Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

War on Iraq

Iraq: Still a Matter of Opinion

By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted November 24, 2005.


Contrary to recent wisdom, public support for the Iraq war hasn't dropped -- that is, the version that the neocons shilled is still popular.
Advertisement

There's a sizeable plurality of the American public that will never accept a war based on our foreign policy elites' ideological preferences or imperial ambitions. Most aren't pacifists -- that's a straw man -- but they believe war should be an action of absolute last resort.

It's a predictable factor, and one that the hawks that got us into Iraq should have taken into account when they formed their policy. They knew that they could sell the war using modern public relations techniques, a friendly media and the specter of 9/11. But there's a limit to how long you can spin the facts on the ground. Early public support was for the conflict they promised us, not the one we got. But they chose to turn a blind eye to the lessons of recent history, especially those learned during Vietnam.

Americans now have no more confidence in the statements coming from the podia of the Pentagon and White House briefing rooms today than they had during the "Five O'Clock Follies" era in the late 1960s and early 1970s. But despite the fact that they have little or no public credibility, the hawks seem genuinely shocked by our lack of fealty. White House press flack Scott McClellan called John Murtha's (D-PA) call for a redeployment from Iraq "baffling."

What did they expect? Infused with that most stubborn of convictions, American exceptionalism, and burdened with the kind of ignorance one can only attain from studying "The Arab Mind" or "The Clash of Civilizations", they launched their adventure fully confident in the veracity of their propaganda. The results both in Iraq and here at home are as ugly as they were predictable.

The myth of declining public support

The right's vitriol towards those who now oppose the war in Iraq is based on a simple and wholly inaccurate narrative of the public's opinion about war and peace.

In their eyes, only the right's jingoists are virtuous enough, have enough fortitude and are willing to sacrifice in order to accomplish what they never question to be a lofty and noble goal. The public, according to this narrative, is weak and fickle and abandons ship when Americans start coming home in those proverbial flag-draped coffins.

But as Noam Chomsky wrote in The Guardian, "Polls have demonstrated time and time again that Americans are willing to accept a high death toll -- although they don't like it, they're willing to accept it -- if they think it's a just cause."

You'd never guess that from the American press, which almost universally supports the right's narrative. On Sunday, the Houston Chronicle editorialized in typical fashion that, "As the American death toll mounts above 2,000 -- with 10 soldiers killed in the last two days -- opposition to the open-ended U.S. occupation rises at home."

That's based on a superficial analysis of the yes/no "headline" questions that polls ask -- broad questions such as "Do you support the war in Iraq?" Based on questions like these alone, it would appear that support for the war in Iraq has plummeted: in April of 2003 -- just after the invasion -- a CNN/Gallup/USA Today poll found that 73 percent of Americans thought it was "worth going to war in Iraq." This month that same question in the same poll got just 38 percent.

But before it slips irretrievably down the memory hole, let's recall what public opinion was really like -- in various polls' internal numbers -- in the days and weeks leading up to and immediately following the invasion of Iraq in March of 2003.

If you looked inside those polls, it was clear that the administration and their allies couldn't just shift the primary reason we went to war and expect the public to stick with them. The headline in a March 7 CBS poll, just two weeks before the invasion, found that 69 percent approved of "military action to remove Saddam." But by a 48-27 margin respondents said that their primary concern wasn't democracy building or regime change, but "making sure that Iraq is disarmed."

The headline in a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll read "Steady Support for Action Against Iraq" -- seven out of 10 supported the use of force. But look at the secondary questions, which include this one: "The White House estimates the war, including one year of reconstruction and aid, will cost at least $60 billion dollars -- or approximately $300 per U.S. taxpayer." At that price, 69 percent of Americans said it is "worth it to disarm Iraq and remove Saddam" and 23 percent disagreed.

That poll was taken two weeks after Paul Wolfowitz had discounted the $60 billion dollar estimate as being too high. War Pollyannas said that Iraqi oil would settle the tab. As I write this, the cost of the Iraq War to date is over $214 billion dollars.


Digg!

Joshua Holland is an AlterNet staff writer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Mrs.
Posted by: truthorelse on Nov 24, 2005 5:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is an excellent and impartial analysis of the current quagmire, although this is not an article for those who are used to the USA Today format. ADD seems to be our national malady, which affects a large chunk of the US population. Perhaps this is why the propaganda machine worked so well for the last 3 years and it took so long for many to see reality beyond the 'patriotic' slogans and the war machine spin. Many still refuse to face the unpleasant truth and stubbornly follow the leader off the cliff.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mrs. Posted by: Pepper
» RE: Mrs. Posted by: werely
» RE: Mrs. Posted by: Edward George
Vietnam, part 2!
Posted by: stoney13 on Nov 24, 2005 5:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What we have here is another Vietnam. I pray that it won't take this administration long to figure it out!

