I can only assume the 'official' Amazon reviewer has a political take on this. The film is powerful high drama but like all drama, takes themes from real life and extrapolates & enhances them to make a point. You may not like the point, but it doesnt make it unbelievable or invalid. In this case, the point is that it is possible for diplomats and politicians to behave venally and dishonestly when they believe 'the greater good' can come from sacrificing a good man, or their own careers are put at stake. Likewise men whose profession is to kill in our defence, can develop a code of ethics and bravery in the face of danger and death that perhaps surpasses any other. Not in all cases maybe, but it happens and it should not be illegitimate for film to explore such themes.
And rarely has it been done in as timely a manner as it was here. The film was made in 2000 and, watching it just today I was put in mind not only of the (then) coming storm of 911, but also of the lies and obfuscation over the Tripoli embassy attack. If anything justifies the presumptions of the film, that does.
The combat scenes both in Vietnam and Yemen have an intensity that effectively underlines the legal misjudgements and diplomatic mendacity after the event, and add to the sense of a massive rolling injustice perpetrated by a corrupt system that cannot bring istelf to address the issues faced by the men we ask to do our dirty work, and the scope of the conflicts they face