>Kelley wrote:
>
>>
>>This si for all the reasons above. And, of course, they have all kinds of
>>propaganda tactics that will clinch it for them. E.g., Not only will they
>>lie about lost lives, they have in every single action we've engaged in
>>in my lifetime, even if the lies indicate that thousands die, people are
>>prepared for this. Not only are they prepared for it, the hardcore war
>>mongers support the use of ground troops (higher troop death rates) than
>>air war (low troop death rates)
>
>I really beg to differ with Kelley's cynical assessment of US support for
>heavy casualties. The polls may say one thing, but we're talking here
>about Americans used to thinking of violence in video game and movie
>terms. The bodybags will start coming home and more and more Americans
>will now somebody who lost a loved one "fighting for nothing," as the
>father of a dead soldier in Baltimore put it. Many Americans are pissed
>off at the government. Lots of people will become opposed to the war. On
>the other hand, some Americans will just become more angry at the Iraqis.
>More bodybags will stiffen their resolve. Throw in some racism on the
>airwaves and you might be able to whip up support for the war.
i agree.
however, most people here think that will will kick military ass in a short time. the real problem will be "the peace".
so, as carrol said, what will people do when it's 10-20 dead soldiers each month?
not much. elizabeth smart, etc. will have taken over the air waves.
that's why i said, "it's our fucking job to keep up the upheaval."
but, hey, how about a bet on it, in LBO tradition?