I have been hearing about the National Geographic documentary Restrepo for some time, though I only had a chance to view it last week. The ninety-minute film and a book based on the documentary describe the experiences of a platoon of US Army soldiers from the 173rd Airborne Infantry in the Korengal Valley of Afghanistan from May 2007 until July 2008. The various military and intelligence focused websites that I peruse on a daily basis have been discussing Restrepo from a number of points of view. Some criticized both the tactics and strategies employed by the army command, noting the futility of posting small units deep in enemy controlled territory. Other sites more frequently visited by Vietnam era veterans criticized the soldiers themselves, noting that they were a far different breed than the citizen soldiers doing their duty but yearning to get out of the army back in the sixties and seventies. They find it hard to relate to the new breed. For some, today’s soldiers are volunteers who suffer from a "lack of introspection." The troops see themselves as professionals with the shooting and killing part of a job that has to be done, though it is interesting to note how traumatized several of them became after their tour of duty, as reported in the documentary.
Restrepo was filmed by a team of two who spent a year with the soldiers on Forward Operating Base Restrepo, a vulnerable army outpost occupying a high point in the Korengal Valley, close to the Pakistani border. Sebastian Junger, who wrote The Perfect Storm, authored the book that came out of the experience and was also involved in the filming. Restrepo is shown at intervals on the National Geographic Channel on cable and satellite and is also available on DVD. I have noted that it is now on Red Box at $1 a pop for a rental.
Restrepo has no plot or story line. Though it seemed to me that it is careful not to take any position on Afghanistan or on the war itself that conclusion might be the result of careful and deliberately ambiguous editing. I note, for example, that many of the laudatory comments on the book and film on Amazon are essentially pro-war, people saying "look at our brave warriors and all they have been enduring for our freedom." A serving Army office whom I know had a different take, "Those poor bastards." I also took away a radically different conclusion and for me, the lack of an apparent agenda is part of the film’s power.
As the soldiers were operating in Taliban controlled territory, the filming only involves the US army troops themselves with hardly a glimpse of the enemy. There is precious little of Afghanistan and the Afghans in the film and one knowledgeable critic who had served in Afghanistan commented that he was concerned by the "lack of outreach to the population." The soldiers are there to make it difficult for the Taliban to use the valley to move men and equipment out of Pakistan and that is all they are there to do. One commenter describes their role as "kinetic." The villagers are in the way, part of the landscape and not to be taken seriously.
The Restrepo platoon is commanded by a captain, an engaged and well meaning sort who is deadly earnest about his mission but completely clueless about the war he finds himself in the middle of. There are a number of scenes that might be considered black comedy in which the overwrought captain is enduring the obligatory weekly meeting or "shura" with local tribal elders. The tribesmen are served fruit juices in foil packs with plastic straws attached and cannot figure out how they are supposed to work. When challenged by the Afghans, the captain tends to fall back on bromides about the American presence in their village and when frustrated he says "I don’t give a f*ck." In another scene, the captain brings in his colonel to explain the situation to the local tribesmen, expecting that the introduction of a higher rank will have a positive impact. But the colonel is every bit as tone deaf as the captain and he comes out with a series of bumper sticker slogans to explain how the US forces are there to help whether the Afghans like it or not. As neither officer speaks nary a word of the local lingo and are reliant on a translator whose English appears to be a bit sketchy, one wonders how all of the palaver and obscenities are actually rendered in Pashto. And one wonders what the local elders go home thinking.
The huge chasm between the American invaders and the stolid Afghan tribesmen is one of the real messages of the film. In physical appearance, demeanor, and sense of mission it is hardly possible that there has ever been a situation in which an army sent ostensibly to help a country and its government has so little in common with those who are reportedly being helped. The Afghans without a doubt just want the foreigners to leave. In one encounter, three village elders show up and ask for compensation for one of their cows that had wandered into the base barbed wire, become entangled, and had been killed and later eaten by the American soldiers. The captain refuses to pay them anything and suggests instead that he might give them a comparable quantity of rice and sugar. They left, clearly unhappy, three more Afghans who might have been resigned to the American presence if they had been treated fairly but who will henceforth be enemies.
