2/5 Emotion reigns in this fictional film. Not a "documentary."
  by Shaphan Richardson (Murrells Inlet, SC)
[I am in the US Army.]
This is not a documentary. It is made up of interspersed interviews with people who fit into four categories: families of civilian contractors who died, civilian contractors who survived an attack, eyewitnesses of wasteful spending by companies with government contracts, and former Soldiers of unknown character complaining about the use of civilian contractors in Iraq. Wrongdoing should be punished. This film never clears up whether it is against wasteful spending or against the use of civilian contractors altogether. The film's arguments are too broad and, sometimes, random and confusing. Several times, the statement is made that "this war has been privatized to a greater extent than any other war in history." This is an asinine comment. With a new type of war being fought over the course of almost a decade, now, of course private companies will be employed more than before. Statements like these are devoid of value in the greater debate of how to regulate wasteful spending by these large corporations. Another frustrating element of this film is that the images from Iraq are not related to the story being told at that time. It's confusing for the viewer. Interviews with people who had first-hand knowledge of the wasteful spending were effective, but few, and as a result, the filmmaker spread them throughout the film, which watered down the effectiveness of their accounts. Unfortunate.
As a Soldier, I found the complaints about contractors living in better quarters than tent-bound Soldiers ridiculous. Soldiers, Marines, Sailors, and Airmen have given their lives to their Country and are willing to sleep in muck and grime for the sake of the cause. Civilians, brave and heroic them all, need a softer touch. The men and women of the U.S. Military are happy to sleep wherever the mission takes us. Keep your pity to yourself. Of course Soldiers are going to living in the suck, suffer, bleed, and die; that's our calling. We love it! We're here, on the wall, so you don't have to be. Just say thank you and move on.
The emotional outcry against Halliburton as a demonic overlord is very compelling; however, not backed by enough evidence to be completely persuasive. The speakers are mostly just making accusations that sound reasonable, but are not substantiated within the film itself. (This only makes the fact that there is a special feature on the DVD aimed at organizing protesters more laughable. Is it possible to organize protesters based solely on unsubstantiated claims, reasonable or not?) Someone is going to make money on the privatization of jobs by the U.S. Government. The American economy is built on the concept of companies doing what they can, within ethical boundaries, to make money. That shouldn't be discouraged. Only wrongful profiteering should be punished. This film does not clearly delineate between the two, so the viewer is never sure which is under attack.
There are two redeeming qualities in the film: First, the opening story of the Blackwater employee, who died in an ambush, was touching. The family's argument that an ambush, by definition a surprise attack, could have been avoided was heart-wrenchingly naïve. The second redeeming comment was the argument that more Iraqi civilians should have been hired, thereby getting them off the street and winning a PR battle, was very enlightening. (This approach worked in Germany and Korea.) Too bad the rest of the film is simply an emotional debate and not one backed up by actual evidence, but rather logical assumptions on the part of the individual interviewees. Pass this one up.