Is Iraq worth it?
PRESIDENT BUSH has recently argued that "the fundamental question is, can we win in Iraq?" But for many Americans, the question has become: "Is it worth it to win?"
So far, the administration's efforts to answer that question have not significantly shifted the responses to the affirmative.
A surprisingly high percentage of Americans agree that Iraq is now and will in the future be better off as a result of the U.S. intervention in that country. But a majority also say the war is not worth it. In various polls, the pattern of responses on these two matters suggests that roughly a third of Americans can be classified as hard-core supporters of the war. They believe that Iraq will be better off as a result of the war and that it's worth it for the U.S. About a fourth are hard-core opponents, and say just the opposite on both points.
It's the group that remains -- about 30% of Americans -- who is the real target of the current administration blitz to move public opinion on Iraq. These "cost-benefit analyzers" agree that Iraq is going to be better off as a result of the war, but disagree that this makes the war worth it. The challenge for the administration in reaching these swing voters is to provide a rationale to justify the costs.
The administration has offered several such rationales. The U.S. public initially gave Bush its proxy to begin the war in large part based on a cost-benefit rationale involving deposing Saddam Hussein and removing the threat of weapons of mass destruction. By the time the war began in March 2003, upward of seven out of 10 Americans agreed that the benefits of ridding the world of a dictator with massive weapons of mass destruction would be worth the costs.
It didn't take long for that support to dissipate. By June 2004, Americans had seen Hussein captured but no weapons of mass destruction. The potential long-term costs of the war were becoming more and more evident. Support fell below majority levels -- 54% of respondents in one poll said that sending troops to Iraq had been a mistake.
The administration then accelerated its use of a second rationale, one that emphasized the benefits of the Iraq war in combating terrorism. But concerned as they are about terrorism, Americans have on average rejected the argument that there is a link between success in Iraq and a lowered probability of terrorist acts.
