscated weapons into Syria.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line
Zero Dark Thirty, the Chris Kyle hagiography and now this. Hollywood seems to have gone full on Dr. Goebbels. Glorification of America’s military interventions has become an industry in itself.
hag·i·og·ra·phy
noun
the writing of the lives of saints.
derogatory
adulatory writing about another person.
biography that idealizes its subject.
plural noun: hagiographies
Who gave the order for the CIA operatives to stand down! The answer is simple,the Secretary of State. These were trained man who disobeyed orders to help the four people stuck in the Benghazi compound. When the bodies of these four great american came home, our Secretary of State was still saying it was a youtube video that created a spontaneous attack. Hillary Clinton is a liar and should be held accountable for murder.
Mercenaries are expensive and often a liability. If a conflict is not worth citizens serving for modest military pay, best not to engage. Be that as it may, Mercenaries by chance sometimes serve a good cause. As in Benghazi and the “The Dogs of War” (1980) based upon the 1974 novel of by Frederick Forsyth.
Haunting poem put to song from the film
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fD0m7uoVl34
“13 Hours” would have been a better film with more story and less special effects.
This article is so well written, and the writer so informed, I almost want to watch the movie. Still laughing at “and might accidentally be taken seriously.” It seems to have stirred up quite a bit of cognitive dissonance in the readers–I look forward to the next piece.
The real Banghazi Lybia story is Obama with the big push from Sec State Clinton bombing a country that then posed no threat to the US for the better part of a year to bring about democracy. Democracy that intially became the Muslim Brotherhood and along with Egypt and constant failure with Syria brings us to Europeans and Americans starting at least temporarily to realize just how incompetent there government are.
Hilary Clinton and President Obama are probably happy about the stupid video lie being exposed and the stand down question staying alive. It beats being held accountable of thousands of deaths from naive ideological nation building that empowered power seeking “terrorists” and Put the world in greater chaos/danger.
I have not yet seen the movie (I will), and rarely comment like this but…
I listened to the guys who lived thru this episode in an interview. They all felt the file was for the most part a realistic portrayal of what happened. To a man, all three of them never uttered a single bad word about Obama or Clinton, however they genuinely felt as a group that the State Department is broken, prone to making poor decisions and even more prone to covering them up. They deeply resented being held back at a time when they felt they could have tipped the scales, and finally went off on their own to try and save the lives of others when they could easily have sat back and blamed State.
Not a one of them sounded like a glory hound, and all three were motivated to get the story out — particularly about how dysfunctional the State Dept is run when interlaced with military ops. In the end they believed their story got out, as one of countless ones that never will.
One cannot always choose the director, producer, screen writer et al as an author(s) of such a story. Maybe, as I have yet to see the film, the director is an ass. Or maybe the critic of the film here is — I have no idea.
In the end however, we should be glad we were given this rare glimpse into a clusterpluck of major proportions that should never have happened to begin with. For that we should all be thankful.
Well said.
Well said
I just left from watching the movie and just about every comment before this is crap. The movie never talks about politics never mentioned Obama, never mentions Hillary. All that they gave were the facts on the ground and it was very well done. It is disgraceful some of the comments I have read before entering the movie. there were no heads exploding like melons. Yes, people did get shot people did die but that is the truth. Those guys were heroes and gave their lives for others. the least I could do is give them two hours in the seat and $12 for my ticket. Before people trash it out of politics and antiwar feelings watch it for yourself and decide. If you think it’s too political then wait till after the election then look back on what everybody said on this comment page.
I was really surprised on how accurate the movie was. Even some small details were dead on.
I thought it really went out of the way to avoid politics.
Yeah, I didn’t really buy the ‘heads exploding like melons’ remark when I read it.
This article is irrelevant half of
It is about the movie and the other half is personal political beliefs and experience it’s a joke at its finest.
There is also the question of why Benggazi was strategically significant in the first place. And the answer is that is was being used as a transshipment point for weapons into Syria, the next “regime change” war in the queue.
