Soldiers Pay

David O. Russell originally created "Soldiers Pay" for the anniversary DVD re-release of "Three Kings." Unfortunately, he was quoted in the press at some point in 2004 saying that he hoped his new short documentary, which would be included on the new DVD, would convince people to vote against Bush. The studios caught wind of this and killed the project, but allowed Russell to take his short film with him so that he could still release it to the public.

"Soldiers Pay" is mostly talking heads. This isn't a Michael Moore ambush film. The people who Russell speaks with are the ones who count - soldiers who served in Iraq and know what they're talking about. These are the men whose stories have been ignored - by the media and by most Americans, especially those screaming the loudest about supposedly "supporting the troops."

Unfortunately for all Americans, especially our proud soldiers in uniform, Russell's short was released well after the election and to very little fanfare.

Despite potential charges from misguided and uneducated Bush supporters, this documentary is absolutely and positively pro-soldier. The very title speaks for itself - "Soldiers Pay." Pay they do - their time, their lives, their souls, their sanity. And they do it for chicken feed.

All of these issues are raised in the film. Russell speaks with veterans who have PTSD. He speaks with those who lacked body armor and weapons - when Halliburton and other contractor employees had the best on the market! And he speaks with soldiers who broke the rules, who stole money. But his focus always comes back on target - the know-nothings who sent those soldiers into harms way in the first place. Sure, some soldiers stole from Iraqi civilians, but they usually did it because they were desperate or were ordered to do so.

In the end, as Russell slams his point home, when the you-know-what hits the fan, the lower enlisted pay the price. Prisoner abuse, theft, deaths (American or Iraqi) whatever, the brass all the way to the White House get off without a speck of dust on their suits.

"Soldiers Pay" says it all.

This short 2004 documentary styles itself as a representation of both sides of American views of the Iraq war. However, most of the opposing arguments expressed toward the beginning of the film--that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous threat that needed to be removed on one hand, or that other alternatives to invasion were available on the other hand--are already widely known by most people without having to sit through this.

One topic addressed by the movie that has received less treatment elsewhere is requisitioning--the taking of private goods or supplies for military use. The story of theft by U.S. Army soldiers of cash in a raided Iraqi house where $3 million was found, is told in a way to present SGT Matt Novak, the only soldier dishonorably discharged in connection with the theft, as the patsy of higher ranking crooks. An interesting tale to be sure, which could have even been the subject of the whole 35 minute film. But evidently, the directors didn't have quite enough material on illegal requisitions to even fill half an hour.

The film goes on from there to use snippets from military service members who oppose the war for various reasons--such as contractors getting paid more than soldiers, the requisition abuses, or the psychological effects of deployment--to paste together a left-leaning anti-war message that becomes more apparent as the video progresses. The pro-Kerry filmmakers felt their anti-war arguments would be made more persuasively by soldiers & sailors. (The directors even tried to influence the election by releasing this on the Independent Film Channel the night before the presidential election.) Yet, public opinion polls from 2004 showed that military voters supported Bush 4 to 1 over Kerry. One would have to be very naïve to think this film represented the majority opinion of the military at that time.

If you are a high school social studies teacher who just taught your class a block of instruction on the facts & history of the Iraq war, this short piece may be a useful springboard for discussion and debate among your students. But for average informed adults, even 35 minutes is too long to waste watching this piece.