So this guy Chris Kyle is a true American hero because he shot and killed at least 160 people. What do you think about this?
If you can access YouTube I highly recommend you watch this guy's rant because he puts it a lot better than I could:
Depends on one's perspective. He's called an American Hero, because he protected American troops, above and beyond the call of duty. Michael "mr. both feet in my mouth" Moore - famous movie director accidentally torched an internet flame war by stating his father's (uncle's?) comment that "all snipers are dirty cowards" - which was actually in reference to Japanese snipers (who, incidentally are revered as Japanese Heroes), because they shoot from hidden locations, instead of beating their chests in plain sight, to announce their murderous intent, then engaging in a shooting battle. I've NEVER been in the line of fire, but I generally understand some of the principals of war based on history. War is not honorable, it's essentially a science of killing or incapacitating the enemy. The men and women who have to fight - they're honorable. They must be - they have to show the highest and best of what it means to be human - honor, integrity, trustworthy, reliable, valor, ethics, etc - but the battleground is none of that - it's just a killing field.
There is no such thing as "fair" in war. The basic goal is maximum demoralizing damage or casualties to the enemy, minimum damage and or casualties to one's own side.
We could also shovel in drone operators - cowards, heroes, neither? They're the new American Snipers - remotely piloted assassinations.
Joan d'Arc was a french heroine and a British pain in the butt - they hated her so much they strongly influenced her execution by burning alive - the common cure for alleged witches and religious heretics in those times.
Benedict Arnold is reviled in American history as a traitor - but he's kind of praised in British history as a loyal spy.
CaoCao (three kingdoms period) was traditionally viewed as a villain - usurper to a weak and corrupt throne, enemy of the underdog romantic hero Lui Bei and his extremely talented crew. But more and more - he's gaining respect as a man with a vision to re-unify China - ending all the debilitating civil wars.
And the US aircrews that dropped nuclear bombs on Japan - to ultimately and definitively put an end to a bloody, vicious and brutal war with Japan - nuclear bombs aren't fair and Japan continues to bitch and whine about those bombs, as unfair, inhuman, barbaric - but as with all things - there're always two sides to every story - when Japan ramped up it's invasion of China - they firebombed civilians in Shanghai - and then there's Pearl Harbor...a sneak attack.
I love Japan and it's people. But I detest liars and Japan's government has a chronic problem with self deception and reality distortion on a national scale.
The lists of heroes and anti-heroes throughout history are endless - so it really depends on one's perspectives and personal biases (and who wrote the history).
Personally, based on his autobiography (I only browsed the book) after he returned, I think he was a bit nuts...but that doesn't distract one iota from the fact that he volunteered for military service, endured and survived the famously grueling US Navy Seal training, or his dedication to his chosen profession.
Hero or not - he illustrated the best standards of his profession, saved friendly lives, an American Patriot, and definitely didn't need to leave life as a victim of the fellow veteran nutjob he was trying to help re-integrate into society.
As for the video rant, professional soldiers serve the USA at risk death, dismemberment, or crippling injuries, so that armchair critics can spout liberal manure.
I may disagree with my country's foreign policies, I may not want our military engaged in poorly planned, poorly executed global peacekeeping missions - but I will never disrespect our military or any other service organization - although these days - it's seems best to try to steer clear of anything having to do with cowboy police forces - but common sense dictates, don't antagonize the man with the gun, and MOST (not all, but most) of those highly publicized police incidents were obviously the result of antagonizing the man with the gun, who called for assistance for more men (and women) with guns. I'm sorry if this offends, but that kind of behavior is just begging for a big ol hunkin can of whoopass. But, on the other side, I'm not black, I don't live in high crime areas, mostly populated by blacks (and why is that?), and I've NEVER been stopped by a cop for no apparent reason...and even if I were - I'd be VERY polite and respectful to the man with the gun.
You make some good points Laotou but I think most of the criticism levelled at the movie and it's success hasn't questioned the validity of using snipers in warfare, neither has it been critical of the military personnel in general, but rather has questioned what is wrong with our society when such a film becomes so massively popular and it's protagonist is made out to be some kind of angel. A protagonist who openly admits he enjoyed killing Iraqis and refers to them as savages. And let's not forget that the people he killed, these so called "terrorists", were the defenders against an aggressive invading force. I wouldn't get into the whole argument about whether it was justified to invade Iraq, but the film could have at least touched on the moral uncertainty instead of making it out as good vs evil. Otherwise it's nothing better that propaganda, as the guy in the video says.
The guy in the video is Cenk Uygur, a Turkish born naturalized American citizen who was raised as a Sunni Muslim. He has every right to express his opinions and add to the discourse. As he says, he "loves America."
It's Hollywood。What do you expect? When they say "based on a true story", don't believe it. Anything to sell tickets. Their a bunch of whores.
He keeps reminding viewers a lot about the "liberation of Iraq", that was used as an argument - i.e. liberating the people.
When the war started, at same time the generals were talking about bombing Baghdad and Iraq "back to stone age".
Thats one special kind of liberation one may say.
I think Chris makes the most important point here.
America liberated Iraq just like China liberated Tibet!
This is Hollywood. They may base things to a greater or lesser degree on real life events (artistic license). If there is controversy they will feed it, as long as it is good for the box office. Look at the controversy over the film 'Zero Dark Thirty'.
As for, what makes a hero? Society, and today the media. Some heroes (incl. non military) were literally just doing their job. Others went above and beyond the call of duty. With military heroes of the past, part of it is down to, 'the winners re-write history'.
As for the morality of war, it has been said many times that 'all war is immoral'. But there are generally rules of war. How the officers and men apply/obey those rules, and a societies mores at that time, affect the perceptions of honour of the men involved in the fighting. Honour and bravery are often linked, but not always.
Hawkeye is pretty good too. He saved lots of lives in NY. But it's not based on a true story.