And the nitty-gritty collateral damage downside of the American presence is rarely seen, but when it is visible it is horrifying. In one truly shocking scene a night raid by the American soldiers results in the deaths and wounding of a number of apparently innocent villagers, including children and infants. The scenes of a wounded or dead little girl and of a bleeding infant are hard to forget. The soldiers are clearly upset by what has happened, but their captain views it as an unavoidable consequence of their mission. In another scene, the soldiers blast away at an Afghan man running on a hillside, hitting him with an explosive round that blows his body apart. They have a good laugh over the carnage and it was not clear to me why they shot him at all except that he was there and running.
Ironically, Forward Operating Base Restrepo was abandoned in the spring of 2010, together with other exposed outposts similar in nature, demonstrating perhaps that it should not have been there in the first place and also making it clear that the US Army, with all its resources, cannot successfully occupy Afghanistan. Fifty American soldiers had died in trying to hold the Korengal Valley. The number of dead Afghans is not known, or at least is not reported by the filmmakers. Clearly, the presence of American soldiers might have made logistical problems for the Taliban but it also turned more Afghans into enemies as a result of the complete cultural insensitivity and ignorance of the US troops. This is what I took away from the film and this is why I think that Restrepo, by virtue of its dispassionate presentation of a terrible reality, demonstrates that the United States will never succeed at anything in Afghanistan and that continued presence there will only guarantee more killing and instability. That makes it one of the best antiwar films that I have ever seen, a complete indictment of a failed and ruinous policy without having to hammer the pulpit to get its message across. One wonders if Barack Obama has seen it and, if so, what he thought of it.
Read more by Philip Giraldi
- Boston Becomes Toxic – May 15th, 2013
- Gatekeeping for Zion – May 9th, 2013
- Kristol Clear – May 1st, 2013
- What Has Bibi Been Doing? – April 24th, 2013
- Drones and Death Lists: The New Face of Warfare – April 17th, 2013





mickperry
January 12th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Also worth watching is a little known film made by Carmela Baranowska in 2004 called 'Taliban Country' .http://www.archive.org/details/Taliban
mickperry
January 12th, 2011 at 10:18 pm
http://www.archive.org/details/Taliban
davidgrayling
January 12th, 2011 at 11:51 pm
It's good that there are movies like this one. It's unfortunate that the ones who seek endless war and the ones who make the tools that enable endless war couldn't give a stuff about the nuances of what is happening in Afghanistan. All they know is that war makes a buck and gives access to scarce resources and improves one's strategic position.
Right from the get-go in Vietnam, no one wanted the Yanks in their country. No one! Did the Yanks care? Not one bit. It's a bit like the current Administration saying they don't care what American voters think. It's the old 'my way or the highway' argument.
Until people can be convinced that war is madness and the people who want it and are involved in it are insane, it will continue.
One day it will end in a nuclear fireball. At least then, the world will again experience peace.
http://www.dangerouscreation.com
Dave Boyer
January 13th, 2011 at 2:30 am
I saw this movie here in Salem, OR about 3 mos ago…. Watching the Americans "try" to comprehend the culture the are surrounded with reminded me much of "Full Metal Jacket", which was situated i n Vietnam-In this movie a Marine Colonel steps before a percieved wavering Marine and states something to the effect of "behind the eyes of every Gook is an American trying to come out".
Also reminded me of the movie,"Last of the Mohicans with Russel Means and Daniel Day Lewis wherein some British Major (fighting the French and Indians in upstate New York) asserts , "our goal is to make the rest of the World like England".
American hubris run yet again amok. Ethnocentrism revealing the weakness and insecurity of America for all the World to see….
