Safe Mode: On
How Hawkish Are Americans?

By Lawrence Wittner.
.
.
In the midst of a nationwide election campaign in which many politicians trumpet their support for the buildup and employment of U.S. military power around the world, the American public's disagreement with such measures is quite remarkable. Indeed, many signs point to the fact that most Americans want to avoid new wars, reduce military spending, and support international cooperation.

The latest evidence along these lines is Foreign Policy in the New Millennium, a nationwide opinion survey recently released as a report by the highly-respected Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Conducted in late May and early June 2012, the survey resulted in some striking findings.

One is that most Americans are quite disillusioned with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars of the past decade. Asked about these conflicts, 67 percent of respondents said they had not been worth fighting. Indeed, 69 percent said that, despite the war in Afghanistan, the United States was no safer from terrorism.

Naturally, these attitudes about military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan fed into opinions about future military involvement. Eighty-two percent of those surveyed favored bringing U.S. troops home from Afghanistan by 2014 or by an earlier date. Majorities also opposed maintaining long-term military bases in either country. And 71 percent agreed that "the experience of the Iraq war should make nations more cautious about using military force to deal with rogue states."

Certainly Americans seem to believe that their own military footprint in the world should be reduced. In the Chicago Council survey, 78 percent of respondents said that the United States was playing the role of a world policeman more than it should. Presented with a variety of situations, respondents usually stated that they opposed the use of U.S. military force. For example, a majority opposed a U.S. military response to a North Korean invasion of South Korea. Or, to take an issue that is frequently discussed today - Iran's possible development of nuclear weapons -- 70 percent of respondents opposed a U.S. military strike against that nation with the objective of destroying its nuclear facilities.

Yes, admittedly, a small majority (53 percent) thought that maintaining superior military power was a "very important goal." But this response was down by 14 points from 2002. Furthermore, to accomplish deficit reduction, 68 percent of respondents favored cutting U.S. spending on the military -- up 10 points from 2010. Nor are these opinions contradictory. After all, U.S. military spending is so vast - more than five times that of the number 2 military spender, China - that substantial cuts in the U.S. military budget can be made without challenging U.S. military superiority.

It should be noted that American preferences are anti-military rather than "isolationist." The report by the Chicago Council observes: "As they increasingly seek to cut back on foreign expenditures and avoid military entanglement whenever possible, Americans are broadly supportive of nonmilitary forms of international engagement and problem solving." These range from "diplomacy, alliances, and international treaties to economic aid and decision making through the UN."

For example, the survey found that 84 percent of respondents favored the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty (still unratified by the U.S. Senate), 70 percent favored the International Criminal Court treaty (from which the United States was withdrawn by President George W. Bush), and 67 percent favored a treaty to cope with climate change by limiting greenhouse gas emissions. When asked about China, a nation frequently criticized by U.S. pundits and politicians alike, 69 percent of respondents believed that the United States should engage in friendly cooperation with that country.

The "isolationist" claim falls particularly flat when one examines American attitudes toward the United Nations. The Chicago Council survey found that 56 percent of respondents agreed that, when dealing with international problems, the United States should be "more willing to make decisions within the United Nations," even if that meant that the United States would not always get its way.

Overall, then, Americans favor a less militarized U.S. government approach to world affairs than currently exists. Perhaps the time has come for politicians to catch up with them!

Dr. Lawrence Wittner (http://lawrenceswittner.com) is Professor of History emeritus at SUNY/Albany. His latest book is "Working for Peace and Justice: Memoirs of an Activist Intellectual" (University of Tennessee Press).




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-wittner/how-hawkish-are-americans_b_1908250.html


Added: Sep-25-2012 Occurred On: Sep-25-2012
By: God_Himself
In:
Politics
Tags: Afghanistan, Climate Change, War Wire, North Korea, United Nations, China, War, Chicago Council On Global Affairs, U.S. Military, U.S. Military Bases, International Cooperation, International Criminal Court, Militarism, Military Spending, U
Location: United States (load item map)
Marked as: approved
Views: 1022 | Comments: 41 | Votes: 1 | Favorites: 0 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • The article mentions Bush, Iraq, and Afghanistan. But there is no mention of that guy up for re-election who has authorized military force in four other countries without so much as a "Brace yourself, Maggy" to Congress.

    Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

    (3)

  • What's more concerning is that 33% think Iraq/Afghanistan were 'worthwhile'...

    Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

    (2)

    • @ElegantDecline

      "Indeed, 69 percent said that, despite the war in Afghanistan, the United States was no safer from terrorism."

      If only we could magically time travel back and re-live the future with a confident and unharassed Taliban/AQ in control of A-Stan, able to do what they want because we didn't invade or fight back. How wonderful the world would be now, eh.

      The easy answer for those ignorant masses around the world -- including you -- is to give up, quit, go home and hide u More..

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (-1)

    • @USA1

      Have your girlfriend called you from her new iPhone5?

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (-1)

    • @USA1 Are you trying to tell us that something was achieved in Afghanistan?

      If so... What do you think it will be like 6 months after we've left?

      The Taliban are still there, and its general population hate us even more than before.

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (1)

    • @o0Tao0o

      I don't think we should be leaving. I think the costs of keeping a deterrent force in A-stan is worth the blood and treasure.

      We need to deny our enemy their perceived victory. We need to deny them a safe haven from which they would continue to export their brand of extremism. We need to deny them the ability to train, recruit, finance, and stage future acts of terrorism

      We're talking about a fascist religion that has been at war with non-believers for 1400 years. This is perm More..

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (-1)

    • @USA1 If only at the time some of us had had the common sense to realise that whilst hunt and destroy operations against al qaeda made sense, attempting to rebuild Afghanistan into a Sweden lodged between Iran and Pakistan, with a happy free democracy and liberalised women skipping about with abandon discovering themselves, was an act of supreme historic folly eh? May be we could have started pushing gay rights in the Helmland valley next?

      Oh and I notice you don't have the cojones to even brin More..

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (3)

  • If you America alone, we leave you alone.

    Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

    (2)

  • Attack us and we WILL destroy you ... Attack our allies and we WILL destroy you ... Attack obama and you can have him!!

    Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

    (1)

  • That survey confirms that most americans are moderate.

    Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

    (1)

  • ...from the Huffington Post, LMAO! Just as credible as Snopes, YT, Media Matters, etc. etc.

    Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

    (1)

    • @MERCILESS

      Yes. That's right. All Americans must jerk off over the idea of war like you do. All Americans must want to watch our young boys go off to fight and die, not to keep us safe and free, but to keep the ignorant idiots like you stocked in misplaced pride in how bad ass their military is.

      All Americans think having bases and troops in 130+ countries is a smart foreign policy.

      All Americans think engaging in preemptive, aggressive wars to score political points for democratic or republ More..

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (-1)

    • @MrsShrodingersBox

      I bet you he's not even an American.

      I let you guess where most of these warmongering Liveleakers come from. Don't get fooled by the US flag, their loyalty rests somewhere else...


      .

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (0)

  • dont abuse that picture of iwo jima.

    Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

    (1)

    • @NECKSHOT

      The photo was staged for publicity. After the battle. If it was a photo of the actual flag being raised, and not a reshoot for publicity purposes, I'd agree.

      But seems to me like that photo already been abused

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (0)

    • @MrsShrodingersBox
      im aware of that.that was on mount surabachi

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (0)

    • @MrsShrodingersBox After the battle? Three of those men shown in that photo didn't survive the battle. The battle of Iwo Jima lasted 19 February – 26 March 1945. Both the first and second flag raising occurred on the fifth day of the battle.

      Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

      (1)

  • lets see how the resident LL turdlings feel lol

    Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

    (0)

    • Comment of user 'rakkasans' has been deleted by author!
  • Only a Liberal would poll Chicago and think it is the pulse of the nation. Derp.

    Posted Sep-25-2012 By 

    (0)

  • This was submitted by a New Zealander.
    Recall that New Zealand would not allow U.S. ships to use their ports during the Cold War, even though Americans died by the thousand to keep Japanese troops out of NZ and Australia.
    To hell with New Zealand, I say.

    Posted Sep-26-2012 By 

    (0)

    • @govett

      Says the troll who never posted any shit on LL.

      If LL was a country, you'll be that lazy wanker who's on welfare but keeps complaining about everything and everybody else.

      For your information troll, more Kiwis have died in all the major wars per capita than any other nation.

      As far as the nuclear issue goes, we are all proud of not letting your warmongering leaders use our beautiful islands to park their shit. Deal with it and next time, don't fucking worry about the Japs just get More..

      Posted Sep-26-2012 By 

      (0)

  • Being a paciFIST is the only rational way. Peace through Strength.

    Posted Feb-26-2013 By 

    (0)