Act of Valor - Features SPECOP Navy Seal Personnel

[Palehorse]

Act of Valor is a movie that was made using active duty personnel currently serving.

The bulk of the movie's action scenes consist of real life training footage with the use of live ammunition.

How do you feel about this nation's elite class military personnel being featured within a movie?

Does the loss of anonymity concern you?

How about the fact that this actually started out as a SPECOP training film that somehow morphed into a full blown action movie?

What about the fact that paid, on duty, military personnel are being used as a means to obtain personal material wealth for the movies makers?

http://www.actofvalor.com/

[Henry Hawk]

I'm not sure.
The movie looks very interesting.  The behind the scenes video was great.
One point, it may show the world just how BA our military elite truly is....
The loss of anonymity is a great point too....
What do you think?

[Anne]

i couldn't get it to load so I haven't watched it, but generally I would worry about the troops loss of anonymity. I don't like someone getting a lot of money from this. Does it say who approved this? I would think someone high up in the military or government would have to approve the filming.

[The Troll]

i couldn't get it to load so I haven't watched it, but generally I would worry about the troops loss of anonymity. I don't like someone getting a lot of money from this. Does it say who approved this? I would think someone high up in the military or government would have to approve the filming.

  Another thing about nothing.  For years and years Hollywood has worked with the Armed Forces to use air planes, battle ships, aircraft carriers, tanks, guns, submarines and yes soldiers.  It is good for the armed forces and America.

  After "Top Gun" the enlistments to the air force increased tremendously.  All of the war movies has had corporation from the Armed Forces.  How could a war movie be made without their help.  Why worry about nothing. 

[Henry Hawk]

  Another thing about nothing.  For years and years Hollywood has worked with the Armed Forces to use air planes, battle ships, aircraft carriers, tanks, guns, submarines and yes soldiers.  It is good for the armed forces and America.

  After "Top Gun" the enlistments to the air force increased tremendously.  All of the war movies has had corporation from the Armed Forces.  How could a war movie be made without their help.  Why worry about nothing. 

Good points Troll....

[Exterminator]

I'm sure that it was all appropriately vetted by the people in charge and doesn't pose a risk to national security.

[Anne]

I am not particularly worried about national security. I was not able to watch the video so I don'tknow if the personnel were identified. That is what would worry me.

[Palehorse]

Just want to point out that most of the characters in this movie are active military personnel.

Whether or not they are named in the credits I do not know at this time.

[Palehorse]

I'm sure that it was all appropriately vetted by the people in charge and doesn't pose a risk to national security.

Yes. IIRC secnav and JCS signed off on it and left it to the team members surrounding green lighting it. All of them said no out of the box, but eventually went along with it.

[The Troll]

Yes. IIRC secnav and JCS signed off on it and left it to the team members surrounding green lighting it. All of them said no out of the box, but eventually went along with it.

  I know it is something I would like to watch and enjoy.  One thing can be said,  We have one hell of a good military and we can kick ass over any enemy. 

[Palehorse]

  I know it is something I would like to watch and enjoy.  One thing can be said,  We have one hell of a good military and we can kick ass over any enemy. 

Except in Korea, Nam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. . .

[Henry Hawk]

that would only because Washington and the Pentegon will not let them fight to thier fullest capabilities.

[Palehorse]

that would only because Washington and the Pentegon will not let them fight to thier fullest capabilities.

We'll never know that. . .

[Exterminator]

that would only because Washington and the Pentegon will not let them fight to thier fullest capabilities.

Former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, the orchestrator of the Vietnam conflict disagrees.  Here are his lessons from that war that can also be applied to subsequent military actions:

• We misjudged then — and we have since — the geopolitical intentions of our adversaries ... and we exaggerated the dangers to the United States of their actions.
• We viewed the people and leaders of South Vietnam in terms of our own experience ... We totally misjudged the political forces within the country.
• We underestimated the power of nationalism to motivate a people to fight and die for their beliefs and values.
• Our judgments of friend and foe alike reflected our profound ignorance of the history, culture, and politics of the people in the area, and the personalities and habits of their leaders.
• We failed then — and have since — to recognize the limitations of modern, high-technology military equipment, forces and doctrine...
• We failed as well to adapt our military tactics to the task of winning the hearts and minds of people from a totally different culture.
• We failed to draw Congress and the American people into a full and frank discussion and debate of the pros and cons of a large-scale military involvement ... before we initiated the action.
• After the action got under way and unanticipated events forced us off our planned course ... we did not fully explain what was happening and why we were doing what we did.
• We did not recognize that neither our people nor our leaders are omniscient. Our judgment of what is in another people's or country's best interest should be put to the test of open discussion in international forums. We do not have the God-given right to shape every nation in our image or as we choose.
• We did not hold to the principle that U.S. military action ... should be carried out only in conjunction with multinational forces supported fully (and not merely cosmetically) by the international community.
• We failed to recognize that in international affairs, as in other aspects of life, there may be problems for which there are no immediate solutions ... At times, we may have to live with an imperfect, untidy world.
• Underlying many of these errors lay our failure to organize the top echelons of the executive branch to deal effectively with the extraordinarily complex range of political and military issues.

[The Troll]

that would only because Washington and the Pentegon will not let them fight to thier fullest capabilities.

  You sure got that one right.  Johnson planning bombing raid at night in his bedroom and no letting us mine the harbor until it was to late and not bombing the river dikes when it flooded in North Vietnam.  You can't win a war with on arm tied behind our backs.

  Also the United Stated military learned a real lession in Vietnam and you sure seen the difference in the Desert Storm War.  General Norman Schwarzhopt and Air Force General Chuck Horner.  "you box them in and you kill them"