Michael Moore's new film: "Where to Invade Next"

how is it we can judge people and define them immediately based on one or two comments on online forums.
I digress...

documentaries seldom show both side of the story, in fact documentaries 'document' one aspect of the respective topic.

there can easily be a documentary justifying why we the US is constantly involved in a war, with as much validity as Mr. Moore's film.
documentaries always force their agenda, good or bad; that's the whole point, focusing on a single argument as mean of persuasion.

.....
I could be wrong though.

a reply to: Farlander

The best part about his docs is that they upset people that blindly accept the status quo--

Yes. Only problem is that lots of those people just put on blinders to all of it and refuse to watch and/or miss the ones that might get them to think outside of their comfort zones.

I am no exception. I do my best to avail myself of "the other side", but I can only stand it in small doses from a few people. Otherwise I get depressed. Trust me, I was not "enjoying" reading Scahill's journalism....but it was too important to ignore, and I learned a Hella Lot about the American M/I Complex.

a reply to: crazyewok

That's the problem. America saw the success of protecting S. Korea and Japan and how they built up their economies to be the powerhouses they are today and then America thinks it can apply these same tactics to other countries and any country will just accept our ideologies with open arms. Japan, TECHNICALLY, didn't have a choice in the matter of being westernized and South Korea only did it so that they can be distinct from North Korea. These are two little facts that many pro-war chicken hawks seem to forget, and the pro-war politicians aren't exactly jumping to tell people these details.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Bluntone22

Okay. Would you watch this 'infomercial'? (Don't see what the big diff is, because neither format is "fiction").

Did you ever buy a product from an infomercial?

They may not be pure fiction, but they are definitely misleading.

a reply to: butcherguy

LOL!!! Yep, I have had a couple of late-nite episodes of insanity.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Okay, I will break it down for you because you aren't quite understanding my point here.

The US military industrial complex was created out of necessity during WWII. Without this "evil" military industrial complex, all of us might be speaking German right now. Very real threats around the world required the need to exponentially expand military programs, as well as the research and development that lead to a lot of the technology we take for granted today.

If Moore was alive during WWII he could have created documentaries about how evil the US was then for expanding such programs, and "invading" nations around the world with military bases.

a reply to: Danke

Okay, thanks for "breaking it down."
Have you ever read Captains and the Kings by Taylor Caldwell?
The M/I complex is FAR older than just WW1.

It's been in existence since before the US Civil War.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Michael Moore is an either or proposition...

But I'm not one to ignore a message just because of the messenger.

That's a fatalistic approach society is falling for.

Would you trust a message if it came from me?

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

So you believe the US was a military powerhouse before WWI and WWII?

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Michael Moore is an either or proposition...

But I'm not one to ignore a message just because of the messenger.

That's a fatalistic approach society is falling for.

Would you trust a message if it came from me?

I'd definitely lend an ear.

I'd hare you out... But don't rabbit on too much though.

a reply to: Danke

"Powerhouse"?

No. But I believe the whole "selling guns to both sides" and then "inflaming tensions so they get sales" thing is a part of history prior to WW1. The Civil War in the US was not an international affair. The weapons manufacturers don't care who buys their stuff. Blackwater doesn't care who they 'disappear'.

Let me guess. Let's blame the government for going to war instead of the resource-hungry people for forcing them to.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

So with that logic you are saying that weapons manufacturers inflamed tensions in Germany so that they could sell guns to both sides.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

How do I feel about MM? Hmmmm....


(Hope ya got the joke)

He is not intellectual enough for me. I don't do these modern comic book documentaries nor hand over my greenback to hysterical soap box softies. Remember, it is only HIS OPINION. Your opinion is just as valid and you can do your own research. You have the same resources at your disposal as MM. Don't be lazy and let others do your thinking and research for you. They will use you.

It is a real world where real power has to be brokered.

Don't hate yourself too much U.S. I prefer you to China, Russia orrrrr...ROME!

a reply to: Danke

America has been waging imperialistic wars and meddling in other countries' business since pretty much its founding. The only thing that really changed with WWII is that the scope of our meddling increased to the whole world instead of just the American continents.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yeah, you are right. We really should have minded our own business and let Hitler conquer all of Europe.

a reply to: Danke

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that what we did in WWII was unnecessary. I'm just giving you the facts of history.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I didn't need to put words in your mouth. Look at your last post.

The only thing that really changed with WWII is that the scope of our meddling increased to the whole world instead of just the American continents.

So you consider what we did in WWII as "meddling" with the whole world.

Definition of meddle : to become involved in the activities and concerns of other people when your involvement is not wanted

: to change or handle something in a way that is unwanted or harmful

originally posted by: Danke
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yeah, you are right. We really should have minded our own business and let Hitler conquer all of Europe.

Noooo! Thank Heavens for the U.S. We in Britain would be marching to Wagner or holed up in deepest darkest Siberia eating black bread with Stalin if not for Uncle Sam!

Go Elvis!

originally posted by: Danke
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I didn't need to put words in your mouth. Look at your last post.

The only thing that really changed with WWII is that the scope of our meddling increased to the whole world instead of just the American continents.

So you consider what we did in WWII as "meddling" with the whole world.

Definition of meddle : to become involved in the activities and concerns of other people when your involvement is not wanted

: to change or handle something in a way that is unwanted or harmful

Fine, you got me. I forgot to put the word "after" in front of WWII. Sorry for the typo.