Since their are incidences where American soldiers rape and torture, should those stories not be told in an Hollywood movie?
Sean
Hollywood propaganda, for the wrong side
- Thread starter billc
- Start date
Sean
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
if you seriously need to ask this question.............
Yes, I am seriously asking why we should treat the world as if we were fight WWII.
Sean
bushidomartialarts
Senior Master
I can think of two movies and at least three episodes of TV that did exactly that
bushidomartialarts
Senior Master
We absolutely should not. One of the things I hated about Bush was that he seemed to view the world through WWII/Cold War eyes. The world ain't like that anymore.
But the point was brought up earlier that we wouldn't have seen this kind of behavior during WWII.
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
no, you are wrong, it IS EXACTLY LIKE THAT
the japanese launched a surprise attack with no declaration of war that cost a crap ton of american lives
radical islamics launched a terrorist attack with no warning that cost a crap ton of american lives
there is a good guy, it is US
there is a bad guy, it is THEM
there is no confusion on this one, and tryng to play "but we are not perfect either" is a waste of electrons
no we are not perfect, but that does not take away from the FACT that we are the better, more honorable and more decent party in this struggle.
the japanese launched a surprise attack with no declaration of war that cost a crap ton of american lives
radical islamics launched a terrorist attack with no warning that cost a crap ton of american lives
there is a good guy, it is US
there is a bad guy, it is THEM
there is no confusion on this one, and tryng to play "but we are not perfect either" is a waste of electrons
no we are not perfect, but that does not take away from the FACT that we are the better, more honorable and more decent party in this struggle.
Bruno@MT
Senior Master
Good or bad...
What about the Japanese Americans that were put in concentration camps. Were they good or bad?
And actually, yes, there is confusion. You're just looking at the wrong timescale.
For example, suppose Iran was able to launch special ops in the US because the current US regime is not to their liking. They succeed in doing so, cause massive upheaval, tens or hundreds of thousands of dead, and as a bonus, you end up with a fundie regime. Incidentally, most of your family died. Iran doesn't even care that you know they did this, they're that arrogant.
Now, fast forward a couple of decades. There will be a festering hatred against Iran, right? Then someone comes along, builds a cause for waging a dirty war against Iran, and give you a chance to inflict major harm to the society that supported those actions, and which still looks down on you today. Would it be a terrible stretch of the imagination to argue that there would be many volunteers and that Iran had it coming to them? Would you think you were evil for striking back, or would you think that you are finally scoring one for the good guys? Or would you forgive and forget and try to just make the best of the ******** that Iran made of your country?
Now, switch Iran and the US, and you have exactly what happened. And instead of Iran you could pick a number of countries where the US bent the lawful government over a barrel because it was not in their best interest. Islam is just the propaganda vehicle which is used to get those people to do bad things.
If you look at this conflict only since 2001, because that was the first time that the US got hit bad since WW2, then yes, I can see how you could argue that they are the bad guys and you are the good guys. If you look back over the last 50 or 60 years and look at how the US messed up the middle east and caused death and mayhem just for political gain, then I say... who threw the first punch?
What is happening today is bad, ok. But just saying you're the good and the other bad without any qualifications is just putting your fingers in your ears and singing lalalalala because you don't want to deal with complexity or accept the fact that the US is not entirely blameless. The extremist leader may hate the US for religious reasons. The majority however just hates the US for what it did to them and their kin. I am also not saying they are good and the US is bad.
However if the US kills tens of thousands for political gain, then it's only natural that someone is going to try and exact revenge. They're doing nothing that the US didn't do as well.
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
i dont engage in moral realativism, it is a false way of thinking.
you simply can not compare a people that think flying a plane full of civilians into a building is ok to a people that bend over backwards to avoid colateral dammages.
they are BAD people and we are not.
is really is that simple, efforts to make it more complicated are a waste of time.
until the united states starts strapping bombs to retarded people and sending them into the market to remote detonate, we are BETTER than the radical islamics are
you simply can not compare a people that think flying a plane full of civilians into a building is ok to a people that bend over backwards to avoid colateral dammages.
they are BAD people and we are not.
is really is that simple, efforts to make it more complicated are a waste of time.
until the united states starts strapping bombs to retarded people and sending them into the market to remote detonate, we are BETTER than the radical islamics are
granfire
Sr. Grandmaster
Well, define 'we'
after all there has been a 'we' that thought it ok to park a truck full of fertilizer in front of a government building...just happened to have a daycare in it...
the we and the them, it's always a few people, not a collective. As there are radical islamists, there are radical whatevers that draw from the ranks of 'we' and do abominable things. and just because the armed forces represent 'we' does not make them above reproach.
Propaganda is just that: a way to make your side pallatable. What the propaganda looks like depends on the side you stand on when you look at it.
In WWII we fought against countries with real armies; now we face negative attitudes of a few radicals, and many of them, including those that attacked us on 9/11 were from countries we are allied with. Do you still think we should outlaw an entire religion, as we did in WWII?