Those of us who lived through those years are in no big hurry to repeat them!

GET US THE FUCK OUT OF IRAQ!!! Should be the rallying cry of the Democratic Party in 2006!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Excellent Piece
Posted by: wobblies on Nov 24, 2005 8:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hi~
That was a very well done piece. What is that line about fooling all of us some of the time...?

God Speed & Happy Thanksgiving,
David

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: xcellent Piece Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: xcellent Piece Posted by: werely
Iraq
Posted by: Ellie1 on Nov 24, 2005 8:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am throughly convinced there is absolutely no underestimating the intelligence of the American public-especially in RED STATES. The motto there should be, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice-well you know I am stupid." Sounds like George Bush's misquote, doesn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Iraq Posted by: werely
» RE: Iraq Posted by: fairleft
enough
Posted by: slewis on Nov 24, 2005 10:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nice work, very well done, with the current trends we cant take anything, even the polls, at face value. Much like our current administration we have to seek out ALL the things they arent telling you.

C'mon poeple we cant do this for another 3 years!!! look at all he has done in this first year of his second reign of death and terror. People all seem willing to accept "a high death toll to achieve our goals" ask youself instead are you willing to have one or all of your children blown up or shot to death to achieve his goals. If the cost is your precious johnny or susie or whatever is it worth it then? Would you let someone kill your child to accomplish the current goals?

I would fight to my death and even give my child to protect your and your childrens freedom and keep a "911" from ever happening again. But that isnt what happening here we arent at war this is bushs private oil war he never recieved a declaration of war its illegal and in my eyes that man is a mass murderer killing our kids for his own goals and lying to us all over and over to do as he pleases..

I dont what a liar and a murderer in my whitehouse the man has no character, if you want to protect our country Impeachment is the war we should be fighting. Can we survive 3 more years of this?

Impeach - Time to say bush YOUR FIRED!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Impeachment is not enough Posted by: crachlis
» RE: enough Posted by: squadsright
» RE: enough Posted by: stoney13
US USES WMD IN IRAQ
Posted by: rockpicker on Nov 24, 2005 10:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Grieving For Falluja, Election Day, 2005

I'm sitting empty in a cold house,
awaiting the old tread of boots
sent to kick in my loose- hinged heart.
The angry hands of those with much
to lose, I imagine, close on me.
They drag me burning, unquenchably,
into their unmooned dark.

A chilled cup of tea upon the table
is how my neighbors find me gone.
No sign of struggle. No skeletal sneer.
Only the storm door banging mad in wind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» gramps Posted by: gramps
boblecht
Posted by: boblecht on Nov 24, 2005 10:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here, for the second time in my lifetime, an American president has led the country to large scale war under false pretences. Johnson and Bush are not the first presidents to pull a politically expedient war out of the closet, but the abdication by Congress of their duty to advise and consent on committment to war in both cases is very troubling. The War Powers Act was severely misused in both instances and Congress blindly rolled over to support both these presidential perogatives to commit troops to harms way. This Congress cannot be excused for their lack of oversight in this decision. I was not fooled by the false claims used to justify this war and I am not inclined to forgive the incumbents in Congress who now claim they were misled by "faulty intelligence." The problem with their intelligence was in stupidly giving this adminstration benefit of substantial doubt that the pre-war propoganda was true. These men and women are too stupid to continue representing us. Replace them where possible in the next election and let us start a national debate on the weaknesses in the War Powers Act that grant designing presidents unfettered power to commit our troops to additional unnecessary and untenable wars.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Throw the bums out Posted by: crachlis
» RE: Throw the bums out Posted by: Edward George
I have a few more thoughts ...
Posted by: JoshuaHolland on Nov 24, 2005 11:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Over in The Mix.

JH

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Joeraider
Posted by: Joeraider on Nov 24, 2005 11:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wonderful article. I get upset with the media's reliance on polls. I think they are manipulative. However, when someone puts that data together like this article's author, there is a powerful, telling result. Wow!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Joeraider Posted by: werely
Soldiers Know.
Posted by: SanFranDuke on Nov 24, 2005 12:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For a very long time, former battle hardened veterans have been saying that we have to start withdrawing from Iraq in an orderly manner.

Congressman Murtha is but the latest of these veterans. He's not advocating that we "cut & run," rather he is saying that we should withdraw to stratigic positions around those areas of the country where the so-called "insurgents" have been the most destructive.


