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”.