General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Real American Sniper: Why Chris Kyle Wasn’t A Hero
The following words are not meant to spit on the grave of Chris Kyle, but rather address a reality that may be unpleasant for many to hear. Chris Kyle was not a hero. He did not protect America or keep it safe. He killed a lot. He also, apparently, lied a lot as well. Sometimes truth lies beyond the lens of star-spangled glasses and once you have the courage to look beyond a constructed work of fiction, you may realize that the facts do not align with your belief system. It may not be easy, but sometimes the truth is harsh. If we, as a people are genuinely in pursuit of truth and the justice that follows, we must distance ourselves from the warm feelings that certain narratives provide and search objectively without the blinders that provide us comfort.
Kyles story takes place in Iraq, his weapon and astute aim followed along with him. The former Navy SEAL and bronco rider was responsible for 160 confirmed deaths 255 if you include unconfirmed kills while he was stationed in the land that was once ancient Babylon. How can it be said that a single person he killed was on behalf of protecting the American way of life or its freedoms when Iraq nor its people were ever a threat to either? Kyle was a member of an invading force. To protect someone or something, an outside threat must first be made, otherwise what is labeled as protector is actually an aggressor.
No matter your thoughts surrounding the events on 9/11, one thing that is for certain is that Iraq was not involved. Saddam Hussein never attacked the United States, nor did it appear that he ever had plans to do so. Husseins regime, although not innocent of crimes in its own country, was not a threat to the United States or its citizens. And despite the Bush administrations assertion that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, they didnt.
It may be brutal to hear, but the facts dictate that none of the people that Chris Kyle killed were a threat to America, its freedoms, or its way of life.
So who or what was the Texan protecting?
<snip>
American Sniper, the movie based on his words, makes Kyle appear as if he was conflicted by the scores who were killed by his marksmanship. Unfortunately for his legacy, his actual words tell a different story.
I wondered, how would I feel about killing someone? Now I know. Its no big deal
Another quote from Kyles book describes his thoughts on the Iraqi people,
Savage, despicable evil. Thats what we were fighting in Iraq. Thats why a lot of people, myself included, called the enemy savages
. I only wish I had killed more.
The sniper also described his chosen profession of killing by saying,
You do it until theres no one left to kill. Thats what war is. I loved what I did
Im not lying or exaggerating to say it was fun.
Kyle also relays his lack of regret by saying,
Theres another question people ask a lot: Did it bother you killing so many people in Iraq? I tell them No. And I mean it.
As far as the moral ambiguity that he dealt with, Kyle said
I have a strong sense of justice. Its pretty much black-and-white. I dont see too much gray.
The last passage from American Sniper that I will list truly demonstrates Kyles lack of heroism:
A teenager, Id guess about fifteen, sixteen, appeared on the street and squared up with an AK-47 to fire at them. I dropped him. A minute or two later, an Iraqi woman came running up, saw him on the ground, and tore off her clothes. She was obviously his mother. Id see the families of the insurgents display their grief, tear off clothes, even rub the blood on themselves. If you loved them, I thought, you should have kept them away from the war. You should have kept them from joining the insurgency.
The insurgency that the sniper is referring to is the local Iraqi insurgency that would have never existed if the United States hadnt invaded Iraq to begin with. These insurgents werent making their way overseas to hurt Kyles family, so where does his malice towards the child he killed in cold blood come from?
more: http://theantimedia.org/the-real-american-sniper/
HeiressofBickworth
(2,682 posts)Please, please don't call the Iraqi people "insurgents" because that isn't true. The definition of insurgent is 1) Rising in revolt against a government or other established authority 2) Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
The Iraqi people were not in revolt against their government -- they were fighting an invasion by the Americans and "the coalition of the willing". We INVADED their country; they had every right to fight back. What we did was a violation of international law. Now remind me, just why aren't Bush and Cheney behind bars?
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)I pretty much steer clear of any movie/show using the Iraq war as a backdrop/prop.
