No End in Sight (2007)

On the spot and thought-provoking documentary about the invasion and occupation of Iraq back in the spring of 2003 and how the muddle brained thinking of those in charge of that disaster came to their misguided conclusions in starting the war in the first place! With no evidence what so ever it was decided that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussin was a threat to Middle East as well as the world with his massive supply of WMD or weapons of mass destruction. This went as far as him being accused of having nuclear missiles that as British Prime Minister and Iraqi war supporter Tony Blair publicly stated can reach America's shores and major East Coast cities within 45 minutes after their launched!The scenario for the invasion of Iraq was in fact cooked up by the GW Bush Administration as soon as it took office in January 2001 some nine months before the 9/11 attacks! It was after the attacks of 9/11 that the wheels,in the White House State Department and Pentagon, went into motion in framing Saddam in him being ,together with El-Qeada chief Osama Bin-Ladin, behind those attacks! The hard hitting documentary "No End In Sight" shows how the Bush Adminisration went full tilt in getting the American public to support the war that it was planning to launch against Iraq in 2003 and even worst never bothered to listen to anyone in the know, the military and diplomatic corps, in what a major disaster it would end up being! Unlike Michael Moore's "Farenhite 9/11" "No End In Sight" is not a left wing or anti GW Bush propaganda piece but extremely even handed in its approach. We get to see interviews of some of the majors players in the lead up to the war as well as occupation of Iraq. Many of them now some four years, the film was made in 2007, after the war started have serious misgivings in them having anything to do with it. With no plans to set up a provisional government, made up of Iraqis, and by disbanding both Saddam's Baath Party and the some 500,000 man in tact Iraqi Army the country quickly fell into total chaos which overwhelmed the undermanned underarmed,in armored combat vehicles, US troops there who became sitting ducks to the thousands of Iraqi guerrilla fighters who were former members of the now disbanded and unemployed Iraqi Army! Who by the end of 2003 had killed and wounded far more US troops then were killed and wounded during the entire 41 day 2003 Iraqi war!By far the most shocking thing in the movie is how those who planned and executed the invasion and occupation of Iraq had no idea in what they were getting their country into. No matter how strong the evidence was to not invade and occupy Iraq, in Saddam not having WMD or being involved in the 9/11 attacks, the Bush Adminstartion from GW Bush on down ignored it and even fired those military and diplomatic experts who informed them of it! Yet at the same time when their plans were exposed as being based on faulty evidence they in turn turned around and blamed it all on their own hand picked "stooges" and "yes men" who only gave them that information in fear that if they didn't they'ed end up getting kicked out of their high position in the military and State Department!Like the title of the documentary now four years after it was released there's still "No End In Sight" to the mess that the US got itself into in Iraq with the new Obama Adminstration, that got in part elected by being against the war, still refusing to set a date for a total US withdrawal from that battered and war torn country that has already cost almost 5,000 American and well over 1,000,000 Iraqi lives! Like What the then and now deposed Egyptian President Muburac said, before the war started in March 2003, that the war will open the gates of hell in the Middle-East is exactly what's happening now! Ironically it's the present US financial debt crisis that more then anything will finally put an end to that endless and bloody conflict. By the US Government running out of funds as well as losing it's ability to borrow money from "friendly" country's like Communist China to continue it!

This is an amazing conformation of the Bush administrations utter failure in the handling of the Iraq war. A girl scoot troop could have made better and more informed decisions. Perhaps even a troop of monkeys would have done a better job then Bush's henchmen?The errors in judgment and lack of military experience within the administration are both appalling and telling of the Bush white house. Every military expert was systematically ignored or sidelined. It's as if the Bush administration's primary and sole interest or concern was the protection and acquisition of Iraq's oil provisions.This film is a testament to the complete and absolute failure of the Bush presidency.

