Last night I went and saw the battle epic "300" directed by Zack Snyder. Afterward me and my date who turned out to be a HUGE Republican (dontcha hate it when that happens) went to Starbucks and it was there over a warm cup of chi-tea that we had a debate about the film and by extension Iraq.
I realize the subject has been mostly covered in a few diaries such as this one which highlights how it's easy to mistake 300 as a propaganda piece for Bush and his Conservative cronies, and this one which does a nice job of defending the film as simply Hollywood's take on a well known Greek Myth.
But it seems nobody has taken the time to put the smack down on the comparisons being made. I did so last night (BTW winning a debate is not the best way to end a date) so I thought I should list some examples here. I will try my best not to spoil the movie but if you haven't seen it you should probably stop reading. For the rest of you lets start with the fact that the themes presented in 300 are quite frankly universal and timeless they could be applied to virtually any war!
Second the War in Iraq is not the same as the Battle of Thermopylae. First off King Leonidas didn't lie to the Congress about Persia having Weapons of Mass Destruction nor did he take his army and invade Persia unprovoked. Quite the opposite, Persia invaded Greece and Leonidas despite failing to get clearance for war took 300 "body guards" and held off an army that vastly outnumbered them.
Next The Surge is NOT the 300 Spartans as so many conservatives are desperately claiming. The 300 Spartans marched into battle as the first (and at the time) only line of defense against the armies of Persia. They were vastly outnumbered and had to use their wit and knowledge of the mountainside to defend their land. The fact that a mere 300 men killed thousands of enemy soldiers in a manner of days inspired the rest of Greece to send their full armies to the battle field lead by the the remaining Spartans. The 300 Spartans went in first and were then reinforced properly when it was shown the Persians were not as invincible as they claimed.
The surge on the other hand is happening in an exact opposite manner. After the initial invasion of Iraq in which we sent in virtually everyone we had Bush is now sending a mere 21,500 troops in as reinforcement. This would be like Greece sending a mere 2 Spartans to reinforce King Leonidas. Furthermore King Leonidas and his men all lost and died. I'm not sure thats the type of comparison they want to make!
Once you've thrown the comparisons out the window Conservatives often cling to the theme of "fighting for freedom" as a last resort. King Leonidas was fighting to insure Greece did not fall to the Persians an empire that was known for slavery and well on its way to conquering the entire world. In contrast we're at war with a nation that never attacked us, posed no threat to our freedom and couldn't have invaded us if they wanted too. While King Leonidas and his men fought and died to preserve their freedom and way of life our men fight and die for oil.
This war is not about freedom. Our brave men and woman are not dying for our freedom. They are dying for geopolitical gain and corporate wealth. I know its one of many inconvenient truths about this war and I realize it sounds as though we discount our soldiers sacrifice when we say it. But it's the truth, and that sad truth is exactly why we need to end this unjust war. It's also why anyone who compares this mess we have in Iraq to any true fight for freedom needs to pay less attention to blockbuster movies and try reading a book, or a newspaper or perhaps a weblog.