The documentary Fog of War depicts the life of former Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara. His eleven lessons are used as guidelines in describing his experiences in life, which include: growing up during World War I, being a part of the Cuban Missile Crisis, his involvement in World War II, and his actions of the Vietnam War. While McNamara does not directly say that this film is a film to rationalize his actions while Secretary of Defense, it seems this way particularly with the last five lessons. This film is a documentary to rationalize and apologize for his actions as his life is coming to an end.
McNamara explains that these eleven lessons are rules that are used when making decisions about World War II and the Vietnam War. Although this film is a rationalization of his actions, he does admit that he did make some wrong decisions. The first six lessons – empathize with the enemy, rationality will not save us, there is something beyond oneself, maximize efficiency, proportionality should be a guideline in war, and get data – are all rules for life and war. The seventh lesson, belief and seeing are both often wrong, is where the major shift occurs. At this lesson and beyond, he shifts to rationalizing his actions and almost defending everything he says rather than giving rules for war and life as in the previous six lessons.
The fifth lesson is not a shift in ideas, but it is a shift in tone. Proportionality should be a guideline in war is the fifth lesson, and McNamara uses it to discuss the morality of war; saying that he would rather use a bomb and kill innocent people then send in his own soldiers across the sea to fight. Citing proportionality as a justification to killing so many innocent people in Vietnam rather than focusing on the military personnel. McNamara said that proportionality was about hurting the enemy the most, not necessarily killing the most military soldiers; killing civilians was hurting the enemy the most.
This film is a film in defense of McNamara’s actions as Secretary of Defense, and he does this through his eleven life lessons, but his rationalizations are questioned; particularly those in reference to Agent Orange. Regardless, McNamara uses this film as a way to justify his actions to the public because war is a fog, so complex that humans cannot understand it clearly.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Blog 12 TJM
The documentary Fog of War brings us the life and lessons of former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. The film is angled around the decisions he made during the Vietnam War. To me the whole film feels as though he is trying to rationalize the decisions he made during that time. An example of his rationalizations is the firebombing of Tokyo. The decision led to the death of over 100,000 Japanese, but McNamara said it was one of those decisions made in the "Fog of War." He also goes on to say that if America had lost the war they would have been tried as war criminals because the bombing was essentially acts of war, nonetheless they needed to be done to save American lives.
McNamara explains his eleven points as guidelines he follows. In 2-4, rationality will not save us, there's something beyond oneself, and maximize efficiency, we see life lessons. These three lesson seem to be points that one could use in everyday life. We see the first shift as he moves on to lessons 5-8. These lessons deal with warfare, especially number 5, proportionality should be a guideline in war. Its obvious that he didn't follow his own lesson when he ordered the bombing of Tokyo. The second shift in his reasoning comes in the last three, 9-11. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil, never say never, and you cant change human nature, all seem to deal with rationalizations. It seems to me that McNamara is rationalizing with himself that he could not help the decisions he made, they had to be done.
Hindsight seems to play a big role in this documentary as well. McNamara looks back on events and tells of his decisions, knowing he cannot change them but looking back seeing a new light. He also spoke of the Fog of War. The decisions made at the time were all made in a time when all you could count on was the fact that no matter what decision was made lives were going to be lost. Through the whole interview McNamara seemingly tries to repent for the thing that he did and the decisions that were made that cost hundreds of thousands of lives in the Vietnam War.
McNamara explains his eleven points as guidelines he follows. In 2-4, rationality will not save us, there's something beyond oneself, and maximize efficiency, we see life lessons. These three lesson seem to be points that one could use in everyday life. We see the first shift as he moves on to lessons 5-8. These lessons deal with warfare, especially number 5, proportionality should be a guideline in war. Its obvious that he didn't follow his own lesson when he ordered the bombing of Tokyo. The second shift in his reasoning comes in the last three, 9-11. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil, never say never, and you cant change human nature, all seem to deal with rationalizations. It seems to me that McNamara is rationalizing with himself that he could not help the decisions he made, they had to be done.
