> BTW, why do you like _Three Kings_? The movie is an argument for a
> "humanitarian intervention"! Is Carl Remick the only LBO-Talker
> who didn't
> like the film?
>
> Yoshie
While I may be in favor of "humanitarian intervention" on occasion, this movie was not about that. It was much more a slam on the US government for collaborating with Saddam to suppress the internal opposition to his regime. The movie highlights the wealth of the Kuwaitis and the fact that the war was about oil, not humanitarianism - this is symbolized when an Iraqi torturer pours oil down a soldier's mouth. I would not this is probably the most sympathetic treatment of an enemy torturer of a US solider you will ever see in a US movie.
And the ultimate heroic act of the GI heroes of the film is not an attack on Iraqis, but instead is helping Iraqi rebels escape the clutches of the US MILITARY, who are ready at the end of the film to turn the refugees over to the Iraqi military. The highlighted evil of the film is the corrupt collaboration of the US and Iraqi regimes.
-- Nathan Newman