http://www.slate.com/id/2182755/:

I don't doubt that Sylvester Stallone feels for the people of Burma. Still, setting his film there is a convenient way of allowing us the satisfaction of a righteous victory without finding a way for John Rambo to intervene in Iraq, where (at least for American audiences) the moral math is far harder to do.

http://fray.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/752312.aspx?ArticleID=2182755:

Does anyone really need to see Rambo to know that it has nothing to do with Iraq? And yet, here's Dana, blabbering on about Iraq.

And does anyone need to see Rambo to know that the violence in a Rambo film has no meaning whatsoever. And yet, here's Dana, blabbering on about how "the moral meaning of the gore keeps changing."

This one sounds mean, BUT...... BUT DANA STEVENS IS JUST A CUTE GIRL HOW CAN YOU SAY THESE THINGS:

All I see is another gutless critic sheepishly following the agenda established for this week. God forbid one of those critics would have their own, original opinion.