War, the Election and the Electorate
By Larry Tritle, Ph.D., is a Vietnam combat vet and teaches courses in history and leadership at LMU.
Public support for the Iraq War has fallen from 63 percent in August 2003 to 38 percent in September 2007 and support for President Bush’s leadership and handling of the war is lower. But is there any connection between the war and public reaction to it, and the upcoming presidential election? Will a candidate for the nation’s highest office tap into this disaffection for the war and ride it to the White House, as Richard Nixon did in 1968 with his “secret plan” to end the Vietnam War?
Right now my answer to that is “not likely,” and my reasons for this skepticism lie in a belief that most Americans care little about the war, the sufferings of either the Iraqi people, which we have created, or those of our own military personnel who are callously ignored. Let me explain.
This is an electorate fed by a media that tunes in to hear about Brittany, OJ, and Koby, but tunes out stories of Blackwater killings in Baghdad or the faceless, limbless veterans returning from Iraq. Too many university students, including my own, don’t know what or where the Sunni Triangle is, or what Shia militias are. Of course, in some ways, maybe, they’re not to blame. After all, less than 1 percent of the US population serves in the military, so we shouldn’t really expect them to know—or care—about these things, right?
The fact is, however, that the horrors of the war in Iraq happen to others, mostly the Iraqis, and to young Americans who either lack the means to go to college or find meaningful work, or believe what the Bush Aadministration tells them about terrorism. Of course, they’re not alone in the latter: even today many Americans believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 911. He wasn’t. So there would seem to be only a small percentage of the electorate who take a genuine interest in the war. But such ignorance could become deadly for one big reason: Iran.
Today there are groups in the Bush Administration actively considering plans for attacking Iran: planning groups at the CIA are in place and role-playing; the poor Navy, not able to help in the bombing of Iraq and Afghanistan, wants to do something to prove its mettle; and all the while, little consideration is being paid to how this will play in the Middle East, or at home for that matter.
But maybe war with Iran is what is needed to wake up the American electorate from its current sleepwalk through life—from caring more about Brittany and OJ and “Go Trojans!” or “Go Bruins!” (take your pick), than in how we as a nation are perceived and imagined from abroad. But such a price could and would be very high, not just in economic terms (if you think the economy is bad now, just wait for war with Iran!), but in life and worldwide conflicts that would make today’s crisis seem like a tea party.
A cure for the electorate’s wartime malaise is not likely to be coming any time soon. A return to the draft would do the job—it would make every American pay attention to current US military adventurism and might make the electorate, the government and the military think a little more about sending in the troops. But relax, this isn’t too likely, and the future wars will continue to be fought like the present one, that is, with someone else’s kids – but you will pay for it.