War sucks.  While doing a little extra reading for Rules of Engagement (2000), I learned that the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) put the film in the same light as The Birth of a Nation (1915).  If you are unfamiliar with the movie for which early Hollywood director D. W. Griffith is best known, then just know that it shows those idiots in white robes known as the Ku Klux Klan in a favorable light.  Does this mean that Rules of Engagement is just as racist as the ADC claims?  I will leave that for you to judge.  My focus here is on other matters, and you can draw your own conclusions from what I describe.  I will say that the scene in question, the one that leads to the trial at the heart of the film, is difficult to see.  For me, this simply underscores the awful nature of armed combat.

Colonels Hayes Hodges (Tommy Lee Jones) and Terry L. Childers (Samuel L. Jackson) are two United States Marine Corps (UCMC) officers who well understand the Rules of Engagement.  They have served together since the war in Vietnam, forming a close friendship, and this is where we first meet them.  During a patrol, they get separated from each other and ambushed.  While Colonel Childers’ men capture the officer in charge of the North Vietnamese Army (NVA) unit they are fighting, Colonel Hodges’ group is gunned down.  It takes Colonel Childers executing one of the NVA soldiers to convince their commander to withdraw.  We then fast-forward thirty years and Colonel Hodges is being fêted for his service as he is about to retire.  Colonel Childers is there, but he is to continue serving.  He does so by being sent to the Middle East.  In Yemen, the United States Embassy is coming under attack by armed protestors outside the gates.  The ambassador, Mourain (Ben Kingsley), has requested evacuation for him and his family.  It is Colonel Childers that leads the Marines tasked with this mission.  Upon getting the Mourains out and securing the American flag, Colonel Childers goes back for his men.  Seeing that there are people in the crowd with guns, never mind the snipers in the buildings opposite, he orders his men to open fire on the crowd, using some colorful language in the process.  While this directive is initially met with shock, it is carried out nonetheless, resulting in over eighty deaths.  When news of the massacre reaches the National Security Advisor, Bill Sokal (Bruce Greenwood), all he can think about is the mess Colonel Childers’ act has caused on a political level.  As such, Bill wants to make an example of Colonel Childers.  Soon, he is facing a few charges, including the murder of unarmed civilians, to be tried in a court-martial.  This means military justice, by the way.  Because he believes that he acted as anyone else would in this situation, he decides that he will be taking the matter to trial.  The person he elects to defend him is his old friend Hayes, who had taken up law after he had been wounded in Vietnam.  It appears to be a daunting task, and Colonel Hodges cautions Colonel Childers that another lawyer should be chosen.  We also see that Bill is willing to do everything he can to make sure that Colonel Childers is the one held responsible for the entire affair.  One of the main things Bill does is to withhold the recording showing footage of the armed people in the crowd firing into the embassy, eventually burning it in a fire.  He also puts pressure on Ambassador Mourain, telling the diplomat that unless the testimony implicates Colonel Childers, the blame will land on the ambassador.  Meanwhile, Colonel Hodges goes to Yemen to gather more evidence.  His first stop is the ruins of the embassy where he takes pictures of the destruction, as well as spotting where the security cameras were placed.  He also finds evidence of a cover-up, with Yemeni officials apparently cleaning up the scene immediately after the tragedy. Therefore, there is no proof of the crowd having weapons.  He also sees the human cost, visiting a hospital where many of the survivors, including several women and children, are being treated for their wounds.  This last bit does not paint a good picture of Colonel Childers, and Colonel Hodges goes to his friend’s house in a drunken state to have it out with the accused.  They have a fight, but Colonel Hodges remains steadfast in defending Colonel Childers.  This is good because the trial is the next day.  This does not go well for Colonel Childers, either.  The person pleading the case on behalf of the United States government, Major Mark Biggs (Guy Pearce) is persuasive in showing Colonel Childers to be a crazed killer.  There are a few salient points, though, on which the proceedings turn.  For one thing, Ambassador Mourain’s testimony appears faulty when he claims he retrieved the American flag, only to have one of Colonel Childers’ men contradict this statement.  The main thing, however, is the tape.  With Bill on the stand, Hayes is able to prove not only that there were cameras pointed at the activities of the crowd, but that a potential recording was among the items brought back from the embassy.  Yet, Bill claims to have no recollection of its whereabouts, despite saying that all evidence was turned over to Major Biggs.  Thus, when it comes time for the panel of Colonel Childers’ peers to deliver their verdict, the only count on which he is found guilty is of a breach of the peace.  More specifically, it means that he is found innocent of murder.  He is able to walk out of the court room a free man, and an epilogue says that he later honorably retires from the service.

One of the realizations I came away from Rules of Engagement with is that I am thankful I have never had to be put into the kind of situations you see in the film.  Soldiers are asked to make decisions in heated moments, and they are not always the most clear-headed of choices.  Colonel Childers’ repeated defense for opening firing on the crowd is that he was trying to save the lives of his men.  Any Christian should be able to empathize with a person who has the preservation of life as a priority.  At the same time, there is an awful cost to be paid by the people at which they shoot.  There were people with guns in that crowd, and they were using them with deadly intent against the embassy and anyone in it.  At the same time, Colonel Childers admits to skipping a step or two in the standard procedures used by the military when they are taking fire.  Ultimately, he is acquitted because his peers empathize with the terrible conundrum in which he was placed.  I think this is why the ADC reacted as it did, though I do not know if it is on the same level as the Griffith film.  The proceedings are sad, no matter how you feel about it.  Whether you are Christian or Muslim, the little girl portrayed as having lost a leg in the shooting represents the loss of innocence that these events bring.  I would call on anyone to pray that these kinds of tragedies never happen.

Rules of Engagement is a mildly entertaining courtroom drama.  There are some pretty violent moments in it, and the massacre scene is hard to watch.  Further, I expected Colonel Childers to be found guilty in the end, or to have some kind of verdict that would have been a compromise between holding him responsible and the truth.  He did instruct his men to shoot at innocent people.  It is said that this is sometimes the terrible price of war.  I pray that it does not have to be.