Posted on 07/08/2023 8:16:51 AM PDT by Starman417
Movies can sometimes be something of a Rorschach test in terms of how one views the world. Like Rorschach tests, they can sometimes leave an observer scratching their heads. As an example, my top 10 movies are probably, in no particular order, Gladiator, Tombstone, Braveheart, LA Confidential, Valley Girl, (The original masterpiece with Deborah Foreman and Nicolas Cage, not that terrible remake!) Lost in Translation, Galaxy Quest, Trading Places, Love Actually and maybe Titanic.
I’m not sure what that list says about me, particularly the inclusion of Valley Girl, but I’m sure some psychiatrist somewhere could say there’s something to be taken from it. The one thing I can observe from my list is that most of my movies have a good guy vs. bad guy conflict, which is of course not a surprise coming from a guy who writes a lot about politics.
Sometimes however in movies, as in life, who is the good guy and who is the bad guy isn’t quite clear. For example, there is A Few Good Men, set in Guantanamo Bay, near the end of the Cold War. The bad guy in the movie is Jack Nicholson’s Colonel Jessup, and the good guy is Tom Cruise’s Lieutenant Kaffee. For those unfamiliar with the 30 year old movie, basically a Marine dies in his bed after being abused by his fellow Marines under indirect orders from Colonel Jessup. Two Marines are charged with his murder and the courtroom drama plays out demonstrating that Colonel Jessup was actually the guilty party.
For those unfamiliar with Guantanamo other than as a political football, it’s an American base on the south eastern end of Cuba. It’s been a permanent American base since the end of the Spanish American war in 1903. It’s about 50 square miles of concrete and mostly brown grass sitting on two sides of a bay and surrounded by a ring of mountains. Christopher Columbus actually spent the night there! I grew up there and it was a spectacular place to be a teenager, with beaches, a golf course, year round baseball, outdoor movie theaters and spectacular scuba diving, all under the glow of perfect weather almost every day.
Of course the resort like experience I had as a kid was ancillary to the actual function of the base itself. The base was surrounded by a fence separating it from Cuba proper. The fence was buttressed by a zone of land mines, with ubiquitous red and yellow triangles warning of the danger of passing a certain point. When I lived there, and the period covered by A Few Good Men, America was in the midst of the Cold War, with Cuba being essentially the front lines, with occasional shots being fired across the no man’s land and the fences being peppered with watchtowers on both sides.
While Guantanamo wasn’t West Berlin, it was always theoretically under threat, and as such the Marines prepared to defend it if necessary. A Few Good Men deals with Marines training to defend the base, and one of those marines was the late PFC Santiago. Apparently PFC Santiago was a subpar Marine who the Colonel felt needed some encouragement from his fellow soldiers to become a better Marine. In this case that encouragement involved what they call a “code red” which is essentially a blanket party, a form of extrajudicial punishment meted out by fellow soldiers / Marines etc. when one of their number is negatively impacting the group.
Usually such punishment is not fatal, but in the case of PFC Santiago, it was. Two privates were charged for the murder but Tom Cruise’s Lt. Caffery is called upon to defend them and eventually places blame on the shoulders of Jack Nicholson’s COL Jessup.
What makes this movie so remarkable is the speech that COL Jessup gives while on the witness stand:
“Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives.One can’t help but see the seething rage coming from Jessup. You can’t help but feel the disdain he had for Santiago and Cruz’s Caffery. He’s a dinosaur from a forgotten age.You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall -- you need me on that wall.
We use words like "honor," "code," "loyalty." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.
I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand the post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think you're entitled to!”
Now, most certainly, Jessup is a son of a bitch for throwing those two young Marines under the bus, but on the bigger picture he’s 100% right. While Santiago’s death was a tragedy, it probably would have saved lives. America needs warriors on walls, America needs men who are willing and able to pick up guns and fight and kill to protect the nation, and often that is a dirty, messy business, including the training that goes into making doing so successfully possible.
When you reread that speech it appears that Jessup could be talking to every snowflake, every Democrat, every Antifa coward and every BLM mark in America circa 2023!
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
We need more Code Red’s. More Atomic Wedgies for all Xiden voters. More swirlies for Camala swooners. More Wet Willies for Chuck Schumer sycophants.
I’d watch that whole movie again just to hear that speech. He is 100% correct and it is more fitting today than when it was written. God bless the Marines and all who defend God and this country.
Outstanding piece — apt analogy between Nicholson’s character, Jessup, and DJT.
Kaffee
A story that has a similar theme is the Caine Mutiny. The summation given in the last scene by Jose Ferrer who is the victorious mutineers drunken lawyer is classic. He says “we won, but should we have? Let’s not be too proud of what we did.” It’s a must see for thinking men, especially veterans.
Excellent post. Makes me recall lending a VCR tape of the movie years ago to a retired Marine officer I worked with. He brought it back absolutely furious over the treatment of Col. Jessup...He laid it on my desk with a string of colorful language (sometimes I believe only a Marine can use) and was still sputtering as he walked out the door.
