35 Comments

1. syn:

When will people finally figure out that the Hollywood Industry worships dictators, plutocrats and mass murdering killers while mocks freedom, liberty and prosperity?

Aren’t people just a little tired of the useful idiot groupthink.

Dec 7, 2008 - 2:49 am 2. Maggie:

Another good #1 comment from syn. I’m tired. Either tell the whole truth about Saddam or I won’t waste my time watching.

Dec 7, 2008 - 6:37 am 3. stu.b.con:

I read a review of this movie in the Detroit News this weekend that lamented the fact that the movied did not provide enough of the ‘personal’ side of the murdering butcher. I don’t think the libtard that wrote the review was thinking of torture chambers, rape rooms, or mass graves.
I’ll pass on this crap…

Dec 7, 2008 - 7:46 am 4. Ann:

Goodness, we wouldn’t want to make the man look bad. It was probably all due to a mismangaged childhood or something.

In addition to #2 comments (with which I am in full agreement)–to respond syn’s questions: I think the “Enough already!” groundswell has started.

I just wonder how long it will take. I wonder where the real tipping point is. I wonder if it will be in time to salvage what’s left of our cultural heritage of decent hardworking people with common sense.

Dec 7, 2008 - 7:49 am 5. jerry:

Coulda, shoulda, woulda arguments are unpleasant, because they lead nowhere. However, it is incumbent upon everyone, of high status or low, to consider carefully what the world would have been like had Saddam been permitted to remain in power.

No one should doubt for a minute that more of his people would have been “disappeared” since he could not tolerate opposition.

Looking clearly at the Iranian power to resist world pressure to forgo weapons of mass destruction, no one can doubt that he would have continued down the same road to acquiring atomic, chemical and biological agents, since he too felt it necessary to “defend” his country.

The oil and the territory of Kuwait was claimed by Saddam before the first American challenge to his power. Had he gone unchecked, those claims would have been reasserted and thus any future oil crisis would have to have been worsened.

Leaving Saddam in power would have led to more sadism (because that is what he and his family regularly engaged in) in the Arab world and perhaps would have led as well its general acceptance as a cultural phenomenon, much the same way that we find Saudi limb removal and the Muslim slash and burn policy toward clitorises as not of supreme importance.

The show’s failure to take such a speculative road is of course a political one. No doubt its contents and tone reflect the Zeitgeist of today’s culture as interpreted by the movie industry.

Dec 7, 2008 - 8:15 am 6. Rubicon:

Once again, the liberal entertinment industry & media industry portary a tyrant as an individual with basic flaws, but no big deal.
The starvation of Iraqi children blamed on America’s sanctions, while he & other corrupt world leaders raked in millions in ill-begotten ga=ins, tells us these industry giants will excuse anyone who represnts a socialist poiunt of view. They never mentionall these clowns eventuallt turn out to be despicable despots who kill indiscriminantly.

Dec 7, 2008 - 9:30 am 7. LennyB:

It’s odd that psychologically, some humans are simply predisposed to be attracted to, submit to, and revisionist explicate the strength, aggression, and brutality exercised by dictators and totalitarians. Almost like an animal who accepts his alpha pack leader, and is more psychologically assured that someone is in control. Particularly, it is the deep-seated submission part, like some biologically authored sexual attraction, that creeps me out the most. It is disturbing to believe that fellow humans are like that. I believe this tendency is what explains a great many historic tragedies.

What gives me hope, however, is that other humans are predisposed to see the world and humanity for what it is, to reject the perverse nature of submission, and to act without prejudice on behalf of the human race. I suspect most of the posters here fit that description.

Dec 7, 2008 - 9:34 am 8. VegasGuy:

Telling the unvarnished truth about Saddam might be interpreted as validating Bush actions. We absolutely can’t have that, even by implication.

Dec 7, 2008 - 9:36 am 9. mk:

It’s too bad they won’t tell the whole story. I saw the ads for the miniseries on HBO and it looked interesting. But you cannot tell a story like that without the whole unvarnished truth.

