Sobrevivendo à queda dos Black Hawks

I start of by saying, all the negative reviews is by blindsided patriotic Americans that just cannot comprehend the message this documentary is trying to send. It is showing ordinary people caught up in war, it's showing how disgusting war is. One dialoge in episode 2 actually sums up entire series, americans breach some house where family is with their new born kid, they tie up the man and pointing guns at the rest of the family, then you hear delta force guy recollecting the story a he says "at the time I was like F them!". Why is it part sums up the documentary? Because after watching one episode you understand both their views, and you realize nobody is the good guy here, just like in war, where you do things best to you ability and do things you have to in order to survive. Image you are some guy in Colorado with good life there, in your adulthood, you join the army and end up is Somalia, in some mission you lost many of your good friends, are you at the time gonna sympathize with the Somalian people? I don't think so. Same goes for the Somalian side of the story, are you actually gonna believe these Americans is here to save you, if all day you hear helicopters around, people dying everywhere and they treat you like a potential enemy etc. ? I don't think so.

It's story that shows how difficult and gore war actually is, I believe it's must watch for everybody try to join the Army or if you try to understand what these people have endure in combat. Good documentary.

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.

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.

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.

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.