The US military should allow anti-military filmmakers open access to their personnel and use of their equipment.
–
The longer and more nuanced reading is that the military exercises some control over Hollywood movie scripts which ask to use actual military personnel and equipment. This is cast by Mr. Sirota as something akin to prior restraint of free speech rather than organizational prudence, Hollywood directors and writers typically having exactly zero understanding of how the military actually works. This lack of experience and comprehension is buttressed by their fixed preconceptions. So the military says this: Go ahead and tar our servicemen with your broad brushes of ignorance and bile if you’d like. Just don’t expect us to underwrite your smear campaigns. Or: Work with us to ensure that 1) you get to make your money so long as the portrayal of our forces is fair, and so long as it fits within the normal training and operation of the force. We’ll bend over backwards, in other words. We just won’t bend over forwards.
Which to me seems fair.
Mr. Sirota’s angst apparently has something to do with Gerry Bruckheimer’s forgettable 1986 movie “Top Gun“, which he believes somehow altered the American viewpoint to the extent that we actually “love war”. Because of Tom Cruise and Kelly McGillis. And that.
Despite the fact that there wasn’t any actual, you know: War. In the movie Top Gun. Just a little beach volleyball, and a couple of splashed MiGs to go with two crashed Tomcats.
The problem for Mr. Sirota isn’t that there haven’t been any anti-war films in this generation. The problem would be that they haven’t been very commercially successful, and thus have failed to shift public opinion in the direction Mr. Sirota would like to see it moved. In fact, they pretty much sucked. Perhaps Mr. Sirota believes that if the military had allowed the directors of anti-Iraq war movies Redacted and In The Valley of Elah (just to name two) to use actual military equipment, those movies wouldn’t have failed so abysmally at the box office.
Perhaps. But perhaps it’s true that the American people simply don’t like Hollywood elites and their media allies trying to tell them that the actions of a despicable few – as depicted by those with no personal understanding of heroism or sacrifice – reflect the valor, endurance and patriotism of the forces sent to fight, no matter who it was that sent them.
In fact, probably one of the most influential movies of recent times – far more influential than the merely entertaining, entirely implausible Top Gun - was Tom Hank’s 1998 “Saving Private Ryan,” which brought to the current culture’s attention both the human cost of war and the heroism of a generation that was by and large too humble to talk about their accomplishments in saving Western Civilization. That movie was made without direct US military involvement, and with Irish soldiers serving as extras. It managed to simultaneously be anti-war without being anti-warrior, a crucial distinction which was a reaction to the demented, drugged and degraded baby-killer movies so favored by the post-Vietnam War generation of directors and writers.
We’ve come a long way since then, in a way that I think represents real progress. Mr. Sirota, I gather, disagrees. He disagrees, I intuit, because popular movies made with military cooperation tend to portray the guardians of the Republic in a favorable light. Mr. Sirota clearly would prefer that they be portrayed differently.
The US military has a frightfully important job to do in a world where perils lurk in the shadows and regional competitors loom on the horizon. Expecting the military to collaborate with the anti-military elements within Hollywood against its own interests – and that of the nation it defends – is facially absurd.
I’m sure that Mr. Sirota believes that he has a frightfully important job of his own to do.
I’m just not sure what it is.
Not a millisecond of any service member’s time, nor a dime’s worth of fuel or paint should be wasted to mollify Hollywood’s weird notions about the military.
We defend their freedom to create worthless tripe, but need not facilitate it.
Mr. Sirota’s greatest contribution would be to go eff himself and stick to making movies about stuff he is familiar with. That would be more appealing to the movie loving crowd anyway.
What Hollywood should do is to make a series of short biographies honoring each individual American who was aboard the SEAL helo that was shot down. Those were role models, real heroes, and worthy of being remembered forever, not just by their families and friends, but by every American. And, our enemies, foreign and domestic.
no no. Don’t go there. Hagiography is most unwelcome. Some people impute too much to a given class of people without actually knowing or understanding those people. Some in the shade should remain there.
And that is PRECISELY why it will NEVER HAPPEN…
*Being nice to your enemies doesn’t make them your friends*
+1
Whenever I hear the word “nuanced,” I know the wool blinders are not far behind. . .
+2 It’s always followed by “let me pee down your leg”
Heh heh. No kidding…
“And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because, deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said “thank you” and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand at post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.”
