Michael Moore does the attacking for America in his latest provocative film Where To Invade Next?

Date
    August 13, 2015


Michael Moore is back with another provocative documentary.

In Where To Invade Next, the Oscar-winning filmmaker and political activist apparently tells the Pentagon to stand down so he can take over the job of invading other countries.   :)

It's another inflammatory topic - the relationship between the United States and its enemies - for the controversial director of such films as Bowling for Columbine (on gun control), Fahrenheit 9/11 (on George Bush's war on terror), Sicko (on American health care) and Capitalism: A Love Story (on the US financial crisis).   :)   


Moore calls it "a film of epic nature."

The documentary will have its world premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival in October then screen at the New York Film Festival, which has described it as looking at America from the outside this time around.

"Where To Invade Next is provocative, very funny, and impassioned," the festival's screening notes say. "But it's also pretty surprising."


While Moore has kept the content secret, including the places apparently invaded, he has started to reveal the odd detail.

One clue came in in a Q&A session on the live video streaming app Periscope about whether there was a particular trigger for the film or whether it came from a sense of the US being "at infinite war".

Moore said that "the issue of the United States at infinite war is something that has concerned me for quite some time and provides the necessary satire for this film."

But rather than a particular trigger, Where To Invade Next reflected what has been happening in the US since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

"It's the constant need, it seems, to always have an enemy - where's the next enemy? - so we can keep our whole military industrial complex alive and keep the companies that make a lot of money from this in business.

"I've always been a little bothered by that so that's where the comedy comes from."

On whether his documentaries should be be more about entertainment or social content, Moore said he aimed for both.

"The first thing I tell the crew on day one is we're not making a documentary, we're making a movie," he said.

"Documentary or non-fiction is just the vehicle we're using. You can tell a good story with fiction, you can tell a good story with non-fiction.

"We choose non-fiction but it's a movie because I'm asking you to give up your Friday or Saturday night and come to the theatre and buy a ticket and $9 popcorn ... I want you to have the best cinematic experience that you could possibly have going to the movies."

In a second Periscope Q&A, Moore revealed he filmed on three continents.

"I think you'll enjoy where I took my army to invade," he said. "And hopefully appreciate it too at the same time"

Moore took a swipe at US presidential candidates Jeb Bush, brother of former president George W. Bush, and, more surprisingly, Hillary Clinton.

"I think this is going to be a very fun election year," he said. "I don't know if that's good for the country, it being fun.

"But at least funny. Maybe that's a better way to put it."

On Bush, he was dismissive: "Enough said, please. Enough of that."

He had mixed feelings about Clinton.

"I wrote a chapter in my first book back in the nineties called My Forbidden Love for Hilary." he said. "The love has waned and grown and then waned again."

But there was one issue Moore believes the presidential candidates need to address - black lives mattering.

"All white liberals should maybe think about that a little bit," he said. "There are so many things that we have to deal with in this country especially when it comes to race.

"People shouldn't be afraid fo it. It's absolutely encumbent on everyone, especially white people, to help put an end to this once and for all."

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/movies/michael-moore-does-the-attacking-for-america-in-his-latest-provocative-film-where-to-invade-next-20150814-giyh1b.html#ixzz3irHPus9i

I vote for invasion of Manus Island, liberation of prisoners and elimination of the guards  and their ilk.

USA won't lose that one. Will they?

They should invade the USA.........we could help them.

They might win that one, even with the gazillion private guns.

I'll look forward to it. Love Moore's work.

Looking forward to seeing this film.  Michael Moore, does it again.   [smiley=thumbsup.gif]    

Must make a point of not watching it then. But if the Indonesians ever decide to invade this place, make sure you turn your noses up to any offer of help from the U.S. eh folks?

I'm sure good old Australia can go it alone..... ;D

Muttley wrote on Aug 15^th, 2015 at 7:30pm:

Must make a point of not watching it then. But if the Indonesians ever decide to invade this place, make sure you turn your noses up to any offer of help from the U.S. eh folks? I'm sure good old Australia can go it alone..... ;D

Nobody knows which side USA will support.