Sean
Sean
I think it would be fairly easy to show the radical islamic terrorists for what they are, and also show islam as a seperate part of the picture. After all, more muslims are killed by these terrorists than westerners. So it is a silly idea that you can't show radical muslim terrorists without implying that all muslims are bad. The failure of hollywood to do this, show the terrorists for what they are, and instead, the way Brian Depalma did in "Redacted" to show american soldiers as rapists and murderers, is really a scandal.
We see movies all the time where "Neo-nazis" are the bad guys. They even substitute Nazis for islamic terrorists, the famous case being Tom Clancy's book. They use neo-nazis all the time and noone ever says, yeah, but not all germans are nazis. That hollywood fails to do this in the case of Islamic terrorism shows that there moral compass is almost permanently bent toward seeing the United States as the bad guy of all bad guys in every situation.
Back to my opening point, In world war 2, would American directors and actors have made movies that showed Americans as the bad guys and the Germans, Japanese and Italians as the victims of atrocities?
We see movies all the time where "Neo-nazis" are the bad guys. They even substitute Nazis for islamic terrorists, the famous case being Tom Clancy's book. They use neo-nazis all the time and noone ever says, yeah, but not all germans are nazis. That hollywood fails to do this in the case of Islamic terrorism shows that there moral compass is almost permanently bent toward seeing the United States as the bad guy of all bad guys in every situation.
Back to my opening point, In world war 2, would American directors and actors have made movies that showed Americans as the bad guys and the Germans, Japanese and Italians as the victims of atrocities?
No, but, again, this isn't WWII.
It isn't the Korean war or Vietnam either, but we have a group, Radical Muslim terrorists who are out to kill anyone who opposes their agenda of spreading Sharia across the world. How hard is it to make a movie that would show them as the bad guys. Not a movie that says, we are just as bad as they are, but an accurate portrayal of the terrorists for what they are.
Let's have some clarity, as one of my favorite radio hosts, Dennis Prager, always seeks. What do you mean when you say, this isn't world war 2?
Let's have some clarity, as one of my favorite radio hosts, Dennis Prager, always seeks. What do you mean when you say, this isn't world war 2?
From bighollywood.com, the "sucker punch" squad, which is a column that points out the usual hollywood story telling device where anti-american, conservative, tea party points of view are sprung on an audience. This sucker punch squad gives away the plot to Source Code, apparently, and it involves a big bomb, and of course the initial ignorant American reaction that the bomber is a radical Muslim terrorist or sympathizer. Want to bet who the real bomber is, and you don't get three guesses?
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...iew-terrorists-attack-america-in-source-code/ Spoilers (not really, you know who the bomber is going to be...ahead)
Finally he tracks down who it is – a completely white, milquetoast, middle-America looking guy. Follows him to his van where the dirty bomb is, and the guy is actually proud of it. Open the van door and there’s a big metal box – with the American flag on the front of it (he’s a PATRIOT!). Says some nonsense about life is hell and we need to rebuild from the rubble, but for that you need rubble.
Later on when he’s captured, on the TV news voice-over “his website contained anti-government statements.”
And there you have it. At this point I didn’t give a crap how good the story or movie was in general.
On the OTHER hand, I’m hearing that Battle: LA is very pro-military/pro-America. So I imagine the former will get glowing reviews and box office death while the latter will get crappy reviews (it’s already getting slammed on RottenTomatoes) but will do great at the box office.
You want fanboy smoochie-smoochie with Hollywood, there are all kinds of sites for that. Hollywood is engaging in political and social war with America and we are simply engaging back.
Of course, the reviewer may be mistaken, we'll just have to wait and see.
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...iew-terrorists-attack-america-in-source-code/ Spoilers (not really, you know who the bomber is going to be...ahead)
Finally he tracks down who it is – a completely white, milquetoast, middle-America looking guy. Follows him to his van where the dirty bomb is, and the guy is actually proud of it. Open the van door and there’s a big metal box – with the American flag on the front of it (he’s a PATRIOT!). Says some nonsense about life is hell and we need to rebuild from the rubble, but for that you need rubble.
Later on when he’s captured, on the TV news voice-over “his website contained anti-government statements.”
And there you have it. At this point I didn’t give a crap how good the story or movie was in general.
On the OTHER hand, I’m hearing that Battle: LA is very pro-military/pro-America. So I imagine the former will get glowing reviews and box office death while the latter will get crappy reviews (it’s already getting slammed on RottenTomatoes) but will do great at the box office.
You want fanboy smoochie-smoochie with Hollywood, there are all kinds of sites for that. Hollywood is engaging in political and social war with America and we are simply engaging back.
Of course, the reviewer may be mistaken, we'll just have to wait and see.
We were fighting nations and their armies, and now we aren't. That is what I mean, in case you forgot what I just wrote a few minutes ago.
Sean
You know; I was in the military, and we had jails with soldiers in them, at the time. Have things changed that much?
Sean
granfire
Sr. Grandmaster
:lfao:
