Hollywood’s take on terrorism

Re “Hollywood’s bad guy problem,” Opinion, Dec. 28

I howled out loud when I read Max Boot’s line, “I work in a think tank.” I can just imagine the other members cringing as they read his nonsense. How can anyone compare the war on terrorism to World War II and still keep a straight face? Hitler’s forces came within days of invading Britain, they advanced to within a few miles of Moscow and almost controlled the entire Middle East and its oil.

A takeover of this nation by Arab terrorists and their supporters is out of the question, yet Boot urges us to panic and overreact to the extent that we would no longer be the very free society that we celebrate. Steven Spielberg is correct in communicating that violence begets violence and an eye for an eye is clearly a path to a cycle of death and destruction.

Can we please just agree that Boot is no strategic genius?

ANTHONY PARKER

Los Angeles

*

Boot and other neocon apologists are fond of using the term “Islamofascism.” It does have a certain ring of truth. Who could deny the existence of adherents? Now Boot and cohorts should begin using Christo-fascism and Judeo-fascism with the same frequency and validity.

GENE TOUCHET

Palm Springs

*

Boot rightfully criticizes two current movies that simply miss the point of terrorism, much less the war against it. But some time ago, not long after 9/11, Hollywood took a big step down this path when it made Tom Clancy’s great book “The Sum of All Fears” into a movie. Its filmmakers performed contortions worthy of the Olympics when they transformed Palestinian terrorists from the 1990s into, of all things, neo-Nazis out to get even with the U.S. after 50 years of repression.

As the film industry contemplates declining box-office revenues, it should rethink its compulsion for moral equivalency in this war. We’re spending our money on “Narnia” -- a fantasy from another time.

LISALEE ANNE WELLS

Long Beach

*

Obviously, Boot has never seen “Das Boot,” the story of a crew of German submariners during World War II, which does an excellent job of showing the humanity of someone perceived as a heartless, faceless enemy. What Boot labels pseudo-sophistication is just an attempt to show that the people we’re fighting are still human beings.

I am not trying to excuse terrorists, but labeling someone a barbarian and the obvious bad guy and then calling any other thoughts on the subject moral relativism is the first step down the road to dehumanization, which is what makes it possible to blindly kill.

JOHN OTA

Culver City