'Black Hawk Down' Brilliantly Depicts The Peril of Entrusting Our Military to Liberal Statesmen

GOPUSA ^ | January 17, 2002 | Rick Erickson

[gopusa.com]

Do not miss Director Ridley Scott's Black Hawk Down. Like the tribute in classic Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down is a motion picture memorial. Lest we forget, Black Hawk Down reminds us of our servicepeople's willingness to enter the fray, regardless of the political, tactical and numerical odds like the ones our soldiers faced in Mogadishu, Somalia on October 3, 1993.

The movie, based upon Mark Bowden's Nobel worthy chronicle, honors the dead and wounded soldiers played by actors who rehearsed their military roles at Special Operations Command, Fort Bragg, North Carolina - the proving grounds for most of the soldiers who fought and died at the Battle of Mogadishu. The movie achieves realism by simulating the fear, rage and exhilaration experienced by the soldiers themselves.

Read the complete article at http://www.gopusa.com/opinion/re_0117.shtml

[11th Earl of Mar]

I agree that Black Hawk down brilliantly done.

I disagree with Bill Clinton being called a statesman. [Liberal? yes. Statesman? no.]

[RJayneJ]

[Dante3]

I hear special effort was made by the director to portray Clinton in a better light and that scenes of an American's body being dragged were cut. Is this true?

[Swede Girl]

Opposite from the proven competence behind the current administration's war against Al Qeada, Black Hawk Down depicts unforgivable military loss caused by the Clinton administration's strategic ignorance and neglect - a political scourge that afflicted our military for years after October 3, 1993. The combatants depicted in Black Hawk Down will tell you that they were fighting the War on Terrorism a long time ago. The problem is, between 1992 and 2000, the President and his administration were too busy skirmishing with the military itself to be protracting a successful campaign against terrorism - a campaign that may have prevented catastrophe on September 11, 2001.

This is the theme of the movie....Clinton was an inept commander-in-chief who WAS and IS resposible for the deaths of these soldiers. Period.

I have not seen the movie yet and I know I will be depressed when I do. I will not be lost in the entertainment of the special effects, handsome faces, props, or acting abilities of the actors. I will not think of it as an "action movie" meant for my mindless entertainment.

I will be thinking of the Clinton administration from the very beginning (when this occurred) to the very end, punctuated by the in-your-face pardons. I will be thinking of how depressed I was when he was first elected, and how shocked I was that the American public actually voted him in. I will be thinking of how angry I was to learn, day after day, new reasons to "loathe" Bill and Hillary Clinton. I will be thinking of how disgusted I was when this tragedy happened and when I saw the news of one of our American soldiers being dragged through the streets of Somalia.

I will be thinking of the fact that these deaths, this tragedy, the moral decline of the country, the selling of secrets, the September 11th attacks, and more would NOT have happened had George Bush Sr. won the election in 1992. I will be thinking how Clinton brought in an inexperienced and incapable administration not up to the job. I will be thinking of how angry, disgusted, and upset I am that the Clintons ever stepped a foot in our White House.

Maybe I won't go see this movie.....it will just be too upsetting.

[11th Earl of Mar]

There was a decision NOT to include pictures of American soldiers being dragged through the street. I don't know what role the producer played in this.

The book's author was particularly kind to Clinton in the written version, probably fearful of the popularity of Bill Clinton in the minds of the readers in the mid 90's.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

I hear special effort was made by the director to portray Clinton in a better light and that scenes of an American's body being dragged were cut. Is this true?

Yes, it's true...stupid Hollywood Rat lovers will NEVER produce an objective motion picture...

[Gigantor]

I remember reading several reports at the time that armor support was asked for BEFORE this mission, and Aspin specifically denied it - the reason? It would send a signal of too much aggression on our part.

Afterwards, Clinton said the decision to refuse armor support was not made by him, and Aspin fell on his sword for his King.

Aspin very quickly died of a heart attack, and I always will believe it's because he knew that he and Billy-bob were responsible.

One more piece of proof that Clinton is one of Satan's minions and anyone who helps him is doomed.

[Fury]

The book's author was particularly kind to Clinton in the written version, probably fearful of the popularity of Bill Clinton in the minds of the readers in the mid 90's.

I do not agree with this and do not believe that Mark Bowden like that. And I believe that does cast the Clinton Administration as having questionable leadership in the Somalia matter...

[Fury]

I remember reading several reports at the time that armor support was asked for BEFORE this mission, and Aspin specifically denied it - the reason? It would send a signal of too much aggression on our part.

MG Garrison and his one up both did not request armor or additional fire support.

[scouse]

I just saw the actors being interviewed on TV and most of them sound like either Australians or New Zealanders.

[Fury]

I want to blame Clinton for everything I can, too, but I won't do so in the face of proof to the contrary. That's intellectual suicide. Those who read the book will encounter proof that the casualties taken in Somalia were not the result of any action or inaction on Clinton's part.

Thank you for posting this. There were mistakes both at the strategic and tactical level up to and on 10/03/93. Clearly, the Clinton Administration at one point was going to pull out of Somalia and then made the decision to stay. The goals - to help establish a stable goverment, to counter the effects of the drought, etc. were well intentioned, but after reading some of the material "after the fact", Clinton did not seem to take advantage of people's expertise who had extensive experience in Somalia.

From a tactical perspective, those involved on 10/03/93 lamented not taking NVD's with them on the afternoon mission and there appeared to be a serious problem with the 5.56mm round not being able to knock down and keep down Somalis who were shot. One also got the impression that the QRF was not at a readiness state that would have offered quicker rescue of pinned down soldiers. Additionally, there was a breakdown in communication between the Delta Force and Rangers elements, with at one point the Army Rangerelement leader refusing to even talk with the Delta Force element leader. As a result, there were in effect two force elements that night. Consolidation may have helped both out.

[Argus]

What I got from the movie was a strong appreciation for the courage and skill of these guys in an impossible situation, a non-stop firefight. The movie lets you draw your own conclusion as to the failures of the politicians, but the implication is there and inescapable - the soldiers were left hanging by the higher ups in DC.

[Fury]

What I got from the movie was a strong appreciation for the courage and skill of these guys in an impossible situation, a non-stop firefight. The movie lets you draw your own conclusion as to the failures of the politicians, but the implication is there and inescapable - the soldiers were left hanging by the higher ups in DC.

We're seeing the movie tomorrow at 12:30 Pm. How would you rate the movie as far as tracking the book?

After reading the book, I am always a bit leary of the movie being not as complete, which of course, it rarely can be as complete. But from I have read on review, etc, those who read the book said the movie really tried to stick to the book and that the battle scenes were unlike any they had ever seen.

Perhaps this movie should be required viewing perhaps for any politician who does not think carefully about putting US military personnel in harm's way.

[Argus]

I haven't read the book but those who have rate the movie as faithful to it, which is the author's reported reaction as well. I can say the picture doesn't insult your intelligence - it just throws you into this chaotic situation and lets you sort it out, vividly sharing the disorientation of the troops onscreen. The depiction of the Somalis and the Mogadishu scene is unsentimental, non-pc and, from my admittedly uninformed perspective, felt very real.

[11th Earl of Mar]

The book, which I have read, makes as much reference to 'Republican partisianship' as it does to Clinton's failures.

The book also fails to explore any of the instaces where a fallen soldier's father confronts Bill Clinton. There were two reported cases that, in the book, only received scant references.

You have to remember that the author was trying to sell a book to a public who approved of the president by almost a 2 to 1 ratio.

[Sueann]

"the peril of entrusting our military to liberal politicians"

How on earth did they keep that realization from hitting the cutting room floor?????