Hindsight seems to play a big role in this documentary as well. McNamara looks back on events and tells of his decisions, knowing he cannot change them but looking back seeing a new light. He also spoke of the Fog of War. The decisions made at the time were all made in a time when all you could count on was the fact that no matter what decision was made lives were going to be lost. Through the whole interview McNamara seemingly tries to repent for the thing that he did and the decisions that were made that cost hundreds of thousands of lives in the Vietnam War.
Blog 12 ARB
In The Fog of War Robert McNamara explains to viewers his life experiences as the Secretary of Defense during the Cold War, Cuban Missile Crisis, and part of Vietnam, also his involvement in WWII and how he was the first ever president of the Ford Motor Company who wasn't part of the family. This film explains 11 rules about war and gives reason why some people make the decisions they do while in combat.
The 11 Rules are:
1. Empathize with the enemy.
2. Rationality will not save us.
3. There is something beyond oneself
4. Maximize efficiency.
5. Proportionality should be a guideline in war.
6. Get the data.
7. Belief and seeing are both often wrong.
8. Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.
9. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil.
10. Never say never.
11. You can't change human nature.
McNamara explains to us that these rules can and are used when people make war decisions such as dropping the atomic bomb in world war two or using agent orange in Vietnam, but he does acknowledge we have made some wrong decisions. One idea that he brings up is proportionality which was not seen during the fire bombing of Tokyo. McNamara argues that proportionality should be part of war so that we don't kill 100,000 women and children and men in one night. We shouldn't be killing innocent people in order to win the war. I is clear the McNamara used these guidelines and he suggests that everyone should use them, but really main guidelines are the first six rules as they specifically pertain to actions in the war and the last five rules is where we see a shift in McNamara's ideas because these five rules pertain more to human nature and explaining why people make the decisions that they do and there isn't much you can do to change it but trying to limit it or control it is what the first six rules do.
The 11 Rules are:
1. Empathize with the enemy.
2. Rationality will not save us.
3. There is something beyond oneself
4. Maximize efficiency.
5. Proportionality should be a guideline in war.
6. Get the data.
7. Belief and seeing are both often wrong.
8. Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.
9. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil.
10. Never say never.
11. You can't change human nature.
McNamara explains to us that these rules can and are used when people make war decisions such as dropping the atomic bomb in world war two or using agent orange in Vietnam, but he does acknowledge we have made some wrong decisions. One idea that he brings up is proportionality which was not seen during the fire bombing of Tokyo. McNamara argues that proportionality should be part of war so that we don't kill 100,000 women and children and men in one night. We shouldn't be killing innocent people in order to win the war. I is clear the McNamara used these guidelines and he suggests that everyone should use them, but really main guidelines are the first six rules as they specifically pertain to actions in the war and the last five rules is where we see a shift in McNamara's ideas because these five rules pertain more to human nature and explaining why people make the decisions that they do and there isn't much you can do to change it but trying to limit it or control it is what the first six rules do.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Blog 12 CG
The Fog Of War is a documentary style film telling the story of Robert McNamara, former US Secretary of Defense. He talks about his experiences as president of Ford Motor Company during both World Wars and the Cuban Missle Crisis. These unforgettable events shaped his life. They taught him how to make choices in crisis situations, how to meet lifes challenges. He gives a list of eleven things that his lifes experience has brought him.
1. Empathize with the enemy.
2. Rationality will not save us.
3. There is something beyond oneself
4. Maximize efficiency.
5. Proportionality should be a guideline in war.
6. Get the data.
7. Belief and seeing are both often wrong.
8. Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.
9. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil.
10. Never say never.
11. You can't change human nature.
Why bother making a set of rules anyways?I think McNamara used it as a way to explain his reasoning for his actions. I think he may feel the need to apologize to people for things that happened in the war during his time. He may feel responsible because he had such influence. Also, he was brought under a good amount of scrutiny on some of his decisions, and I think this may be his clairification or the explanation of his logic.
I think there are two definite idea shifts, making three idea groups. The first of the groups is the first three lessons. They all speak to the humanity side of the audience. Number three even brings up religious aspects, which is a huge part of human culture. The second group consists of lessons four through six. This group is very mechanical, basic, definite. "Maximize efficiency" seems almost robotic. The third and final group is made up of lessons seven through eleven. All these lessons were big picture ideas. They were more philosophical. For example, rule number nine brings up the idea of good vs evil. Also, the final lesson mentions human nature and change, two hot philosophical topics.
