Free Candy Giveaway

I just (finally) saw the acclaimed movie Zero Dark Thirty and I have to admit that I was deeply disappointed.  Don’t get me wrong, the movie was fast paced and entertaining at times, but it had a fatal flaw (warning, spoiler alerts abound in this post).  The ending just wasn’t believable.  For starters, I don’t see how the CIA or the White House would approve such a dangerous mission when most of the experts agreed that there was, at most, a 60 percent chance that Bin Laden was in the compound.  I know, one person said she was 100 percent sure that Bin Laden was in the compound, but that person was a female ginger who wasn’t even Claire Danes.  I’ve worked for the federal government (albeit as part of the federal judiciary) and there is no freaking way senior decision-makers would’ve just taken the ginger’s word for it over all the other dark-haired males in the room.

I was willing to forgive this misstep because, I get it, the filmmakers needed a Hollywood ending.  What better way to keep the audience’s attention than a military assault?  Ok, fine, but if you are going to have a dramatic attack at the end, it should at least bear some semblance to reality.  But in Zero Dark Thirty, the assault on Bin Laden’s compound wasn’t even close to anything that could happen in real life.  The compound where the movie’s Bin Laden was hiding was in Abbottabad, Pakistan.  This doesn’t make any sense.  Abbottabad is a relatively well-to-do city, far away from the loosely governed tribal areas where he would probably hide if he went to Pakistan.  Moreover, Abbottabad is where Pakistan’s version of West Point is located, something the filmmakers could have figured out with a simple Google search.  Obviously, there is no way Bin Laden could ever hide so close to such a large military school in Pakistan, a crucial ally of the United States.  I have no idea why the filmmakers chose to have the assault in Abbottabad, when there are countless other places in the Middle East where Bin Laden is more plausibly hiding.

Also, the unit that attacked the compound in the movie was a group of Navy Seals.  Again, a simple Google search would’ve told the filmmakers that the Navy is responsible for fighting on water.  But the attack in Zero Dark Thirty was carried out on land, with helicopters.  There were no boats and the soldiers were not wearing scuba gear or white outfits with blue trim, as is typical for people in the Navy.  I thought this was inexcusable, because the United States has a service that fights on land.  It’s called the Army.  The script writers could’ve easily had the Army carry out the assault, rather than the Navy.

As for the assault itself, I’m not buying it.  There were only two helicopters full of soldiers in the attack.  I just don’t see how the powers that be in the government wouldn’t have sent more than two measly helicopters to capture one of the most wanted men of all time.  But I guess for budget reasons the studio didn’t want to hire more actors.  One of the helicopters also crashed, which is totally ridiculous.  Whatever part of the armed forces that would’ve carried out such an attack would’ve made sure that the helicopters could work properly in the conditions around the compound.  It would’ve been tested a million times.

Once the “Navy” soldiers finally got into the compound, the movie lost all semblance of credibility.  They had almost no resistance getting into the house, even though one of the most dangerous terrorists of all time was supposedly living there.  They shot everybody they saw instead of arresting them and reading them their Miranda rights, which they legally have to do, even to terrorists.  The soldiers also shot and killed Bin Laden, even though in real life the CIA would’ve wanted him alive so they could question him.  There were also a lot of computers in the house, and I doubt a group that basically wants to turn back the clock to the Middle Ages would ever use modern technology like computers.

Look, I want the United States to capture or kill terrorists as much as anybody, especially Bin Laden.  I just don’t think it is helpful for Hollywood to give the nation false hope by concocting such an unrealistic scenario where the government kills him.  We will get him in due time and, when we do, I’m sure the reality will be way more exciting than this ridiculous Hollywood invention.