Iraq War - What's different this time?

[Patroklos]

Yep, it seems it was the shiny zeros

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Geronimo
You appear to agree that most people were opposed to the war and wanted to see it end. The change in sentiment certainly was not in response to the protests. On the contrary I think disgust with the protests actually helped bolster support for the war. The strongest influences behind the growing opposition to the war were surely the draft and casualties that accompanied it, TV bringing the appalling realities of the war directly into the homes of Americans and finally the sheer apparent permanence (lack of tangible progress year in year out) of the war.

It's laughable to suggest that businesses opposed the war because they thought the protesters would overthrow the government and establish a socialist revolution.

You might want to consider studying the time period instead of just making up your own ideas on the subject.

http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/Mistakes/Vietnam_support.html

Support for War in Vietnam, by Age
Under 30 30-49 Over 49
May 1965 61 59 43
August 1965 76 64 51
November 1965 75 68 57
March 1966 71 63 48
May 1966 62 54 39
September 1966 53 56 39
November 1966 66 55 41
May 1967 60 53 42
July 1967 62 52 37
October 1967 50 50 35
Early February 1968 51 44 36
March 1968 50 46 35
April 1968 54 44 31
August 1968 45 39 27
Early October 1968 52 41 26
February 1969 47 43 31
September 1969 36 37 25
January 1970 41 37 25
March 1970 48 41 26
April 1970 43 40 25
January 1971 41 38 20
May 1971 34 30 23

As you can see, support for the war didn't begin to be unpopular with all age groups until late 1969 (except for a statistical deviation in August 68, likely as a result of the Chicago police riot). Opposition for the war grew as casualties dropped, as less and less serviceman were serving in Vietnam. You can see a five point drop in one month after the invasion of Cambodia.

The size of protests mirrored the opposition to the war, whereas in 1965, only a few nutty communists like me would be out protesting, within a few years, protests numbers in the thousands, then hundreds of thousands. The only nation wide student strike occurred with the announcement of the invasion of Cambodia, and almost immediately the United States declared victory and retreated from that operation. Workers were beginning to strike against the war, soldiers were beginning to go on strike. As the protests got bigger, more people turned against the war. As more people turned against the war, the protests got bigger. There's a feedback effect.

You ought to read some of the news reports back then. I read a lot of news papers from the late 60s, and the threat of revolution in this country was taken seriously. Across the Atlantic, in France, in May 1968, students and workers almost brought down the Fifth Republic. In actuality, the threat in America was taken far more seriously than was warranted, but reality and perception aren't the same things. Just because the leaders of the country were seriously worried about a revolutionary outbreak, to the point they began assassinating leaders in the movements, it doesn't mean that the U.S. was actually on the brink of revolution. After the apparent relative tranquility of the 50s, the upsurge in the late 60s early 70s had leaders worried.

[Patroklos]

in 1965, only a few nutty communists like me would be out protesting

Exactly

Nobody was scared of a socialist revolution in the 60's/70's, it is a often repeated myth about every decade communists tell themselves to feel relevant.

[chequita guevara]

COINTELPRO sez different

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


You might want to consider studying the time period instead of just making up your own ideas on the subject.

http://www.seanet.com/~jimxc/Politics/Mistakes/Vietnam_support.html

Support for War in Vietnam, by Age
Under 30 30-49 Over 49
May 1965 61 59 43
August 1965 76 64 51
November 1965 75 68 57
March 1966 71 63 48
May 1966 62 54 39
September 1966 53 56 39
November 1966 66 55 41
May 1967 60 53 42
July 1967 62 52 37
October 1967 50 50 35
Early February 1968 51 44 36
March 1968 50 46 35
April 1968 54 44 31
August 1968 45 39 27
Early October 1968 52 41 26
February 1969 47 43 31
September 1969 36 37 25
January 1970 41 37 25
March 1970 48 41 26
April 1970 43 40 25
January 1971 41 38 20
May 1971 34 30 23

As you can see, support for the war didn't begin to be unpopular with all age groups until late 1969 (except for a statistical deviation in August 68, likely as a result of the Chicago police riot). Opposition for the war grew as casualties dropped, as less and less serviceman were serving in Vietnam. You can see a five point drop in one month after the invasion of Cambodia.

The size of protests mirrored the opposition to the war, whereas in 1965, only a few nutty communists like me would be out protesting, within a few years, protests numbers in the thousands, then hundreds of thousands. The only nation wide student strike occurred with the announcement of the invasion of Cambodia, and almost immediately the United States declared victory and retreated from that operation. Workers were beginning to strike against the war, soldiers were beginning to go on strike. As the protests got bigger, more people turned against the war. As more people turned against the war, the protests got bigger. There's a feedback effect.

You ought to read some of the news reports back then. I read a lot of news papers from the late 60s, and the threat of revolution in this country was taken seriously. Across the Atlantic, in France, in May 1968, students and workers almost brought down the Fifth Republic. In actuality, the threat in America was taken far more seriously than was warranted, but reality and perception aren't the same things. Just because the leaders of the country were seriously worried about a revolutionary outbreak, to the point they began assassinating leaders in the movements, it doesn't mean that the U.S. was actually on the brink of revolution. After the apparent relative tranquility of the 50s, the upsurge in the late 60s early 70s had leaders worried.

protests mirrored the shift in mood they didn't cause it. Do you know even anecdotal instances of people changing their minds because of a protest? How about people changing their minds because of on the scene TV coverage of the war? Or people changing their minds because someone they knew was drafted/killed/maimed? But number one on everybody's mind was the lack of tangible progress. That will generate increased opposition over time that actually picks up steam once the tipping point is reached. The tipping point where people have decided there is zero prospect of tangible results. The protests changed nothing. They were a symptom and not a cause of deep opposition to the war.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Geronimo
protests mirrored the shift in mood they didn't cause it. Do you know even anecdotal instances of people changing their minds because of a protest?

Yes, I do. A documentary about the birth of the Vietnam antiwar movement in Madison, WI had several people say they changed their minds about the war because of a protest, specifically, because the police beat up protesters. I also know participants in the Vietnam antiwar movement who said that after a demonstration, they would also have a huge number of people show up to their meetings.

But number one on everybody's mind was the lack of tangible progress.

Which is why today's antiwar movement in America has a million people marching in the streets?

They were a symptom and not a cause of deep opposition to the war.

Let's return to this discussion when you actually know what you're talking about.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Let's return to this discussion when you actually know what you're talking about.

If I did not in fact know what I was talking about the time to discuss it would be now. Assuming "knowing what I'm talking about" to mean that I would agree that people largely change their minds about political issues in response to protests what would remain for you and I to discuss?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'm wondering how much the protests actually "changed people's minds" when Nixon was re-elected by an overwhelming number in '72.

[FrostyBoy]

Please. Americans always vote for the wrong guy. It's tradition.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I'm wondering how much the protests actually "changed people's minds" when Nixon was re-elected by an overwhelming number in '72.

Consider that the Democratic leadership actively went after McGovern and sabotaged him.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by FrostyBoy
Please. Americans always vote for the wrong guy. It's tradition.

It's not like we have a choice.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I'm wondering how much the protests actually "changed people's minds" when Nixon was re-elected by an overwhelming number in '72.

It was the 70s, what else can you say.