Re: No Country for Old Men - Ending Sucked
- From: davegb <davegbel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 12:05:54 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 5, 7:16 pm, Red Cloud <mmdir2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 4, 9:25 pm, Sable Basilisk <sable_basil...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Here's my question about the movie, suppose Chigurh gets the $ 2
million, what does he do with it? The way he is presented, he never
enjoys anything, he just goes around killing people that his weird
internal rules tell him to kill. If he was on a single revenge spree,
this would sense, but how does someone who presumably has been like
this for all of his adult life survive without being crushed by police
or an armed bystander?
It's called "Open Wild West Shooting Rampage." The US history tells
me that
this kind of mass rampage is normal. It was part of American history
and culture.
This is how they started the nation, and that's what you get. There isnoreason
for it. Just killing more killing without any logic and reason. Thinks
of how many
Native Indians murdered by psychopath White men killer. This gets
worse during
WWII where they drop bomb in Tokyo and killing 80,000 civilian in
three days. More worse, they even used nuclear bombs. IF you can
found the reason why they
nuked Hiroshima, you will found the answer why Chigurh did that.
Seems the two are rather different. As I recall, the bombing of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not a random act of violence. Remember
Pearl Harbor?
While history may judge Truman harshly for his lack of foresight in
dropping the A-bomb, he had valid reasons. I like to think I'd have
done otherwise, but given the circumstances at the time, he did the
best he could. The war had been dragging on for 5 years (almost as
long as the war in Iraq!). The Japanese were clearly losing but
showing no sign of giving up, and the eventual actual battle for Japan
itself was expected to be very bloody. Intelligence estimates were
that at least 100,000 more American troops be lost by the end. I
imagine it was a tough decision, but I haven't any reading on Truman's
personal feelings about it. Nonetheless, there were compelling reasons
to just get it over with, and if that meant a major loss of life to
the Japanese as opposed to a major loss of lives to the Americans,
Truman felt justified. The math alone kind of justified it. It saved
20,000 lives.
If you want to compare that to what was done to the native Americans,
be my guest. But I don't believe any such comparison is apt.
Sometimes, bitterness can distort our perceptions, and even an act of
self-defense and be seen as hostile.
The truth is that if the native Americans had invented the wheel and
gunpowder first, they would have come across the Atlantic and
slaughtered thousands of Europeans and taken their land. Read their
history, war was not unheard of in North America before the white man
arrived. They just hadn't perfected it as the Europeans had. The
Europeans just did it first. Was it right? Of course not. Just how
people are, all over the world. And the losers always claim the moral
high ground while the winners re-write the history books. It hasn't
changed a bit in all of human history. Talk to any good Confederate!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: No Country for Old Men - Ending Sucked
- From: Red Cloud
- Re: No Country for Old Men - Ending Sucked
- References:
- Re: No Country for Old Men - Ending Sucked
- From: Sable Basilisk
- Re: No Country for Old Men - Ending Sucked
- From: Red Cloud
- Re: No Country for Old Men - Ending Sucked
- Prev by Date: 300 (Spoilers)
- Next by Date: Re: TOM HANKS TELLS HOLLYWOOD WHOPPER IN 'CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR'
- Previous by thread: Re: No Country for Old Men - Ending Sucked
- Next by thread: Re: No Country for Old Men - Ending Sucked
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|