Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Third Impression ... Bummer!

Bummer, man.

They really do want to drop those bombs, you know. I mean, really.

And although some of the pilots seem to try to justify or rationalize ... 'We're supporting the guys on the ground and if they don't need our help, it's because they are now in a position where they are able to do their jobs better, it's a good thing' ... they really do wish they were dropping those bombs.

Two months in the Gulf and not one dropped?! It's what they train to do. And besides, it's fun. And, as some of those of the Nimitz say, if we're not dropping bombs, if we're not needed here, then why are we here?

Which led me a little closer to finally formulating a query that has been floating around the edges of my consciousness for some time but continues to remain elusively just out of reach.

Some of the pilots spoke about the difference between being on the ground (in this case, in Iraq) as opposed to flying thousands of feet overhead. About how being a pilot, it's a different kind of war. And somewhere in there is an inkling of something I still can't quite get my head around, with regard to the whole F/A pilot thing. Being a pilot as opposed to actually being 'boots on the ground'. If dropping bombs is "fun" ...

Alas, I still can't quite determine where my feeble mind is attempting to go with this. Perhaps some day it will form itself into a coherent thought I can share.

The other thing that struck me last night was the sense that they are interviewing a lot more sailors and pilots who are 'against the war' or, at the very least, question the way it is being fought and their part in it than those that unreservedly support what they, themselves, are doing.

Of course, these are real people and you would expect a divergence of opinion on a subject as controversial as the Iraq war. But what I would like to know is if those interviewed are really a representative sample. I never kept track of the actual numbers and it might well be that those expressing negative opinions are simply standing out more in my mind (perhaps they are getting a little more screen time?) but assuming my perception is correct and we are hearing more negative than positive opinion, are they simply tending to interview more of those that disagree or does the majority of crew feel that way?

Not something we will ever really know for sure, I suppose. But I was surprised to see what at least looks to me as the preponderance of opinion. Did it strike anybody else that way, I wonder.

At any rate, you have to give the US Navy credit for letting it all be seen, the positive and the negative.

Carrier is underway for two more nights. "What next?" she asks.


Anonymous said...

Michellee, Dear Michelle, You know in your heart of heart's That the film crew and the Editors are exhibiting Bias. THEY CAN'T HELP IT, THEY ARE REINFORCING THEIR WORLDVEIW.

That being said: I personally have encountered less than 10% of Troops that have a problem with what we are doing.

After all they are ALL Volunteers, and after this tour for KBR, I am thinking of Re-Enlisting into the Army. So I can go and blow up some more stuff. HOOURAH


Themav1977 said...

Being a naval aviation junkie I found it really funny watching a fighter squadron skipper get hammered on TV.
I have to wonder if he will make flag :)
It was also amusing to watch everyone on the boat play PLAT they say the view is always nice from the sidelines.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if their using anti-war quotes was the filmmakers' way of showing "the other side." After all, don't most folks assume EVERYone in the military is a right-wing, pro-war, gung-ho type? Showing anti-war views shows viewers that even in the military, all folks don't think alike.

TheBronze said...

Yes, I thought the same thing. Too many anti-war interviews vs. pro-war.

The make up of the military isn't the way the producers portrayed it. Adding the two anti-war Aussie idiots sealed it for me.

Good show, but the producer's bias showed through for me.