The attack famously recorded as a disaster that happened during the September 11th is one of the worst waged war on America. The attack is unique as it has been described as one of the few attacks directly made on American soil. The attack left President George Bush administration under a rude shock and lack of intelligence to develop countermeasures on the terrorism. Therefore, this attack has received a lot of critics as well as empathizers of the government. Although it raises humanity’s concerns and pity to the American people, the war has been perceived from different perspectives (Chaman et al.). This includes a military perspective, journalist, citizen, and terrorist perspective. A lot of films, documentaries, and articles present the attacks from different angles. It is unique as to how the films develop a critic and support of different groups afflicted in the film.
The attack launched by the al-Qaida terrorist portrays American society from two different perspectives. On one side, it portrays the American people as the main cause of the attack. The presentation and idea are based on the fact that as America wages war on the Arabian people, it results in an equal reaction (Bradshaw). Although pointing towards the support of the Arabs the presentation does not justify the cause of actions by the Arabians. This approach leaves a lot of questions as to which side of the war is right. The film such as the battle of Algiers shows the struggle of the Algerian people in fighting for their democracy.
On the other hand, the American perspective makes a mockery of President Bush ruling. Starting from the occurrence of the war, it has been provided that the government failed to perform its duty of securing the American citizens. This mockery of the attack is based on the idea that the government would have developed policies and institutions that gains knowledge of such attacks. Additionally, the terrorists not only hit the heart of American trade, the caused panic by attacking the military facilities. This is attack is a mockery in the sense that it was waged on the protectors of the nation.
The American sniper although builds its idea under the notion of loyalty among and within the snipers. It has shown a sniper, in the memory of Chris Kyle. The film portrays a foundation where the kills of the sniper granted him the medals and achievements in life (Kaufman 0907). In a similar model, the American government through President Bush is compared to the sniper who earns medals through merits. The striking element of the film is that the sniper is granted success by killing and destroying several enemy territories. This is the principle behind American international policies. The government has been on the upper front of engaging in international matters, rooting its principles to the different cultures. Eventually causing destructions earning the country more merits.
According to La salle his article provides that the American way has been to implant the western ideologies to different nations. Offering international environments with a new policy challenging the traditional systems. This aspect of international relations focuses on the American ideologies developed in communist communities. The American government forces the people to adopt their practices and let go of the traditional structures (Chaman et al.). Causing a lot of disagreements and conflicts to the international community. However, the catch of this sinister mode of interaction is the value earned in exchange. The government realizes more value by having its presence in a specific country. For instance, in Iraq, the Americans get to have a share of the oil produced.
The al-Qaida group of the militia was proving and passing a message to the American people. Similar to the manner American presence in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq threatens the structures of society. The attack also passed a similar message. It crippled trade and infiltrated military intelligence within the country (La sale). However, the perspective reinstates the idea that Muslims are the real daredevils. A lot of films have portrayed them to be a danger to humanity. The Arabian community is portrayed as people who are ready and willing to attack even if it is at the cost of their lives themselves. For instance, films show them brainwashing innocent souls such as women to carry explosives.
The attack in its sense manipulated the plane dynamics and sciences making it become a human-guided missile. This type of attack was a military strategy that was carefully planned and executed without the military having an understanding of the happening. The militia perspective holds that the American people for long have decided the fate for their countries determining who is a terrorist and who has to die as well. Such actions cause an equal reaction, all pre-determined by the existing war between the two countries. The international relations between the two countries fail to secure mutual policies between the two states and countries in conflict.
THE PORTRAYAL OF THE ATTACK
The attack has been categorized based on a humane approach to the subject. Leaving no direct conclusion as to the nature of the war between the two cultures; communist and capitalist. The bottom of the attack has been based on the root cause of the war which is the government’s cause and response to terrorism. Journalism cover of the subject provides the basis of the argument on the right of the government to interfere in the Arabian Gulf affairs. The response, however, is governed by the response that the local people provide. The war caused great damage to the people, it led to the loss of loved ones, economic activities and some lost their abilities to operate.
9/11 attacks aftermath have been discussed by James, showing that it caused more cancer. Until date, the article recounts that there are people who are receiving medical benefits due to the exposure to jet fuels and the smoke from the falling towers. In unofficial statistics, more than 20,000 people lost their lives in a matter of fewer than two hours (Kaufman 0907). This greatly affects the structure of the community basing more emphasis on the failures of the government to provide for its citizens. Additionally, the grievance of the American people indicates the failure of the Bush administration to fend for the people. This justifies the presentation mocking George Bush. He failed to gain intelligence on the attack and also to respond to the people during the attack.
The portrayal of the attack forms a mirror occurrence and image of society. This reflects that whenever the American government will increase its presence in international soil, it will lead to a similar effect on the war being waged upon them. It increases the sense of paranoid to the American people. It develops the ideology that the international community is not safe anymore for the Americans. As a result, there has been a lot of development of ideologies explaining complex conspiracies of attacks. James mentions that the most recent conspiracy is Trump’s triumph. The ideas provide that it might have been a staged conspiracy to get Trump to power.
The 9/11 attacks still being fresh in the minds of the American it does not only affect the political and economic affairs of the country. It devastates the nature of films and media influence in the country. The aftermath of the three attacks awakened American society to develop structures and institutions that would secure the people even more. Therefore, the portrayal of the aftermath is based on the real cause of suffering for the American people. As the attack did not directly affect the president, it affected the livelihoods of the people and their families. Some of the films made mirror the paranoid effect of the government. Reinstating the idea that the people were in constant threat from the militia groups and terrorists from the east. In military-based films, it has shown an American ideology of fighting for rights leading to the deaths of civilians. Additionally, the films provide that the American people are in constant fear of attacks from other communities. For instance, the portrayal of human bombers to the American troops
Bradshaw, Peter. “The Battle Of Algiers”. The Guardian, 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/film/2007/may/11/drama.worldcinema.
Chaman, Jose et al. “The Myth, The Legend, The American Sniper: Chris Kyle – Stmu History Media”. Stmuhistorymedia.Org, 2020, https://stmuhistorymedia.org/the-myth-the-legend-the-american-sniper-chris-kyle/comment-page-9/.
James, Caryn. “CRITIC’s NOTEBOOK; Experiencing The Cataclysm, From The Inside”. Nytimes.Com, 1997, https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/06/arts/critic-s-notebook-experiencing-the-cataclysm-from-the-inside.html.
Kaufman, Michael. “What Does the Pentagon See in.” Battle of Algiers (2003): 0907-07.
La salle, Mick. “Persuasive And Passionate. ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ Is Both. It’s Also Michael Moore’s Best Film.”. Sfgate, 2004, https://www.sfgate.com/movies/article/Persuasive-and-passionate-Fahrenheit-9-11-is-2746736.php.