Bush tells the Vatican what statements to make? How does this work?
>
> Wouldn't such a propaganda ploy be very risky and prone to backfire?
>
>Did anyone care last time? it was just as risky then, but it turned out
>very well for them.
>
>not only did they overcome the Vietnam Syndrome but they managed to make
>anti-war activisits who harped on the death and destruction about to rain
>down on the US military look like a bunch of "The Sky is Falling" Asswipes.
>
>>Wouldn't it easily lead to more antiwar activity,
>
>yes for some, but they were protesting anyway. The target are the people on
>the brink, like my mother, who worries what protesting means to the men and
>women over there. My mother to this day still breaks down and cries about
>all the friends she lost in Vietnam. My father, a disabled vet, is the same
>fucking way. They lost a lot of friends and relatives. They don't want to
>do anything that would make them feel unsupported. (Yes, yes, I argue with
>them about this point frequently. :)
Your parents support another act of aggression like Indochina? Most Americans think this way?
>
>> a decrease in volunteers for the military,
>
>people who are signing up for stints for the "bennies" aren't going to go
>anyway--whether bodybag orders are 100 or 100,000. the people that are
>signing up now are doing so for various reasons and those reasons would be
>bolstered by learning that we might be looking at a very deadly war.
Recent enlistees won't go to the front and get killed? What information is this statement based on?
Reports of high casualties "bolster" enlistments for
neocolonial wars? Could you give an example?
>
>the shrubs aren't planning to be there much more than 3 months, i
>garunteeeeeee you that.
Powell spoke today about a "long-term commitment".
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-02-13-us-iraq_x.htm
>
>>and dissension within the military itself?
>
>do you know what these guys say to themselves? It's not our job to die for
>our country, but to make the other guy die fighting for his country. Don't
>get me wrong: i'm not impugning their character. They _have_ to think this
>way, as we all do. We all imagine that we won't be the one to buy it, but
>someone else would. If we really went around believing that we were risking
>our lives and were bound to buy it, we'd be paralyzed. I know a few people
>in the service who are not in favor of this war at all. even so, they
>aren't going to be dissenting any time soon. Do you know what it would mean
>for them to dissent? The _only_ thing these men and women have going for
>them is the service. Anything other than a dishonorable discharge would
>make their lives harder than they already are. [1]
There's plenty of recent history of dissension within the military that prevented mostly civilian policymakers from achieving their maximum goals. Civilian policymakers have to worry very much about morale and dissent in the armed forces; they know from Indochina and other conflicts that they don't have a group of robots to order around.
>
>Otherwise, their tactic here is working very well. With the cover of the
>Pope, you think it has to be more believable than without it. Americans
>like my mother, against the war and extremely apprehensive, will do just
>what kids on the playground do. Suck it up and prepare for the worst. The
>dominant mode of thinking I hear from folks like this is that we have to be
>strong for our kids over there. We shouldn't protest, no matter how much we
>hate it, because it will make our kids (over there) feel worse.
>
>> More likely, Bush, Cheney and company expect significant US
>> casualties and are planning for them, but want to avoid talking about the
>> issue.
>
>Nah, as Kjoo pointed out, they would never even _try_ this war unless they
>expected relatively few casualties.
>
Because of Bush/Cheney/Powell's great concern for the minorities and poor whites who actually make up the all-volunteer military? The same way they care about them in US civil society? The information about body bags and coffins that inadvertently escaped from a US military base close to the conflict speaks eloquently about the real planning going on.
You're right that a successful domestic antiwar movement will influence currents of dissension and revolt within the military, and increase the difficulties of policymakers.
Mark