No End In Sight - Documentary on Iraq War

[GiggsOho]

http://www.noendinsightmovie.com/


Has anyone seen this movie? I'm about halfway through it, and while it hasn't taken a rocket scientist to figure out that this war is awful, this is probably the best program/film I've ever seen on the Iraq war.


And to those of you that are just going to post something along the lines of "this liberal is beating a dead horse," and won't actually watch the movie, this isn't just some leftist propoganda movie with people from internet rags talking about how much the current regime fucked this up.


These are people who were highly involved in the Iraq War talking about what happened and nothing more. The decisions are there for the viewer to make; you aren't fed lines of political rhetoric. While depressing, it's facsinating nonetheless.

[saysmydoctor]

I'm watching this now.

[GiggsOho]

I just finished the film, and it has absolutely changed my perspective on the war, possibly the way I am going to vote.


1) I have never been one to buy into the thought that Bush should be charged for war crimes. I would now gladly empty my bank account to see it happen.


2) We cannot leave Iraq. We absolutely cannot leave Iraq.


3) If we do leave Iraq, it is the first domino to fall in a row that could end in World War III.

[se1046]

I just finished the film, and it has absolutely changed my perspective on the war, possibly the way I am going to vote.


1) I have never been one to buy into the thought that Bush should be charged for war crimes. I would now gladly empty my bank account to see it happen.


2) We cannot leave Iraq. We absolutely cannot leave Iraq.


3) If we do leave Iraq, it is the first domino to fall in a row that could end in World War III.

Well the fact that it's made you say we can't leave Iraq has me wanting to watch this. I know most on the left are all for pulling out of Iraq but it just simply cannot be done now. The result of pulling out of there would definitely spawn a war of much larger proportion, starting with I believe Iran.

[se1046]

I'm watching this now.

I'd like to hear your take also.

[Nevuk]

I'll watch this after I get off work. The staying in Iraq comment has me interested, although I suspect I've heard the argument before.

[boykosaurus]

Holy balls I'll watch tomorrow.

[saysmydoctor]

I don't understand the we can't leave comment.

[GiggsOho]

I don't understand the we can't leave comment.

We leave now, it leaves Iraq in basically a state of anarchy, which allows pretty much anyone, including terrorists, to come in and try to wrestle power for their own favor. A "leader" is going to be put in power, and all he has to do is drive home to point that America is the reason Iraq is in the dissarray it is in now (which isn't wrong).

Which then, in turn, you are going to have a large amount of Iraqis wanting to join al Qaeda, form other terrorist organizations, unite terrorist organizations, and try and carry out with the destruction of America. It will become that harbor for terrorists that everyone thought Iraq was in 2002.


This movie shows that regardless of whether or not the U.S. was justified going into Iraq, the groundwork was there to set up an actual post-war reconstruction of Iraq, and those featured in the movie understood the basic necessities needed for that process, but the bosses (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Bremer) did absolutely dick about anything going on.

It astounds me to even say this, but 5 people fucked this country, and arguably the globe, for the better part of our lifetime.

McCain saying "we may be in Iraq for 100 more years" doesn't sound as nearly as insane as I once thought.

[Nevuk]

We leave now, it leaves Iraq in basically a state of anarchy, which allows pretty much anyone, including terrorists, to come in and try to wrestle power for their own favor. A "leader" is going to be put in power, and all he has to do is drive home to point that America is the reason Iraq is in the dissarray it is in now (which isn't wrong).

Which then, in turn, you are going to have a large amount of Iraqis wanting to join al Qaeda, form other terrorist organizations, unite terrorist organizations, and try and carry out with the destruction of America. It will become that harbor for terrorists that everyone thought Iraq was in 2002.


This movie shows that regardless of whether or not the U.S. was justified going into Iraq, the groundwork was there to set up an actual post-war reconstruction of Iraq, and those featured in the movie understood the basic necessities needed for that process, but the bosses (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Bremer) did absolutely dick about anything going on.

It astounds me to even say this, but 5 people fucked this country, and arguably the globe, for the better part of our lifetime.

McCain saying "we may be in Iraq for 100 more years" doesn't sound as nearly as insane as I once thought.
Define "Terrorist" in this scenario, as it is a term which has fully lost its meaning due to constant misuse.

[GiggsOho]

Define "Terrorist" in this scenario, as it is a term which has fully lost its meaning due to constant misuse.


the myriad of arab/muslim/Iraqi militias that would form for the sole purpose of destroying this country. Hence why I used to al Qaeda in the example.

