Discussion History Film / CourageUnderFire

The sub-comment under HonorBeforeReason makes zero sense. It currently reads \\\"His reasons have little to do with honor, however: he\\\'s trying to make sure that he was justified in what he did, and that Boylar\\\'s death, while regrettable, was not actually his fault, in an attempt to deal with his guilt.\\\" Considering that the final act shown in the film is him \\\'\\\'accepting responsibility and placing the burden of guilt on himself to the dead man\\\'s parents\\\'\\\', that interpretation does not hold water. Recommend its removal.

Furthermore, the entire post under NotQuiteTheRightThing is wholly inaccurate as written. The argument of HonorBeforeReason makes sense insofar as pressing the idea of a court martial while under fire, but as written the entry is inaccurate. Did not perform the rewrite as it would be a major change on the main page and I really don\\\'t want to be accused of arguing/debating on an information page.

The sub-comment under HonorBeforeReason makes zero sense. It currently reads \\\"His reasons have little to do with honor, however: he\\\'s trying to make sure that he was justified in what he did, and that Boylar\\\'s death, while regrettable, was not actually his fault, in an attempt to deal with his guilt.\\\" Considering that the final act shown in the film is him \\\'\\\'accepting responsibility and placing the burden of guilt on himself to the dead man\\\'s parents\\\'\\\', that interpretation does not hold water. Recommend its removal.
Furthermore, the entire post under NotQuiteTheRightThing is wholly inaccurate. I won\\\'t even touch the further implications of how it\\\'s written. Recommend its removal in its entirety for inaccuracy.