Lone Survivor, the movie.

Originally Posted by WillBrink

I think the only people that have a real right to take issue here - have a dog in this fight - on details being altered, are those in the community such things can directly impact/impacted. My interpretation is that in their view, it was a FUBAR op from the start, and got good people killed, and the end result is a book and movie putting those involved in a positive light to the degree they are.

Obviously, they don't take issue with details/facts being altered for OPSEC/PERSEC reasons or even if the guns carried, etc are accurate.

That's strictly my interpretation of it. Questioning the details is out of my lane and above my pat grade, so strictly my interpretation of it as an outsider.

Personally, any books of the ilk, I tend to take with a big grain of salt knowing human nature, the malleability of memory, the need to alter details to protect PERSEC/OPSEC, protect egos, editors taking liberty to "spice" up the book, input/changes from co authors or ghost writers, and all the other confounding things that can and will enter the equation in the end product we see.

Obviously, some are going to be much closer to the factual events than others, but unless you're actually there in some form, and or talk to them directly, you just don't know where the truth starts and those aforementioned confounding human issues end.

I'm with you a 100% Will, that's basically what I was alluding to with less words

Originally Posted by graffex

I'm with you a 100% Will, that's basically what I was alluding to with less words

Oh, so now you're calling me wordy?! Bastad.

Saw the movie this morning. Great show. The end definitely choked me up a bit.

I don't know why, but I'm continually surprised how many liberals really HATE the US military. Yahoo News has a "Lone Survivor" review, and the un-censored comments on the story are flabbergasting. Leftists really hate this movie. Based on their comments, my theory is because they know the guys depicted in the movie are better men than they are, and it eats them up.

I just saw it a few hours ago. To me, the fight scene on the mountain shows you how having some scope magnification could be an asset at first, but once it becomes close in having too much X become a liability real quick. Also in the places and terrain where the fight scenes took place, I would see no advantage to having a .308/7.62 weapon, even if ammo resupply was not an issue.

Me and my girlfriend saw it last night and both thought it was very well done. The tribute at the end was moving and hard to not get emotional when watching. There was also a round of applause when the credits started. I'm sure I will be buying it on Blu Ray when it comes out as well.

Originally Posted by Biggy

I just saw it a few hours ago. To me, the fight scene on the mountain shows you how having some scope magnification could be an asset at first, but once it becomes close in having too much X become a liability real quick. Also in the places and terrain where the fight scenes took place, I would see no advantage to having a .308/7.62 weapon, even if ammo resupply was not an issue.

Not to mention EVERY shot was a headshot.

Saw it yesterday and loved the film. Regardless of the liberties taken in the book and especially the movie, it's one of the best films of 2013.

When studying Operation Red Wings last year for some PME, one of the questions brought up was that of the ROE and the vote that LT Murphy called for regarding how to deal with the goat herders. Basically I was asked "what would you do and why?" and relating it to the ROE.

What I asked was "why did they even have a vote? it's the military, decisions are downward directed by the person in charge." Someone in the movie (I can't remember who) also mentioned that. Turns out, that whole event is somewhat controversial in that many believe it didn't happen at all.

I wonder if, in 20/20 hindsight, another option besides 1) kill them, 2) let them go, or 3) tie them up, could have been 4) take them with us as we exfiltrate until nightfall, then let them go.

Otherwise, very powerful movie.

Originally Posted by Koshinn

When studying Operation Red Wings last year for some PME, one of the questions brought up was that of the ROE and the vote that LT Murphy called for regarding how to deal with the goat herders. Basically I was asked "what would you do and why?" and relating it to the ROE.

What I asked was "why did they even have a vote? it's the military, decisions are downward directed by the person in charge." Someone in the movie (I can't remember who) also mentioned that. Turns out, that whole event is somewhat controversial in that many believe it didn't happen at all.

I wonder if, in 20/20 hindsight, another option besides 1) kill them, 2) let them go, or 3) tie them up, could have been 4) take them with us as we exfiltrate until nightfall, then let them go.

Otherwise, very powerful movie.

Eric Haney and a few other former CAG authors have detailed that that was a common question back in the day on psychological evaluations for operators. There wasn't really a correct answer if I remember correctly, but it served as a window into the mind of that particular candidate.

Originally Posted by Koshinn

I wonder if, in 20/20 hindsight, another option besides 1) kill them, 2) let them go, or 3) tie them up, could have been 4) take them with us as we exfiltrate until nightfall, then let them go.

That thought crossed my mind as well when I watched that scene.