I do not like to be hit on the head with moral messages a la "Body of Lies", "Lions for Lambs", "Rendition" etc - all preaching to the converted. I don't understand this new fangled argument about separating the personal views from the film. Isn't a director's viewpoint a part of the film and is meant to be reacted to? Are we supposed to ignore it and just focus on the technical aspect? Plus, this is a film about war so wouldn't it effect the view of a person with an opinion on the subject? Morally, is it fair to fashion an action/thriller out of misery (American or Iraqi)? Or we are supposed to ignore that, as well? If you praise this film because it is ambivalent or not passing any "facile" judgments about war you admit war is too complex, is that not an opinion too? Are American critics falling over this film and calling it the "best american film about Iraq war" because it does not show the torture and the suffering gone through by the Iraqi people? Oh, that would be passing a "facile judgement" right? By focusing on a group of American bomb squad is maybe a good cinematic decision. It makes the film more tense and compact but ignoring the plight of the invaded and make them come across as a tribe deserving of such treatment makes this film more dubious than ambiguous. While I did enjoy the film's various action set-pieces, I find the idea that it took a film about the plight of the soldiers rather than the other sides to get the critics sympathy flowing, disturbing.