lack of war fervor

[low_delta]

I don't hear many people talking about this impending war on Iraq like it is a good thing. A few, but not many. You don't hear much about it, though. Could that be because most people are in favor of it, but they realize it might not be a good thing, so if they keep their mouths shut, they don't have to ask the hard questions? Or that they don't bring it up, hoping that we go to war, and then when it fails miserably, they can say they didn't support it?

Comments

[seamusd.livejournal.com]

We're still suffering from a national Vietnam hangover. I saw it during the Gulf War as well. People don't want to appear unpatriotic, especially after 9/11. I think most Americans agree that Hussein is a bad guy, but they feel an unprovoked invasion would be wrong. Nevertheless, most are afraid to speak out against it in the interest of having a unified front in Bush's "War on Terror." Iraq is such an unpleasant subject, invoking memories of the worst of the 60s, that most avoid the topic at the water cooler. Or I could be wrong and we've become a nation of silent lambs waiting to follow our idiot leader to the slaughter to defend the RedWhiteandBlue. Fuck Bruce Springsteen!

[cherie.livejournal.com]

Very good observation. I think deep down people know it would be very bad but no one wants to admit their true feelings - that any war is not good. For gosh sakes, who really wants to send their son or daughter off to their death (even in the name of freedom). I heard it last night from Ralph Reed or some other 'right house source'...something like 'we are helping a nation be free'...you know that whole rhetoric didn't work for Vietnam and it is not going to work now.

[cherie.livejournal.com]

My gut feeling is that 'he' will send us to war with Iraq...but you know in doing so he will lose great popularity and that is the risk he is taking...unless of course he can bring Hussein's head on a platter. But my feeling is, shouldn't he get the other bad guy (Osama) first?

[blonnie.livejournal.com]

you're probably right..
my personal feelings..
why talk about something that i'm 90% sure will not even happen..
i don't think it's gonna happen.. it seems like w/all of the talk that's gone on since 9/11.. only 20% of it has occured

[blonnie.livejournal.com]

not saying i support or don't support.. either way because i don't feel like i have enough info.. but i don't think he should be worried about his popularity.. whether or not what he's doing is wrong or right, i certainly hope he's doing it because he feels it's the absolute solution to what he's trying to accomplish and not because he thinks it will make him more or less popular.. ya know? so if he feels it's what he -should- do.. i hope he doesn't NOT do it.. because he thinks it'll make him less popular.

[sirreal13.livejournal.com]

I agree with the statement: "We can't do nothing", but I also think that we can't afford to do anything unilaterally. Now that news of the war atrocities from Mazar-i-Sharif are coming out (even though there is no clear evidence of US knowledge of the mass executions of Taliban prisoners), there will be even more calls for the US to avoid overt military force in Iraq. I predict a massive campaign to boycott US-made goods if "we" (dubya) attack without allies or UN approval. Only then will George W. "get it." It still IS the economy, stupid George.