They also missed the Iraq leader paying Palestinian terorrist families 15K for every successful suicide bomber in Israel, I assume?

Dec 7, 2008 - 12:07 pm 10. cedarford:

Complaining one biopic of Saddam doesn’t cover EVERYTHING, is like bitching that only one properly made Holocaust movie should have covered all elements of that disaster – and the other 499 Holocaust movies Hollywood backed would have been unecessary. (Not saying many were not purely redundant).

A lot of stuff went down in Iraq during Saddam’s time. This 4-hour effort went to his family dynamics. That was the focus. Lots of other stuff of interest awaits future projects, if Saddam is considered “worth doing” – and not yesterday’s news.

Of interest is Saddams early work as a dirt-poor “enforcer”, then his rise through Ba’athist Party ranks as an ardent pro-American and Westernizer who handled modernization projects and expanded university access for those of modest means. And how power and the means to preserve it in the literal cut-throat world of Arab politics produced a very different President Hussein from the previous Party Councilman Hussein.

I remember watching a pretty good FDR movie which just dwelt in a 3 year time span of his being striken with polio after running as VP. Numerous other FDR movies dealt with other angles, other subjects. Same sort of situation. Impactful leaders, particularly the ones dealing with war and meting out and suffering their own tragedy – are far more the focus of attention by biographers and film-makers than the Jimmy Carters and John Majors.

Dec 7, 2008 - 12:53 pm 11. Bart:

I wonder how this same group would treat GWB if they did his story? By comparison, Saddam would look like a Catholic priest or reclusive nun once the liberal entertainment and media finished the hatchet job.

This is just another reason I cancelled my HBO subscription long ago.

Dec 7, 2008 - 1:02 pm 12. NahnCee:

Unfortunately, from what I can see in the last five years, Iraqi’s appear to enjoy being raped, disappeared and shredded. They do not appear to be to eager to help themselves, nor to work to build up either their country nor better lives for themselves.

Therefore, minus the whole weapons of mass destruction issue, I sort of think if Saddam had been left in control of Iraq to keep on doing what he had been doing, it really wouldn’t have made any more of a difference to the rest of the world than Mugabe being left in charge of Zimbabwe.

All sandboxes in the charge of idiot dictators being equal.

Dec 7, 2008 - 1:46 pm 13. fred:

I’ve boycotted all of Hollywood’s politically-motivated movies and “documentaries” and will continue to do so. I see no reason or purpose in exposing myself to the diatribes of the Left Coast’s hoi poloi, since I have no voice to register the points at which I disagree with them AND can back it up with fact and reason. Not being a masochist, I can calmly go about finding true entertainment elsewhere.

Dec 7, 2008 - 4:23 pm 14. fred:

Shouldn’t work like this go into the giant shredding machine down by the Tigris, where the Baathist thugs fed people into?

Dec 7, 2008 - 4:26 pm 15. Jim G:

Why would you ever think that HBO would give an honest portrail of anyone or country that was concerned with the destuction of the USA. If you’re gay or very left leaning you”re HBO heros.Otherwise you’re a gun carying lunatic.

Dec 7, 2008 - 5:14 pm 16. Preemptive strike:

We invaded Iraq because of Saddam’s repression and WMDs. We think he killed 300,000 Iraqis most Innocent some not.
Joseph Stalin- nicknamed the ‘Mule’ appears to have killed a minimum of around 10 million surplus deaths—

4 million by repression and 6 million from famine — are attributable to the regime, with a number of recent books suggesting a likely total of around 20 million. Adding 6–8 million famine victims to Erlikman’s estimates above, for example, would yield a total of between 15 and 17 million victims. Some victims were fed the corpses of their family and friends.
Researcher Robert Conquest, meanwhile, has revised his original estimate of up to 30 million victims down to 20 million. Others continue to maintain their earlier much higher estimates are correct.

Pol Pot killed 2.5 million Cambodians.
Why did America not invade Russia or Cambodia?

We knew these people were being killed.

We did nothing!

