>I can't speak for the rest of the world, but it seems to me that most
>Americans don't care too much if their military is bombing other countries
>as long as no Americans get killed, or are at risk of getting killed. No
>draft, no antiwar movement. Am I being too cynical?
My knee-jerk response is yes. But I think you have hedged just enough to avoid cynicism (and certainly you haven't descended to comparing people to vegetables). Surely, at this stage, people "don't care too much," but, as Kelley pointed out yesterday, this seems to arise more from a feeling of powerlessness and alienation than from apathy. I don't see the "no draft equals no antiwar movement" connection as being a very strong one, just as I don't think it's only because no Americans are getting killed that people are indifferent; the history of this thing is just too mixed and inconclusive. Yes, Vietnam was opposed, largely, but not exclusively, because of the draft. The Gulf War, where a half-million soldiers were "in harm's way" (to borrow Bill's solemn phrasing), was overwhelmingly supported; by comparison, the support for the Yugo war is none too vigorous, and there are no Americans getting killed or even in any remote danger of it.
Certainly the lack of American deaths plays a part in the weakness of the antiwar movement, but I think there are other reasons as well. I just don't know what the hell they are.
Eric