Two interesting articles by two separate AP writers today. The first wonders why Americans appear less tolerant of deaths in Iraq than in prior wars; the second, in my opinion, highlights why this is the case.
Some excerpts from the first article by Jeff Donn:
U.S. toll in Iraq lower than past wars: Americans may question this war for many reasons, but their doubts often find voice in the count of U.S. war deaths. An overwhelming majority — 84 percent — worry that the war is causing too many casualties, according to a September poll by the nonpartisan research group Public Agenda.
The country largely kept the faith during World War II, even as about 400,000 U.S. forces died — 20,000 just in the monthlong Battle of the Bulge. Before turning against the wars in Korea and Vietnam, Americans tolerated thousands more deaths than in Iraq.
A death toll of 3,000 simply sounds higher to Americans in this war than it did in other prolonged conflicts of the past century, for a number of reasons…
In the weeks after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003, public backing was powerful. But opinion began to shift quickly once the Iraqi army was beaten, its leader was forced into hiding, and chemical, biological or nuclear weapons were not found.
Sad to say that most who backed the war in 2003, including our political leaders, have very short, very selective (even revisionist) memories and behave as if President Bush took this country to war all by himself.
The article is a good one with many theories on why support for this particular war waned so fast, I encourage you to read it in its entirety. One area that is briefly touched upon is the influence of the press in public opinion:
In what’s called “the CNN effect,” the unblinking eye of video news and unending chatter of the Internet quicken and maybe intensify the public’s reaction to the carnage of battle.
“The American people have never been known for their patience, and I suppose with these 24-7 news cycles and access to the Internet, everything seems to have accelerated,” says Richard Melanson, who teaches a class on public opinion and foreign policy at the U.S. military’s National War College, in Washington, D.C.
What this article does not point to is something that I believe is a key difference in levels of support for any war: does the press support the war or oppose the war. Which brings us to the second article by Steven R. Hurst:
U.S. toll in Iraq hits 3,000 as ‘06 ends: The U.S. military announced Sunday the deaths of two soldiers, raising the number of Americans who have died in the Iraq war to at least 3,000, a somber milestone in the 46-month-old conflict.
A somber milestone…
On the final day of an exceedingly bloody year…
Exceedingly bloody year…
There was a relative lull in the bombings and assassinations that have threatened to rip Iraq apart along sectarian seams. Police reported finding 12 bodies dumped in Baghdad Sunday as well as 12 other violent deaths nationwide, both relatively low numbers by recent standards.
… rip Iraq apart…
We are only up to the third paragraph folks. Reading the headline and lead, you would never guess that the majority of this article is actually about the execution of Saddam Hussein.
With editorialized reports such as this, why is it a surprise that the American public views this war negatively. How many articles like this were there during World War II, or even the early phases of the Vietnam War? This type of article is the norm, not the exception, and yet we wonder why we are witnessing a lack of support for this war.
To be sure, the politicians in Washington, especially our President, should have done a better job of selling this war to us, but the battle for public opinion is tough to win when the liberal press refuses to acknowledge anything positive, focuses on the negative with a high powered microscope, and spins in the guise of reporting to purposely sway public opinion against the president in all things… especially the war against terror.
If we lose this war because we make the wrong decisions at the wrong time because of overwhelming public opinion, we can thank the press to a large extent. Let’s hope and pray we do not need another 9/11 to realize that we can not afford to lose this war.
|
|
|
|