Mogadiscio 1993: La chute du faucon noir

As someone who has endured the horrors of civil war in Eastern Africa, I can attest that war is a grim, complex reality, never simply black and white. The so-called "good" side often commits atrocities too-Ukrainian drones targeting surrendered Russian soldiers, American bombers devastating Tokyo in WWII, the Allied destruction of Dresden, or Israeli actions in Gaza. The list is endless.

To label the Americans who intervened to aid starving Somalis as evil is foolish. Similarly, branding Somalis who turned hostile after losing loved ones in crossfire as villains is arrogant and naive.

The best path forward is to learn from our mistakes and embrace forgiveness. We've done this effectively in other areas-improving nuclear safety after Chernobyl or implementing the Halo in F1 after tragic accidents. War demands the same reflection and growth.

One can totally relate with the negative reviewers wondering why the lives of the people from Somali were disregarded as enemies when I'm sure 3/4 of them were innocent bystanders. What they fail to realize is the Leader Mohammed was not a saint to the people. They cheered him because I believed that is all they know and whom they thought had their best interest as a whole.

This is why this style of documentary is important because it utilizes the old phrase: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Were Americans wrong for acting like World Police? Or were the Somalians wrong for cheering and parading the dead body of a soldier, in an inhumane way.

I appreciate the view brought to us from the Somalian people because the movie itself gave me a one sided view of everything.

To sum it all up, there were no winners but many tragic losses. Its safe to say war never solves anything.

I've long awaited this since I've seen it advertised, especially from the Somali perspective. I knew going into it, especially with said perspective, that there will be a lot of angry Somalis who have inevitably been mislead into believing propaganda that exists even to this day.

This documentary series leaves out a LOT of context, especially related to why the U. S. was even there.

Here's just some of the stuff it leaves out:

1. Hostility by locals to the UN mission, and attacks that occurred resulting in the deaths of 30 peacekeepers months before hand. 25 were Pakistani, 5 were American and 2 were Italian.

2. Aidid was originally on good terms with the UN / US, until the UN prevented him and his militia from stealing food aid to starve out his opposition and feed his growing army. As time wore on and he further weaponized starvation, a ICC warrant was issued for his arrest.

3. The reason for distrust among US / UN soldiers about Somali locals, which were a series of bombings committed by militia that blended in with the local population.

4. Women and children were in fact involved in the fighting, though the number of casualties of combatant women and children is unclear to this day. Old clips recorded at the time even show women / children with AK-47 rifles and RPGs, and reports of this were corroborated by other UN soldiers present in the area at the time. This event had a HUGE influence on the rules of engagement involving civilians during later conflicts such as the Iraq war, and influenced urban battle doctrine.

5. The involvement of the Malaysians and Pakistani troops in the rescue convoy.

Originally during Operation Restore Hope, the US had very limited involvement, as many Americans back home did not want to become entangled in yet another war. Somalia is not resource rich, and even to this day we have limited diplomatic involvement with it. The war is still going on to this day.

The documentary seems to unfairly paint the US as the agitator, despite the fact that Somali fighters were firing widely and launching RPGs in densely populated areas. Many civilians were killed during the Durant crash, which further caused anger among civilians, civilians who fail to realize that it was their own people who shot down the helicopter over a densely populated area. This is part of why the US is very hesitant to get involved in humanitarian issues abroad, as despite our intentions the local population never seems to be thankful and would take the word of a tyrannical warlord over us. There was outrage when we ended our involvement in Somalia in 1995 as well.

Ultimately it's a good documentary, but leaves out a lot of history and doesn't really add anything new to the story that can't be found in other documentaries, short of civilians and fighters who are always going to minimize their culpability, the only one being remotely thankful is the women who's house they had to use as shelter.

As Episode 1 of "Surviving Black Hawk Down" (2025 release; 3 episodes ranging 47 to 56 min) opens, David, an Army Ranger who was there when it happened, sits down and starts talking into the camera. We then go back to "October 3, 1993" as the Army Rangers and Delta Force are getting ready to head out into Mogadishu, Somalia's capital, for another daring mission. At this point we are 10 minutes into Episode 1.