1. Empathize with the enemy.
2. Rationality will not save us.
3. There is something beyond oneself
4. Maximize efficiency.
5. Proportionality should be a guideline in war.
6. Get the data.
7. Belief and seeing are both often wrong.
8. Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.
9. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil.
10. Never say never.
11. You can't change human nature.
Why bother making a set of rules anyways?I think McNamara used it as a way to explain his reasoning for his actions. I think he may feel the need to apologize to people for things that happened in the war during his time. He may feel responsible because he had such influence. Also, he was brought under a good amount of scrutiny on some of his decisions, and I think this may be his clairification or the explanation of his logic.
I think there are two definite idea shifts, making three idea groups. The first of the groups is the first three lessons. They all speak to the humanity side of the audience. Number three even brings up religious aspects, which is a huge part of human culture. The second group consists of lessons four through six. This group is very mechanical, basic, definite. "Maximize efficiency" seems almost robotic. The third and final group is made up of lessons seven through eleven. All these lessons were big picture ideas. They were more philosophical. For example, rule number nine brings up the idea of good vs evil. Also, the final lesson mentions human nature and change, two hot philosophical topics.
Blog#12:FoW-RGV
Through the interviews portrayed in Fog of War, Robert McNamara tells of some of the most significant parts of his life, and he describes how these moments lead into his participation in the Vietnam War as Secretary of Defense. McNamara discusses his education, his marriage, his military experience, and his job experience after college before introducing his role in the government and the topic of the war. The descriptions he offers of his earlier life give the audience background on the unfamiliar areas of his personal life as well as the setting in which he grew up and lived the majority of his life.
The reason for Robert McNamara's presence in the film is the fulfillment of his desire to defend his actions as Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam War. More than thirty years after the end of the war, most people recognize that a considerable amount of corruption was present within the US government at the time. It has become evident as time has progressed that much was kept from the American people in regard to the status of the war and the accomplishment of American troops. When dealing with this subject, two events that immediately come to mind are the My Lai massacre and the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Now that the public has been made aware of much of what truly took place in Vietnam, many people see numerous negative outcomes of the United States' participation in the war. This perspective has caused many people to wonder why American involved itself in this war and what positive purpose did it serve.
In attempt to justify his actions as Secretary of Defense, McNamara attempts to present his own perspective through his interviews in Fog of War. He explains that not all the knowledge that is available to the public now was available to him during the war. McNamara also attempts to portray his course of action as the right, ethical way of going about things given the circumstances he was in and the stress he was under. His interviews in this documentary are essentially composed of his personal rationalizations about his actions that aim to downplay the stark reality of the war and remove personal guilt that he still carries.
McNamara composes a list of eleven lessons that can be learned from his life experiences. There is a shift in the tone of these lessons after the first three lessons. The first three lessons, "empathize with your enemy, "rationality will not save us," and "there's something beyond one's self," deal with conceptual, ethical issues that one can encounter during life. He advises the audience to view problems from other perspectives in order to make good, moral decisions because of responsibilities people have to themselves and society. On the other hand, the next three lessons, "maximize efficiency," proportionality should be a guideline in war," and "get the data," are more concerned with quantitative, factual topics. In the documentary, numerous images of statistics are shown within these three lessons as to demonstrate the numbers used by government officials in wartime. These lessons also seem to deal with effective ways of waging war successfully. For example, McNamara discusses the necessity of firebombing 100,000 civilians despite its unethical nature. This lesson is an obvious representation of the self-contradiction present in McNamara's fourth, fifth, and sixth lessons because an argument cannot be made that the United States empathized with its enemy through its merciless killing of 100,000 noncombatants.
