Will Our Broken Public Affairs Office Lose Iraq for Us?

Looking through so many of the threads in the topics given, it seems to me that we haven't discussed the fact that the center of gravity for Iraq has shifted from Iraq to the U.S.
When that happened, I don't know exactly, but it seems that the only ones who can beat us at this point are the U.S. media, politicians, and organizations which are left of center.
All of the discussions are excellent on how we can do a better job of fighting in Iraq or wherever our next small war will be, but all of it could be for naught if we don't figure out how to keep the American people in the fight.

I understand why the tide turned at home for the French in Algeria, for the Israeli's in Lebanon, and for us during Vietnam, but not why it turned against us in Iraq. Any thoughts?

Why is the media inherently left of center and how do we do a better job of getting out the other side of the story?

If the Public Affairs office is broken at the Pentagon, how do we fix it?

Given that the nature of a democracy allows and encourages open discussions, opinions, freedom of speech, etc does this mean that from now on the left leaning organizations which set the news agenda for the majority of news groups to be consumed by a majority of the public will always undermine every Small War that comes along and inevitably doom us to loss at home?

Will those groups only fail to undermine U.S. attempts to defeat its enemies when the circumstances are the most dire and/or after repeated attacks on us in CONUS? (Obviously the need to fight a GWOT is not dire to them at this point).

Brian, I think we discussed this several times in previous posts, but the bottom line is we didn't find WMD, and then senior administration officials denied we were facing an insurgency for several months after the insurgency started. These among other things led many to think that the administration may be incompetent, or worse untrustworthy. I think it is fair to state that the American people were not prepared for a tough war (relative I realize), so I would argue that public opinion wasn't truly mobilized to support the war from the out set. Those are the big mistakes we're still trying to overcome.

The good news is that Americans have fallen in love with our military, and we don't have the break in ranks between our citizens and soldiers we saw during the last years of Vietnam. That means still have plenty of good will to build on. Furthermore, I saw some very positive coverage on the war today on CNN. If we can continue to build on the successful election we may be able to turn public opinion around on the overall policy. I think our President's recent press conferences and an apparently successful election process (to date) has softened much of the criticism.

I think at this juncture we're very dependent on the will of the Iraqi people to solve their problems using a political process. If they show some measure of success which results in giving the American public a ray of hope that this can work, then I think you'll see our public resolve stiffened.

Quote:

---

a tough war (relative I realize)

---

Tough war, my ass... Even as a combat arms soldier that left the wire regularly, I spent the last year getting fat and lazy, sleeping on beds inside air conditioned trailors(with satellite tv and internet btw), eating lobster tail/crab legs/shrimp/steak/strawberry ice cream w/ multiflavored toppings, ####ting in flushable toilets, taking hot showers, buying flatscreen TVs/Xbox/dvd players/laptops at the PX, driving around in air conditioned vehicles, eating popeyes/burger king/pizza hut/taco bell/hardees/KFC/cinnabun/subway, drinking 5 dollar fruity latte's from starbuks and green been, watching new movies in a double decker theater, and swimming in saddams pools- only to pad the pockets of KBR logistics, risking the lives of soldiers and civilians that sustain this lifestyle. Just look around and see how fat lazy we are. I saw a 300 lbs soldier the other day.

I am suprised the VFW allowed me a life membership :eek:
"

Bill,
Your reply is much appreciated. Certainly didn't mean to make you backtrack over ground already taken. Points understood on the WMD and denial of an insurgency relating to the view of trust and competence at the highest levels. Since the top got us into the PR problem, maybe they're the only ones who can get us out, given the current level of drive coming from the white house?
I too have hopes that the elections and will of the Iraqi people will help drive opinion here and provide the ray of hope for those here who don't see it. (Overall I found Iraqi's quite capable of handling their own affairs when they decided to and it looks like they've decided to).

From your posts in other threads, you (and several others) obviously have a good grasp of Small Wars doctrine and history. (Would mention Major Strickland as well, but I served with him and know that to do so would only expand his ego to levels dangerous to himself :)). So, as to the second half of my original posting, I would really value your thoughts and the thoughts of others.

Is the Public Affairs Office broken? Or in light of your previous reply, maybe it's irrelevant if public opinion will be focused on the White House alone?
My experience since returning is that opinions can be swayed by what's happening on the ground as much as what's happening in D.C. I've converted doubters. I know that we can certainly buffer or counter bad news if we're out here doing a good job of telling the good news. So I keep wondering how we can do a better job at the Pentagon level of getting out all the good news stories our warriors have to tell?

Are we ready, set up and prepared to handle a press which is always going to be ready to jump on every misstep, whether incredibly large or small, and prevent erosion of support which is definitely harder to maintain in Small Wars?

GorTex, please allow me to introduce you to www.crossfit.com, a great warrior training program that will allow you to maintain warrior fitness levels despite KBR's best efforts to sabotage the force by providing dessert buffets in their chow halls. I for one think all these nicities are grossly excessive, a huge drain on your resources, and distraction from the main effort; however, I realize that our video generation would boycott the war effort if we pulled them back now. That is an entirely different topic that I would like to engage on, but not until after the Christmas season :) Personally I prefered Napolean's version of entertaining the troops, but I think those days are long gone (lol).

Brian, excellent point on the differences between public affairs approaches between large and small wars. We have different doctrine for warfighting based on the nature of the war (COIN, SASO, Conventional, etc), but I don't know if the PAO community has a different doctrinial approach for presenting our story in a small war scenario? If not, it is sorely needed from the beltway all the way down to the tactical unit level. It is obviously a tougher story to sell to the American public. Co-opting public support for "war of the flea" scenarios will require a unique approach, perhaps more educational than cheer leading?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Moore

GorTex, please allow me to introduce you to www.crossfit.com, a great warrior training program that will allow you to maintain warrior fitness levels despite KBR's best efforts to sabotage the force by providing dessert buffets in their chow halls. I for one think all these nicities are grossly excessive, a huge drain on your resources, and distraction from the main effort; however, I realize that our video generation would boycott the war effort if we pulled them back now. That is an entirely different topic that I would like to engage on, but not until after the Christmas season :) Personally I prefered Napolean's version of entertaining the troops, but I think those days are long gone (lol).

---

They are also known to maintain a very nice 24/7 weight room- better than most in the states.