War, Inc: Cusack's Savage Satire Strikes a Chord with Soldiers and Their Families
This post originally ran during War, Inc's theatrical run. It has just been released on DVD.
"Whose top advisers are linked to war profiteers?" asks John Cusack in a new TV ad linking John McCain and George Bush ("Both...Bet you can't tell them apart"). The ad, produced by MoveOn.org, starts airing today and is already being passed around the Internet.
Cusack's righteous rage over the billions being pocketed in Iraq by companies like Blackwater, Halliburton, and Bechtel is the beating heart of his brilliant War Inc. The film, a corrosive, audaciously funny takedown of the Right's push toward privatized war, has become a surprise, grassroots-driven hit -- despite having almost no ad money behind it.
I saw the film before it was finished, and even before the final edit, the music, etc., I was overwhelmed by how it captured the insanity going on in Iraq. War Inc. has pulled off the near-impossible: it has a found a savage, reality-altering humor amidst the tragedy of Iraq.
It masterfully wields my favorite creative weapon: satire. It punches you in the gut, making you laugh, wince, and become outraged all at the same time. Naomi Klein rightly calls War, Inc. "one of those rare satires with the danger left in."
Political satire designed to confront the powers-that-be with painful truths and to produce not just laughs but change is rarely seen in today's multiplexes. And that's not surprising; it's a high-wire act few even dare to attempt. But when someone does and succeeds at it -- think Stanley Kubrick, Paddy Chayefsky, Joseph Heller, Billy Wilder -- the effect is indelible.
Lewis Lapham identified the satirist's project as "the crime of arson, meaning to set a torch of words to the hospitality tents of pompous and self-righteous cant." And that great satirical arsonist Mark Twain wrote that exposure to good satire made citizens less likely to be "shriveled into sheep."
The great satirists have always been passionate reformers challenging the status quo. "Sometimes," says Paul Krassner, whose satiric and radical journalism inspired Cusack and his co-creators, "humor is just a way of calling attention to the contradictions or the hypocrisy that's going on officially. ... That's the function of humor -- it can alter your reality." Which is exactly what War, Inc. does.
When in 1729, Jonathan Swift wrote the most famous work of political satire of all time, "A Modest Proposal," he was seeking to light a fire under the indifference toward the twin Irish crises of hunger and over-population. His proposal was to feed young children to hungry men. "I have been assured," he wrote, "that a young healthy child, well-nursed, is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout."
You can imagine the blowback from those who failed to grasp the satiric point Swift was trying to make. Similarly, the satire-challenged Right has tried to attack Cusack and War, Inc. as (all together now) unpatriotic and a slam on American troops. They've also gotten their knickers in a twist, outraged that someone would try to find humor in the death and suffering of U.S. soldiers.
But Cusack's targets are not our troops but private military contractors, war profiteers, and flag-waving politicians who, as Cusack puts it, support "keeping our troops in harm's way in Iraq but not the bipartisan G.I. bill of rights to support them when they return home." (And, yes, he's talking about you, Messrs Bush and McCain).
Indeed, since the film's release Cusack has received many moving emails and postings on his MySpace page from soldiers and military family members supporting the film and its message. Their missives run from disappointment to disillusionment and fury over being asked to serve and sacrifice while mercenaries are better paid -- and often better treated.
Among the emails:
From Sgt. Brent Sammann, an active-duty soldier in the US Army:
(Click for full-size image --
check out the two flags)
I'm a first-hand witness to the exploitation by KBR and other companies lending their services to the war effort -- services us soldiers are fully capable of doing ourselves.... The military is being overcharged by these companies on a regular basis. Also, the poor service and treatment we get from some of their employees who make three times as much as those of us serving our country that are not in it for the money but are trying to make the world a better place for everyone.
