the kingdom

At the heart of The Kingdom lies America’s complicated relationship with Saudi Arabia, rooted in our desire for oil and worsened by our presence in the region. Saudi Arabia is interesting because of the constant struggle to balance modernity spurned by massive oil profits and the traditional religious conservative beliefs. The collision of these different ideals presents problems for both the U.S. and the House of Saud.

Our involvement and presence in Saudi Arabia directly influences radical Islamic sentiment against the United States. Attacks by bin Laden and al Qaeda can be traced directly to our defense of the Saudi Kingdom and the placement of half a million U.S. troops down the road from Mecca. This is not a judgment on the First Gulf War, but an accurate example of why anti-American sentiment is fervent.

What I find most intriguing about the movie is the alternative to our current foreign policy that it presents. The response by the F.B.I. in The Kingdom presents a complete reversal of our current policy against extremist violence around the world. This is significant in that it presents a different idea of dealing with crises in such a delicate region of the world, possibly with a little more success.

I find the movie to be an optimistic but honest look at our relationship with those in the Middle East. The Kingdom attempts to address a crisis in the Middle East not with brute force, but with cooperation and trust. In the end, the movie shows us that we may think the Western and Middle Eastern cultures are radically different, but in reality, they’re more similar than we think. And, Jamie Foxx gets to be a badass for an hour and a half.

what really matters

I would just like to comment on "An Inconvenient Truth" since I have seen the movie and attended Al Gore's presentation last semester. While some of the facts may be out of date, the movie has succeeded in bringing climate change to be a main discussion topic and the forefront of policy making.

The sad thing is how an all encompassing issue such as climate change gets politicized and divided into left and right camps. The point that Al Gore is trying to make is that we're all affected by this whether you believe the science or not. We have a moral obligation to do something about the way we interact with the environment. Writing off the problem by turning it into a political blame game doesn't solve anything.

I find it amazing that a science as solid as climate change can get attacked just because Al Gore is talking about it. But with said, a little comfort is brought by this great op-ed in the NY Times a few months ago. Now those who lambaste Al Gore will probably feel the same way about the NY Times (the liberal center of the universe, or something to that extent), but the gist of it is this: The Right hates Al Gore because he's right. He's always been right. Every time he has gotten up and spoken about an issue, he's been attacked by the Right, but he's been correct. Its really a psychological complex that the Right can't get over. They hate Al Gore because he always proves them wrong.

But I don't want to rant (completely) about Right vs. Left but instead keep the focus on climate change. Its too important to get bogged down by political bickering and blame game. But if Al Gore has done anything, its got everyone talking about our impact on the Earth. And thats what matters.