The reason for Robert McNamara's presence in the film is the fulfillment of his desire to defend his actions as Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam War. More than thirty years after the end of the war, most people recognize that a considerable amount of corruption was present within the US government at the time. It has become evident as time has progressed that much was kept from the American people in regard to the status of the war and the accomplishment of American troops. When dealing with this subject, two events that immediately come to mind are the My Lai massacre and the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Now that the public has been made aware of much of what truly took place in Vietnam, many people see numerous negative outcomes of the United States' participation in the war. This perspective has caused many people to wonder why American involved itself in this war and what positive purpose did it serve.
In attempt to justify his actions as Secretary of Defense, McNamara attempts to present his own perspective through his interviews in Fog of War. He explains that not all the knowledge that is available to the public now was available to him during the war. McNamara also attempts to portray his course of action as the right, ethical way of going about things given the circumstances he was in and the stress he was under. His interviews in this documentary are essentially composed of his personal rationalizations about his actions that aim to downplay the stark reality of the war and remove personal guilt that he still carries.
McNamara composes a list of eleven lessons that can be learned from his life experiences. There is a shift in the tone of these lessons after the first three lessons. The first three lessons, "empathize with your enemy, "rationality will not save us," and "there's something beyond one's self," deal with conceptual, ethical issues that one can encounter during life. He advises the audience to view problems from other perspectives in order to make good, moral decisions because of responsibilities people have to themselves and society. On the other hand, the next three lessons, "maximize efficiency," proportionality should be a guideline in war," and "get the data," are more concerned with quantitative, factual topics. In the documentary, numerous images of statistics are shown within these three lessons as to demonstrate the numbers used by government officials in wartime. These lessons also seem to deal with effective ways of waging war successfully. For example, McNamara discusses the necessity of firebombing 100,000 civilians despite its unethical nature. This lesson is an obvious representation of the self-contradiction present in McNamara's fourth, fifth, and sixth lessons because an argument cannot be made that the United States empathized with its enemy through its merciless killing of 100,000 noncombatants.
Blog #12 AEE
Fog of War, a film by Errol Morris, offers an alternative view to the harshly critiqued decisions involving foreign wars and tragic bombings. It is an hour and half long documentary featuring Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense under Linden B. Johnson and JFK, who played arguably the most crucial role in making decisions concerning the Vietnam War as well as WWII bombings. The voices of the solders and the protestors overrule the voices of the politicians behind the decisions. McNamara is a statistical guy whose job sometimes demanded he calculate out how to cause the most destruction to a company. In this film McNamara speaks for all the politicians as he speaks to explain, justify and rationalize war decisions of the mid 20th century.
McNamara was only scheduled to be interviewed initially for a hour long special, but his interview transformed into an eight hour conversation. This film was made first of all because the topic was interesting. McNamara offers an alternative prospective on a highly controversial topic. Looking just at the initial interview that turned into an 8-hour conversation, it is clear that there is a lot to be exposed about these decisions. McNamara agreed to make this film because he was given almost two hours to talk through and explain things like the Cuban Missile Crisis and Agent Orange. Morris decided to make the documentary so that the viewers could discover the philosophy within the minds of the politicians that they harshly critique. Together they open up the viewer to a new outlook and whole new set of questions to ask regarding the “shoulds” of war. “What makes it moral if you win but immoral if you lose?” The film exposes the conflicts of interests and the double standards which politicians have to sort through to find what they reasonably feel is the best solution. I don’t believe though that the film is meant to justify the actions of war-time criminals (and arguably it doesn’t justify them) but rather give voice to an area that isn’t often heard first hand. Morris is also looking to make a statement about the uncertainty of right and wrong. By showing the viewer scenes like a collection of McNamara’s authorizing signatures, he is accentuating the blame that is often placed on the ex-secretary of defense. He does this not to put blame on McNamara but rather to bring to light the difficulty of justification.
McNamara battles through a lot of different emotions during the lengthy interview. Initially it seems as though he is presenting the logical, numerical side of the war-decisions. Statistics and equations which prove that, by some standard, the mass killings are okay. During the beginning we see lessons like #4 “Maximize Efficiency”. Shortly after though his point seems to get confused this is because he is stuck between pride, rationalization, guilt and denial. When he enters in Lesson # 7 “Belief and seeing are often both wrong”, and more importantly the Vietnam War he begins to tangent a bit. The reality that data isn’t 100% is exposed and therefore the platform behind all the violent war decisions is weakened. From here on McNamara seems to explain the war as it applies in life. The war truths become war-related life lessons, such as Lesson 10 “Never say Never”.