[MyNameIsRoss]

I think I'll watch it now.

[open mind]

the myriad of arab/muslim/Iraqi militias that would form for the sole purpose of destroying this country. Hence why I used to al Qaeda in the example.

even al queda has purposes (and was formed with other purposes) that don't/didn't involve the destruction of this country.

http://www.history.com/encyclopedia.do?articleId=220097

[GiggsOho]

even al queda has purposes (and was formed with other purposes) that don't/didn't involve the destruction of this country.

http://www.history.com/encyclopedia.do?articleId=220097


You show me this article, and I still say....


Such as?

[Love As Arson]

Most Iraqis despise Al-Qaeda, and the nationalist insurgency has actually gone to great lengths to limit and eliminate their influence. Furthermore, if one acknowledges that the invasion, and subsequent events that accompanied it, were war crimes, then the staying there is a perpetuation of that war crime.

[loveisdead]

Most Iraqis despise Al-Qaeda, and the nationalist insurgency has actually gone to great lengths to limit and eliminate their influence. Furthermore, if one acknowledges that the invasion, and subsequent events that accompanied it, were war crimes, then the staying there is a perpetuation of that war crime.
This.

[saysmydoctor]

Most Iraqis despise Al-Qaeda, and the nationalist insurgency has actually gone to great lengths to limit and eliminate their influence. Furthermore, if one acknowledges that the invasion, and subsequent events that accompanied it, were war crimes, then the staying there is a perpetuation of that war crime.
:appl:

[Neo Cassady]

Most Iraqis despise Al-Qaeda, and the nationalist insurgency has actually gone to great lengths to limit and eliminate their influence. Furthermore, if one acknowledges that the invasion, and subsequent events that accompanied it, were war crimes, then the staying there is a perpetuation of that war crime.

yes.

[GiggsOho]

Most Iraqis despise Al-Qaeda, and the nationalist insurgency has actually gone to great lengths to limit and eliminate their influence. Furthermore, if one acknowledges that the invasion, and subsequent events that accompanied it, were war crimes, then the staying there is a perpetuation of that war crime.

I disagree. The original plan was to drive out Saddam's regime and build up the country to the point where it could sustain itself. We made it worse than under Saddam. And I never said Al-Qaeda would come in, I said groups would grow and aim for the destruction of the U.S. due to what we have done over there. If we stay there and to the damn job right (jobs, water, electricity -- you know -- treat them like human beings), along with sending a few off to trial for war crimes, I think you diffuse a situation otherwise that would end in a lot more bloodshed.

[Love As Arson]

I disagree. The original plan was to drive out Saddam's regime and build up the country to the point where it could sustain itself.
Most of the original plan was accomplished with the entrance of foreign oil companies into the country. Building the country up was necessary insofar as oil infrastructure and order facilitated the extraction of Iraqi resources.
We made it worse than under Saddam.
Agreed.

And I never said Al-Qaeda would come in, I said groups would grow and aim for the destruction of the U.S. due to what we have done over there.
And you do not think the perpetual presence of foreign soldiers in their homeland, regardless of their intent, is going to inspire more radical groups? That is a ready-made example to point out the aggression of the west.

If we stay there and to the damn job right (jobs, water, electricity -- you know -- treat them like human beings), along with sending a few off to trial for war crimes, I think you diffuse a situation otherwise that would end in a lot more bloodshed.
The nation that perpetrates war crimes has no right whatsoever to "do the damn job right." If anything, other nations would have to take over, while the perpetrating nation is held accountable.

[open mind]

You show me this article, and I still say....


Such as?

maybe you didn't read the article so here's a quote.

Its ultimate goal is the reestablishment throughout the Muslim world of a pan-Islamic caliphate, a theocratic, transnational system of government based on Islamic law.

[GiggsOho]

maybe you didn't read the article so here's a quote.

Its ultimate goal is the reestablishment throughout the Muslim world of a pan-Islamic caliphate, a theocratic, transnational system of government based on Islamic law.

No, I read the article, and understood it, I just don't see what you are saying. Are you saying that Al-Qaeda isn't all evil, and what they are doing can be viewed as just?

[GiggsOho]

The nation that perpetrates war crimes has no right whatsoever to "do the damn job right." If anything, other nations would have to take over, while the perpetrating nation is held accountable.

