Comments on: An illogical ‘Hurt Locker’ review

By: Kourtney

Kourtney — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:48:35 +0000

The FAIL baby with its head in the stroller always gets me. It’s MY drug.

By: Adam

Adam — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 20:53:21 +0000

“Nothing about fighting for something bigger than oneself, quashing evil around the world, or saving innocent, oppressed people from tyranny.”

To be fair, Marlow never claims that the above accurately describes the true motives of soldiers in the military or their commanding officers. Rather, he implies that a good war movie should be grounded in these ideals, whether accurate or not. The conservative right doesn’t see anything wrong with propaganda so long as it’s pro-American.

By: Mary

Mary — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 05:47:27 +0000

I don’t think I know anyone personally who joined any military branch because they “were motivated by something upbeat or inspirational.” Most of them join because they need money or a way to attend college. Anyway, what exactly is upbeat about war? I can’t imagine anyone going into battle with a smile on their face and without death on their mind.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:36:09 +0000

How about a sticker that says, “War is not the answer to question #25. The answer is (B).”

By: Nicholas D

Nicholas D — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:30:11 +0000

I think Steve just wants someone on the Internet to tell him that he’s right.

But I’m not going to because [unnecessary ad hominem insult deleted].

If Edwin were alive today, I’m pretty sure he’d say he was okay with the Civil War. I’m just sayin’.

By: Ian Cook

Ian Cook — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:20:00 +0000

I need a bumper sticker that says “War is rarely the answer.”

Ha! Ha!. Some people’s kids.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 18:58:27 +0000

I see your point about the difference between ignoring context (like Marlow does) and filling in details without any context to go on. So you filled in details based on your own beliefs (not logic, sorry). There’s nothing wrong with that, but you stated it as though it is a fact that that’s how everyone else feels, too. To you, “War is not the answer” means war should be a last resort and should not be preemptive. But you stated it as though that is the official, generally accepted meaning of the slogan. I maintain that there is no official, generally accepted meaning of this particular slogan, and your statement should have therefore been presented as personal opinion or belief rather than fact. It is true that some statements are obviously statements of opinion and don’t need to be called out as such (e.g., “that’s a great book”), but I don’t think that this is one of those statements.

And for evidence that at least some people hold the irrational belief that war is NEVER the answer, see the lyrics to Edwin Starr’s “War.” He states over and over that war is good for “Absolutely nothing.”

By: Eric D. Snider

Eric D. Snider — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:32:53 +0000

Alexander Marlow tells us that the epigraph really means that war is bad. And Eric D Snider tells us that the bumper sticker really means that war should not be the first resort. Is one less guilty than the other of jumping to conclusions about what other people really meant to say?

In order to get that “war is a drug” really means “war is bad,” he has to ignore the rest of the quote, about how war is addictive. The author provided him with a conclusion, but Marlow jumps to a different one anyway. The bumper sticker, on the other hand, doesn’t have any additional context, so one has to use logic to deduce its fuller meaning. It’s silly to use something as shallow as a bumper sticker to determine someone’s philosophy anyway, but that’s what Marlow does.

But I guess it’s possible that some people with “war is not the answer” bumper stickers believe that war is NEVER the answer, under any circumstances, no matter what, even if we’re attacked and need to defend ourselves. That belief isn’t rational, but I guess some people might have it.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:23:10 +0000

�’War is not the answer’ is a statement against preemptive wars, against choosing war as your first option instead of your last.”

By: Casey

Casey — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 07:48:02 +0000

Dangit, I was hoping this site was going to be a goldmine like Conservapedia. Instead it’s just a filled with dull reviews with occasional broad ideological barbs. Of course, the writers have conveniently co-opted every desirable “good ol-fashioned” American ideal as “conservative”, obviously in stark contrast to the godless, hedonistic, ne’er-do-well Hollywood liberals with their dastardly schemes. It’s just an exercise in the broadest kind of strawmen arguments possible, but presented in an earnest way that annoys rather than entertains.