From SPC (P) Johnny Rhodes in 3/2 SCR Infantry based in Diyala, Iraq:
After being awake for 3 days I may be a little bit out of it, so excuse any rambling or incoherence on my part. Off the top of my head, I can easily say that KBR in particular is of no help here in my area of Iraq. They do, jobs soldiers could do, get paid way better for it, but the work is almost always substandard.... at any given time there are hordes of these guys tying up the phones and internet, cramming the chow hall, etc. Which makes the soldiers have to wait. And wait. And wait. They also paid way more than me, for a job, I could do with my eyes closed.
From Brenda Clampitt, of Baton Rouge, LA, the wife of a soldier stationed at Camp Adder in Tallil, Iraq:
[My husband] drives the trucks and Humvees and escorts the KBR around where they need to go. He doesn't understand why they get paid way more then he does when [he and his fellow soldiers] are the ones doing the protecting, and are the ones getting shot at and blown up. He has seen soldiers die in front of him; he has seen lives destroyed and the country torn apart. My husband would serve his country whether he got paid or not, that is just how he is. He loves his country and wants to protect it but he sees first hand what is going on over there and he doesn't like it.... I myself am sick and tired of this war. It is dragging on and on and it is all about the money. I am not anti war. But I am FOR everything your movie is about.
Today's lead editorial in the New York Times, titled "Interrogation for Profit," decries "one of the Bush administration's most blatant evasions of accountability in Iraq -- the outsourcing of war detainees' interrogation to mercenary private contractors" and calls on Congress to approve "measures to make war-zone contractors liable for criminal behavior." The editorial concludes: "The way out of the Iraq fiasco must include an end to the outsourced shadow armies."
This indictment has the same urgency of War Inc. Especially with John McCain reminding us that it's "not that important" to him when our troops come home.
Click here to watch a new interview with Cusack in which he talks about War, Inc, war profiteering and the McCain campaign's race-baiting.
Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I would agree. Cusack is not johnny come lately to this. As you yourself are not. What is more amazing is how the populace looked the other way when this was garbage from the get go. You get an oil guy in the white house and a defense contractor as vp and presto look what happened. An invasion and occupation of a country that has guess what... oil. So this mean HUGE profits for the defense business not only to blow up the country and kill its citizens but also to "rebuild" it so the occupation and possession of oil can take place. Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, Blackwater, Exxon posting huge profits. What a surprise. Cusack is not only a great actor he is a great person to stand up and say this type of stuff. Shame on America for staying quiet.
I recall reading a Sci-Fi story years ago in which the premise was that the world had created new borders based on Corporations domains. Each Corporation had it's own private military. Most of the populace of the world owed their continued existence and livelihood on the "benevolence" of their host Corporate Masters. It seems as though we are headed in that direction.
Sounds like a mixture of "Snow Crash" and "Jennifer Government", two of my favorite books. What was this called?
Have been for some time. That's basically the definition of 'privatization'.
Clearly there are a lot of people on the HuffPo site that are 'Anti-War'. Good, me too. But ...
Can I implore your American readers to actually get off their butts and GO SEE THE MOVIE THIS WEEK! It's all well and good to add it to your 'must do' list and talk about how great it is (without having seen it yet) around the water cooler or at dinner parties BUT if the film has any chance of success YOU MUST SEE IT NOW!
That's because the Right are just itching to call the film a failure. And if the Box Office results are poor it will be deemed a failure. And the opposite is true too. If everyone (on HuffPo) rushes to see it now then there is a spike in the box office returns and other theatres will consider picking it up. And if it does well in the US then it will be released worldwide and people like me will get to see it.
And it would be good for 'Brand America' for the rest of the world to see that not all Americans are pro war.
If I can find it, I'll be on it like a republican on an orphan's pocket money!
Where is this movie playing?
I wonder how fast Bush would declare War Over IF he were told ALL the private contractors had to be pulled from the stage immediately?
Without his Privateers siphoning off the money, his NEED to prolong this occupation and devastation of Iraq would change for certain.
It is not about the troops, its about the Private Profiteers from war.