- Col. Nathan Jessup – “A Few Good Men”…while he was a despicable movie character, some of the script seems to bear relevance to this discussion…
Would a have been a great line if it had not been attached to such an anti-military movie.
Would have been a far better movie if there had subsequently been a line pointing out how dishonorable Jessup was *after* the Code Red–rather than accept responsibility as CO, he lied repeatedly, conspired to cover up the truth, and attempted to sacrifice two of the men under his command in order to save his own hide from embarrassment and censure. When the time came to stand up and be a man, he broke all bonds with his troops and forsook his honor in order to protect his power and position of authority.
*That* should have been the point of the movie. Not the death–which was an accident, possibly negligent homicide if you squint just right–but the deliberate sacrifice of subordinates for personal gain.
Of course, Hollywood just couldn’t quite understand something like that.
+10
I have not seen a Hollywood movies since Saving Private Ryan. Even in that movie, I could tell when the “Hollywood narrative” started. IMHO it was as soon as a Ranger Capt. lead a squad to find Private Ryan. IRL, it was an administrative transfer.
It is another sign that the Left have triumphed in the culture war. As a species we have 4000 years of documented experimentation in what works for culture success, civilization, and progress. The American Constitution and a culture of the open frontier made a great and strong culture, brimming with success over obstacles. Today’s cultural tropes are regressive. We reinforce failure at the Left’s behest.
There is no better example than media treatment of the US military, the lynchpin in supporting global peace.
We have a small percentage of the entire population doing incredible things, like liberate Iraq. It’s our incredible personnel that make the difference. I aver that if the US military had been the defenders of Iraq, using the Iraqi equipment, and the Iraqis attacking with all US equipment, the US military would have still won handily. We have the world’s preeminent military, and none of the good we do daily, none of the incredible stories, are ever cast in even a favorable light by Hollywood.
Rather than be stuck in moderation, I will refrain from discussing the vile individuals in Hollywood.
Come now Salty, moderation ain’t that bad. Just as Virgil or myself. Just bring the lazy boy and your cooler and kick back with us.
Said Ranger Captain should have blown the bridge. It was valiant but irresponsible of him to defend as he did. An armoured battle group vs a Plt (-) would be ok on the other side of the bridge as the Germans undertook bridging efforts. Just goes to show that school teachers and the like did their absolute best and the Captains were corporals and did their absolute best.
Ah, but the entire point of having the paratroopers there was to secure the bridges for the Allied advance. If the bridge had been blown the Germans could just as easily posted a heavy platoon on their side to oppose Allied bridging efforts and sent the bulk of their force against some other group of ‘troopers. As I recall the Captain was attempting to blow the bridge when the cavalry arrived.
As the Instapundit says:
“They are not so much anti-war, they’re just on the other side.”
Now there’s an often overlooked fact. Not once….NOT ONCE….did the “peace groups” petition North Vietnam for peace, nor protest their part in the war, and they have held the same attitude during EVERY OTHER CONFLICT that the U.S. has been involved with since. And if you take a look at the funding for these groups, it always comes down to socialist/communist groups subversive to the Unites States. Simple fact is that they are not anti war, they are anti U.S.
As any self respecting KGB black op would be.
Anyone wanting to see the “left-coast” mind-set on display of the sort that infects Sirota ought to take a gander at today’s LA TIMES op-ed hit-piece on Texas’ Perry–didn’t miss A SINGLE leftist bullet-point in a totally seamless condescending smear of “intellectual” “progressive” superiority from first to last without missing a beat. Disgusting and vile are only TWO of the words that come to mind. And that’s the point. In the LA/Hollywood axis, the stuff is in the air like background radiation–it touches/infects everyone and everything as a fact-of-life given–almost impossible to escape its taint–it colors the entire civic culture. They don’t call it “The People’s Republic of Santa Monica” and the “Left Coast” for nothing..
Sorry, forgot the link. See LA Times editorial “The Problem With Perry” @
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-0828-perry-20110820,0,2977803.story
Sorry, link bad, go to opinion page and hit topic heading
The really amusing aspect to Perry and the Left is they can’t deal with what’s really wrong with Perry, so they have to lie about him. What’s really wrong are teh things the left actually agrees with.
I think we can do without another Bush Republican President, frankly.
