4 reviews
Mainly just leaving this review to set the record straight. Unsurprisingly, this film been jumped on by war-hawks and people who believe women 'don't know what they're talking about' and should stay away from subjects like war. Bigoted reviews notwithstanding, this film is neither pro-insurgent nor one sided.
It's a valuable critique of aerial warfare and tools that have become all too common in war. Tools that are divorced from the reality of the act of killing and make the turning of children into dog-meat a fairly palatable experience for drone-operators (who you will hear laughing on these tapes as they reign hell down on unsuspecting civilians).
Contrary to other reviews of this film, bombing civilians and killing children is not a necessary evil. Approximately 13,247 innocent civilians were killed by the US led coalition in Syria and Iraq, over 2,366 of which were children. There's no excuse for this, and critical documentaries such as this one are a valuable tool to question the implications of the ways we choose to wage war.
A slow burner of a film.
It's a valuable critique of aerial warfare and tools that have become all too common in war. Tools that are divorced from the reality of the act of killing and make the turning of children into dog-meat a fairly palatable experience for drone-operators (who you will hear laughing on these tapes as they reign hell down on unsuspecting civilians).
Contrary to other reviews of this film, bombing civilians and killing children is not a necessary evil. Approximately 13,247 innocent civilians were killed by the US led coalition in Syria and Iraq, over 2,366 of which were children. There's no excuse for this, and critical documentaries such as this one are a valuable tool to question the implications of the ways we choose to wage war.
A slow burner of a film.
Being someone who followed the conflict online through media channels such as Live Leak this had me interested from the start. Plus a score of 7 but no reviews?
This is a documentary build around combat pilot footage from recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, with a French narration. I had wondered what the angle was going to be but my first instincts seemed to be correct.
Its basically trying to cast doubt on legitimate targeting of active combatants, seemingly because the film maker doesn't think its fair the West has this technology.
As such the narration from the very start is all about how the pilots are constantly doubting their vision and of course she uses examples where mistakes had been made.
The now famous video of a supposed journalist who was shot for walking in broad daylight with what was later described as a camera tripod, albeit slung over his shoulder like a rifle. Maybe not a fantastic idea when you know that could make you a target? The argument about civilian casualties isn't very strong when that side target civilians intentionally.
There is little balance in this documentary, nothing is mentioned about the fact these missions save lives and thwart atrocities.
Another critique is that these are far from being the best videos available, there is much better footage online. However its maybe a case of picking clips which suit the narrative of the producers as opposed to making a balanced educational documentary.
This is a documentary build around combat pilot footage from recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, with a French narration. I had wondered what the angle was going to be but my first instincts seemed to be correct.
Its basically trying to cast doubt on legitimate targeting of active combatants, seemingly because the film maker doesn't think its fair the West has this technology.
As such the narration from the very start is all about how the pilots are constantly doubting their vision and of course she uses examples where mistakes had been made.
The now famous video of a supposed journalist who was shot for walking in broad daylight with what was later described as a camera tripod, albeit slung over his shoulder like a rifle. Maybe not a fantastic idea when you know that could make you a target? The argument about civilian casualties isn't very strong when that side target civilians intentionally.
There is little balance in this documentary, nothing is mentioned about the fact these missions save lives and thwart atrocities.
Another critique is that these are far from being the best videos available, there is much better footage online. However its maybe a case of picking clips which suit the narrative of the producers as opposed to making a balanced educational documentary.
- torrascotia
- Jun 5, 2022
- Permalink
Leave to a under qualified French female journalist to demonize her own and the American military about things she doesn't fully comprehend. Afghanistan was a terrible place for the military in same way Vietnam was. You don't know who's friend or foe. They all look the same. Extreme levels of stress on soldiers to have to fight with constant doubt. Either you shoot the or not , if you don't have definite proof, risking your life and other soldiers lives, because if you guess wrong, either your demonized for being wrong or killed because you hesitated. Some aspects that of war are not for uptight journalists to put there uneducated two cents in. Know that war is horrible. Terrible things are going to happen. Never will there be a "clean" war. In aspects of war like this, nothing but a easy. Purposely targeting civilians is never right. It's obvious these soldiers do not think they are targeting civilians unlike Russia in Ukraine for example. The narrator is an ignorant fool.
- frankblack-79961
- Jul 25, 2022
- Permalink
This film contains inaccuracies which seem to be added to push the pro-insurgent agenda described in other reviews.
For example, she says about the 'Collateral Murder' video that the military was "wrong about everything" they thought that day. Said without further explanation to make it sound more impactful. But for the first attack, actually it was true that some of the crowd were carrying weapons?
The narrator and director of this movie give a knowingly biased view which doesn't come close to providing the appropriate context. Unfortunate, as this movie had an interesting concept and there was a good opportunity for meaningful analysis.
For example, she says about the 'Collateral Murder' video that the military was "wrong about everything" they thought that day. Said without further explanation to make it sound more impactful. But for the first attack, actually it was true that some of the crowd were carrying weapons?
The narrator and director of this movie give a knowingly biased view which doesn't come close to providing the appropriate context. Unfortunate, as this movie had an interesting concept and there was a good opportunity for meaningful analysis.