“13 Hours, like American Sniper, is allergic to context. American Sniper presented Iraqis as sub-human, and that’s pretty much the same treatment Libyans get in 13 Hours, which includes the now-obligatory shot of Muslim fighters praying next to their AK-47s. ”
My comment is not terribly useful because, precisely because of the quote above, I seldom go to the movies.
Last time was…several years ago.
Are you kidding me? There were multiple shots of Libyan men HELPING AND FIGHTING ALONGSIDE our protagonists. Shots of Libyan men simply praying in the aftermath of a battle, or just waving at the protagonists in friendly gesture. The ONE shot we see of the TERRORISTS who killed AMERICAN men in the name of religion, IS SIMPLY SHOWING TWO FACES OF A DYSFUNCTIONAL STATE. Maybe you should go back to the movies and see it again.
This is anecdotal, but Michael Bay is apparently a massive JFK conspiracy theorist. He used to make it MANDATORY that studio folks stuck in post-production/publicity meetings with him watch an HD up-res of the Zapruder film he had made, and listen to him drone on and on about what he thinks happened for HOURS…. Again anecdotal, but hilarious to imagine the misery of sitting through that.
I find it strange that someone would actually expect anything more from Hollywood.
So yet another Hollywood propaganda making heroes out of psycho-killers.
US ambassador to Libya met consequences, what is usually referred in Islam as “makafat-e-amal” (English: consequences of action). Actions that his country was planning for Libyans.
Or let me quote the King Bible, Proverbs “[Ecclesiastes 10:8] Whoever digs a pit may fall into it; whoever breaks through a wall may be bitten by a snake.”
While I would not word things in the same manner, you have made a far better argument than the author in making the case that the movie is propaganda.
Can you expand on the concept “makafat-e-amal” in application to the Benghazi attack?
Psycho killers? Wow I can’t even begin on this. All I’ll leave you with are these quotes “I want to go home” “I should’ve stayed, I just kept coming back I don’t know why” “I love you”. We’re all human. You call these men “psycho killers”? Maybe if you’re calling those men humans that are incapable of emotion or feeling, you should examine yourself. Sincerely- a 16 year old guy who is really disappointed in a lot of people and comments, including you and yours
And being someone with a B.A. in Film and Digital Media with an inclination for telling the brutal truth, I’m game for taking part in making such a film if you’ll have me. Send me an e-mail and let’s see if we can write up a treatment. Do you want it as a fictionalized account or a documentary?
I thought I over heard that the “Benghazi ” diplomatic team and thus the facility wasn’t an official United States operation to represent the United States for whatever reasons that the US government would do such thing? Basically, the diplomatic team was on their own to assume the risks of being in that lawless place.. If so, who gives a shit!
Not the first instance of the film industry, bang-bang special effects and propaganda in a Libyan setting. Anybody remember 1981’s Lion of the Desert? A Muammar Qaddafi production.
“the story of Benghazi”
Seriously? Benghazi is a 2500 year old city with, I bet, thousands of stories a lot more important and interesting than that of some CIA gun runner posing as a US diplomat t having justice delivered to him – I am paraphrasing GW Bush here.
Yes, such instances are quite rare but, still… not “the story of Benghazi” unless ‘we’ are truly at the center of the Universe and everything that’s happening is about us.
Sorry for all the typos and such. Frozen fingers, crappy keyboard.
Thank you for reminding us of these points.
Also, the “embassy” was hosting a black site that was involved in torture, as we know from Petraeus’s mistress/biographer, who is on video telling this to an audience.
Thank you for the reminder here.
You left out one tidbit, however. Not only was this part of a gun running organization (that was arming what is now Daesh, aka ISIL), but it was operating a black site used to torture. This we know from the video of Patreaus’s mistress/biographer telling this classified info to an audience.
..argh the usa_naziland policy of reinventing history that its idiot population will swallow down whole. After all americunts love genocide & slaughtering people/animals because your way is the ‘only’ way & of course its righteous & rewarded by some delusional god.