They are all based on a lie and a crime.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)Just a joke, though I'm curious does the movie even have a spotter? If not, that would be a glaring inaccuracy. For snipers my favorite is Bob Lee Swagger though he is fictional, the movie "Shooter" did a great job in detailing the accuracy that goes into sniping though the book Point of Impact is much, much better. The Third Bullet is another in the Bob Lee Swagger series which deals with the JFK assassination, I haven't made it that far yet but from what I can tell Stephen Hunter has a very good understanding what the government & side factions are capable of. A gun nut living in the woods is why he was chosen as the perfect "patsy" in Point of Impact.
glasshouses
(484 posts)Not just him but every sniper who was deployed.
Hero?
he did his job that's all
The only ones who called him a hero were people who never served and hollywood
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)but it is very clear he saw this more as a game or some type of contest. He mentions all the killing led him to figure out ways to be "creative" and he also mentions "Our ROEs [Rules of Engagement] when the [Iraq War] kicked off were pretty simple: If you see anyone from about sixteen to sixty-five and theyre male, shoot em. Kill every male you see. That wasnt the official language, but that was the idea." Which is pretty interesting as this is very different from official ROE or the ROE directly from CENTCOM so I'm more interested in who gave this order. Generation Kill portrays a Marine battalion under an ROE that is always changing on the fly from the Battalion commander himself.
I certainly don't deny he saved lives, especially regarding the RPG story though I'm curious what were the circumstances for him providing sniper cover on an Army convoy (my job) when there are dozens on the road at a given time & so many others given "trip tickets" as they're coming back. I logged about 30,000 miles myself -- but it also appears he did a lot of this for fun, or sport, got an enjoyment out of it and I don't care who are or what the job asks of you, only a sociopath values human life as much in the same way Chris Kyle claims he did.
glasshouses
(484 posts)As for the talk , a lot of talk and bravado was spoken by a lot of Marines and soldiers there after battles .
They just didn't write books or have movies made about them.
If you're asking me is he the best example human being ? no
But he is far from the worst example also.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)He appears to be less hypocritical though I'm not sure how much post-Iraq was a lie. I agree because I have seen the darkest corners of human existence, he doesn't qualify as my worst.
I really can't comment on the Marines experience as I have little to no knowledge of what it is like with the exception they have the best overall uniforms, ran an extra half mile & also do pull-ups as part of their PT test(based on rumors). I do know they won't take a GED, high school diploma only but generally the Department of the Navy has the toughest standards. If you're chaptered out of the Navy you can still join the Army but out of the Army, you're out.
My experience was in the transportation corps and we were deployed to the same base as CENTCOM, now unwritten ROE is another story. Directly, it was show, shout (the show and the shout switched places about the winter of 06-07), shove, shoot. You shout your orders to halt, to go away. You "show" your weapon for the implied consequences of failure to obey. "If you can shove you can shoot" was always the introduction if whoever didn't follow.
Wikileaks actually hit it dead on bullseye
Two months later, US troops gunned down a group of bus passengers even more peremptorily, as the logs record.
Patrolling on foot, a Kentucky-based squad from 1st Battalion, 506th Infantry Regiment, known as "Red Currahee", decided to flag down the approaching bus, so their patrol could cross the road. Before sunrise, a soldier stepped out on to Afghanistan's main highway and raised both hands in the air.
When the bus failed to slow travelers are often wary of being flagged down in Afghanistan's bandit lands a trooper raked it with machine-gun fire. They killed four passengers and wounded 11 others.
The bus likely kept rolling towards after the show & the shout
<snip>
The bulk of the "blue-white" file consists of a relentless catalogue of civilian shootings on nearly 100 occasions by jumpy troops at checkpoints, near bases or on convoys. Unco-operative drivers and motorcyclists are frequent targets.
Each incident almost without exception is described as a meticulous "escalation of force" conducted strictly by the book, against a threatening vehicle.
US and UK rules require shouts, waves, flares, warning shots and shots into the engine block, before using lethal force. Each time it is claimed that this procedure is followed. Yet "warning shots" often seem to cause death or injury, generally ascribed to ricochets.
