What would be the most effective message to convince the American people to bring the troops home from Iraq?

Question

Yahoo! Answers staff notice: This is the real Arianna Huffington
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-d8pH0dcoRKeB12yOcnUQp.9VCFos?p=5795

Answer 1

As I read this question, the hope is not merely to convince the American people that it's a good idea to bring the troops home, but also to motivate them to action. As previous posters have suggested, mere public opinion isn't necessarily going to have a measurable effect on policy decisions.

The current state of things already suggests that Americans are unhappy with the war, but even those staunchly opposed to the invasion from the start often feel that to leave "prematurely" could irreparably harm the development of the new Iraqi government.

Of course, that issue is mired in policy spin and PR - I would venture out on a limb and say that it's extremely difficult for the average American to get a good, valid sense of conditions in Iraq - stability of government and infrastructure, genuine threat assessments, etc. I can honestly say, despite spending a good deal of time trying to figure it out - I have no idea how much "we" are needed to keep stability there now.

Obviously, "the job is done" is a fine message to send to the American people, and it might do the convincing that the original question requests. However, it depends on where this message comes from.

If liberal or progressive sources, for example, proclaim proudly that "the job is done", while the administration does the opposite "...and we will stay as long as we're needed" - then public opinion may divide strongly along party lines about the imminent need to bring troops home. So unless this message comes from the right place, I think it will fail.

So what is the right origin for a message - one that counters policy PR spun by an administration with contrary goals?

I read recently that Howard Zinn believes that messages like this need to come from the troops themselves - and in this case, I heartily agree.

If the troops themselves begin to voice *either* an overwhelming sense of dissent from the administration - i.e. "We're no longer accomplishing anything here but putting ourselves at risk", or an overwhelming sense of completion - i.e. "We've accomplished our goals in Iraq; it's time to come home"....if THOSE voices could be heard, then our troops could come home.

Answer 2

Stupid question from someone who writes books on the subject.

Better questions: Why should we reduce the number of military in Iraq ? Or when ?

You're assuming that we need to bring the troops home. We still have troops in Germany and WWII ended long ago. There are still troops in Korea. Iraq is a strategic location close to the other Middle East countries. I think an American base will exist in Iraq or Kuwait for many years.

We should reduce the number of troops when the mission has been accomplished. And in case you've forgotten, the mission will be accomplished when the Iraqi government determines they can handle the security of their nation.

The President has stated that American military will be withdrawn when the Iraqis can do the job.

Answer 3

I fail to see what "The American People" have to do with this. Obviously support for the Iraq war and President Bush is at an all time low. Somewhere dipping into the upper 20% range. To me that shows that its NOT The American People who need convincing. If this were truly a Democracy the people who painfully want this war to end who are in the VAST majority would have some say over what is going on. But obviously that isn't the case.

The better question is when will Bush and his cronies accept that they have enough money and don't need to control all of the worlds wealth. When you figure out the answer to that, let us know.

It really bothers me that you would even state the question the way you did.

((edit))

If anyone is interested in seeing all the faces of the American Soldiers who have lost their lives for this war here are some links to a gallery graciously kept by Cryptome.org. Names, dates, and pictures. It really brings home how tragic this is. It should probably be force fed day and night to some people in Washington.
http://cryptome.org/mil-dead-iqw.htm
http://iraq-kill-maim.org/dead/dead-gallery.htm

Answer 4

If the troops pull out now the complete operation was once for not anything....it's going to simply be like Vietnam....So many squaddies sacrificed, such a lot cash spent and such a lot of guarantees made.... Iraq will slide right into a civil battle with out a central authority competent to manipulate the nation and it's going to emerge as the superb base for Al Quaida. We ought to keep so long as the Iraqis are competent to furnish their possess protection and therefore gain the target of this battle: A democratic Iraq with a company executive and a powerful best friend of the west!

Answer 5

As usual, Arianna. I find you a little off in your thinking. It is not "the American people" who wanted the war. We did not vote on having a war. It was the President on the United States that wanted the war, convinced others (not the broad base of American people) to support him, and, voila, we have a war. Now there is much controvery as to whether it was ever warranted -- like that truth wasn't going to come back and bite him in the you-know-what! The President and pals would have to be convinced to halt the war -- swallow his pride and do it! As the war prolongs, he is probably searching for a reason to justify it -- a kind of "I knew it all along" address. I believe if you had called a vote amongst the American people before the war ever started, as to whether or not we should declare war on Iraq, the answer would have been, "No, what for? Why?". That, of course, would have been without the assertion from the President that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction. Of course, once he did that, their are those who blindly follow the President, whom they may have voted for. No, I believe wars are often declared because presidents, their staffs, and congress can not solve economic problems, so they want attention diverted away from those problems to the affairs of war and what might happen if we don't eliminate the alleged dreadful terror.

