I'm gonna take some shit for this...

So after a late start, I finally finished Hearts and Minds (I would be worried about the late post, but I know Slothy is still gonna be incapacitated by his 26 odd miles of self-effacement, so I should be able to deftly dodge most of his attacks tomorrow). Two things immediately come to mind:

a.) The US was an asshole (or were it's citizens collective assholes?) for the duration of the war

and b.) That was a bloody brilliant piece of propaganda.

Now, before you stone me, let me explain.

The modern perception of the Vietnam War closely follows this film. The US was a hubristic, power-hungry nation that bit off more than it could chew from someone else's plate. We were scared shitless that we'd lose ground- any ground, especially after Sputnik- to the Ruskies so we launched what boiled down to being a full scale invasion in Vietnam. We committed mass atrocities, burned villages, murdered women and children, and even had the gall to say it was inconsequential to the Vietnamese, all in a losing war effort (which we deftly covered up and euphonized so well that many current US History classes but skim over said "advisory conflict"). All of that is present in this movie. Stirring scenes of Viet families weeping for their relatives juxtaposed with arrogant American military leaders makes for great pathos favoring the anti-war effort. The inclusion of all the war-footage creates a credible ethos. Statistics readily work as logos. The movie does exactly what it sets out to do: make the viewer detest the US's involvement in Vietnam without any argument.

That last clause, my fellow classmates, is what made me double-take. No side in a conflict should be taken without some sort of argument. The reason I dislike many documentaries is because many of them are one sided. They fail to adequately represent both sides of a conflict, and shamelessly champion their cause to the detriment of the other. During war-time, such informational pyrite is better known as propaganda.

It amazed me that so many of you were able to meticulously list the ways in which the director manipulated the audience with rhetorical devices, yet still ended up being worked by said devices worse than a 8 year old's silly putty. Yes, the US did awful things in 'Nam and yes, they lied about them at home, but there is another part of the truth being repressed which is not equally represented here.

The US, while going extremely overboard in 'Nam, did have a legitimate threat in Soviet Russia. The Soviets had enough nuclear armaments to eradicate the US, and vice versa. In 1962, the Ruskies housed nukes in Cuba within striking distance of the US. While the Cuban Missile Crisis did not amount to any physical damage, it showed how dangerous the USSR's lesser allies could be as a launch point for nukes. It was with this image fresh in his mind that Uncle Sam had his knee-jerk reaction to the then relatively minor disturbance in Vietnam.

The US committed many horrendous atrocities in 'Nam, and then lied to cover them up back home. Only a willing fool would contradict that, and after watching this film I'd say even the willingly obtuse would agree with that statement. My assertion that this film is as much propaganda as the mock communism TV commercials lies in its disregard for the entire truth, instead focusing only on one portion of it.

Ok, I put on my helmet. Now you can start throwing stuff.