Reading that I “learned” two things:
1) The LA Times editorial board is full of idiots.
2). I could comfortably vote for Perry.
Note: I already knew both of those things. In the case of (1) for several years.
Except in the mind of the Great Obama, of course.
Offering open access to the military and it’s resources to any narcissistic filmmaker would only result in a flood of crappy movies and more narcissistic filmmakers. The military isn’t in the business of underwriting the creative juices of Hollywood, and somebody else would complain if we did, most notably, the US Taxpayer. If not approved by the services or the Pentagon, any such requests would have to be vetted by somebody anyway, probably some congressional panel, and it’s not like they don’t have more important things to do. That would just allow even more politics to creep into areas they don’t belong. I can just imagine some bipartisan panel arguing over the merits of one script or another, each member trying to ensure his or her agenda is met by some aspect of the film. Even without that process though, we still got films like “Stealth” and “Annapolis” thrown at us.
An excellent counterpoint to Mr. Sirota and a close look at the upcoming film “Act of Valor,” all about SEALs… starring SEALs, and filmed with the Navy’s cooperation and participation.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904787404576528293606172306.html?mod=WSJ_ArtsEnt_LifestyleArtEnt_2
Some (but not all) of my thoughts on this matter ‘might offend’ some here. So discretion tells me to respectfully refrain from comment….
…. Except for – although slightly OT – responding to this quote:
“That movie was made without direct US military involvement, and with Irish soldiers serving as extras,”
I offer this:
War-battered dogs are we,
Fighters in every clime,
Fillers of trench and of grave,
Mockers, bemocked by time.
War-dogs, hungry and grey,
Gnawing a naked bone,
Fighters in every clime,
Every cause but our own.
‘Clare Coast’ by Emily Lawless
To wit I think wars are better endured than glorified.
Fliterman,
“To wit I think wars are better endured than glorified.”
True. But only one side of a complex issue.
There is a decay in memory that effaces the horror of war. War has a direct cost in the lives cut short and national futures changed. Without constant reminders, a future generation may feel that war is preferable to other outcomes, like surrender of one’s culture, wealth, and freedom of action.
An example is Imperial Japan in 1941. Their previous wars were endurable and winning ones. Even the large numbers of war casualties with Russia in 1905 had faded in memory. The soundest leaders of Japan knew that war with the US, their largest trading partner, would not end well. Japan had martial spirit, but a limited industrial capacity and resources. Yet, rather than be dictated to by the US, they went to war. The Japanese people suffered greatly in losing a predictably un-winnable war.
OBSF: Ben Bova’s short story Bushido had a future Japanese genius bring ADM Yamamoto into the future and show him the history of WWII. Then he sent him back before the war started.
I’m with you. As a young man they were glorious. As the father of a little girl, not so much. Little boys and little girls should not be forced to endure that sort of thing. No more fire bombing. No.
When I was young my wars (naval wars) were strictly between men who either chose to be there or were drafted. I had nothing at all to do with killing everybody until much later. Killing everybody changed things for me. I honestly don’t know how those guys got on with life. That they did is incontestable but we did it anyway. We.
All things considered I wish that we did not do it anymore. I’m way way way way more in favor of simple direct assassination. Send in the SEALS by all means.
If one doesn’t like the message, don’t kill the messengers anymore. Kill the mofo in charge directly at once.
Gosh, only been a gentleman farmer in Ohio for a month and I’ve turned on a dime. Agreeing with whossname! Color me shocked.
Where in Ohio?
Shaker Heights. House sitting until she and her family return from Oslo next year.
Cool. Grew up about 50 miles south in Massillon and my wife went to college in Painesville, Way Back When.
And where in Oslo? We lived in Baerums Verk while I was stationed at Kolsas. (OMG – has it been 20 years ago? We loved it there!
Crap. Getting old sucks.
I used to be Morgan County Engineer and lived in Marietta before that. Loved SE Ohio.
Skillebekk. They got there just two days before that mass murder took place. My sister said they’d spent the morning looking at the kids’ schools and had just missed being blown up by the car bomb.
PS: And a very finely well-crafted essay, Lex, both style-wise and content-wise. Super stuff..
Concur, VX. I don’t think that adding tasks to an overworked military will win any favor from the left. Hollywood is too artistically bankrupt. It’s sad that we just talk past each other now.