War Over... isn't that the same as "Mission Accomplished"? No??
Okay, carry on then.
No. "Mission Accomplished" was setting up a siphon for draining American taxpayers' money out of the treasury into Halliburton and other bushco buddies' pockets.
Has anyone noted that the Right in many states and the Federal Government is already privatizing what should only be a government function. Private for-profit prisons are all around us. Where is government accountability when we hire someone else to do our dirty work?
"Privatizing" is a euphemism the Right uses for "opening up for corruption
Yeah, they're privatizing government services--even the postal services--what a crock! And as a result, you can bet the costs are going to skyrocket to create profit. How can it be legal to use the taxpayers dollars to finance the private sector? And if it is legal, what rate of return can the People expect from their investment? How do we the people benefit from this little scheme? Something doesn't smell quite right here.
I think this is a scam that has been devised to steal the peoples' money. Government domestic services paid for with taxpayer dollars should not be used to personally enrich anyone, much less those in the private sector. And at the very least, there should be some pretty good sized tax cuts for all Americans out of this deal. What do you think the chances are that that will happen?
And this for-profit private prison scheme is scary. It seems to me that these for-profit private prisons, in order to realize a profit, will have to keep those prison cells full.
He is a great Chicagoan, a great American, and a pretty good actor...;) The scum must be cleaned out of washington
When Rome reached the apex of its glory as an empire, the politicians discovered they could buy power with legislative largesse. The people became spoiled and lapsed into willful ignorance. They craved luxuries and entertainment. Fewer and fewer were willing to serve the empire, because they would rather stay home and live in comfort. Excess became the rule of the day, and to hold its borders, the empire began hiring mercenaries. As Rome rotted from within, its mercenaries sold their services to the highest bidder, and Rome fell. Europe was plunged into a dark age that lasted almost one thousand years. Sound familiar?
Sure it sounds familiar: We've heard it all before.
in fact, Rome was a slave society. Depending on the value of slaves (which had something to do with the current wars) Roman patricians argued whether slaves should be allowed to form families and concluded, this should be reserved for managers among them as their little reward.
During its long duration, Rome tried various ways to sustain its society. Reforms were often designed to reduce such welfare as soldiers pensions.
I think Rome's real problem was the vast split between its very very rich and the laboring citizen.
Very familiar and I am afraid a reality we are experiencing. The question is how in the world can we convince the American people that the path we are traveling goes to hell?
Yup--it's happening again. This time the mercs are the Goths and the Muslims are the Huns.
I'll say it again: George W. Bush's presidency is NOT a failure. He was put in office to make certain people rich and he has accomplished that goal. What "We The People" think of him neither he nor those who put him in office care one tiny whit.
Yes! I agree!
When people ask me why I think the war was about oil when we are paying $4.50 for gas. I tell them it wasn't to get "us" cheap gas, it was to get "them" record profits.
"When people ask me why I think the war was about oil" ...
... you can reply: "Because McCain said so" ...
"My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East that will - that will then prevent us - that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East."
Once we get those "terrorists" to agree to our 58 PERMANENT military bases to control their OIL, control Iraqi air space up to 30,000 feet, and immunity from prosecution for U.S. troops and private military contractor
Problem is... the Iraqi government rejected the terms as unacceptable.
"The points that were put forth by the Americans were more abominable than the occupation," said Jalal al Din al Saghir , a leading lawmaker from the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq . "We are being asked to sign for our own occupation. That is why we have absolutely refused all that we have seen so far."
OBAMA '08!
HOPE & CHANGE!
Stay safe, healthy and happy,
Love, Loretta
Absolutely right, jhoughton.
Yup.
This war is such a --- stuff up --- that I decided a long time ago it was designed that way. Forget trickle down economics - this is an annexation of the US treasury. Your tax dollars are being handed over to War Inc (Halliburtan, et al - not the movie) and there's no transparency or accountability.
