Why Do Most Democrats Only Theoretically Care About The Iraq War?

[MannyGoldstein]

Ask a Democrat if the Iraq War is important to them, and you'll get a "Hell yeah!"

But the reality is much different - by our actions, we've shown that we don't really care much about the war. Two of the three leading presedential candidates voted for the thing - heck, one even co-sponsored it - while most Democrats voted against it. But that's not important enough to actually sway voters - the guys in front are the guys who voted for it.

Personally, I think that the 'Dems' in Congress see this, and figure that they might as well keep the war going - as a practical matter, it won't hurt them at the ballot box.

[More Than A Feeling]

1. Maybe they blame the Republicans, the media, worthless consultants

and the remnants of the culture of militaristic resentment left over from the loss of the Vietnam War more than they blame the candidates, who see that there are problems, and offer a variety of approaches in terms of how many troops they'd have stay after a pull-out, as well as different intellectual approaches. You've got a choice between continuing "the War on Terror" with Hillary Clinton, or rejecting the entire idea that there could be such a thing with John Edwards. I don't know where Obama stands on that particular issue. The minor candidates have things to distinguish them as well. Lots to choose from.

Reducing the Iraq War to the people who voted for it misses most of the picture. Nobody elected the Military-Industrial Complex, but it hovers like a shadow over every politician, regardless of their personal ideology. Even those who bitterly oppose it have to contend with it.

[Coyote_Bandit]

2. It is all theory until

someone you know is in Iraq and at risk. Then all bets are off, the dangers are real and the folly of the war is utterly apparent. Nothing theoretical about that. It is the single best reason for reinstating the draft - provided, of course, that there are virtually no exemptions from service.