Lex has a great forum, like a high signal to noise French salon, but with scintillating essays and comments. Even Fliterman has written with sage lucidity.
The indoctrinated Left, like Hollywood, the LA Times, and the NYT, not so much.
Ah VX you saw that piece of trash re Perry in today’s LA Times as well. Their parting riposte was that “despite the overwhelming scientific consensus” Governor Perry doesn’t believe that the man caused global warming theory is all that and a bag of chips. For being a heretic, Governor Perry obviously needs to be cast from polite society.
But to get back to Lex’s original post: Look, I’d go a long way to avoid seeing a Tom Cruse movie–whether he was pictured using pukka U.S. military equipment or not. To my everlasting shame (and because I like airplanes) I did see Top Gun when it came out. About the best you could say about it was that it was lame.
I had never seen TOPGUN until last year. I decided to see it because of discussion here and so borrowed the movie from my daughter.
One word review: sorry.
I was tempted to buy the movie once upon a time, and I’m glad I didn’t.
When you look at the film in the cold light of day – its homo-erotic. I never talked to senior officers in bathroom in underwear – whats up with that?
Him and the horse he rode in on.
Kelly was hot the music was spot on but perhaps you had to be a surface line ensign fresh from a Condition III tour to enjoy the movie while living in San Diego and noting that all the scenery was totally bogus. Nothing else would have dragged us to Miramar and having done it once, nothing would drag us back. MCRD bay bee.
In the 1940′s, Hollywood was there to support the war effort and the Country.
In the 1960′s, the hippies rejected America who in turn rejected them after seeing how worthless they were to the rest of society.
Now, 40 years later, we are dealing with them & their children who took refuge in Hollywood & Academia while they nursed a serious grudge for the rejection.
I feel that these “Blame America First” idjits need to spend sometime in the other parts of the world like IRAQ & Afghanistan, where we can treat them to a personal visit with Al Qada & the Taliban….then we’ll see who loves the military when we come to rescue their ungrateful feckless arses from the bastards with the guns….F&%king hippies and their worthless spawn can all take a flying leap.
Laugh at Top Gun all you want but recognize the power of cinema. Most of an entire generation of Naval Aviators will admit, after enthusiastically pointing out all of the many flaws in the movie, that seeing it as a kid had something to with creating their dreams of “Flying Navy/Marines”.
BTW, they will also pretty much all agree on the one realistic scene in the moive as being where Goose visits Maverick in the BOQ and he gets up from a desk stacked with books.
Ah Quartermaster: One word review “sorry”.
Bobby Jean Rowlands the meanest little motor scooter ever to come out of Broken Bow Oklahama was my drill sergeant.
His favorite “review” was “sorry”. As in “You sorry little sack of fertilizer! I KNOW you’re sorry. But that’s no excuse.” I saw that review visited on some trainee more than once. Alternated with “You redheaded little peckerwood” etc. Those were the days when a DI was allowed to have a full vocabulary.
When I was in OCS, one poor guy was set upon by TAC. He then said “Sorry Sir.” The TAC then spooled back up “I didn’t ask for a personal evaluation. I already know your sorry.”
The drills and TACs are just a lower form of life.
I caught Sirota’s essay in WaPo. Overblown, breathless paranoia if you ask me.
Top Gun came out while I was a 1st C Mid on a boomer nuke cruise. I was not yet knowledgable enough about the different Navy community cultures to know all of its many flaws. I did know that after the boomer cruise I figured it was better to be above the water than below it. Of course I later found out that there was a very great deal of bulls#@t in that movie – to the point where it’s pretty painful to watch. But I also remember that my first reaction coming out of the movie was “that was really f-ing cool.” It did much refocus my objective going into my senior year to get to Pensacola. I consider myself very fortunate indeed to have made it there and beyond.
Which is why “Hunt for Red October” got made. With total cooperation with Hollywood. “Crimson Tide”, mmm, nobody bats a thousand.
Some of us were complicated anyway.
Tom Carlson came back from his two week leave in the states with that book in ’84 or ’85 and he didn’t stop talking about it. OOD and JOOD watch schedules were different but every watch I shared with him it was Red October. Something to talk about while dragging anchor at the Bahrain Bell with utter indifference. When I did get around to reading it, impressive. I like the movie. I see his books now in the bookstores and just marvel. That man needs an editor. Thousand page novels are crap like Tolstoy to read.
