American Wars starting with Vietnam became very unpopular the biggest reason I think is they lasted far too long with little visible result , the public goes into the disconnect mode there becomes to many distractions , economics , politics and whatever .

Technically, the two most unpopular wars in US history were the wars of 1812 and the Mexican-American war. We just have TV now so everyone knows how everyone else is pissed off about them.

Agree about 1812 and Mexico , the general feeling about them was not good and Mexico got screwed big time , but the U.S. was on the move .

Originally Posted by tetvet

Agree about 1812 and Mexico , the general feeling about them was not good and Mexico got screwed big time , but the U.S. was on the move .

Actually the US gained nothing in the war of 1812 it was a draw.

Originally Posted by brinktk

Technically, the two most unpopular wars in US history were the wars of 1812 and the Mexican-American war. We just have TV now so everyone knows how everyone else is pissed off about them.

TV actually helps create the opinion that the media wants to impress upon the people by skewing the news. It is not unbiased. I would image you'd be aware of this. I don't believe this took place to the same extent in earlier times.

Originally Posted by JOC

TV actually helps create the opinion that the media wants to impress upon the people by skewing the news. It is not unbiased. I would image you'd be aware of this. I don't believe this took place to the same extent in earlier times.

I do, but because of instant access to information and millions of people being able to seek out like minded people to talk about things (good, bad, or indifferent) it creates the illusion that times today are more messed up than ever....the reality is that they've always been messed up to one degree or another, previous to about 60 years ago, most people were ignorant of just how messed up areas could be outside their local area. It was also easier to censure less desirable aspects of "exploration", "expansion", and the brutalities of war. A good example would be in the opening battles of the civil war, politicians, esteemed citizens, and the curious set up pic nics on hilltops just outside where these battles would take place thinking it would be a glorious sight. That quickly faded when they witnessed the carnage that warfare is.

Today, a quick google search will show just about anything anyone is curious about. I know it is hard to believe, but as we sit right now, we are literally in one of the most peaceful times in human history.

Originally Posted by brinktk

I do, but because of instant access to information and millions of people being able to seek out like minded people to talk about things (good, bad, or indifferent) it creates the illusion that times today are more messed up than ever....the reality is that they've always been messed up to one degree or another, previous to about 60 years ago, most people were ignorant of just how messed up areas could be outside their local area. It was also easier to censure less desirable aspects of "exploration", "expansion", and the brutalities of war. A good example would be in the opening battles of the civil war, politicians, esteemed citizens, and the curious set up pic nics on hilltops just outside where these battles would take place thinking it would be a glorious sight. That quickly faded when they witnessed the carnage that warfare is.

Today, a quick google search will show just about anything anyone is curious about. I know it is hard to believe, but as we sit right now, we are literally in one of the most peaceful times in human history.

A very interesting perspective. The awareness factor. However it can work against us. Take the insurgents they show a picture of a civilian killed or supposedly killed by an US Army soldier (that both you and I know does not intentional target civilians). Yet the image that comes home to TV audiences is the Army is killing civilians. Makes headlines, catches peoples interest. This is what I mean by the kind of of crap the media can generate to sell papers, get people to watch TV, etc... I feel they sell more papers with stories of Americans that do wrong that stories of terrorist that do wrong. I'm a bit tired of our guys getting a black eye. Not that the terrorist don't make headlines of course they do, big time but considering their actions they should.
People were likely blissfully ignorant before media came around. Sure that makes a lot of sense. I think that most of the conflicts going on presently are rather small in scale compared to earlier conflicts so as far as people living in more peaceful times it makes sense. However we do well to remember that it's only been 70 years since mankind's worse catastrophe.

Originally Posted by JOC

A very interesting perspective. The awareness factor. However it can work against us. Take the insurgents they show a picture of a civilian killed or supposedly killed by an US Army soldier (that both you and I know does not intentional target civilians). Yet the image that comes home to TV audiences is the Army is killing civilians. Makes headlines, catches peoples interest. This is what I mean by the kind of of crap the media can generate to sell papers, get people to watch TV, etc... I feel they sell more papers with stories of Americans that do wrong that stories of terrorist that do wrong. I'm a bit tired of our guys getting a black eye. Not that the terrorist don't make headlines of course they do, big time but considering their actions they should.
People were likely blissfully ignorant before media came around. Sure that makes a lot of sense. I think that most of the conflicts going on presently are rather small in scale compared to earlier conflicts so as far as people living in more peaceful times it makes sense. However we do well to remember that it's only been 70 years since mankind's worse catastrophe.

Oh certainly! There is very much the potential for things to go very wrong, very fast in many parts of the world, if they aren't already.

As for the media....well, ever since they became for profit (around the mid to late 1970s) they now can show what's going to generate the most views. They could show the insurgents, terrorists, etc. doing bad stuff...and so what? We know they're bad so it is just par for the course. But if todays GI does it...holy crap, we hold them to a much higher standard as a society so it is going to generate news. I absolutely hate it, but that is the way it works now.

Why else would pop culture crap, feel good crap, and shocking crap be in the news? It is a business venture now. They know human beings will respond to feel good drivel or tragedy. So that is what they show.

Its a wonder that Grunts can even move with the amount of equipment they are required to wear or carry in Afghan and with ied's being the biggest problem what's the point ? .

Originally Posted by brinktk

As for the media....well, ever since they became for profit (around the mid to late 1970s) .

The Press has always been "for profit". "Yellow Journalism" started in the 1890s in the area of foreign affairs. Media changed from being a reasonably balanced show when Media Liberals "changed history" by bringing down Nixon. They found that instead of simply reporting the News, they could make the News. Now most of the Media is the propaganda arm of the DNC, and the fact they don't control Fox drives them nuts.
Prior to Vietnam seeing dead US troops was rare. A pic of three US dead on a beach in New Guinea was reportedly shocking to the population. In Vietnam on the evening news you saw our guys getting killed in what seemed like the same rice paddy day after day with no progress in sight.