Never understood your reaction to sniper. I saw it when it came on cable, and it seemed pretty subdued to me. It’s like the Kyle book gave Eastwood a chance to revise the Rambo motif from First Blood . . to strip off all the emotional bits . . the crying over his lost buddies, his inability to fit into the world, etc. . . leaving a Rambo that 21st century Reaganites can be proud of. Kind of hard to take this stuff seriously, but maybe I’ve just seen too many movies.
I do appreciate learning about some of the
current propaganda from Delusionalwood and
the strength of those who are subjected to watching it
and saving me from getting anywhere near the contamination.
The Intercept in “Hollywood films are now utterly crap” Shocker. Go guys!
Ah,noble America,sending guns to Syria in our never ending murder campaign brought to US by Zion and their traitor pols.
Propaganda never sleeps.
I’m glad you use the word “compound”. In various media I’ve seen “diplomatic compound”, “consulate”, “embassy”.
Any, even limited, exploration into what “ambassador” Stephens was doing in post US bombardment Libya with his mercenaries would not lead most reasonable people to call his work “diplomacy”.
So you have to understand how someone like me, seeing the US shocked that a small military post (as that was what it was) get attacked by the people the US and Europe were bombing then attacking on the ground (with…consular staff perhaps???) I find it hilarious to observe the American media and politicians trying to lay blame on each other for Libyans striking back at the people who only just bombed their country into chaos.
To most people in the world, I’d hazard a guess, this isn’t the quintessential “diplomatic presence”:
Good old New York Times, can’t have efforts to overthrow other governments be jeopardized, can we?
for a movie review this is way too political and engaged, for journalism it completely lack any references and sources. So what is this – just some whining?
Lots of links (i.e. sources) in the story. Click on them, please.
You are so far off base it is comical. Unless you were directly involved, don’t act like you know what you’re taking about.
And you were? The movie is a joke. Sniper movie was a joke and it even deviated from the book. Bullshit is what it’s called. Just like the man said. Propaganda and bullshit.
Great piece.
So first off, democrats are the defense budget cutters. So.
Next, war movies are not propaganda for war. You act as if these people in Libya are less than human because they have beliefs. It almost sounds as though you wished they’d die.
As for your saying that these hired people aren’t “heroes” they’re just doing their job. Do they have to be? They’re protecting a consulate with American people inside. That’s heroic enough for me.
You talk about American Sniper as well, and how people shot at Kyle because of the US invasions. Was that not expected after 9/11? I suggest that they kill 2500 more American citizens, namely those you especially love, and see how you feel about revenge. Or at least being put in your place.
As for it all just being propaganda, people don’t watch lord of the rings and then run in the masses towards money and the people they hate for the sake of power. recent movies have quite often depicted the darker side of war. Kyle and his wife’s consistent fear for his life. The obvious mental toll on Kyle, and the death of Kyle at the end being depicted as tragedy, with emphasis on family and kids to put soldiers in the place of just being another human with human desires. Does that fulfill your “war is glory” appeal to me? Not much.
I suggest you do a little research before writing down blatantly misguided facts. Journalism is unbiased. Leaving out half the details, and getting other ones wrong makes you look like a fool.
As for being in Iraq, it appears though your service is appreciated, you are just another one following orders vs understanding them. Being there doesn’t mean you know everything. You weren’t stationed in Benghazi.
That you apparently think that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 indicates that you are probably the least qualified person on the planet to determine what is and what is not propaganda.
Chris Kyle is well known to be a virulent racist and also a proven liar. Is this really who you wish to elevate as a hero?
You should have taken your own suggestion before writing the “misguided” following:
Peter Maass wasn’t a soldier in Iraq, “following orders,” you ignoramus jerk.