President Bush was allowed to attack a sovereign country,
I blame Republicans and Democrats.

Now our great country will pay dearly for this stupid invasion.

And don’t try to tell me I am un- American,

I am a combat veteran.

Dec 7, 2008 - 5:36 pm 17. Bugs:

Reason not to invade Russia: Desire not to instigate a nuclear war.
Reason not to invade Cambodia, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Congo, Myanmar, etc.: Vietnam.

Dec 7, 2008 - 7:50 pm 18. fred:

The regime of Saddam Hussein was a state sponsor of Islamic terror groups. The inspection regime, which kept the Baathists busy in a game of hiding the equipment, stocks, and programs shifting around, was about to end. And when that happened, it was only a matter of time when the Baathist alliance with Islamic jihad groups would involve the potential for devastating attacks.

Iraq violated EVERY SINGLE STIPULATION of the 1991 Truce. The consequences were the resumption of hostilities.

Russia moved out its contributions to the WMD programs before the invasion, called Operation Sarindar, in the months and weeks before OIF. The stuff was moved to Syria and Lebanon. The Israelis and now we know exactly were it is.

So, “Preemptive strike” chew on those. And as a matter of policy, the Commander in Chief has the right to set policy in a direction that favors chastising human rights’ violations.

I don’t care if you claim to be a combat veteran, because I know a lot of them who have a contrary viewpoint to yours. Not questioning your patriotism, just your judgment and political instincts. We think a show like the one being critiqued here is indeed biased and portrays our policy and country as a capricious bully.

So, now let us retire to our respective echo chambers.

Dec 7, 2008 - 7:59 pm 19. Jason S:

How does anyone expect the left to tell the truth about Saddam, when they can’t even bring themselves to admit that Che Guevara was a sadistic murdering bastard – and heck, to them, even the name “Stalin” isn’t a dirty word.

I regularly see nasty little hipster sh*ts walking around Manhattan with t-shirts bearing the Soviet Hammer and Sickle logo, as if they think it’s “cool” to glorify a regime which slaughtered four times as many innocents as Hitler.

The left has a sick, warped value system which permeates almost every square inch of our media and education institutions. It’s illustrated perfectly by photos like these:

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

Dec 7, 2008 - 10:32 pm 20. cedarford:

Preemptive Strike: And don’t try to tell me I am un- American,

I am a combat veteran.

BFD. So was Benedict Arnold. In fact, America’s greatest combat hero before he turned coat.

In general, America is fairly sick of professional ‘Nam Vets and others arguing that theirs is a higher form of citizenship, they are more American than others, and wierdly – their political opinions and legitimacy on a range of issues is more credible than others because they were once a supply clerk in Da Nang or they drove trucks in Iraq or carried a rifle in Germany in 1982…

****************
PS – for those that opined that HBO whitewahed Saddam before watching it. No, they pegged him and son Uday as world-class dirtbags.

Dec 8, 2008 - 12:18 am 21. The Whale:

Saddam would have fit right in out in Hollywood. The left and fake soldiers lecturing real soldiers would have paid his rent……….

Dec 8, 2008 - 7:58 am 22. Barry 0351:

I don’t watch any movie from Hollywood about any events in current history due to the great gap between fiction and fact.
When Hollywood gets done with the evil ones in our world they are turned into persecuted underdogs who have only been mistreated by the American’s.
Hollywood basically sucks.

Dec 8, 2008 - 9:13 am 23. thinking mom:

My cynicism with those Hollywood persons who leave out LARGE IMPORTANT events in a Saddam biography (such as mass murders, rape rooms, torture, past gas warfare against Kurds…)
—means that this movie will not be on my viewing list.

I don’t have time to waste on grotesquely inaccurate history – I’d rather watch a good officially fiction movie.