Here is an idea.
Congress should follow the laws it has passed especially the balanced budget legislature. Instead of passing supplemental bills, which we have to pay in the future, suspend all governmental programs in this country and use all of the funds in the Treasury to pay for this war.
No, that will not work because the American public would not willingly give up on the services provided by the governmental entities of this country. Because if this was done, state and local services would be suspended also since they get federal subsidies to operate some of their prespective programs.
When I read about the inability to train an Iraqi army and police force in spite of spending billions I have to ask, why don't we just re-hire the army and cops they had before we invaded. They were capable and trained. There was no looting, no civil war, no car bombs, etc. And they weren't killing as many Iraqis as we are in the pusuit of their duties. Matter of fact why are we trying to rebuild the country ? After it was bombed to pieces by Bush l in 1991 the Iraqis rebuilt their own country with their own engineers and Iraqi contractors, only to have it destroyed again by Bush ll. Course no profit for American contractors if they get the jobs.
I have seen other articles on John Cusacks War, Inc. The suprising thing about the comments on this posts is that a few of the people are actually suprised by the thought Congress is profitting from this war and the fact that the military is being privatized by the government.
Lets remember, Republicans are for privatization of, not just some, but all government programs. Bush's brillant idea of privatizing Social Security through investing in the Stock market would have bankrupted Seniors if he had been successful.
Yesterday, C-Span had on a gentleman with the Department of Transportation. The discussing revolved around privatizing Amtrac and the highways because the subsidies to support the two entities are expensive. Supposedly, the private market is better prepared to implement cost saving measure to operate these entities.
I get an ad for John McCain when I click the link to John Cusack's my space! I bet John would not like that. I sure was insulted.
That sounds perfect; Citizen Cusack is probably the one who put it there.
Here is an idea:
Small groups of People should get together and see the film in a theater party outing. Support is always a good thing to give for a film being distributed as this one is.
Please see the report from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee (aka the Waxman committee) hearing titled, “Accountability Lapses in Multiple Funds for Iraq” on Thursday, May 22, 2008: http://ove
The popularly held belief that privatization of any government function automatically results in increased efficiencies, which will in turn result in greater value for our tax dollar outlay is being exposed as erroneous. This notion, as taken to previously undocumented new depths by the Bush administration, is an example of “magical thinking” at best. The element of fair market competition simply does not exist in any of these arrangements. And, in the absence of this condition, private sector service providers can and do abandon quality with regularity in order to reduce their costs at the public’s expense. Add to this, especially in the instance of Iraq War contractors, a lack of due diligence with regards to effective contract administration, and you have a no-consequence environment for non performance. Incredibly, and this is documented in numerous instances, these war service contractors are expected to provide the oversight for their own contracts.
Question: Since when did letting the fox guard the henhouse ever work?
Answer: Since Dick Cheney took of the process.
I haven't seen the movie but definitely will. One of my big concerns has been the role of Blackwater and the mercenary army they have built - at our expense. Eric Prince is a right wing idealogue which makes it all the more scary. What happens to this mercenary force when they get home? Something has to be done about this before, God forbid, they decide they can take over. If they did, our military forces have been so badly used, they'd not be able to defend our government.
HOW LONG UNTIL BLACKWATER TANKS INVADE DALLAS
and NYC and LA and SF and Chicago and St Louis and Philadelphia and Detroit and......
NATO to the rescue?
The plans are all in place for martial law. Our military is trained in it, and they have to pass loyalty oaths when questioned about how they would react to overseeing friends and family. With what this planet is going to send our way, it will not be long.
If the dollar keeps slipping, we won't be able to pay them anymore. Then, their services will go to the highest bidder. The USA may find itself their target then.
They don't have tanks. They have an urban assault vehicle called the Grizzly.
They wouldn't attack Dallas. Dallas is home turf. As a matter of fact I'm willing to bet the next and future White House would be in Texas.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