Muttley wrote on Aug 15^th, 2015 at 7:30pm:

Must make a point of not watching it then. But if the Indonesians ever decide to invade this place, make sure you turn your noses up to any offer of help from the U.S. eh folks? I'm sure good old Australia can go it alone..... ;D

The US and Australia are bound by treaties that say that if one is attacked the other will intervene.

If a foreign nation attacks us, the US will be involved immediately.  If the US is attacked, Australia will be involved immediately.  The only recent difficulty arose over whether or not the War On Irak was really in response to an attack on our Ally - the United States.

In the modern era of assymetric warfare, it is often hard to define who is the enemy, and declaring a War On Terror over a terrorist attack is tenuous to say the least, and leaves treaty obligations on very thin ice.  The parameters of an anti-terrorism war are difficult to define, and attacking someone held to be a harbourer of terrorists is a very slippery slope.

Terrorists, though they may hold citizenship rights in a sovereign country, are not necessarily acting on behalf of that country, and it is not then necessarily a valid response to attack that country in response to an act of terrorism.

That smacks of imposing group responsibility for an act on a tribe or social group, rather than on the individuals concerned directly.  Terrorists are tried as individuals - not as national entities, and if found guilty, are imprisoned as individuals... we do not imprison nations - how, therefore - do we apportion blame for an act by individuals to a nation - UNLESS it can be clearly proven that the nation, as a matter of national policy, actively supported the act of terrorism and those involved, and KNEW that in doing so it would create the act of terrorism?

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Aug 16^th, 2015 at 12:25am:

The US and Australia are bound by treaties that say that if one is attacked the other will intervene.

That is only true if USA don't have a similar treaty with Indonesia.

Unforgiven wrote on Aug 16^th, 2015 at 12:59am:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Aug 16th, 2015 at 12:25am: The US and Australia are bound by treaties that say that if one is attacked the other will intervene. That is only true if USA don't have a similar treaty with Indonesia.

And if the US don't need the shipping straits through Indonesia more than they need us.

And let's face it, they don't need us.

Moore could do a lot of good if he wasn't such an Ass Clown with his own agenda. His stories are slanted mockumentaries telling his bias side. "Roger and me" was the only one I could finish watching and Roger Smith closed GM plants because the employees were massively over paid and under worked There was more sleeping then car production on some shifts! I know more people then ever see no connection between production and profit but if a doughnut shop was run the same way it would be out of business overnight.

Any one of the last three got any links?

Here's a start - but I haven't read it yet... I await your responses.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/09/197277.htm

Sorry to bring it from the horse's mouth..... I know how hard that is for some...

I see no treaties for mutual defence between the US and Indonesia - there are such pacts between the US and Australia.

The US is going to sell the Indos 30 superannuated F-16s - with the usual 'foreign' combat systems (lesser than the standard US ones and well known to US operators) - and the Indos are going to refurbish them with........ Russian of Chinese systems..... all fully known to the US and nowhere near as good.

Now also recall what I said about foreign built submarines and the built-in 'signatures' that the building nation will know only too well..... and may well sell on for filthy lucre to another nation......when it comes to YOUR son and daughter serving under the waves one day in a Meccano Class submarine or above the waves in a Lego Class corvette.......

This nation needs its own self-sufficient industries to survive the coming cataclysm of the collapse of the 'globalised economy'.  I offered them to you with the GAIAs....

Where is there one man to stand for this and to stand for our children and grand-children?  Not here today.....

Well said Grappler, we had a strong defence production industry, we must make it strong again.

red baron wrote on Aug 16^th, 2015 at 7:55am:

Well said Grappler, we had a strong defence production industry, we must make it strong again.