A group of individuals holding a nation politically hostage while they live like a parasite off the land as compared to actual humanitarian and peace-keeping efforts differ on the war-crimes spectrum. The military first went over there with the notion that they are going to drive Saddam out and set up some form of democratic government. It went from a dictatorship to a disgusting form of oligarchy, instead of dictatorship to, use Bush's words, "freedom." While disgusting and utterly reprehensible, I think, (a thought formed by watching this documentary), that a lot of the military would like to go over there and give the Iraqi people the "freedom" that was originally intended.

But then again, that may be an idealist thought, considering how many military deaths have been caused because this was all fucked up a while ago, and it is probably past the point of no return. Just like there may be soldiers who feel they can still complete a job, there are some (probably more, I'm willing to bet) that just want to off everyone because 14-year-old Asad wired an IED that blew his friend's hum-vee up. While I'm not saying I condone that, that bitter feeling is probably really real within the ranks of troops on the ground over there.


I don't know, it's a fucking mess, but i think we all knew that to begin with. All I'm saying is I think, IMO, it would best serve the country to stay there and ACTUALLY help reestablish some sort of free society. Again, I'm probably an idealist, and I know better, that in no way will that actually happen.

[open mind]

No, I read the article, and understood it, I just don't see what you are saying. Are you saying that Al-Qaeda isn't all evil, and what they are doing can be viewed as just?

haha........pure evil is pretty hard to come by but no, i'm just pointing out the fact that even al queda has always had goals (it's main goal auctually) that don't automattically involve the u.s.
people can view anything in anyway they want to so it's obvious that what they do CAN be seen as just.

[GiggsOho]

haha........pure evil is pretty hard to come by but no, i'm just pointing out the fact that even al queda has always had goals (it's main goal auctually) that don't automattically involve the u.s.
people can view anything in anyway they want to so it's obviouse that what they do CAN be seen as just.

Understood, it's propaganda just like anything else, everything is twisted to sound nice and just.

[open mind]

Understood, it's propaganda just like anything else, everything is twisted to sound nice and just.

yes, and no.
alot of what they say about the u.s. government is true, but i don't agree with thier methods.

[Love As Arson]

A group of individuals holding a nation politically hostage while they live like a parasite off the land as compared to actual humanitarian and peace-keeping efforts differ on the war-crimes spectrum.
Regardless, the nation incurring the crime should have nothing to do with rebuilding it, aside from paying the population reparations for their suffering.
The military first went over there with the notion that they are going to drive Saddam out and set up some form of democratic government.
Their notion is irrelevant to the actual objectives of the administration. Let us recall that imperialism in the past was justified by "civilizing the savages", and some did believe that, but what actually happened told a different story.
It went from a dictatorship to a disgusting form of oligarchy, instead of dictatorship to, use Bush's words, "freedom." While disgusting and utterly reprehensible, I think, (a thought formed by watching this documentary), that a lot of the military would like to go over there and give the Iraqi people the "freedom" that was originally intended.
If they feel strongly about it, they should join an NGO, rather than participating in an organization that is structurally oriented towards brutal imperialism.

But then again, that may be an idealist thought, considering how many military deaths have been caused because this was all fucked up a while ago, and it is probably past the point of no return. Just like there may be soldiers who feel they can still complete a job, there are some (probably more, I'm willing to bet) that just want to off everyone because 14-year-old Asad wired an IED that blew his friend's hum-vee up. While I'm not saying I condone that, that bitter feeling is probably really real within the ranks of troops on the ground over there.
The difference is, the American army's violence is unjustified.


I don't know, it's a fucking mess, but i think we all knew that to begin with. All I'm saying is I think, IMO, it would best serve the country to stay there and ACTUALLY help reestablish some sort of free society. Again, I'm probably an idealist, and I know better, that in no way will that actually happen.
It can happen, but only if the the American army leaves and allow them to reconstitute the country on their own terms.

[GiggsOho]

It is pretty amusing that you apparently developed these three bold opinions after watching one Internet documentary.

It's pretty amusing that you call a Academy Award Nominated documentary made by a ex-government think-tank employee with countless people who worked in the administration, as well as in Iraq, an "internet documentary."


Do your homework, asshat.

[open mind]

It's pretty amusing that you call a Academy Award Nominated documentary made by a ex-government think-tank employee with countless people who worked in the administration, as well as in Iraq, an "internet documentary."


Do your homework, asshat.

eh, it's still just one carefully argued and well edited message really.
i haven't seen it myself (waiting for hbo or showtime or some station to pick it up) but that's what all (even the best) documentaries are in the end.