GradyWilson
January 13th, 2011 at 3:11 am
"I think that Restrepo, by virtue of its dispassionate presentation of a terrible reality, demonstrates that the United States will never succeed at anything in Afghanistan and that continued presence there will only guarantee more killing and instability. " – Giraldi
what the 'dispassionate' film does is what you, Philip Giraldi, also do – ignore the terrible reality that 'successes' in this war are the private profits 'earned' by capitalist war pigs who control US foreign policy, 'both' parties, along with the media. Killing and instability are good for profits – that is how 'free market' ideology is spread.
Johnny in Wi.
January 13th, 2011 at 4:19 am
Endless wrar makes for endless enemies. We can never have peace if we keep interfering in other countries and killing there nationals. Our policy since 9/11 has made a few hundred terrorists into hundreds of thousands.
bogi666
January 13th, 2011 at 6:31 am
The AfPak war generates profits, that's what it is about, profits and indiscriminate weapons testing. Not to mention "Collateral Murder" of civilians.
jojo
January 13th, 2011 at 6:35 am
Johnnycomelately : I got bad news for you—there were no terrorists from any muslim country on Sept11/2001
bogi666
January 13th, 2011 at 6:36 am
Perhaps the USG wanted to create more terrist's to ensure endless war, which is actually a World War, the GWOT, that's a world war and the American people don't even know it.
MvGuy
January 13th, 2011 at 6:59 am
************ CORRECTION……….. NOT "hundreds of thousands" No….. It's hundreds of MILLIONS!
Think real not small…… I.4OO,OOO,OOO Muslims to see the haughty condescension of the gung-ho infidels and their slaughtered children…. and WOW a stolen cow ["killed and later eaten by the American soldiers"] and denial of equal [just] compensation to add local cultural flavor….[AKA legs] We seem to be our OWN worst enemies….. Why are we there…??????
Terrance&Philip
January 13th, 2011 at 7:23 am
I've come rather late to this conclusion but I wonder if what we're doing in AfPak-Iraq isn't meant primarily to divert us from the pig's breakfast our "leaders" are turning our country into at home. A bit of military legerdemain, if you will.
MvGuy
January 13th, 2011 at 7:25 am
Remind me once again, why is the U.S. trying to occupy Afghanistan……??? Too few problems..??
MvGuy
January 13th, 2011 at 7:54 am
***"legerdemain"..?? Don't underestimate the lust for energy and control of energy……Especially as a stick to bludgeon Iran….. [The Neocons swoon at anything to harm Iran in their all Israel realpolitik] Then there is the TAPI pipeline…..Amoco campaign contributions and all the "perks" of the MIC…. More than enough slush and pork to kill millions……….. For G-d of course…!!!
Bruce Richardson
January 13th, 2011 at 8:06 am
As is usually the case, Dr. Phil's commentary is spot on. His remark that the Taliban just want the foreigners to leave is etched in stone. This has always been the case in Afghanistan, as a cursory look at their history would indicate to most, of course, with the exception of those in that great intellectual wasteland…Washington, DC.
I had the experience of traveling with the Mujahideen during 5 tours to Afghanistan during the Soviet era, the civil quagmire and during the Taliban tenure. In my opinion the Afghans harbor no extra-territorial ambition, like the American people, but not the Bush/Obama crowd, and have always wanted only one thing…to be left to their own devices, to call their own shots and destiny.
It is counter to all they behold, to think they can be controled and or ruled from a foreign capital. It took Moscow 10 years to learn this, sadly, Washington has yet to learn from this recent experience or from history.
Kelley V
January 13th, 2011 at 8:35 am
COIN at its very best. Thank you for the poignant review, Phil
Guy Montag
January 13th, 2011 at 10:35 am
I watched both “The Tillman Story” and "Restrepo" at the theaters. I wanted to like "Restrepo", but it didn't move me nearly as much as "The Tillman Story" (nor was it as good a story).