Technology has overtaken boomerang and spear manufacture. The beer can launcher is the only viable weapon Australia can manufacture.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP0f1_f8nuc

'F-35 hopeless, less battleworthy than Soviet jets from Cold War'

Published on Aug 15, 2015
The F-35 was hailed as the most hi-tech fighter jet ever created far ahead of anything else in the skies. But it's now claimed the most expensive warplane in history is worse than a Soviet fighter dating from the Cold War.

Unforgiven wrote on Aug 15^th, 2015 at 8:37pm:

Muttley wrote on Aug 15th, 2015 at 7:30pm: Must make a point of not watching it then. But if the Indonesians ever decide to invade this place, make sure you turn your noses up to any offer of help from the U.S. eh folks? I'm sure good old Australia can go it alone..... ;D Nobody knows which side USA will support.

I suspect that the whole point of Moores movie will the that the Americans always support the 'side of war' .

John Smith wrote on Aug 16^th, 2015 at 11:51am:

Unforgiven wrote on Aug 15th, 2015 at 8:37pm: Muttley wrote on Aug 15th, 2015 at 7:30pm: Must make a point of not watching it then. But if the Indonesians ever decide to invade this place, make sure you turn your noses up to any offer of help from the U.S. eh folks? I'm sure good old Australia can go it alone..... ;D Nobody knows which side USA will support. I suspect that the whole point of Moores movie will the that the Americans always support the 'side of war' .

It appears that America wants to wage perpetual war. If they have no evident enemies they will invent one or more.

Michael Moore might have some issues with American society but it sure caters for his appetite. His big fat ass obviously has never had a hungry day in it's life.

double plus good wrote on Aug 16^th, 2015 at 12:31pm:

Michael Moore might have some issues with American society but it sure caters for his appetite. His big fat ass obviously has never had a hungry day in it's life.

Double plus good is infatuated and slavering again.

double plus good wrote on Aug 16^th, 2015 at 12:31pm:

Michael Moore might have some issues with American society but it sure caters for his appetite. His big fat ass obviously has never had a hungry day in it's life.

has yours? :D :D

John Smith wrote on Aug 16^th, 2015 at 2:52pm:

double plus good wrote on Aug 16th, 2015 at 12:31pm: Michael Moore might have some issues with American society but it sure caters for his appetite. His big fat ass obviously has never had a hungry day in it's life. has yours? :D :D

Not many. That's why I stick up for country, unlike you leftards.

Michael Moore was made an honorary al qeda member by the mad muslims for his services to terrorist propaganda, its an honor most of the left would die for, no wonder they worship at his altar.   ::)

For Unforgiven:   Some boomerang!!!

States Reconnaissance and battlefield surveillance   

Infantry weapons

F88S-A1 Austeyr, shown fitted is:
- a standard issue carry handle/1.5x power sight,
- M203 grenade launcher
- and an AN/PEQ-2 night aiming device.

SR-25 rifle, Heckler & Koch USP sidearm and Multicam uniform.


MAG-58 fitted with 3.4x Elcan Wildcat sight.Assault rifles and carbinesAustria / Australia F88 Austeyr - a derivative of the Austrian Steyr AUG STG-77 assault rifle. It is the ADF's standard individual weapon, which replaced the L1A1 SLR and the M16A1 rifle from front-line service in the late 1980s. The rifle uses an Australian 5.56×45mm cartridge with a modified propellant. According to the ADF, the modified bullet is more accurate and goes further but costs more to make. The F88 Austeyr can use the 5.56×45mm NATO round but under continued use, damages the barrel.[citation needed] The rifle has a 508 mm barrel and an integral 1.5x magnified optical sight inside the carry handle. The weapon is manufactured under licence in Australia by Thales Australia (formerly Australian Defence Industries Ltd).

double plus good wrote on Aug 16^th, 2015 at 5:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Aug 16th, 2015 at 2:52pm: double plus good wrote on Aug 16th, 2015 at 12:31pm: Michael Moore might have some issues with American society but it sure caters for his appetite. His big fat ass obviously has never had a hungry day in it's life. has yours? :D :D Not many. That's why I stick up for country, unlike you leftards.

when did you ever do that?