Couple of comments: this is the latest documentary from director Jack MacInnes ("Leaving Afghanistan"). More importantly, this is produced by Ridley Scott Associates Production. Ridley Scott is of course the director of the well-received 2001 movie "Black Hawk Down". This documentary mini-series covers the same ground, but in greater detail, and with on-camera interviews of plenty of people who lived through these events, both from the US side and from the Somali side. Best of all is that the producers tracked down a Somali who calls himself a "war cameraman", and who videotaped a LOT. On paper, all of this sounds pretty enticing, but now having seen these 3 episodes (in a single setting), there is a major setback, namely the countless reenactments that are peppered throughout this mini-series. I am in general not a fan of reenactments in documentaries, but here it is even worse as most of them are filmed with handheld cameras, resulting in a non-stop barrage of shaky footage that resulted into a headache for me towards the end of this mini-series. It's like you are in the middle of the boxing ring, and absorbing the blow-by-blow account as if you are there yourself. I felt exhausted by the time Episode 3 concluded.

"Surviving Black Hawk Down" started streaming on Netflix a few days ago. If you are a fan of the 2001 Black Hawk Down movie, or simply interested in a slice of geopolitics, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

Surviving Black Hawk Down .

A Harrowing Examination of Vulnerability and Moral Ambiguity in War

Netflix's *Surviving Black Hawk Down* (2025) is a gripping three-part documentary that revisits the infamous 1993 Battle of Mogadishu, offering a visceral portrayal of urban warfare and the precariousness of ground troops without air support. Directed by Jack MacInnes and produced by Ridley Scott, the series juxtaposes firsthand accounts from U. S. soldiers and Somali civilians, creating a tense narrative that forces viewers to confront the brutal realities of combat and its moral complexities .

1. The Vulnerability of Infantry: A Stark Reality The documentary underscores the fragility of even elite forces like the Army Rangers and Delta Force when stripped of air superiority. The downing of two Black Hawk helicopters transforms a routine mission into a desperate fight for survival, trapping soldiers in a hostile urban maze. Through harrowing interviews, veterans recount their shock at being pinned down by Somali militias armed with RPGs and AK-47s, highlighting how quickly technology and training can be neutralized in asymmetric warfare . Archival footage of soldiers scrambling for cover under relentless fire drives home the chaos, emphasizing how the absence of air support left them exposed and outgunned .

2. Moral Gray Zones and Allegations of War Crimes The series does not shy away from implicating both sides in acts that skirt-or cross-ethical boundaries. Somali interviewees describe civilian casualties caused by U. S. forces, while American soldiers defend their actions as necessary for survival in a city where combatants blended with non-combatants . One gut-wrenching scene shows Delta Force operatives raiding a home, pointing guns at a family, with a soldier coldly reflecting, *"At the time, I was like, 'F them!'"* . Such moments force viewers to grapple with the dehumanizing effects of war, where split-second decisions carry lifelong consequences.

Critics argue the documentary leans toward justifying U. S. actions, particularly by framing Somali militias as aggressors who fired indiscriminately in populated areas . However, it also includes damning omissions, such as the lack of historical context for U. S. involvement (e.g., Aidid's weaponization of famine) and minimal acknowledgment of civilian deaths caused by American firepower . This selective framing risks perpetuating a one-sided narrative, even as it attempts balance.

3. Lessons in Futility and Human Cost The documentary's greatest strength lies in its unflinching depiction of war's futility. Survivors from both sides-including a Somali cameraman who filmed the chaos-recount stories of loss and trauma, dismantling any notion of "heroes" or "villains" . A Somali woman whose home became a battleground and a U. S. veteran haunted by killing a child combatant exemplify the shared humanity amid carnage . As one reviewer notes, *"There were no winners, but many tragic losses"* .

Conclusion: A Flawed but Essential Watch While *Surviving Black Hawk Down* occasionally falters in historical depth and tributes to fallen soldiers (e.g., neglecting Medal of Honor recipients Gordon and Shughart) , its raw storytelling and dual perspectives make it a vital educational tool. It challenges viewers to reflect on the ethics of interventionism, the myth of "clean" warfare, and the cyclical nature of violence.

Final Takeaway: This series is not just a recounting of past events but a mirror to contemporary conflicts. As drone warfare and urban battles dominate modern headlines, *Surviving Black Hawk Down* serves as a stark reminder that war's true cost is measured in human lives-a lesson we desperately need to learn .

Rating: 8/10 - A brutally honest, if imperfect, exploration of war's chaos and moral ambiguity.