by donald dusinberre imartsyfartsy@gmail.com
Stop-loss. These days, it’s a term that is often used flexibly as an adjective, noun, and even a verb. With the upcoming release of Stop-Loss, a movie written and directed by Kimberly Peirce, the term is bound to become more common and much more controversial.
Peirce, who also wrote and directed Boys Don’t Cry, was inspired to create the Stop-Loss movie after hearing the story of Brandon Leonard King, who served his time and got stop-lossed.
Title 10, United States Code, Section 12301(d): “The President may suspend any provision of law relating to promotion, retirement, or separation applicable to any member of the armed forces who the President determines is essential to the national security of the United States”
Paragraph 9(c) of DD Form 4/1 (The Armed Forces Enlistment Contract): “In the event of war, my enlistment in the Armed Forces continues until six (6) months after the war ends, unless the enlistment is ended sooner by the President of the United States”.
These quotes are excepts of the stop-loss policy present in our government’s law books and in the contract signed by every American soldier since its inception after the Vietnam conflict. It’s a real policy, and it’s getting more use lately as a tool to keep soldiers engaged even after their contracts expire.
At face value, there seems to be no basis for folks to be outraged. Every soldier signs a contract that warns him or her that being stop-lossed is a possibility. Sure, it sucks, but you get what you pay for, right?
Aside from the sneakiness of such a policy and the havoc it wreaks on families, the biggest legal complaint comes from the word “war.” You see, the Iraq War is actually the Iraq Conflict; we’ve never officially declared war, and so the legality of the stop-loss policy has been hotly debated.
We took the opportunity to speak with Kimberly Peirce about her upcoming movie, even though we haven’t seen it yet, either.
EU: For many of us, the stop-loss policy is a brand new idea. What inspired you to tackle an issue so difficult and timely?
Peirce: I was originally working on a movie about soldiers, but I was in New York on 9/11 at the time and I knew I had to make a movie with that in mind. Then, my little brother signed up to serve, so I had a more personal connection to the cause. The movie is about the soldiers and their familes, but it’s more about how the soldiers become more focused on camaraderie and looking out for the guy on their right and left.
EU: Do you think that the subject matter will allow your movie to stay relevant far into the future, well beyond our current military engagements?
Peirce: I do think it will stay relevant, because when I looked at movies about World War II and Vietnam, there’s something universal going on there that never loses importance. The movie will show that the stop-loss issue is emblematic of what we’re going through at that time, because I think Americans feel stop-lossed.
EU: I don’t really keep track of celebrity politics, but was it something you had to deal with? Do all the actors involved generally agree with each other and the movie’s message?
Peirce: Well, the movie doesn’t have a political message. I was just inspired by the soldiers and their families, as well as my brother, who all have to balance their responsibilities as soldiers with their family lives. We all just worked together to portray what’s going on right now.
EU: Do you think the movie will have an impact, one way or another, on enlistment and/or morale?
Peirce: I don’t think it will have and impact on enlistment, but I hope it will with morale. It brings common stories to everyone involved. I’ve heard from a lot of soldiers and families who say that the movie is right on, and they’re pleased that the story is being told.
Article Published in the 03-08 Issue of EU Jacksonville
|