Maybe should add “White Squall” since so many are in need of the training that learning to sail a 3 mast tall ship brings and brought to a summer camp of prep school boys. True story and reality on the sea.
Gladiator, Tombstone, Braveheart, LA Confidential, Galaxy Quest, definitely Titanic.
Poseidon Adventure, Heat, Aliens, The Matrix, Saving Private Ryan, Bonnie & Clyde, Platoon, The Last of the Mohicans, Interstellar.
I happened to cross paths a few times with the guy who was touted as the inspiration for the Tom Cruise character. Greasy and not admirable. And always made sure everyone knew...
I like your analogy. Another movie along the same lines is Judgment at Nuremberg with Spencer Tracy.
That entire movie is a contemplative reflection of the inhumanity of Germans during World War II.
JAGs are disgusting creatures and that movie lionized them. From the Judge, all down to all of the others.
And now the modern military is awash in them. They function like the old soviet Zampolit political officers.
Buttigig, Lindsay Graham, DeSantis, Beau Biden, Hunter Biden, etc etc.
You assume that Lt Cnl Jessop (in the play) read the situation right.
Willy Santiago was a poor performer physically but we only have Jessop’s word for it that a hazing or blanket party would’ve made a difference. Santiago had already admitted to his shortcomings and clearly some of them were physical in nature... Enough to consider a medical discharge.
You can’t beat up a weed with a bad heart to make him into a superfit fighting machine. Santiago had reported himself, and asked for transfer. The officers all knew he wasn’t physically up to the job.
“You weep for Santiago and curse the marines” is Jessop showing his complete lack of good character by deflecting. In any event nobody’s mourning Santiago and nobody’s having a go at the Marines.
The whole thing about Kaffee is he’s no ideologue; he’s brought in by internal affairs who suspect Code Red... and initially is minded to just plea bargain for a quick wash up (which is what he always does).
In the play, Santiago’s hazing and death followed him pleading for a transfer and offering up the name of a marine who’d fired into Cuban territory potentially sparking an escalation. He might’ve given the Code Red just as much for betraying a member of his unit as for his poor physical condition.
Jessop doesn’t seem to consider that - or maybe it suits him to have a dead whistleblower.
Boy - that’s a good memory. That’s what he said...and how impactful - but I believe everyone was walking out of the room at the time and did they hear him?
“I’m not sure what that list says about me...”
I don’t think you really want to know.
This is a total misread of the film and the author (and everyone else) needs to go back and re-watch the movie. The whole point of the character is that he is delusional and narcissistic. He's a gold brick in a dead-end job who believes that he is the lynch pin of the whole operation. His belief that he is a "warrior on the wall" stands in strong contrast with the fact that he is a redundant administrator who has only made it as far as he has by the labors and sufferance of his loyal subordinate, whom he personally abuses. He demands respect which he does not reciprocate, or which he owes to equals and superiors in rank. He insults the office and uniform of other officers. In a fit of delusional grandeur, he threatens to call the president, as though that should frighten his staff or as if the president should be expected to know and care about a colonel in an administrative backwater. His is so dismissive of the duty and office of his peers that he genuinely believes he can just bluff his way out of a court procedure officiated by men who certainly out-rank him.
Jessup was not hero or warrior. He was a c*nt who probably shouldn't be allowed to handle a gun and who was barely qualified to assault the buffet.
It is crazy that many people allegely on the right like Jessup.
I am not a military man. But I know that rules exist for a reason.
Jessup is guilty. Regardless of what we think about the left, their weak morals, etc., he is an awful hero.
wondeful.
It is a common pattern though.
Jessop is an archetype that the right wing inexplicably falls head over heels for - the strong guy who sees himself as a visionary whose successes are always entirely his own making, his errors are always someone elses’ fault, his frustrations are always due to conspiracy and treachery rather than incompetence or “due process”, and anyone criticising his vision must be a pinko/traitor/communist.
They’re often guys who just don’t like ever being on the receiving end of the word “no”.
Erdogan, Putin, Johnson, Trump, and several tech billionaires are like this to varying degrees. And they’re not all entirely evil.
It’s not an inherently bad thing - since innovation butts heads with rules, sometimes you need bulldozers - but it’s not what I’d call conservative.
Because conservatives are not by nature disruptive revolutionaries.
American conservatives place great store on the immutability of the Founding Fathers and their principles underpinning the Constitution... One of which is you don’t want an autocratic tyrant in the White House (whole point of independence from the British!)
British conservatives champion custom, law, precedent, and the moral compass provided by the Lords Spiritual i.e. the Church. Over here, a populist government can pitch any fashionable law it likes but if the law violates centuries of fundamental constitutional or moral imperatives, the unelected Lords are meant to represent the voice of the unfashionable continuity.
Tony Blair is another Jessop. He actually had the law changed so that if the Lords kept blocking his legislation in defense of traditional values he could cite popularity to override them.
Classic doesn’t like the word “no” behavior.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.