They basically jumped through hoops to avoid making any kind of political point or statement at all, besides like "war bad"

I appreciated the cinematography and the subject they were exploring, I just agree that they maybe told too much about the background to kill the immersion. Maybe if they had not said who was fighting and why and just went with the idea that everyone already knew and didn't talk about it. Sometimes leaving it up to the viewer's imagination works better than trying to show everything.

Because the movie isn't about political happenings. It's about war. It's not supposed to be about "yeah this exact set of events would happen." If anything I'm glad they chose something outlandish.

Immediate edit: I'm trying to find better words to say it, but having trouble. Obviously war is political. I'm not saying the movie isn't political or not about specific political things happening today. I'm trying to say it's not meant to be about conservatives versus liberals and/or leftists or North versus South (like the actual American Civil War). But when I said it's not about political happenings it sort of came out wrong and I'm not sure how to say it succinctly.

I think I got maybe 15 minutes into that disjointed clusterfuck of a movie. I had some high hopes too. The trailer made it seem like the plausible future but that shit just went in circles and had nothing to say.

That scene was a total flop to me given the fact that it ends with the guy choosing to shoot the only non-Americans and letting all of the Americans live, regardless of what "kind" they were??? It basically reinforces the complete opposite point than it seems to be trying to make?