Netflix’s ‘War Machine’ Gets It Right On Everything That’s Wrong With COIN

Entertainment
Ah, I love the smell of burn pits in the morning.
Photo courtesy of Netflix

With the White House mulling a new troop surge in Afghanistan, “War Machine,” a dark comedy about the last time we tried this, is exactly what we need right now. On the surface, the feature-length film from writer-director David Michôd — streaming on Netflix starting today — is an examination of post-colonial hubris. Brad Pitt stars as an eerily familiar four-star general tasked with doing what no other foreign military leader could: winning in the storied Southwest Asian graveyard of empires.


But for me, “War Machine” captures the futility and absurdity of the counterinsurgency, or COIN, operations I took part in when I deployed to Helmand in 2010 during the Battle for Marjah. For those who never had to deal with COIN in Afghanistan, it’s pretty straightforward… in theory. First, you clear an area, which means killing the bad guys. Next, you hold the ground you gained. Then, you build infrastructure and maintain ties with the locals. But don’t forget, those bad guys you’re fighting, they’re the friends, relatives, and neighbors of the very people you’re trying to win over, so when you kill one, you turn someone else against you. Think of it like a tricked out version of the Vietnam War’s “hearts and minds” strategy, because, as the movie points out, that worked out so well.

The movie opens in 2009 and follows Army Gen. Glen McMahon, also known by his nom de guerre “the Glenimal.” McMahon is a throwback to the bygone days of Gen. George S. Patton, when men were men, and weren’t judged for it. He’s crass, hard, and shuffles along with a wide gait, a permanent scowl, and one hand curled into a claw clutching an imaginary cigar, as the narrator describes in the first three minutes of the film. This is the man who’s meant to bring the “forever war” to a triumphant close, but instead his career is torpedoed by a Rolling Stone exposé. Sound familiar? It should. The film is loosely based on the late Michael Hastings’ book “The Operators: The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America’s War in Afghanistan” — which was actually based on a Rolling Stone article by Hastings that led to the 2010 dismissal of Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

“War Machine” relishes in pitting the Pentagon brass against those pesky and meddling politicians, both in the states and in Afghanistan, which you kind of expect to see in a movie centered around the politics of America’s longest war. Where “War Machine” really stands out though, is in its candid portrayal of what it feels like to be an enlisted service member told to go into a hostile province with a plan so dizzyingly complex it takes a flowchart with more lines than an M.C. Escher illustration to explain how it works.

Remember this?

Like Hastings’ writing, the film is rooted in deadpan humor. When McMahon addresses his command staff, he describes the challenges civilian casualties pose to counterinsurgency operations in Afghanistan as such: “We are here to support the civilian population. Therefore we must avoid killing it at all costs.” He’s not wrong, but it ain’t that simple, and that’s kinda the point of this movie. It talks about COIN as if it were a slow-motion train wreck — everyone else can see what’s going to happen — only the conductor is blissfully, perhaps deliberately, unaware of how it will end.

Related: Want To Watch Brad Pitt Play A Certain General In This New Trailer? Sure You Do »

To put it the way one Marine does during a heated exchange with McMahon: “Seems to me, we're all here with our guns and shit, trying to convince these people that deep down, we're actually really nice guys. I don’t know how to do that when every second one of them, or third one of them, or every tenth one of them is trying to fucking kill me, sir.”

The look every Marine had during a COIN briefing.Photo courtesy of Netflix

“War Machine” does a decent job of illustrating some of the challenges Marines faced in Marjah during Operation Moshtarak, with the film’s climactic battle appearing to be closely modeled on HBO’s “Battle for Marjah” documentary by Ben Anderson, a journalist who embedded with Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 6th Marines, the unit I was attached to during the battle.

Though there’s a lot of things war movies will never get right — small unit tactics, uniforms, grooming standards, the list goes on — there was some obvious creative license taken in the film’s depiction of the mission, with one Marine pulling a “Hurt Locker” and running through the streets alone, but many other parts were spot on. Like when the Afghan National Army soldiers have to be shoved through a doorway because they’re unwilling to clear a compound — Marines weren’t allowed to go into a building without members of the Afghan military present — or when the Marines realize that none of their Afghan counterparts speak Pashto, only Dari, even though the ANA was there to help build ties with the local citizens. Also, a lot of the Afghan soldiers were high, all the fucking time. All that stuff actually happened.