McNamara was only scheduled to be interviewed initially for a hour long special, but his interview transformed into an eight hour conversation. This film was made first of all because the topic was interesting. McNamara offers an alternative prospective on a highly controversial topic. Looking just at the initial interview that turned into an 8-hour conversation, it is clear that there is a lot to be exposed about these decisions. McNamara agreed to make this film because he was given almost two hours to talk through and explain things like the Cuban Missile Crisis and Agent Orange. Morris decided to make the documentary so that the viewers could discover the philosophy within the minds of the politicians that they harshly critique. Together they open up the viewer to a new outlook and whole new set of questions to ask regarding the “shoulds” of war. “What makes it moral if you win but immoral if you lose?” The film exposes the conflicts of interests and the double standards which politicians have to sort through to find what they reasonably feel is the best solution. I don’t believe though that the film is meant to justify the actions of war-time criminals (and arguably it doesn’t justify them) but rather give voice to an area that isn’t often heard first hand. Morris is also looking to make a statement about the uncertainty of right and wrong. By showing the viewer scenes like a collection of McNamara’s authorizing signatures, he is accentuating the blame that is often placed on the ex-secretary of defense. He does this not to put blame on McNamara but rather to bring to light the difficulty of justification.
McNamara battles through a lot of different emotions during the lengthy interview. Initially it seems as though he is presenting the logical, numerical side of the war-decisions. Statistics and equations which prove that, by some standard, the mass killings are okay. During the beginning we see lessons like #4 “Maximize Efficiency”. Shortly after though his point seems to get confused this is because he is stuck between pride, rationalization, guilt and denial. When he enters in Lesson # 7 “Belief and seeing are often both wrong”, and more importantly the Vietnam War he begins to tangent a bit. The reality that data isn’t 100% is exposed and therefore the platform behind all the violent war decisions is weakened. From here on McNamara seems to explain the war as it applies in life. The war truths become war-related life lessons, such as Lesson 10 “Never say Never”.
Blog 12 MMW
The documentary The Fog of War is a film about a former US Secretary of Defense, Robert S. McNamara. McNamara discusses some of his experiences from childhood in World War II, The Cuban Missile Crisis, Working at the Ford Motor Company and the Vietnam War. This movie is broken up into 11 lessons that McNamara teaches. All of these lessons relate to war but can also be applied to real life.
The Eleven Lessons:
1. Empathize with your enemy.
2. Rationality will not save us.
3. There is something beyond one's self.
4. Maximize efficiency.
5. Proportionality should be a guideline in war.
6. Get the data.
7. Belief and seeing are both often wrong.
8. Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.
9. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil.
10. Never say never.
11. You can't change human nature.
I believe that McNamara’s reasoning behind the film is to give an explanation to the actions he took in terms of the Vietnam War.
There is a shift in the lessons after lesson 5. The first five mostly pertain to war and how to go about it successfully. They are more like rules than lessons. They speak of fighting for ones country and realizing what you are there to do. Then next set of rules is a more general set of rules. It is about life in general. Lessons 7,8,and 10 are more mental lessons to live by. They are guidelines one must follow in order to stay sane throughout war.
The Eleven Lessons:
1. Empathize with your enemy.
2. Rationality will not save us.
3. There is something beyond one's self.
4. Maximize efficiency.
5. Proportionality should be a guideline in war.
6. Get the data.
7. Belief and seeing are both often wrong.
8. Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.
9. In order to do good, you may have to engage in evil.
10. Never say never.
11. You can't change human nature.
I believe that McNamara’s reasoning behind the film is to give an explanation to the actions he took in terms of the Vietnam War.
There is a shift in the lessons after lesson 5. The first five mostly pertain to war and how to go about it successfully. They are more like rules than lessons. They speak of fighting for ones country and realizing what you are there to do. Then next set of rules is a more general set of rules. It is about life in general. Lessons 7,8,and 10 are more mental lessons to live by. They are guidelines one must follow in order to stay sane throughout war.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)