Click to go to Forum Home Click to go to maXbimmer Home

Go Back   maXbimmer Forums > Misc > Off-topic
User Name
Password


Welcome to Maxbimmer.com!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 02-23-2009, 03:20 PM   #46
MiroE36
6th Gear Member
 
MiroE36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,896


is it a crime to say I never watched it?
__________________
1992 325i / Briliant rot - SOLD @ 301,000km
1998 318is / Arktic silber - SOLD @ 207,000km
2007 335i / Jet Black - CURRENT @ 28,000 km

MiroE36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 03:23 PM   #47
simplycars
6th Gear Member
 
simplycars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oakville / Mississauga
Posts: 1,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arash View Post
you're wrong here. the mistake of Americans goes way before the revolution the time when Iran had developed a perfectly healthy democracy and they overthrew it. they have even publicly admitted their mistake. when the revolution started there was no stop, no matter who came to help. 99% of the people were against the monarchy, they would have to kill them all off to stop the movement.
If I remember correctly Pahlavis were in power since mid-1920s.
Internal developments of few years prior to the revolution were mainly result of the Pahlavi's policy of pro-western democracy that was seen as threat by the Islamic fundamentalists. US was backing Pahlavi (they even got F-14s that they never used), but once Shah became more of dictator and after few violent events during early demonstrations, US decided to wait and see what happens - the whole country was turned upside down.
__________________
simplycars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 03:30 PM   #48
Castel
4th Gear Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 519
Posts: 876
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMW_7 View Post
It a typical american propaghanda film, i hated it...Not only it's very racist movie, it completely ignores the involvement of malaysians, pakistanis and not to mention other UN nations. What a shame 80% of americans who saw this movie accept it as truth.

At least Blood Diamond was executed a bit better
Thank you! i was hoping someone would point that out before i had to do it.
Castel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 03:36 PM   #49
Arash
6th Gear Member
 
Arash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by simplycars View Post
If I remember correctly Pahlavis were in power since mid-1920s.
Internal developments of few years prior to the revolution were mainly result of the Pahlavi's policy of pro-western democracy that was seen as threat by the Islamic fundamentalists. US was backing Pahlavi (they even got F-14s that they never used), but once Shah became more of dictator and after few violent events during early demonstrations, US decided to wait and see what happens - the whole country was turned upside down.
did you say pro-western DEMOCRACY? lol main reason for the revolution was due to a LACK of democracy, I would like to know where you are getting your facts from? And what were Americans supposed to do when the revolutionary movements started? Not like they didn’t interfere? Do you know SAVAK (the Iranian intelligence agency during shah to counter revolution) they were trained INSIDE the US by the CIA to fight the revolutionary movement, what else could the americans do? Send troops inside Iran? Do you know how many Iranians lost their lives due to revolution? NOTHING could’ve been done to stop it, the movement was too powerful, the entire population was actively involved, and it wasn’t just the fundamentalists, there were many many many other groups involved which were all imprisoned and/or killed after Khomeini assumed power. This is why you see the fundamentalists in power today.
Arash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 03:52 PM   #50
simplycars
6th Gear Member
 
simplycars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oakville / Mississauga
Posts: 1,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arash View Post
did you say pro-western DEMOCRACY? lol main reason for the revolution was due to a LACK of democracy, I would like to know where you are getting your facts from? And what were Americans supposed to do when the revolutionary movements started? Not like they didnít interfere? Do you know SAVAK (the Iranian intelligence agency during shah to counter revolution) they were trained INSIDE the US by the CIA to fight the revolutionary movement, what else could the americans do? Send troops inside Iran? Do you know how many Iranians lost their lives due to revolution? NOTHING couldíve been done to stop it, the movement was too powerful, the entire population was actively involved, and it wasnít just the fundamentalists, there were many many many other groups involved which were all imprisoned and/or killed after Khomeini assumed power. This is why you see the fundamentalists in power today.
Shah over time became a totalitarian leader but introduced democratic concepts (e.g women rights) and his policy was more pro-western - hence he received help from Western Europe and US. Shah once said that he attempted to create monarchy European style, but instead it became more dictatorial.

US backed Shah and even helped to remove his opponents. SAVAK was the main tool of the regime and as most of the military/police was trained by the US.

Main problem was that people were unhappy with Shah but not completely pro-Khomeini. If US would provide military support to the government (while forcing the Shah to abdicate) revolution would end up being a change in the government and not beginnig of islamic state.
__________________
simplycars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 04:03 PM   #51
Arash
6th Gear Member
 
Arash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by simplycars View Post
Shah over time became a totalitarian leader but introduced democratic concepts (e.g women rights) and his policy was more pro-western - hence he received help from Western Europe and US. Shah once said that he attempted to create monarchy European style, but instead it became more dictatorial.

US backed Shah and even helped to remove his opponents. SAVAK was the main tool of the regime and as most of the military/police was trained by the US.