Dec 8, 2008 - 12:51 pm 24. Royal prince bush bin abdl aziz:

where are the WMD

Dec 8, 2008 - 1:50 pm 25. fred:

Response to the insolent remark by the asinine nom-de-plume @ #24

Over 500 tons of yellowcake removed from storage site, found in June of 2003 inside Iraq:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/07/about_that_500_tons_of_yellow.html

Russians execute Operation Sarindar successfully in the months and weeks leading up to OIF:

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/3/2/230625.shtml

“where are the WMD” (Doofuss does not even put a question mark after the question)

The yellowcake is now in storage in Canada somewhere. At least that is where it was shipped after its discovery.

The chemical and biological stocks that the Russians helped Iraq to produce are now in Syria and Lebanon.

Any more questions, cretin?

Dec 8, 2008 - 3:30 pm 26. trashhauler:

Now our great country will pay dearly for this stupid invasion.

And don’t try to tell me I am un- American,

I am a combat veteran.
__________________

You’re also historically ignorant. If one cannot see the political and military differences between widely separated eras and understand why countries behaved differently, then cherrypicking one event and claiming to know all about it is simply hubris. Ignorant hubris, at that.

Dec 8, 2008 - 3:56 pm 27. Preemptive strike::

You’re also historically ignorant. If one cannot see the political and military differences between widely separated eras and understand why countries behaved differently, then cherry picking one event and claiming to know all about it is simply hubris. Ignorant hubris, at that.

Rwanda- 500,000 slaughtered, What, couple years ago? Help UN!

Dafur you dufus.
250,000 slaughtered. AS OF TODAY. Help UN!

I guess we don’t invade other genocidal regimes killing black people,
Unless they have Light Sweet Crude Oil on their bodies.

Remember- Russia invading Georgia? Two months ago?
We didn’t do Shiite-
because Bush knew the Russians were only bullying a small country just like we did in Iraq.
Help UN! They are even building a Georgia Wall,
Do Something
please?

You need a modern history lesson- 101
and you call me ignorant. HA.

Dec 8, 2008 - 4:25 pm 28. fred:

“Preemptive strike”

Who taught you the Alinsky Rules for Radicals? One of the rules is to take some stated ethical precept of the capitalist system and then cite instance after episode where the United States and the capitalist system fail to measure up to its own ideals. Ram it home and keep establishing hypocrisy in order to win the argument with the young people, who are easily impressed with such jejeune debate tactics.

But, anyway, there were many reasons for deposing the Babylonian Baathists. Pre-eminent is the fact that any violation of the 1991 Truce would trigger the resumption of hostilities.

Is that too much for your mind to absorb, retard?

Dec 8, 2008 - 6:00 pm 29. Preemptive strike::

28. fred:

Tries to take me down the path of retard.

But it is painful trying to explain why a retard like Donald Rumsfield was turned lose with his “We will fight with the army that we have” 50,000 brave young men and women national guard troops going into a country of 25 million with no plan to get out.

Collin Powell told the dingbats, Bush and Rumsfield,
that one million men and women would not be enough.

Bush and Rumsfield come from a long line of ‘Water Walkers’ that think their God is the only God and this planet is one big American experiment.

Well, Rumsfield got his butt fired, that is fact.

And Bush got McCain swamped with 8 million more voters wanting ‘Change’ in Iraq which had already been saved by the more stupid terrorists that have killed more civilians than Blackhawk and the Coalition.
The Surge helped the Iraqi civilians kill more terrorists and take back their country. ‘THE CIVILIANS AND THEIR COUNTRY.’

Now we have another ‘Water Walking’ Marlboro smoking Pres. Elect Bambi that HOPES he can go into the caves of Afghanistan and Pakistan with American troops and kill Sodom bin Lying, he also hopes you wont notice the CHANGE.

Most combat vets are not as dumb as you think/hope we are!
And we have lived history not just read about it!

Alinsky Rules for Radicals! -LOL

Dec 8, 2008 - 11:58 pm 30. RW:

Someone has forgotten the code of military behavior and treaties entirely. And failed to address the complete violations of Gulf War I’s truce.

In the history books, the Gulf War with Iraq will look more like one conflict than two.
It will judge whether the cost was worthwhile in a historical window.

