Question about the movie 'Lord of War'

[Heisenberg]

In the scene in Lebanon where he's in the building with the piles of M16's, Cage's character says something to the effect that whenever the US leaves someplace, they leave their weapons behind because it's cheaper to buy new ones than ship the old ones back. Anybody know if there's any truth to this?

 

[OdiN]

if it's in the movie it jujst haasd to be truei!!!!!

 

[TheoPetro]

that was a poorly done movie IMO. and to answer your question...i have no idea.

 

[PurdueRy]

I liked the movie...but I doubt its entirely true...maybe in some cases...but not in most

 

[mugs]

I doubt it. Those guns cost $600-1000.

 

[Reckoner]

Paying $$$ in bribes to move illegal arms from one place to another has got to be pretty costly, nevermind the actually storage, handling, and transportation of said items. I wouldn't be surprised if it's in fact, true.

 

[kitkit201]

probably is true. Considering the work that needs to be done bring those big M16 back... (sarcasm)

 

[Svnla]

Not sure about small arms but I read somewhere <60 Minutes IIRC> that heavy arms and equipments were left in the Middle East. The National Guards were told to do so, yet they didn't get new arms and equipments to restock.

 

[Syringer]

Originally posted by: OdiN
if it's in the movie it jujst haasd to be truei!!!!!

It's based on true events.

 

[blahblah99]

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: OdiN
if it's in the movie it jujst haasd to be truei!!!!!

It's based on true events.

So was the Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

 

[DaWhim]

Originally posted by: mugs
I doubt it. Those guns cost $600-1000.

I doubt 600-1000 is the manufacturing cost for 1 m16. probably 10x less.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: DaWhim

Originally posted by: mugs
I doubt it. Those guns cost $600-1000.

I doubt 600-1000 is the manufacturing cost for 1 m16. probably 10x less.

The military doesn't manufacture them though. I remember seeing in USA Today a loooooong time ago that an M16 costs the military about $600.

 

[Vin0134]

By the way they were AK-47s, and every single one of them was real. Taken from imdb:

According to Andrew Niccol, the filmmakers worked with actual gunrunners in the making of the film. The tanks lined up for sale were owned by a gunrunner who had to have them back to sell to another country. They used a real stockpile of over 3,000 AK-47s because it was cheaper than getting prop guns. The gunrunners were more cooperative and efficient than the studio or the crew.

EDIT: it may be possible i am thinking of the wrong scene

 

[Phoenix15]

My brother was in the Army for Desert Storm. He told me they dug a huge hole out in the desert with bulldozers and burned all of ther extra fatigues, boots etc.. the day before they came home. His LT said the same thing, cost more to bring them back than to burn them. He STILL has tons of desert camo and boots that the sergant told them they could have.

I have no idea about the weapons though. He did say that on the firing range when you checked out ammo you had to shoot it all. Well, you didn't HAVE to, but returning it to the armory was a PITA. They had to insect every single round to make sure it wasn't tampered with.

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: OdiN
if it's in the movie it jujst haasd to be truei!!!!!

It's based on true events.

Translation: "This movie is completely true except for all the stuff we made up to make it more interesting."