Reading Sebatian Junger's accompanying book to his movie,"War", provides much needed context to his film. And,t o fill in the details of "The Tillman Story", I'd suggest Mary Tillman's "Boots on the Ground by Dusk" (paperback at blurb.com with preview), Jon Krakauer's "Boots on the Ground by Dusk" and his 10-15-09 Daily Beast piece "General McChrystal's Credibility Problem", and "The [Untold] Tillman Story" at http://www.feralfirefighter.blogspot.com
Bill
January 13th, 2011 at 11:13 am
I'm sure this would be an interesting movie but I'm not going to watch it because it would just make me angry and depressed.
From the description, it sounds like the movie would make anti-war people like me more anti-war, and pro-war type people more gung-ho than they already are.
Therefore, what a final vote on the movie might be I don't know, but probably slightly more "pro-troops" than "anti-war".
Wolfgang9
January 13th, 2011 at 1:41 pm
I just hope, when those guys come home they do get some therapy?__But they won't live in the backyards of those who made milions with the war machinary.__W
mjb
January 13th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
Giraldi ends his excellent analysis by pondering whether President Obama has seen the film and what he thought of it. I surmise that he has not watched it and never will. This Administration's policies, like the one that preceded it, are totally divorced from the on the ground reality that faces the troops who are forced to fight a war that is immoral, illegal and based on lies and deceptions. Why would President Obama be interested in reality or the truth? Do you really think that the "inconvenient truths" could ever break through the bubble and force a true evaluation of American aims and goals? I think not.
EyeOnMadisonStreet
January 15th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
Watching the Baranowska film "Taliban Country" two things came home to me: how utterly insulated from the inner reality of the Afghanis are the American troops; and how twisted that reality is. As Mr. Giraldi says, "How little in common [American troops have] with those who are reportedly being helped". The most bizarre scene in "Taliban Country" must be when the provincial chief is threatening a captive suspected Taliban with threats of homosexual rape of him and his friends, whose pictures he's ogling like a normal man would ogle Playboy, while all-American Marines loll around the circle grinning. Then two troopers run up with a beat up old Kalashnikov they found in a field, hand it off to their captain, who's seated at the feet of the old Afghan pervert, and all the Americans feel like they've done something meaningful for the war effort! Meanwhile the province chief never has taken his eyes off the photos of the boys, who he says are "more beautiful than ten women!" Watching those two young Marines run up with the rifle and then run back to their position, I was reminded of nothing so much as bird dogs fetching something for their master; they had about as much understanding as good pointers of what they were doing. What a sorry waste of American youth, and what an evil moral hazard the government blithely exposes them to.
RobertB
January 15th, 2011 at 9:29 pm
At least the Romans left theaters, buildings and culture instead of a ruined wasteland. The more I think on the matter, the more the Romans seem like the good guys who have sufferered from relentless negative propaganda for the last 2000 years.
The US has sunk into a miasma of total degenerate decadent behavior, and until it regains its sovereignty there is no hope for this nation.
Claus Eric Hamle
January 19th, 2011 at 5:45 am
As one writer points out the madness will end in nuclear war. Why is the Pentagon pursuing a disarming first strike capability ? Clearly, it´s madness and it´s suicidal. Is it only for the money or is there a darker motive ? With the missiles in Bulgaria, Romania and Poland the Pentagon´s Disarming First Strike Capability will be available by 2015. MAYBE only for blackmail. What can the Russians do ? Launch On Warning, maybe even Automatic Launch On Warning because of the bloody fools in the Pentagon.
Claus Eric Hamle
January 19th, 2011 at 5:51 am
Of course, the missiles on ships in the Black Sea and in Romania and Poland are to take out the Russian Second-Strike Force, i.e. the missiles not destroyed in a FIRST STRIKE. Former CND Information Officer David Guinness suggests it´s only for blackmail. But anyway, it´s total insanity and suicidal.