As Michael Yon said, it’s mostly in the rear view mirror now with an Iraqi government in control now.

Dec 9, 2008 - 4:41 am 31. fred:

Preemptive-strike,

What was your military MOS? What unit? Campaigns and countries?

Vets like you who are dopes for the Left are a minority. That’s why only 23% of the military voted for Oobonga.

Oh, and by the way, “pre-emption” is a sensible policy to have in today’s world of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons proliferation. You can’t adequately play defense in this kind of environment. Not with enemies who have stealth on their side. Our CIA is toothless, because it has no case officers and no agents in those countries that are hostile to us. It is very difficult to set up networks within Iran or other terror states, because your average Caucasian male, even if fluent in the language, is not going to pass unnoticed. You have to recruit perhaps some unsavory characters to get on the inside. Plus, your agents may have to “prove themselves” within the terrorist organizations and governments in order to be trusted. And that means the death of innocents.

I never served in a combat MOS when I was in the Army. But I do know combat veterans – Marines, Army, and Navy SEALS – who did go in harm’s way. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM BELIEVES IN THE MISSION. Officer and enlisted.

It was our armed forces more than “Iraqi civilians” who made the Surge work. Yes, we had the help of Iraqis who increasingly were feeding us good HUMINT about the enemy. But it all would not have happened without a supported Gen. Petraeus and his men.

YOU may have soured on the mission and the overall strategy, but yours is a voice that mainly counts in groups of veterans against the war. Kind of like what John Kerry did in 1970-71.

Dec 9, 2008 - 11:12 am 32. Preemptive strike::

But it all would not have happened without a supported Gen. Petraeus and his men.

I agree.
but it came 5 years after the fact that we had a couple of idiots Bush-Rumsfield- lead/push us into war.

I don’t need to tell my MOS or unit.

I have one purple heart.

John Kerry 1970-71 was more superior,
he has 3.

/

Dec 9, 2008 - 12:31 pm 33. chrisk:

#3 “Either tell the whole truth about Saddam or I won’t waste my time watching.”

What a bizarre comment. Do you understand the limits of film? Do you understand that a whole truth couldn’t be told in any format?

Maybe you meant to say “I am incapable of enjoying a movie that doesn’t tell me what i don’t already know.”

Dec 9, 2008 - 1:00 pm 34. hockeyplayer:

Let me say this “Preemptive-strike” – I will give YOU more credit than I will John Kerry, and here’s why:

1. Kerry’s wounds were TRULY cuts and scratches. None of them required hospitalization, nor even more than a brief visit to the unit infirmary. His commanding officer did not want to give him the Purple Heart.

2. When he came home, while still a Naval officer subject to the UCMJ, he participated in anti-war organizations. He also went to Paris to secretly meet with Madame Binh to “negotiate” a brokered deal between the U.S. and North Vietnam’s Communist regime. Clear violation of U.S. law and the UCMJ.

3. Upon his separation from service, supported by evidence the FBI and CIA had furnished to the Naval Investigative Services, he received a General Discharge and his awards were revoked. Many years later, after the Democratic Party’s untiring work on his behalf, his discharge was upgraded to Honorable and his awards were restored.

4. But the efforts on behalf of John Kerry were costly. The Church Hearings effectively ruined the CIA and have crippled it to this day. The 1978 Foreign Intelligence Service Act is at the foundation the cause of the “wall of separation” between the FBI and CIA, enabling terrorist organizations and foreign spies to exploit the gap.

5. John Kerry had difficulty getting accepted into law schools upon his discharge from the Navy. A less than honorable discharge can be a problem. It also proved to be a problem when he applied to the Massachusetts Bar. The tireless work of Sen. Edward Kennedy prodded the Church Hearings, which were meant to expose and expunge the CIA’s files on domestic activities on behalf of the Soviet agents of dezinformatzia.

Dec 9, 2008 - 1:59 pm 35. WestGuard:

John Kerry the dirtbag who threw his undeserved medals on the ground and became a voice for the anti American government liberals.

Dec 11, 2008 - 12:07 pm