Sleepwalking Democrats and American Public Support for President Bush's Attack on Iraq

نویسنده

  • John D. Huber
چکیده

Since the threat posed by Saddam Hussein became the leading issue in American politics and international relations in late summer 2002, American public opinion has been out of step with public opinion in other western democracies. In the months leading up to the war, compared with citizens elsewhere, fewer Americans felt that war in Iraq was unjustified, fewer felt that UN-endorsement was necessary before a war could begin, and more Americans were willing to support unilateral action by the US. Why were Americans more supportive of a pre-emptive war in Iraq? There were many reasons, but in what follows, I blame the Democrats in Congress. I focus on the Democrats because other factors shaping public opinion – such as the obvious reality that September 11 occurred in the United States and nowhere else – do less to distinguish America from other countries than did the behavior of our political elites in the months leading up to war. And I " blame " the Democrats because they lacked the courage to debate the merits of President Bush's foreign policy. Had they opened a debate, American public attitudes toward the Iraq issue would likely have been quite different, and much closer to those of our allies. This would have made it more difficult for President Bush to proceed with a war that lacked the legitimacy of broad international support of the sort seen in the first Iraq war, Bosnia, and Afghanistan. And it would have given Americans the opportunity to weigh competing visions of how to protect their physical and economic security in the post-9/11 world. Failing to articulate a clear response to President Bush's security policy on Iraq was a mistake for the Democrats. The mistake may have rested on false assumptions about national security – something we will never know because the only world we will observe is the one that's seen a controversial preemptive war unfold in the face of broad international opposition. And the mistake almost certainly rested on false assumptions about optimal electoral strategy for the Democrats. Indeed, at a time when the core Republican supporters are a fragile coalition of extremists – whose opinions are much further from the average American's than are the opinions of core Democratic supporters – the leaders of the Democratic Party are tripping over each other to avoid confrontation with President Bush on the issues that are most important to Americans. …

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

On Why the United States Should Not Attack Iran: A Conservative, Evangelical Christian Response

In the midst of American intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq, and in the aftermath of the presidential election in Iran, support for American involvement in Iran has increased in some circles. In this piece, our desire is to give a conservative, evangelical Christian response to why America should not support any military action against Iran. A position advocated by many of us is “Just War.” I...

متن کامل

Lies in a Time of Threat: Betrayal Blindness and the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election

Some of the most perplexing exit polls from the 2004 U.S. presidential election indicated overwhelming support for President Bush among voters who said they valued honesty, even though the Bush administration had been sharply criticized for deceiving the public, especially concerning the reasons for invading Iraq. A psychological theory recently developed to help explain memory loss in trauma s...

متن کامل

American Decline in the Perspective of Democrats and Republicans: Otherization and Construction of American Identity in Election Speeches

American decline has received substantial attention from Iranian political and academic circles, with few analysts paying attention to the domestic debate on the concept. One of the overlooked aspects is the different ways that liberals and conservatives define and construct it. This difference is manifested in the perception of American identity and on the global role of the US, and intensifie...

متن کامل

On the eve of war: authoritarianism, social dominance, and American students' attitudes toward attacking Iraq.

In the week before the 2003 American attack on Iraq, the effects of authoritarianism and the social dominance orientation on support for the attack were examined. Based on prior research on the nature of these constructs, a structural model was developed and tested. As predicted, authoritarianism strengthened support for the attack by intensifying the perception that Iraq threatened America. So...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2003