Calling something propaganda is not the same as trashing it.
I'm simply pointing out that Capra's Why We Fight series was worthy of Oscar consideration as were the two feature films mentioned. In 1942, when the US was still gearing up to fight a world war after a Japanese attack, I can see a need for training films designed to convince a bunch of young draftees that they were in uniform for a good reason and not at just some government whim. I can see the need for sex education films for soldiers in their teens, many of them away from home for the first time. And I can see the need for films reminding people loose lips sink ships and encouraging workers not to "play sick" because it would hurt the war effort. But I also see things in both Capra's series and the feature films that lift them above the usual level of most propaganda efforts. I also question how great was the need for feature films to dispense propaganda in 1943, well into the war when many--likely most--families had one or more members in uniform and when hundreds of thousands in the movie audiences had been notified of loved ones who were dead or maimed or missing. Do you think those people and others living in fear of what the war would bring really needed a movie talking about "Japs" and "Nips" and "Krauts" to hone their anger against the common enemy? Weren't most Americans and Canadians and Brits and Australians and Free French and Russians and many others already saying such things--and worse? Seems to me more like an element of realism in those featured films that sounds worse to us now when Japan and Germany are allies in the war of those rotten terrorists.
If the war movies made in 1941-1945 were propaganda, they were remarkably unsuccessful. I remember research for a college term paper years ago that indicated no correlation between war films and enlistments during World War II. Among the most popular films during that period were many musicals and comedies. The statistics also showed that reports of Allied victories were usually followed by a dip in military enlistments, indicating the possible assumption of why do they need me if things are going well? On the other hand, news reports of Allied disasters often brought a surge in elistments. Like when cruiser Houston--named for the Texas city--went down. There was a drive started in Houston to replace the sunken ship with a new Houston. There was a local war bond drive that raised a large amount of money toward construction of a replacement vessel, and a recruitment drive that brought in more than enough local volunteers to replace the Houston crew who were killed or captured.
The only example I ever heard of a person enlisting after seeing a movie was Tony Curtis's claim that he joined the Navy and became a submariner after watching Cary Grant as the submarine commander in Destination Tokyo.
Anyone who has seen the films knows what's in them and should be able to discuss them in a "shades of gray" manner without having a cow.