Here, do a little “research” after having made a a “fool” of yourself:
http://petermaass.com/about/
“In 2001, I reported from Afghanistan and Pakistan about the post-Taliban era, and I reported from Iraq about the 2003 invasion and its aftermath. In 2009, Knopf published my second book, Crude World: The Violent Twilight of Oil, which was a finalist for the New York Public Library’s Helen Bernstein Award for Excellence in Journalism. In 2014, I became a senior editor at The Intercept, a publication of First Look Media.” –Peter Maass
“Democrats are “defense budget cutters,” eh? That’s a very bold claim considering the war budget has actually gone up during Obama’s reign and we’ve expanded our wars and domestic surveillance. That’s not to mention the untold billions shelled out for useless programs like the F-35 and F-22 jets that have horrible operational records—but HEY, they LOOK really cool in the sky!
War movies and films are more often than not propaganda for war and those who wage wars. Just look at any John Wayne war movie. Still, not all of them are pro-war (‘All Quiet On the Western Front’, ‘M*A*S*H*’, ‘Apocalypse Now’, and ‘Full Metal Jacket’ spring to mind), so on that point you are being somewhat truthful—just not completely truthful. The writer expressed no sentiment that Libyans are less than human; that is what the movie-makers portrayed.
Mercenaries for the most part are not heroes in any sense of the word. They are murderers for hire and, in the case of the U.S. war policy of the 21st century, largely given full immunity from the law. Their reckless and homicidal actions have done more to spread hatred of America than many U.S. military personnel, and our own soldiers have said as much.
Suggesting the murder of thousands of Americans as a way to “teach someone his place” or get him to shift his views to your warped and depraved way of thinking is morally reprehensible at best, and possibly criminal if you are actually attempting to incite a crime. You know better than to do something so fundamentally stupid.
Kyle apparently lied about many of his activities, which he consciously went to so he could make money murdering innocent people and resisters alike. It’s his fault he suffered PTSD. And apparently he had a tendency to shoot his mouth off and get in trouble, so it’s not ironic that he was killed by a former Marine who was also suffering PTSD as a result of wars the man had been sent off to fight.
I suggest you follow your own advice and do some research before lying to people on the Internet, where the facts are just a Google search away. Journalism is not now nor has it ever been unbiased. Real journalism is adversarial to power and to official news stories put out by those who wield power.
One doesn’t have to have been stationed in Benghazi to talk to people who were there and find out what actually happened. But you knew that already. If you spent half as much time telling the truth as you do lying to people, you wouldn’t look like such a bloody fool.
Excellent essay. And truthful. Except Pauline Kael is dead.
Of course, the reference to her was not meant to imply she was still among us.
“The short answer to the Clinton question is that everyone in the government should be blamed for what happened, including the Republicans who for years have bled the State Department of the funds it needs to provide proper security for its overseas facilities.”
This is just demonstrably false. It’s bad enough you did zero research about Libya and have no knowledge of the country, but you are actually rehashing completely debunked BS.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/may/13/ronan-farrow/ronan-farrow-says-inadequate-security-funding-cong/
It’s fine to do movie reviews, but don’t present it as journalism.
Even the article you link to acknowledges that the full security funding request was not met. This led to the hiring of unreliable Libyan contractors who ran when the attack began.
Correct, and that was part of the problem.
Putting your spurious funding argument aside. Let’s imagine the scenario where not only there are two or three extra DS agents but 10. Do you really think they would have held back a large heavily armed group? Also, the Libyan contractors were merely the compound guards. The February 17th was the QRF and completely unreliable. The State Department got repeated warnings about how unreliable the February 17th Brigade actually was. It is easy to blame security when intel was the core problem in Libya. The attack on the compound was a symptom of our failed intel during the entire intervention.
REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R-CA): “It has been suggested the budget cuts are responsible for lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Ms. Lamb, you made this decision personally, was there any budget consideration and lack of budget that led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”
CHARLENE LAMB: “No, sir.” (U.S. House Of Representatives, Oversight And Government Reform Committee, Hearing, 10/10/12)
REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R-CA): “It has been suggested the budget cuts are responsible for lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Ms. Lamb, you made this decision personally, was there any budget consideration and lack of budget that led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”
CHARLENE LAMB: “No, sir.” (U.S. House Of Representatives, Oversight And Government Reform Committee, Hearing, 10/10/12)