I was very aware throughout the movie how they were handling this. He's an arms dealer. Had his arms ended up in say, Mexico everyone would have screamed and how they dodged the issue. So, I payed attention at whether they would play his enemies as "fanatical ragheads" or what. They dodged the issue of religion quite well and made that villain a warlord with no interest other than gaining power. He designs his suit with the help of brilliant middle eastern doctor who he can't even repay even when he ends up in his village which is under attack. I felt the movie didn't quite carry the shift to the greater villain which was another power mad American. So the bigger message gets botched by poor delivery which was that we create the villains because we are the bigger one to some extent.

he wants to stop selling weapons because he realizes his weapons have ended up in the wrong hands.

the fact is that they were in the wrong hands all along -- namely, the US military.

then he goes "over there" and kicks some ass. yes, a very emotional scene. people suffering violence is horrific.

which is why, once again, the movie fails to be anything other than jingoism because it fails to invite the US as a villain.

it's once again the case of "oh, the singular bad egg (stark's partner, in this case) spoils it for everyone else."

when the reality is that the corporate agenda and the military might that backs it is rotten to the core.

thanks for that link!