Main problem was that people were unhappy with Shah but not completely pro-Khomeini. If US would provide military support to the government (while forcing the Shah to abdicate) revolution would end up being a change in the government and not beginnig of islamic state.
were you actually there? the military HAD TO surrender, there was no other option, they couldn't open fire on their own people and people wanted a new government, they did not want anything to do anymore with a monarchy. the US couldn't come in and block a democratic movement AGAIN, in view of international community. Even if they did, nothing would have come out of it. they made their mistake way before by overthrowing mosadegh, which had a HUGE part in the revolution and the subsequent hostage crisis.
Arash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 04:37 PM   #52
simplycars
6th Gear Member
 
simplycars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oakville / Mississauga
Posts: 1,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arash View Post
were you actually there? the military HAD TO surrender, there was no other option, they couldn't open fire on their own people and people wanted a new government, they did not want anything to do anymore with a monarchy. the US couldn't come in and block a democratic movement AGAIN, in view of international community. Even if they did, nothing would have come out of it. they made their mistake way before by overthrowing mosadegh, which had a HUGE part in the revolution and the subsequent hostage crisis.
If I were there I would be dead :-)

The military was in the worst situation as they didn't take sides.
I would not call Khomeini part of the democratic movement.
Shah and US made the mistake by not eliminating Khomeini.
__________________
simplycars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 05:04 PM   #53
TNation
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto/Calgary
Posts: 1,908
i just don't get anyone that says this movie is a propaganda movie for the U.S. It makes no sense to me. It shows the US fighting a battle that was out of control against armed militia's who had little skill and plenty of AK-47's to fight.
The movie was really well done. It shows the death and survival of US soldiers better then most other movies, and it used soldiers that fought in the actual battle to help film it.
TNation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 05:09 PM   #54
Fel
Not Banned
 
Fel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Schomberg
Posts: 4,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNation View Post
i just don't get anyone that says this movie is a propaganda movie for the U.S. It makes no sense to me. It shows the US fighting a battle that was out of control against armed militia's who had little skill and plenty of AK-47's to fight.
The movie was really well done. It shows the death and survival of US soldiers better then most other movies, and it used soldiers that fought in the actual battle to help film it.
It's propaganda because it features a bunch of US soldiers generally being badasses and prevailing over their plight. it glorifies their actions despite the fact that the actual events were different than what was depicted in the film. It is not a documentary, it is a glossy retelling of a historical event filtered through an American camera lens. It strives to prove that even under the harshest conditions, the brilliant US armed forces will prevail and save the day. Propaganda.

Urah.

That being said, it is a good bit of entertainment. But lets not get all caught up in the "message". That's what they want you to think.
__________________
Fel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 05:25 PM   #55
SamE30e
6th Gear Member
 
SamE30e's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Milton
Posts: 2,875
I watched it last night, it was on t.v. Awesome movie.
__________________
91 318is - M50NV (gone)
02 WRB Subaru WRX EJ207 forged, 320 AWHP stock turbo.
85 - 325
02 325i Sedan
SamE30e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 05:30 PM   #56
TNation
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto/Calgary
Posts: 1,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fel View Post
It's propaganda because it features a bunch of US soldiers generally being badasses and prevailing over their plight. it glorifies their actions despite the fact that the actual events were different than what was depicted in the film. It is not a documentary, it is a glossy retelling of a historical event filtered through an American camera lens. It strives to prove that even under the harshest conditions, the brilliant US armed forces will prevail and save the day. Propaganda.

Urah.

That being said, it is a good bit of entertainment. But lets not get all caught up in the "message". That's what they want you to think.
its essentially a very very close adaption of the book, and if you've read the book, it interviews many many soldiers who fought in Operation Gothic Serpent and what actually happened. I didn't see any American soldiers being "badasses".. .. I saw them trying to rescue two downed copters, and to get the hell out of Mogadishu. It shows the UN as helping to save the day, and teamwork as being an integral part of their fight, not merely the US armed forces as 'saving the day.' Not saying you specifically, because I agree it has some American influence in its filming, but too many people have an anti-American bias, anti-United States view and its pathetic.
TNation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2009, 07:24 PM   #57
AceOfSpades
♠ ♠ ♠
 
AceOfSpades's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Creston, Iowa
Posts: 4,171
^^ where's the quote in your sig from?
AceOfSpades is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 03:18 AM   #58
craigIS
A.K.A. crossfire291
 
craigIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chatham
Posts: 2,044
Send a message via MSN to craigIS
Quote:
Originally Posted by simplycars View Post
AK-47 is very innacurate and very simple to operate and service hence being the perfect weapon for untrained "soldiers".
^^^the AK-47 is a crap AR....your right in saying its perfect for the untrained soldier. the rifle being as inaccurate as it is would help someone out if they cant aim, but if they cant handle the recoil then they are up shits creek.

IMO i think the US had a pretty big part in WW1 and 2. i dont think that the allies would have lost the war if the US didnt jump in. it may have taken a year or 2 longer to defeat Japan, but i think it was achievable......hard as eff, but achievable. then again maybe not. just my opinion.
__________________


flickr
craigIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2009, 03:25 AM   #59
craigIS
A.K.A. crossfire291
 
craigIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chatham
Posts: 2,044
Send a message via MSN to craigIS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fel View Post
It's propaganda because it features a bunch of US soldiers generally being badasses and prevailing over their plight. it glorifies their actions despite the fact that the actual events were different than what was depicted in the film. It is not a documentary, it is a glossy retelling of a historical event filtered through an American camera lens. It strives to prove that even under the harshest conditions, the brilliant US armed forces will prevail and save the day. Propaganda.

Urah.

That being said, it is a good bit of entertainment. But lets not get all caught up in the "message". That's what they want you to think.
need my eyes checked, i didnt see this one......

Fel - i agree.....great movie, but its just propaganda. there has been so much propaganda since the WW2 movies made back in the day, the US fighting in a battle that they never fought in, so now its hard for ppl to see that just because a movie is based on an event, doesnt make it a factual film.
__________________


flickr
craigIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Maxbimmer Copyright 2001 - 2015