Last night my wife and I saw “Eye in the Sky” with Helen
Mirren (see: http://www.wired.com/2016/04/eye-in-the-sky-modern-war-film/)
.
The film does a nice job of dramatizing the decision making
behind the go/no-go decision for an attack. The scenario is set in Kenya, an
ally. Helen Mirren, as a British Colonel has been tracking a British national
who was radicalized, her husband and two new suicide bomber recruits.
The plot leads all of the suspects to be in the same house
at the same time in a militia controlled slum. The drama is moved along by
having the audience identify with a local young (12?) girl who is selling bread
outside the house.
Mirren’s staff calculates a 65% certainty that the girl will
be killed in a missile strike.
Action goes back and forth until the two new suicide bombers
are fitted with vests and explosives. Ultimately Mirren forces her targeting
officer to lower his Collateral Damage Estimate (CDE) to 45% which she believes
will turn the no-go into a go.
Part of the arguments center on the propaganda value of the
strike. The diplomats argue that killing the one girl gives the propaganda
victory to the enemy while allowing the suicide bombers to strike a soft target
and cause extensive carnage would give the allies the propaganda victory.
While there was a flying cockroach like recon drone taking
footage of the suicide bombers getting their vests – and of course everything was
recorded, no mention was made of the need to justify the strike using that
video.
Worth your time and probably a good write off as a business
expense!
Photo Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOqeoj669xg
No comments:
Post a Comment