<underfire> chaos, illusions & the 60's

[Robertson, Linda]

I would like to suggest that there are two essential differences relevant to the narratives of warfare in re comparing Vietnam and Iraq and American public opinion.  Vietnam was fought during the Cold War.  The mise en scene for many Americans was that the Communist/Soviet/Nuclear threat hung over foreign policy.  The disillusionment with the war in Vietnam was related to the effects of the Cuban Missile Crisis and the nationwide reaction and call for disarmament, not to mention Johnson's decisiion to commit Americans to battle.

The threat of Terrorism just does not have the magnitude of effect on the imagination that the Cold War did, particularly as there was no evidence of either wmd or collusion with Al queda.  The mask was tron from the Official Story earlier than it was with Vietnam.

There were two similarities which also have to be taken into account:  As long as Congress went along with the President, the press did not enter into any kind of independent criticism of the war.  It was only after the Gulf of Tonkin declaration was shown to have been based on a lie that Senior members of Johnson's own party began to raise very serious questions about Vietnam.

Pictures may be important; but unless the political elites are fighting with each other, it is difficult to shape public opinion.

The disillusionment with Iraq arises, I would argue, as much from the very important insider accounts as well as the reports by serious investigative reporters than it does from the pictures on the internet.

Linda Robertson
Director
Media and Society Program
Hobart and William Smith Colleges
Geneva, New York
14456



-----Original Message-----
From: underfire-bounces at underfire.eyebeam.org on behalf of Michael H Goldhaber
Sent: Fri 11/3/2006 7:59 PM
To: underfire at underfire.eyebeam.org
Subject: Re: <underfire> chaos, illusions & the 60's
 
But similar issues  were evident in Viet-Nam. Neither situation's  
images unambiguously show or showed winning or losing. But y0u are  
right that when an unambiguous victory occurs (and this must be  
rather quickly) the public is likely to be more willing to support  
the (former) war. However, the greater show of images helps make more  
situations ambiguous. And, as I mentioned in my earlier post, signs  
of "enemy" suffering must be considered now in deciding an  
unambiguous victory, which makes the problem harder.

Again, we have to look to history for comparisons. WWI 's long  
stalemate was often not enough to create widespread disaffection  
until many years later. (For instance, New Zealand, which sent many  
troops to the western front in WWI, and has memorials to dead WWI  
soldiers everywhere,  apparently didn't much begin to question their  
involvement in that war until the 1990's.) I think something similar  
occurred in the US Civil War, where it took the North years to seem  
to be winning.

Best,
Michael

On Nov 3, 2006, at 5:14 AM, Eugene Wyatt wrote:

>
> From: "Michael H Goldhaber" <mgoldh at well.com>
>
> "Now a comparison to today: In the US the level of opposition to the
> Iraq war has risen much more swiftly than a comparable movement did
> 30 years ago, although the form of opposition is very different.
> Polls already show a majority quite opposed to the Iraq war, even
> without the draft, without a major youth movement, with one-twentieth
> the number of US deaths. Why? I think largely through the much vaster
> cavalcade of images from all sides that are seen from the Internet
> and other sources."
>
> Perhaps this is somewhat off topic and too obvious, but I suspect  
> that if
> this "cavalcade of images," etc. were showing that the invading  
> forces were
> 'winning' in Iraq, the polls would NOT show that a majority at home  
> were
> opposed to the invasion of Iraq.  'Winning or losing' very largely  
> determine
> war's acceptability for many.  And the sad thing is:  if the war in  
> Iraq
> were to turn around, if the invaders were to be seen as 'winners',  
> so the
> polls would turn.  'Winning and losing' here make temporary  
> bedfellows, "Oh
> you're antiwar my dear, since when and for what reasons?"
>
> Eugene Wyatt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Under Fire  http://underfire.eyebeam.org
> 16 October - 10 December 2006
> International Biennial of Contemporary Art of Seville
> all writings copyright individual authors
> no commercial use without permission
> to post a message, send an email to:
> underfire at underfire.eyebeam.org
> to unsubscribe, send an email to:
> underfire-leave at underfire.eyebeam.org
>