American Sniper

[WinePusher]

I haven't seen it (I plan on seeing it once I get some free time) But I am well aware of the controversy surrounding it. The question boils down to whether the American Sniper was a hero or not. Even though I'm a pretty big conservative, I can understand what people like Michael Moore are saying. For those who are unaware, Moore essentially called snipers cowards because they shoot people in the back. I don't necessarily agree, but I understand his point of view.

Question for discussion: was the American Sniper a hero?

[Zzyzx]

.
I have no intention of seeing that movie or any other (vicarious living is not my cup of tea). However, I would say that ANY sniper is just doing his/her job. If s/he does the job exceptionally well s/he deserves credit – not necessarily hero worship.

Fifty plus years ago I was trained by the Army to do that job. Though we did not receive the good sniper training since it was "peace time" (after Korea and before Vietnam heated up), we received a LOT of training in long range accuracy (out to 1000 yards, well over half a mile). The term sniper was never used. Instead, we were known as the rifle team, long range guys, or shooters. That is one of the reasons I wear hearing aids now (supplied by the VA).

If any oppose our snipers killing people (or "shooting them in the back") they should be even more opposed drone attacks and bombing by aircraft – which kill far more indiscriminately, often including many non-combatant deaths (children and women). In fact, we as citizens of a warlike nation condone, support, fund ALL such killings.

As William Tecumseh Sherman famously said, "War is hell." Its PURPOSE is to kill and destroy. The US has the greatest killing, destroying force ever known – capable of wiping out or incinerating any nation on Earth in hours, if not minutes.

If our troops are guilty of "cowardly" killing, we are ALL guilty because we send them there and pay them to kill for us. Those who promote war for personal gain are doubly guilty.

I am definitely NOT a pacifist and am completely in favor of maintaining massive, overpowering self-defense capability – at national and individual level. As a friend (who shares my attitude) says "I can't keep you from messing with me, but if you do I promise to make it exceedingly painful for you."

The whole "hero" or "celebrity" concept is distasteful to me and much of public adoration seems misplaced or downright stupid. Hero / celebrity figures often have "feet of clay" as Lance Armstrong and Bill Cosby demonstrate.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 1 by WinePusher]

He did more than sniping in the movie.

This movie is not part of the culture wars. It's just so basic and mundane. This happens, then this, with barely a plot.

Pitching it as a culture war was clearly for marketing purposes. The idea that the war or religion might matter is not explored. But I suspect the hint of anti-nihilism, like a trace of lemon in a glass of water, was enough to call the movie part of the culture wars.

[WinePusher]

I have no intention of seeing that movie or any other (vicarious living is not my cup of tea). However, I would say that ANY sniper is just doing his/her job. If s/he does the job exceptionally well s/he deserves credit – not necessarily hero worship.

Fifty plus years ago I was trained by the Army to do that job. Though we did not receive the good sniper training since it was "peace time" (after Korea and before Vietnam heated up), we received a LOT of training in long range accuracy (out to 1000 yards, well over half a mile). The term sniper was never used. Instead, we were known as the rifle team, long range guys, or shooters. That is one of the reasons I wear hearing aids now (supplied by the VA).

If any oppose our snipers killing people (or "shooting them in the back") they should be even more opposed drone attacks and bombing by aircraft – which kill far more indiscriminately, often including many non-combatant deaths (children and women). In fact, we as citizens of a warlike nation condone, support, fund ALL such killings.

As William Tecumseh Sherman famously said, "War is hell." Its PURPOSE is to kill and destroy. The US has the greatest killing, destroying force ever known – capable of wiping out or incinerating any nation on Earth in hours, if not minutes.

If our troops are guilty of "cowardly" killing, we are ALL guilty because we send them there and pay them to kill for us. Those who promote war for personal gain are doubly guilty.

I am definitely NOT a pacifist and am completely in favor of maintaining massive, overpowering self-defense capability – at national and individual level. As a friend (who shares my attitude) says "I can't keep you from messing with me, but if you do I promise to make it exceedingly painful for you."

The whole "hero" or "celebrity" concept is distasteful to me and much of public adoration seems misplaced or downright stupid. Hero / celebrity figures often have "feet of clay" as Lance Armstrong and Bill Cosby demonstrate.

Good post, your points are well stated and I agree with most of them (except for the not seeing movies part). I think that people, particularly soldiers, should be celebrated as heroes if and only if they meet the necessary qualifications, and of course reasonable people will disagree as to what these qualifications are exactly. Louis Zamperini (Angelina Jolie made a movie about him) and John McCain would fit the bill imo because they bravely endured torture and interrogation in POW camps, and other purple heart recipients should be extolled as well. As you said, I think Chris Kyle executed his job efficiently and is by no means a coward, but I wouldn't call him a hero either.

[JoeyKnothead]

Heroes need not rise above the occassion in which they find themselves, but should be there all the same.

In the case of those who joined the military (and other agencies) post 9/11, I find 'em heroes for knowing the potential occassions they'd face, and being there all the same.

In the case of POWs, yes, there's some heroism going on there, but we also remember they got caught, where others didn't. Is the man in a POW cell more a hero than the one still fighting?

We also gotta think of the families of our military, and the heroism they display in the face of the absence of a provider. What child ain't a hero that works to ensure undue stress doesn't happen? What mother ain't a hero who bravely hugs her child, silently praying for his safe return, as they're sent off to war?

Heroism and soldiering are the same, when they're done for a right and good purpose.

[jeager106]

I find Mike Moore's comments disgusting.
The sniper did what he was assigned to do and did it well.
Shooting an armed enemy in the back or front matters not.
Artillery kills anyone in the blast zone and humans have been killing with artillery ever since the technology was available.
Napalm cares not who gets incenerated.
Then there is the atomic bomb that kills for years after the blast.
So Mike Moore makes judgements about a soldier for doing his job well?
I just happen to be a trained sniper. I'm very happy I never had to use the skill but understand that I would have. Without reservation.
Our military people died ensuring the Mike Moores of the world can say what they do.