Who Supports the War(s)

[Griff]

The CS Monitor reports thst the young are more likely to support an Iraqi conflict, than us old farts. Why? You'd think kids who grew up in the Clinton years would have a bit more cynicism. Or maybe thats it we have a generation trained to real politics, goal oriented screw the means. I remember UT making an off-hand comment about the kids who were raised strapped in child seats being hauled around by paranoid soccer moms and how they'd react to college. Well they're here and they've switched allegiance from mom to the nanny state. They'll be rendered no more safe by their new parent than they were parked in front of that airbag.

Now that the elections over-with Bush can compromise on Iraq having acheived his majority. I wonder if these voters will feel used or vindicated?

[hermit22]

I have a friend in the Army, and he's seeing the complete opposite there. It is the old-timers who just want to go fight a war, and the young that think there's no justification for it.

Aside from that, I think it is because the young aren't burdened by Vietnam. All my generation has seen is victories - I barely remember Panama, but I remember it being a victory. The Gulf War went astoundingly well, as did Afghanistan. The only situations that were less than victories were Somalia and Kosovo.

So we see the military as basically infallible. We can't remember a lot of bodybags - but when we do, I think the attitude of the youth will shift to a more pacifist attitude if the war goes badly. Remember, the only really nationally unifying even in my lifetime was 9/11. We have nothing else to go on.

It should also be noted that, although I'm 23, I'm pretty emphatically opposed to a unilateral war, and less opposed to a UN backed one.

[Undertoad]

I'm talking about of my ass, here, but I wonder if part of that is because of the very complete training.

Unlike in the NFL, there is no room for the perfectly-trained army to expect a rout and play down to the level of the opponent. The military has to go in not expecting, but at least planning for the worst-case scenario. I would expect the rank and file to be anxious that maybe the harm's way they are going to see is going to be a shitload of harm.

The rest of us can look at the Vegas line and see we're giving 50 points, and relax a little.

[Skunks]

I'm not seeing a clear age-based grouping within the small groups of people I'm familiar with. Instead, it seems that all the people who were strongly in support of retaliation after 9/11 are strongly in support of the Iraq war (which needs a better name).

I would hazard a guess that, moreso than age, upbringing and environment play a large part in one's political outlook: people raised in a very liberal and laid-back household will most likely grow up to be laid back and liberal. The political alignment of most people will probably change over time, yes, but what doesn't?

--Sk

[SteveDallas]

I don't know about age-related differences on this issue. I'd be surprised if it's that cut and dried.

I personally am quite conflicted. On the one hand, I certainly don't disagree with the concept of going over and rooting Saddam out. On the other hand, I think after we do we're going to have a lot of trouble on our hands that a lot of politicians are downplaying. And I think Bush has really done a horrible job with our image in the international community which, like it or not, is important.

I also think we'd have many fewer problems with mideastern countries in general if we would have acted following the oil crises of the 70s to wean ourselves from needing so much oil.

[Griff]

Originally posted by Skunks
...the Iraq war (which needs a better name).

You're right man!
Operation Poppy's Payback? Operation Just Cuz? Operation Armageddon?

[SteveDallas]

Originally posted by Griff

Operation Just Cuz

ROFL.... funniest thing I've read all week.

[Griff]

Thanks k, my work here is done.

[elSicomoro]

Griff, that article is very interesting indeed.

My generation and the one after that (1981 and beyond) have always seemed to be the anti-war gang...maybe even more so than the 60s. We just listen to angry music, do drugs, and post to places on the net like the Cellar. The times, they are a-changing, indeed.

From the article: "'He's really capable of anything,' says Mr. Gardner, who worries about Iraq's potential use of chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. 'The only thing you can do is go to war - it's unavoidable.'"

Look buddy, you're just saying that shit b/c as long as you're in college, you probably won't be affected by any type of draft.

[slang]

besides the majority of Americans and the UN? No one.

[tw]

Originally posted by slang
besides the majority of Americans and the UN? No one.

The UN resolution was carefully worded so that the US could not unilaterally attack Iraq. But then why would we attack a nation that does not threaten us? It makes one wonder the direct relationship between those who purchase Listerene and those who advocate a unilateral (iilegal) attack on Iraq.

[Griff]

Another in a long line of quality folks against Operation Just Cuz.

[slang]

Originally posted by Griff
Another in a long line of quality folks against Operation Just Cuz.

sorry guys, your going to have to present better factual arguments other than the "we hate Bush and think Klinton should be the leader of the universe" BS.


If a trillion people think that 2 + 2 = 6...does that make it so? I dont think so.

You left wingers may have had fun patting yourselves on the back bashing the Iraqi war/ Republicans/ Bush but you are in the minority now. Sorry.

[slang]

Originally posted by tw



The UN resolution was carefully worded so that the US could not unilaterally attack Iraq. But then why would we attack a nation that does not threaten us? It makes one wonder the direct relationship between those who purchase Listerene and those who advocate a unilateral (iilegal) attack on Iraq.

Iraq may not threaten us at this moment. I'll give you that. They may in the near future if they develop the weapons they are hoping to. If they arent developing WOMD they shouldnt have a problem with NON-US inspectors to verify this. Once they have them, we're all screwed any way you look at it.

Why is it that Iraq's illegal act of not allowing inspectors ANYWHERE they want to go not play in your argument that the <I>attack</I> is illegal? If we we didnt have these assurances in the cease-fire agreement from 1991, I would be much more likely to agree with your anti Iraq war sentiments.

I do realize that to a large degree politics is religion to many people. That's fine. It seems to me though that the people opposed to Bush are simply bitter leftist democrats that are trying to kill his approval with the American people. That to is fine but dont think we cant see through you. And yes , I know, not everyone here is from the US. I have never met a right wing foreigner though so please, step forward if you are out there, I'd really like to meet you.

Finally, I think that most of the public in the US does not want to stampede over Iraq and kill thousands of servicemen, women and children. What we fear is that Iraq will build some really nasty weopons and , as we have recently seen, use them against us. We believe Saddam can't be trusted and we need to use force becuase the wimps at the UN wont. Why even HAVE the UN if they cant enforce their OWN resolutions?

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by slang
You left wingers may have had fun patting yourselves on the back bashing the Iraqi war/ Republicans/ Bush but you are in the minority now. Sorry.

Now? When would you say the left-wingers were last in the majority? Surely, you're not going to say that the current Democratic-controlled Senate and Clinton are really left-wingers, are you?