Let's listen to Murtha and begin a statigic withdrawal NOW.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Soldiers Know. Posted by: Edward George
A Compassionate Poll
Posted by: david.model@senecac.on.ca on Nov 24, 2005 1:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The next poll on how the American people feel about the war and military occupation might include the question: Since the beginning of the war, tens of thousands of Iraqis have died, many Iraqis are still without food and clean water, the insurgency is not abating, many Iraqis have been exposed to white phosphorus and many cities and towns have been partly or completely destroyed. In light of this information do you support the continued occupation of Iraq?

When the question is posed only in terms of the confidence and trust the people have for the President and his decision to keep the troops in Iraq, a critical and essential factor about the occupation is overlooked, namely the conditions under which people are living and the question about whether the lives of the Iraqi people have improved or worsened. It seems negligent and callous to talk about the timing of withdrawal without considering the lives of the people we are supposed to be helping.

Author of "Lying for Empire: How to Commit War Crimes with a Straight Face"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Compassionate Poll Posted by: werely
» RE: A Compassionate Poll Posted by: Edward George
Iraq a matter of opinion
Posted by: jleo on Nov 24, 2005 6:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Greetings everyone and a Happy Thanksgiving. As far as Iraq and the polls, let me reiterate a quote from Josef Goebels; "Tell a lie long enough and loud enough and people will believe its true." I think most everyone has heard that.
However, there was a second part to the quote: "This will work as long as the state can shield the public form the economic and political consequences of the lie. Truth, becomes the enemy of the state. Mind you, this is a paraphrasing and not Goebels ver batum. But you get the picture? The American public was convinced of the following;
1: Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD"s)
2: There was a direct link between Sadham Hussein and the attack on Sept 11, 2001.
The public know believes that both statements are false.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You are all so owned!
Posted by: Jeffersonista on Nov 25, 2005 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are all so owned. It doe not matter what any plurality of Amerians think. The money bags are set on plundering and stealing all the oil left in the world and selling it to you while they morgage the country to China. Amazing times to see the entire constitution and bill of rights go out the window, just so fat boys can have thier big pickups, sixpacks and big screens. The wages of tryrany have never been cheaper.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You are all so owned! Posted by: Edward George
When will Democrats take responsibility?
Posted by: yngcelt on Nov 25, 2005 10:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am so sick and tired of hearing the same old "Bush Lied to Us" load of crap from these rich spoiled liberal larva protesters and bored hippies who have just been waiting for something to protest again! The left-wing media machine and the Democrats in Washington want to paint this picture of only Republicans voting to go to war and the "whole country" being misled.
And when the fact of faulty intelligence that was shared and believed by everyone is brought up, the Dems and Libs go right back to the "yeah, but Bush LIED TO US and he manipulated the intelligence!"
But how many Democrats sit on the foreign intelligence committees? How many of them were privy to information before even the President touched it?
And why hasn't anyone challenged Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and the other high profile Democrat leaders who have all been QUOTED YEARS BEFORE the 9/11 attacks that they believed Saddam Hussein was dangerous and needed to be stopped and that he was connected to terrorism? I mean they have been QUOTED!! Yet the Kool Aid drinkers on the left side just dismiss any quotes or evidence that doesn't support their agenda and will whole-heartedly support any and all half-assed conspiracy theory that has the chance of making the President and the office of the President and any and all Republicans and even our troops look like evil liars and murderers.
How many times have we heard the Democrats call for someone on the right to "step down" or be fired because of something they said that ruffled their feathers while they make slanderous, false and often inflammatory statements that they feel they have the right to say and they believe they shouldn't be held accountable for?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Fuck!! I need a joint!! Posted by: stoney13
Polls are a gimmick! The design of the questions makes answers predictable.
Posted by: Sojourner on Nov 25, 2005 1:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you, Holland. It is possible to write a similar critique of every poll that has ever been taken.

Yes, if it is one candidate against another candidate, I suppose that it's possible to learn which one has more support. But questions about attitudes and policies suck! They're for headline writers who have their heads stuck up their you-know-where and therefore need to be told what to write.

For years now, I have refused to participate in telephone polls. They are democracy (as well as research) at its most stupid. I encourage you to hang up on them, too.

The idea that somehow the least common denominator (what else does a poll show? oh, the logical contrary? the logical obverse? logical schmlogical!) is significant does not compute. What's significant about what makes no difference?

Yes, the polling organization gets paid. Yes, the press gets more BS to print. Yes, our politicians get told what to say. That's what I mean: what's significant about that? Same old, same old.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

privatkredit
Posted by: pjohnq on Oct 3, 2006 7:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]