I never saw Crimson Tide. I’d heard they didn’t even try to get help from the Navy. I did watch, and buy, Hunt For Red October. I’m sure a Russki Bubblehead would call BS on a lot of that. HFRO was a decent movie overall.
Topgun was worth it for the brief bits of footage showing flight deck ops put to Kenny Loggins. We were fresh from WesPac 85. That was some stoke.
Flightdeck ops hadn’t got so much public play as they do now. Our squadron got a couple tix to go the world premier at the old UA 70 in Mission Valley. I was drawn for one of the tix. Ensign Rocket Bob got the other. I wasn’t going anywhere without my best girl and wasn’t all that thrilled about wearing my ice cream suit. So AT2 Me gave Ens RB his ticket so he could take a date. Don’t know if her name was Paula or if that was just a nasty rumor…
RE: Top Gun, the movie…
Once again I seem to be odd man out here. I have always enjoyed the movie. I still do when I catch a scene or two on cable. So do a lot of people. It was the best recruiting tool ever!
Yes, it is fashionable to bad-mouth the movie today. And yes, there are indeed grounds for legitimate critique. But Top Gun the movie was something very special in it’s time. Its positive reception by the Navy and the country was absolutely overwhelming!
People tend to forget that this 1987 movie was the first time in years where the Navy had an important say in how it was portrayed. Indeed one of the original cadre of the original, real TOPGUN in 1969 – later a retired admiral – was technical advisor for the movie and had significant input into many details. In fact, his original TOPGUN call-sign was used – “Viper” – and he had a cameo appearance in the movie. The studio was very receptive to any and all Navy input. Much of it was incorporated, something unheard of previously.
A lot of Naval personnel made great effort for the movie to portray Naval Aviation more accurately than it had been in years prior. Despite the now well-known flaws – especially the part played by KM, they were very happy with the finished product at the time. It was groundbreaking.
Fighter crews at Miramar were tripping over themselves, trying to get bit parts and to provide valid input. Much of it was included. In fact F-14 crews were given a private showing by the studio of the film before its release at a downtown theater. They all gave it a rousing, two-thumbs up! They loved it, despite its poetic license in some areas.
While there were no women in TOPGUN, nor were there any lockers or showers in their spaces, lots of guys did play volleyball, shirts-off on South Mission Beach. They then went to the Beachcomber or Pennant, and had a few brews. Next day they flew. If you ever called them gay, or even implied as such, they would have cold-cocked you on the spot!
Kelly not a woman? I’m shocked!
and what can you say about a beach volleyball set that labels itself as “the office”? I always liked that one. Follow the modern rule, spare keys and spare cover lying on the desk. At the office! OTC was huge/gigantic and sprawled.
Hey, I liked the movie too. There were some great lines in the movie. Most of the flying scenes were bogus but at the end, the big final engagement was not bad. Reminded me of every furball I got into, too many people to keep track of.
Once again, BS. Final Countdown preceded Top Gun by only 6 years, and gave a completely realistic view of carrier ops, albeit with the unrealistic time travel angle. But Tomcat vs Zero was cool indeed. Done with full cooperation of the Navy. And given the input of Pete Pettigrew, I am shocked at just how poorlythe dogfights were portrayed. Battlestar Galactica gave a better sense of multi-ship engagements, for goodness sake.
Tomcat verses Zero almost splashed a F-14. I am surprised they left the engagement in the film as it showed the Tomcat almost departure controlled flight thus the vapor and AB.
For some reason This Comes To Mind reading that whining hit piece.
My problem(s) with Rick Perry are;
1. Career politician
2. Multimillionaire who has never earned more than 150K/year, and never had a job that wasn’t paid for by taxpayers. So who owns this guy?
3. Won’t tell us Texans who he meets with, where he travels, or how much it costs.
More on topic – can’t see why we’d spend one cent of defense funds on helping somebody make a movie. Best case, you get a bad movie, see Top Gun, The Green Berets, etc, worse case you get a bad movie that slams the military. Best military related movie I’ve seen in years was Restropo, and near as I can tell, support consisted of a few helicopter rides and access.