The operation was meant to show that COIN would work. It was meant to be Afghan-led, and it was meant to convince the residents of Marjah in particular, the people of Afghanistan at large, and subsequently, people back home in the states, that the war could, and would, be won. It didn’t work out that way in “War Machine,” and many would argue it didn’t work out in real life, either.

While “War Machine” has taken flak for not really knowing what kind of movie it wants to be — lurching back and forth between introspection and gallows humor — it does one thing really well: It talks shit about the people running the war. It may not be fair, in fact, it’s definitely not, but I’m not going to lie, the enlisted Marine in me kind of loves that there’s finally a war movie that calls the brass out on their bullshit.

You can watch “War Machine” on Netflix beginning May 26.

Soldiers from the 1-118th Field Artillery Regiment of the 48th Infantry Brigade Combat Team fire an M777 Howitzer during a fire mission in Southern Afghanistan, June 10th, 2019. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Jordan Trent)

Once again, the United States and the Taliban are apparently close to striking a peace deal. Such a peace agreement has been rumored to be in the works longer than the latest "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure" sequel. (The difference is Keanu Reeves has fewer f**ks to give than U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad.)

Both sides appeared to be close to reaching an agreement in September until the Taliban took credit for an attack that killed Army Sgt. 1st Class Elis A. Barreto Ortiz, of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division. That prompted President Donald Trump to angrily cancel a planned summit with the Taliban that had been scheduled to take place at Camp David, Maryland, on Sept. 8.

Now Taliban spokesman Suhail Shaheen has told a Pakistani newspaper that he is "optimistic" that the Taliban could reach an agreement with U.S. negotiators by the end of January.

Read More
Audie Murphy (U.S. Army photo)

Editor's note: a version of this post first appeared in 2018

On January 26, 1945, the most decorated U.S. service member of World War II earned his legacy in a fiery fashion.

Read More
A Purple Heart (DoD photo)

Florida's two senators are pushing the Defense Department to award Purple Hearts to the U.S. service members wounded in the December shooting at Naval Air Station Pensacola.

Read More
Ships from Destroyer Squadron (DESRON) 23 transit the Pacific Ocean Jan. 22, 2020. DESRON 23, part of the Theodore Roosevelt Carrier Strike Group, is on a scheduled deployment to the Indo-Pacific. (U.S. Navy/Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Erick A. Parsons)

Editor's Note: This article by Gina Harkins originally appeared on Military.com, a leading source of news for the military and veteran community.

The Navy and Marine Corps need to be a bit more short-sighted when assessing how many ships they need, the acting Navy secretary said this week.

The Navy Department is in the middle of a new force-structure review, which could change the number and types of ships the sea services say they'll need to fight future conflicts. But instead of trying to project what they will need three decades out, which has been the case in past assessments, acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly said the services will take a shorter view.

"I don't know what the threat's going to be 30 years from now, but if we're building a force structure for 30 years from now, I would suggest we're probably not building the right one," he said Friday at a National Defense Industrial Association event.

The Navy completed its last force-structure assessment in 2016. That 30-year plan called for a 355-ship fleet.

Read More
Master-at-Arms 3rd Class Oscar Temores and his family. (GoFundMe)

When Oscar Jesus Temores showed up to work at Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story each day, his colleagues in base security knew they were in for a treat.

Temores was a master-at-arms who loved his job and cracking corny jokes.

"He just he just had that personality that you can go up to him and talk to him about anything. It was goofy and weird, and he always had jokes," said Petty Officer 3rd Class Derek Lopez, a fellow base patrolman. "Sometimes he'd make you cry from laughter and other times you'd just want to cringe because of how dumb his joke was. But that's what made him more approachable and easy to be around."

That ability to make others laugh and put people at ease is just one of the ways Temores is remembered by his colleagues. It has been seven weeks since the 23-year-old married father of one was killed when a civilian intruder crashed his pickup truck into Temores' vehicle at Fort Story.

Read More