So Mike seems to think that because Danny only sent out a two-man group (As opposed to the recomended six) they were overun and thus had to call in the Army was backup which in turn resulted in the death of his son.
Would it -really- have made much of a difference though? I mean there were so many in that mob they'd have likely been pinned down in anycase. Was Mike right or is he just looking for a scrapegoat?
What do you think?
It was Dannys fault alright.
1. He arranged the kidnapping of the doctor. This was the start of the entire chain of events.
2. He coordinated the release of the doctor, broke security rules and put two of his own crew in danger.
3. Right or wrong, he proceeded to involve the regular army to rectify a problem he himself had caused.
So yeah, I'd say he could be blaimed for that mess.
And a six man group in two vehicles (3 Guys per vehicle) properly equipped could have fled from the mob.
shareDanny should've taken responsibility over everything he was involved, knowing full well what could happen. If so, he wouldn't have gotten everyone into the mess they were in. If it wasn't Mike's son, it would've been someone elses.
shareI think the end point was, the war was to blame. Everyone was victims of going to Iraq and all in different ways. Yes you can go and blame actions by Danny for the death, but he also was a victim. It was the situation these people were put into which all changed them and changed them for the worse which was ultimately to blame. I thought that was the underlying theme. The Iraqi's, it's the situation that the war and occupation put them into which was to blame for the actions. Occupation is what leads to these bad things.
shareDanny a victim? Lord have mercy . . . you think his drinking, drugging, bribing, breaking the law, and kidnapping had nothing to do with any of the problems he created? You are daft.
share