DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**nofkayalk** · 07-03-2006, 04:21 AM

I may have misinterpreted the movie, but it seemed to me to be a warning. I didn't know the US military had a veto over it's contents, or that others had seen it as pro-US. I thought that since the US got a bloody nose from an ill-advised military action and had to pull out of the country as a result was the point.

@Geronimo, it was unauthorized by higher authorities. The US was there at the UN's request to oversee the distribution of food aid. The local commander on the ground decided on his own authority to organize a raid to capture a local warlord.

@Darius871, BHD was released on January 18, 2002, the US attacked Iraq in March of 2003, so the movie was released a year and a bit before.

07-03-2006, 04:21 AM	#15
nofkayalk Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 396 Senior Member	I may have misinterpreted the movie, but it seemed to me to be a warning. I didn't know the US military had a veto over it's contents, or that others had seen it as pro-US. I thought that since the US got a bloody nose from an ill-advised military action and had to pull out of the country as a result was the point. @Geronimo, it was unauthorized by higher authorities. The US was there at the UN's request to oversee the distribution of food aid. The local commander on the ground decided on his own authority to organize a raid to capture a local warlord. @Darius871, BHD was released on January 18, 2002, the US attacked Iraq in March of 2003, so the movie was released a year and a bit before.
	Quote