|
| quote: | Originally posted by Tasty Onions
I was saying that Vietnam is what lowered the tolerance. It was the breaking point, so to speak. If we get involved in some far away place with alien cultures and the conflict isn't wrapped up quickly, Americans don't want it. |
I think there are a number of factors which differentiate the current conflict, along with other conflicts, from Vietnam and that the social acceptance/tolerance/rejection for wars is more constant than this quote gives it credit for. Vietnam was far more televised with far less constriction about what was being reported and, while the Gulf of Tonkin incident was presented to the American public as an attack on our sovereignty, it did not support the clear-cut imperative propelled by more legitimized outrage of Pearl Harbor and 9/11.
Even in WWII, Americans had become tired and demoralized. The staged flag-raising on Iwo Jima was a response to that demoralization. Had WWII been more televised than Vietnam, I suspect we still may have persisted, but only because it was a necessary act of self-defense. I don't think it's a lowered tolerance for war as much as it is a naturally occurring moral compass for what should be tolerated.
___________________
Now with extra singles!
my old stuff, not quite up to snuff - but I still dig it - UPDATED 9/23/2012
Last edited by EddieZilker on Aug-07-2011 at 21:34
|
