Mi-go amigo: I thought the military's allegiance to the Constitution, and not the fact that it answers to the person of the President, was what made the military different from mercenaries. By your definition, the President could order the Pentagon to do whatever SHIELD asks of them, and they'd do it.

// Of course, the Pentagon is also cool with using mercenaries private contractors ...

I wrote "answer to", not "allegiance". You can't take orders from the Constitution. The salient point is that the person at the top of the chain of command is elected by the people.

ANyway, it makes sense that the pentagon wouldn't allow the use of real uniforms in this movie, because it shows their organization in a negative light. Just like George Lucas might not allow Yoda to appear in The Apprentice.

Jenny Agutter was also in the shadowy council. I have no issues in taking orders from Jessica Six. Her encounter with Box was seared into my childhood memories and many kittens were killed.

fanbladesaresharp: Babwa Wawa: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Babwa Wawa: I don't have issue with -a- military being protrayed as answerable to some cabal, but I would have an issue with the US military lending its IP to a movie where they're protrayed as knowingly answerable to anyone but the President.

You know I posted a hot woman in a uniform right? Why u gotta be all serious and stuff?

Hehe. Just saying I understand why US military wouldn't allow the producers to use their uniforms in the movie is all.

Don't get too worked up over it. It's just a movie. And it's free advertising for the military.

Who's getting worked up?

Mi-go amigo: Babwa Wawa: I wrote "answer to", not "allegiance". You can't take orders from the Constitution. The salient point is that the person at the top of the chain of command is elected by the people.

IMHO, the salient point is that, in theory, if the person at the top of the chain of command gives an unconstitutional order, the military is bound by oath to disobey it. If the military only answered to the President, s/he would have full authority to hand nuclear launch powers over to a secret, unelected multinational entity.

The people are fully capable of electing a would-be dictator.

Fair enough. At the same time, I can see why the pentagon might have issues with the Avengers story line. In that case, neither the chain of command is broken AND the military isn't upholding the constitution.

"Join the Air Force and get used by a nefarious cabal! Nuke Americans!"

That's just not good advertising.

It is, however, a good story.

FTA: "The Pentagon decided to stop cooperating with "Marvel's The Avengers" because the film seemed too unrealistic, Wired reports."

NO, REALLY?

Diogenes: Their concerns about realism seem highly imbalanced.

Not really. The Pentagon liaison isn't passing judgment on the realism of the overall story, only the Pentagon's role in it. In reality, the DoD works for the U.S. government. As long as it is portrayed in this manner, they have no problem with helping in the defense against alien invaders or transformers or whatever. But when you put it out there that the DoD reports to an organization like SHIELD, then they'll back away from supporting it. They're not censoring anything, and they're not blocking the production of the movie. They're just not providing their support. That's their prerogative.

The Pentagon doesn't mind helping out when (1) resources allow for it, (2) it portrays DoD in a favorable light, and (3) it has some potential recruitment value. In the context of the SHIELD relationship, the Pentagon simply didn't see that their role in the story was being depicted in a realistic enough manner to warrant expending the resources and providing the assistance. It's pretty straightforward, really, and it's certainly consistent with previous choices they've made about supporting movie projects.

scottydoesntknow: It's simple, the Pentagon didn't like being somebody's biatch. In Iron Man, SHIELD was just a vague organization with no ties to anyone. In Avengers, SHIELD (and their leaders) have the ability to call nuclear strikes on populated American cities.

And this pisses me off the most, the time frame between Iron Man and Avengers is very narrow, maybe a few years yet they get all those nice toys in that amount of time? I know you aren't supposed to think that hard about it but it still bugs me.