What "effective message"? I don't know that there is one to the American people regarding the war, directly. A message should be to find honest people who want to and will address and solve economic problems and will, at the very least, let America be a model in what good democracy and love (compassionate caring) can do for other countries, and vote them in to office(s). I maintain faith that our future holds good things.

Thank you for the opportunity to answer this question.

Answer 6

The American people are already convinced that we should bring the troops home from Iraq. We have an administration that has it's own agenda. Unfortunately, their agenda does not reflect the best interests or desires of the populace.

This is a war about Oil. It is not about terrorism (Saddam was not involved in 9/11). It is not about human rights (we are doing nothing in Darfur, where there is a real genocide going on). It is not about Democracy (our rights are being infringed upon here at home). The oil companies are making billions, members of the administration and their pals are getting wealthier and more powerful, and we are not safer here at home.

Answer 7

I certainly am not able to speak for all Americans, but I can speak for myself.

We have brave young men and women in Iraq, Afghanistan and other areas around the globe where they are in harms way. I am grateful for the services of each and every one of those people. If you are reading this and are a member of the US Military or a veteran, please give yourself a big pat on the back from me (and many millions more Americans who think the same way I do... You might not realize it by the way the media portrays public opinion, but most Americans are solidly behind the wonderful work you are all doing).

I don't think that the American people need to be convinced of our military's status in Iraq. I think that the Generals and other personnel on the ground need to be convinced that we can pull back our troops and have a democratically elected government sustain the power necessary to propagate democracy.

The way your question is asked is not fair. You're looking at the whole affair as some kind of a popularity contest. I don't think any conflict should be directed that way.

Answer 8

Save America - Bring home our troops!

We are losing so much with this stupid war in Iraq. Soon this war will be longer than World War II. We are losing hundreds of lives every week, we are creating thousands of crippled people every month, we are losing tons of money every day, we are losing world respect, we are losing our countries strength, we are torturing people, we are giving money to the rich and greedy while our soldiers and poor are deprived of benefits, our mighty corporations are corrupt and stealing from taxpayers, and our civil rights and laws are being violated. This is all as a result our corrupt Executive Branch, corrupt Republican Senate, and corrupt Republican Congress leading the country for 6 years. Tom Delay and Ken Lay are the poster boys.

Americans have become lazy and soft, but when the above problems really hit home - then all hell will break out and the people of America will punish the wrong doers.

Answer 9

I believe that the American people want Iraq secure and safe for the Iraqi people before we bring the troops home. I don't believe and I wouldn't support bringing the troops home when the country of Iraq is in the shape it is today. Yes, Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. They have their own government. But Al-Qaeda is running a terrorist campaign in the country. They will do anything to kill as many people as possible. I know that if we left Iraq right now it would seem as if Al-Qaeda had won. They want American troops gone. Al-Zarqawi may be dead, but a new head of Al-Qaeda in Iraq has already been named. Until Iraq is a safe place for the Iraqi people, I believe that the American people will not support bringing any troops home.

Answer 10

That if we don't win the war, Iraq will become another Vietnam.

Actually, this will probably keep the troops in Iraq longer than Ms. Huffington would want. But most of the troops we have over there are over there to win the war. Anti-war activism cost us a victory that we could have had in Vietnam. I would hope that we have learned from those mistakes and won't make the same mistakes in Iraq. But the anti-war movement and anti-Bush movements seem determined to repeat history.

Answer 11

not meaning to be a Bush basher, but it is getting pretty hard to figure out what country our president is presiding over. what with him wanting to allow UAE shipping companies to take over major American ports and now those companies wanting to buy military manufacturing companies here.

it will surly be interesting to see what bush comes up with next for his mid-east buds, and they wonder why it's so easy for people to believe the hype surrounding 9/11 and this war. I personaly think bush has to much of an interest in the middle east for him to ever pull the plug on that war and say "it is done, come on home".

until we get a new president that doesn't have such a seemingly personal interest in Iraq and the middle east then there is no message in the human language that will be spoken to bring the troops hime. JMO