I wish to compliment this piece alongside another British theater play called Stuff Happens. The content of both pieces—No End in Sight & Stuff Happens—displayed pithy and compelling accounts of the events that led to the US's involvement in the Iraq war, yet both were also respectfully motivated by political agendas. I do not mean to imply that these pieces were mere exercises in propaganda (though some might argue otherwise), but rather that they attempted to display the facts as objectively as possible while simultaneously suggesting the imprudence, and perhaps immoral behavior of the Bush Administration. Both pieces are enormously complex and in no way can provide easy solutions to the monster that the US has helped create. Of course, it is difficult for US citizens to even think they have helped create this monster—most would rather scapegoat such responsibility to their government leaders; leaders chosen by the majority of US citizens. The argument that both pieces seem to make is: Are Americans right for shifting this blame to the Bush Administration? As both would heavily suggest, they are.I felt that Stuff Happens was weaker in its execution as compared to No End in Sight because it relied more upon speculative guesswork than factual information. I do not deny that much of the information was taken from real-life news conferences, television interviews and public addresses; however, the closed-door conferences, especially the private meetings between Bush and Tony Blair created more of a dramatized and perhaps even fictional quality to the piece, thus lessening the play's credibility and overall objectivity. As to what was exchanged during those meetings can only be assumed. But the premise of assuming the truth only precludes certainty from solidifying the truth, and can therefore only lie within the realms of either probability or possibility. The author can rightfully exclude the possibility of those conversations taking place—and indeed, I think he knows he's beyond possibility. He's made a much more persuasive argument that leans upon probability; probability of the US's mistake to enter the war, and is upheld by various witnesses that sensed the immorality of the Administration. Where the author of Stuff Happens argument is weakened by excessive assumption, the author of No End in Sight strengthens the same argument by more reliance upon facts, thereby lessening the viewer's skepticism. The film does not attempt to necessarily hide or manipulate the facts, but rather ironically suggests those who would hide from and manipulate the facts. The author suggests that the viewer has very good reasons to be skeptical of the US' political leaders because many of them refused to be interviewed for the film. The implication here could mean multiple things: those who hide from the truth; those guilty of creating the Iraqi monster; those who refuse to take responsibility for the war, and so forth. Could some of these implications be true? Yes, and indeed I think some of them are, but I also think the issue is more complicated than that. I think it is unfair to label the entire Bush Administration as wholly corrupt. In other words, the author still had an agenda behind the piece. Perhaps certain members of the Administration had denied interview access because of how their words might have been spun out of context to fit another's opposing agenda. That could be true too. The author is only showing what he chooses to show, but I must admit he did a pretty good job of persuading an opinion that seems more probable of proving the dirt on our leader's hands. He carefully created a persuasive tapestry of political hypocrisy—showing how remarks made by certain members of the Administration contradicted what was actually taking place out in Iraq. For example, cabinet member Rumsfeld told political news analysts and journalists that there was no insurgency or anarchy in Iraq—the on-sight film footage, however, proved those statements false; President Bush is shown speaking about giving Iraq food, freedom and prosperity—again, the footage contradicts his words. The author uses other contrapuntal and ironic devices to stress the idea of the Administration's corruption: US soldiers listening to country music while killing Iraqi citizens, as well as other juxtapositions of the Administration joking with the newsroom about the situation at hand.Both pieces are powerful in their aims. Stuff Happens falls slightly behind No End in Sight regarding credibility, while No End in Sight secures a very sturdy position in its attempts to awaken more Americans to political awareness and activity. It's a formidable piece that will not easily be conquered and will be remembered for many future years to come. All Americans can benefit from watching this film closely and pondering upon what is shown. I highly recommend it.

One of the most honest documentaries I have ever seen, I never feel the documentaries personal politics or beliefs bleeding through in anyway, are multiple news channels and mediums around the country could really take notes from this honest and truthful reporting. It's unfortunate that some of the key players in this story refused to be interviewed, I wouldn't expect the president but if anyone involved in this quagmire really believed that they handled it correctly you would think they would step forward to defend it. No one does so I would assume no one believes this is the case. Sure, to be fair some of this was reported by our news channels but it was done in such an anti-Bush administration way that it just felt like more bashing and blowing things out of proportion as had been done for years. If they would have put that aside as these documenters have in this film and just report the story and get first hand accounts then maybe more Americans would truly understand what went wrong in Iraq and what we have done since to begin to fix it. Sure as the commander and chief ultimately Bush is to be held accountable, but he is just one man and as anyone who has worked with people under them, there are times when you have to delegate authority to people under you, and you chose the best people you can and sometimes they screw it up, and it comes back on you. That's the way it is, but that doesn't mean that Bush ever wanted all this, he made a bad choice in putting his faith in people who made bad decision. Also to be fair this was like no other war we had fought before and a rebuilding effort like we had never seen. Now choosing to go to war that's another issue for another time. Anyway, this was a very fair uninteresting look into why and how things went so wrong in Iraq.