It's a matter of choice

Celestine 2021-12-10 08:01:24

Although the story is purely fictitious, what the director wants is just the kind of momentary situation. It doesn't matter how Americans can save the world by screaming. Therefore, what is discussed here is not the truthfulness of the background explanation of the overcast nuclear war in the film, but the choice of the parties at a critical time.
It is curious to see that some people think that Denzel and others are rebellious, the reason is that they opposed their immediate superiors, and even forcibly removed the superiors from their posts.
It has been explained clearly in the film that according to the US Navy’s combat regulations, the use of nuclear weapons must be clearly confirmed. This should be a consensus in every nuclear country, especially in the two nuclear powers that were capable of destroying the entire planet dozens of times. Regardless of the French clamoring for a preemptive nuclear policy, in the eyes of the understanding people, the greatest effect of nuclear weapons is nothing but incomparable deterrence, to scare powerful opponents away from their own ideas. The current nuclear war cannot be fought by the people of the earth. This was a consensus as early as the Cold War. In the early 1960s, the Soviets who wanted to be the boss were firmly held in the second place by the Americans. They worked so hard to smuggle nuclear bombs to Cuba and tried to threaten Americans’ backyards, but they did not plan well and act secretly. , Was frightened by the Americans, did not dare to fire a shot, obediently withdrew back to the country. The nuclear attack against the same nuclear country is a military necessity of nuclear retaliation (such as the hostile country in the movie-Lao Maozi, because the old Maozi has the ability to avenge and end if there is no enemy, if it is really beaten. It hurts, people don’t need to launch a nuclear bomb directly on their own territory, directly blasting through the earth, and the whole world will finish it together). The use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear countries will face political and moral condemnation, because not only the value basis of the Western world, but also the universal values ​​of mankind as a whole will be completely destroyed.
Moreover, knowing that the new order has been issued but not received, a nuclear war is rashly triggered. Even if the other party is willing to suffer such a big loss, the millions of people who have died cannot be compensated by a life-long imprisonment or suicide in a military court after the fact. .
In addition, the film also introduces that for such a major task, several nuclear submarines have been dispatched at the same time. If the Alabama fails to complete the mission, there will be several other nuclear submarines. To stop the launch of nuclear bombs and destroy nuclear bases, when there are many options, they must be pressed together. Can this kind of decision-making level lead the most powerful country and the most powerful navy on earth? Is this true?
A careful analysis will reveal that a nuclear bomb was definitely not required to be launched at that time.
You must be cautious in the face of all right and wrong. In front of the lives of millions of innocent people, you should not think about it at this time. It is completely nonsense to say arbitrarily that it is the duty of a soldier to obey orders! You are an individual first, and a soldier second. You have to obey the basic values ​​of mankind first, and then the order of the superior. This must be clearly recognized! Shakespeare said, "Human beings are the essence of the universe! The primates of all things!" The first reason is "how noble reason." What is the difference between a person who understands the grass roots and has no thoughts and salted fish?
But it doesn't matter to rashers and minions. As the captain said, he believes that the best soldiers are those who are completely free from political constraints. To be sure, countless cases in history show that decree always bound the soldiers. As far as the United States is concerned, if the U.S. military were not interfered by the Washington politicians’ decree forbidding the expansion of the scale of war, the Korean War and the Vietnam War would definitely not be the end. Winning is always the ideal of a passionate soldier. For a battle or battle, it will indeed increase the bargaining chip to win at any cost. There is no doubt about it. But for a protracted war, the bargaining chips on the scale of victory and defeat cannot be so big. There is no doubt that force cannot solve all problems. A good commander should also take into account the overall situation and consider whether he can bear the consequences, knowing that the support of the people is the most important bargaining chip to win a war. For people who grew up in China, this truth should not need to be explained.
For the slave, there is only the master before him. Naturally, I don’t understand what the system and the law are, let alone what justice is, what is universal value, and I don’t understand that man is not a machine or a tool. He only knew that something went wrong, and he was shirking responsibility in a disguised way. In particular, military regulations are often exchanged for the lives and blood of countless predecessors. There have been countless bloody cases caused by non-compliance with military regulations in history.
Please do not use the system and law in a slave country to speculate on the seriousness of the system and laws of a democratic country. The construction of the rule of law has always been something we have been striving for, so this movie has a lot of enlightenment for us.

View more about Crimson Tide reviews

Extended Reading

Crimson Tide quotes

  • Rear Admiral Anderson, Board of Inquiry President: Now, based on the testimony from personnel on board the Alabama and, in no small measure, to that of the senior officer, Captain Ramsey, I am prepared to make my recommendations to SUBPAC.

    Hunter: Without my testimony, sir?

    Rear Admiral Anderson, Board of Inquiry President: You have a problem with that?

    Hunter: I might, sir.

    Rear Admiral Anderson, Board of Inquiry President: I have known Captain Ramsey for almost 30 years. We served together on more than a few occasions. If he is lying this will be the first I've heard of it.

    Hunter: Yes, sir.

    Rear Admiral Anderson, Board of Inquiry President: My primary concern here is the breakdown in the system. In this instance the system failed because the two senior officers did not work to resolve their differences, while preserving the chain of command. Now you may have been proven right, Mr Hunter, but insofar as the letter of the law is concerned, you were both right, and you were also both wrong. This is the dilemma that will occupy this panel, this navy, and this country's armed forces as a whole, long after you leave this room. Off the record... you've both created one hell of a mess: a mutiny aboard a United States nuclear submarine, violation of nuclear launch protocol.

  • [repeated lines]

    Zimmer: Message is authentic.

    Lt. Darik Westergard: I concur, sir.