I’m not sure you understand how many people the military needs to recruit every single year. They try to recruit high school graduates at worst but I think we all figured out that a high school diploma doesn’t actually mean the dope can read. Military movies are probably the best tool recruiters have for reaching out to the populace. Good or bad they tell the teenagers that there is an option that is always open to them provided they haven’t completely screwed over their lives with violations of the major laws of the land.
I’d say the Duke never made a bad movie. But you would have to forget about the Conqueror. I saw a few short clips of that on Siskel and Ebert one night while they were still on PBS back in the 80s. It was Turkey night, or whatever they called it. It hurt to watch those clips.
Green Beret was good if for no other reason than it set the moonbat jorno’s teeth on edge. There was BS in it, but Wayne tried to portray things accurately. He didn’t try to cover up the bad stuff and humanized the troops at a time the leftists were doing all they could to dehumanize them.
“Miniver Cheevy” is equally applicable.
Gosh, the guy must HATE movies like Transformers and Battle of LA, who DARE to portrait armed forces not only fighting aliens but doing it sucessfully. Hollywood usually only shows military forces in alien movies as an icon of harmlessness.
Too bad, mr Sirota, but series like Band of Brothers teach how far from reality is the classic 60´s hollywood war hero. I´m sorry if you are not seeing enough baby killers and gunpower-in-wound maniacs, but you can always tell your own lies, if reality does not fits in your worldview.
I was quite impressed with Blackhawk Down.
So was I. I guess the Sirota guy would not share our opinion, since it shows a SNAFU without pointing big fat Michael Moore fingers to anyone wearing green.
You should try the book. Much better even than the movie.
I have it.
I’ve always felt that the Hollywood take on war was more in line with the `Cicero kid’s` way of looking at it “Nervos belli, pecunium infinitam” (The sinews of war – unlimited money) thereafter any similarity parts company.
I believe Iron Eagles 7 has done more to crumble the foundations of democracy than the hordes of Russians ever did.
Is there a SEVEN? I lost track after the second one. Please don´t answer.
Here is the comment I left on WP:
Wow! What a sniveling little lump. Way back in the late 70s there was a little film that managed to create Death Stars, fighters that operated in space, various fantastic versions of tanks, and other hardware using models and CGI. Now it seems that Hollywood has lost all its talent in those areas.
Maybe the studios should allow the military use of studios, people, and hardware to make films that highlight the shallowness and hypocrisy of the studios and many of the top actors.
After reading that inane article, to put it bluntly, Sirota sucks.
So now I know we have the Pentagon to thank for putting Kelly McGillis in the female starring role and not Kim Basinger. I’ve always wondered…
“Top Gun”: Weren’t the “MiGs” actually F-5′s…
The F-5s were painted black to simulate the bad guys. Problems arose when the black paint was removed; it took off all the paint. The studio had to pony up new paint jobs for all the jets.
Perhaps Mr. Sirota ought to look at war movies which did well without the benefit of actual military involvement, either for extras or equipment.
Red Dawn comes immediately to mind. Not a great movie along the lines of The Longest Day by any stretch, but it’s certainly a cult classic and one the anti-war set love to rail against, hence it must have influence far beyond its meager budget would have predicted.
If memory serves, Apocalypse Now was made with some equipment support from the Philipines and virtually no involvement from the military in the US. Privately funded too, I seem to recall.
I guess it simply takes better men^H^H^Hfilmmakers than Mr. Sirota to overcome these obstacles to their great vision for the masses.
– Max
MaxD – “Red Dawn comes immediately to mind. Not a great movie along the lines of The Longest Day by any stretch, but it’s certainly a cult classic and one the anti-war set love to rail against, hence it must have influence far beyond its meager budget would have predicted.”
Red Dawn being something of the ‘anti-war set’ (aka me) rails against? Not necessarily!
Yes, I could identify. As a young farm kid during the Cold War, I often fanaticized about blasting away Commies coming over the hill on our farm with my .22 and .410. Seriously.
Manny years later I got the chance. Indeed I did blow away a whole bunch of Communists. No regrets then, or now. The movie Red Dawn was years later, and I loved it! I grew up in that scene. But I am still mostly anti-war in most cases. Yes, experience is the best teacher. BTDT.
Nothing wrong with being anti-war. Who in his right mind *wants* to be placed in a situation where he can be maimed or killed?
I laughed at the timing of the release of Red Dawn. Just in time for the ’84 election with Reagan vs Moonbat Mondale.