Sometimes, it seems as though civilian drivers merely failed to get off the road fast enough. On 9 July 2006 mechanic Mohamad Baluch was test-driving a car in Ghazni, when the Americans rolled into town on an anti-IED "route clearance patrol".
The log records: "LN [local national] vehicle did not yield to US convoy
Gunner on lead truck shot into the vehicle and convoy kept going out of the area." The townspeople threw rocks at the eight departing armoured Humvees. Baluch ended up in hospital with machine-gun bullets in his shoulder.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-civilian-deaths-rules-engagement
This revelation didn't surprise me none. Every convoy mission brief, though this applied to the gun trucks, shoot (if you can shove you can shoot) anyone who fails to yield to orders, usually arabic words for stop or halt. After that, it was told fair game so you'd expect many incidents just like Wikileaks revealed. Either The Guardian got the facts wrong or the DoD was misleading but we were taught warning shots were bad ideas based on logic like the bullet has to go somewhere and it would qualify as "shove" so if you can fire warning shot, you can fire a kill shot. Shots into the engine block? That was never taught though I noticed a bit of an editorial slant even though it wasn't necessary. The troubling thing is were they given the wrong facts or choose to misrepresent the actual facts relayed to them?
As far as Fallujah, I never driven through the city or Ramadi but the road going to TQ was named "Long Island" and it was by far the worst road in Iraq. We were trained to swerve around potholes, trash, debree, anything but Long Island had "man holes" the whole way there. Also the area was infamous for "Daisy-chain IEDs" (think of roadside bomb lit up like Christmas tree lights) that area was bad. Though, I wouldn't justify road crimes unless a supervisor gave the order but it was made very clear, many times, we are allowed to disobey unlawful orders.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)glasshouses
(484 posts)They also took lives
So every trigger puller , field artillery , pilots are all savages by your definition
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)as 'savages'.
If that's the case, the American soldiers were equally 'savages' -- as invaders, even more so.
The guy was an asshole. When he got home he created a company to train more people how to kill. He was no innocent victim. He enjoyed killing, wished he'd killed more -- by his own testimony. Don't try to whitewash him, he was a sick savage.
Well said.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)bastard clint eastwood who turned him into a hero because he hates things so much he ignored half the book this movie is based on to make a clay hero to say and do all the things his sorry old ass was never willing to do. F Clint Eastwood.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)murderer?
I suppose it depends on how you weigh these things.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)massive world wide audience and considering that muslims in other countries will become enraged by it, the totality of the potential to make huge trouble is greater. This man was a psycho and one of their traits is not getting their own savagery. Eastwood is a mean old bastard but he isn't a psycho. He knew what he was doing and how it was going to be received. He helped enure us against outrage against future wars with this tripe. He fed the lie machine like Bush and Cheney. He is worse. His effect is longer and greater than some idiot writing a book. He twisted this to make it acceptable to accept snipers and their psychotic behavior. It is worse. Think bigger picture.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)muslim world; i.e. invading countries, removing governments, installing puppet governments, killing people, etc.
I'd say that's the background for all else.
kwolf68
(7,365 posts)OR the jihadists?
Was this quote taken out of context?
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)that, everything we did was illegal, and trying to draw some line between "jihadist" Iraqis and "good" Iraqis (who we're nevertheless invading) is bullshit.
There were no jihadists until we invaded, killed the leadership and destroyed the country.
nilesobek
(1,423 posts)would catch on that this guy wasn't a hero. In another thread I called it this year's Zero Dark Thirty and a jingo pick at the Oscars.
The movie is extremely well made from what I have heard. Good acting, good writing, great production values and photography. I would never go see this thing. I was awakened to the propaganda apologizing for the Iraq war ten years ago. There's no way I can go back.
A lot of people have pointed out to me that the picture itself is not blatant pro-war propaganda, but rather, insidious propaganda of clear omission. As a viewer I want to be entertained, not led on a leash.
BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)cwydro
(51,308 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Thank you, tenderfoot! War for oil is making America into the monster Nietzsche warned us about.