Why We Fight [DVD]

Why We Fight explores the rise and consequences of the Military Industrial Complex, as warned about in President Dwight D. Eisenhower's farewell address of 1961: "...we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

This speech, according to director Eugene Jarecki's film, is disturbingly prophetic and his film aims to fulfil another part of Eisenhower's speech: "Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defence with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

Jarecki attempts to achieve Eisenhower's goal of an "alert and knowledgeable citizenry" through the use of many talking heads, from those on both the political right and left, such as John McCain and Richard Perle, Gore Vidal and most interestingly, former CIA analyst turned academic, Chalmers Johnson. Despite the fact that Jarecki was attempting to fulfil an American, Republican president's farewell wishes, he was unable to raise a single dollar towards the funding of this film in the United States, with the exception of the Sundance Institute.

Why We Fight is an important documentary, taking a calm approach to an important subject, through the use of first hand interviews and plentiful archival footage. This deserves to be seen by as many people as possible because when director Jarecki asks American citizens "Why we fight?", the answer in the documentary is uniformly "freedom" but the interviewees are unable to provide any more depth than that, as if the response to the question is some indoctrinated automatic mantra (curiously, "Why We Fight" is also the title of Frank Capra's propaganda films of the Second World War).

This film is highly recommended for those interested in subjects such as the Military Industrial Complex of course, the American Empire, foreign policy and the shift from a Cold War posture to a post-Cold War footing and what is often referred to as pre- and post-9/11 thinking.

This covers the same ground as many US centric post war analyses of the causes of 9/11 and the consequent response with the invasion of Iraq. It explains its view very well, basing as its premise on the prophetic warnings of Eisenhower's leaving speech in 1961. I have seen stronger (and more extreme) films but the this one sticks to its convincing argument. It is depressing as many people in a so called democracy looked helpessly by as greedy and evil individuals seem to do their will with no come back and certainly no conscience.
The only negative with this film is the repetitive piano 'music' in the backgound which almost drove me to throw the DVD player out the windonw. Can any explain why there seems to be a trend in all flims and TV to have constant music on the background? This acts as a distractor to me.

This documentary takes a look at the reasons behind the recent American war in Iraq, drawing on historical parrallels and using a seemingly forgotten speech by Eisenhower, an American hero, where he warned the American people of the threat of a overpowered, overreaching military with strong ties to industry and corporations, and how these intrests can become intertwined.

It draws on a range of contempary interviews with a non partisan list of guests including Republican Presidential Candidate John McCain (i have a new found respect for the man for his insightful and surprisingly frank views on the Military Industrial Complex, and on Donald Rumsfeld!), former CIA agents, Pentagon insiders, New American Century members and historians from a wide range of backgrounds. It uses historical footage and document transcripts to show how military might has been used to expand an American "corporate and economic empire", and how uses it's military to open new free markets to American influence.

What great about it is the strength of the interviews and interviewees and the fact it only reaches it's conclusions towards the end - it is not as in your face as Michael Moore (as much as like his docs) and is more balanced and serious in it's arguments. It does though make for concerning viewing and should serve as a tool to ask the question - What is really happening in the world, and is my government telling me the whole truth, or just their truth?