The Persian Gulf crisis may well have been the most extensively polled episode in U.S. history as President Bush, his opponents, and even Saddam Hussein appealed to, and tried to influence, public opinion. As well documented as this phenomenon was, it remains largely unexplained. John Mueller provides an account of the complex relationship between American policy and public opinion during the Gulf crisis. Mueller analyzes key issues: the actual shallowness of public support for war; the effect of public opinion on the media (rather than the other way around); the use and misuse of polls by policy makers; the American popular focus on Hussein's ouster as a central purpose of the War; and the War's short-lived impact on voting. Of particular interest is Mueller's conclusion that Bush succeeded in leading the country to war by increasingly convincing the public that it was inevitable, rather than right or wise. Throughout, Mueller, author of War, Presidents, and Public Opinion, an analysis of public opinion during the Korean and Vietnam wars, places this analysis of the Gulf crisis in a broad political and military context, making comparisons to wars in Panama, Vietnam, Korea, and the Falklands, as well as to World War II and even the War of 1812. The book also collects nearly 300 tables charting public opinion through the Gulf crisis, making Policy and Opinion in the Gulf War an essential reference for anyone interested in recent American politics, foreign policy, public opinion, and survey research.

American politics and political economy series.

A young family enjoys all the traditions of Chinese New Year.

Master's Thesis from the year 2004 in the subject Sociology - Political Sociology, Majorities, Minorities, grade: Distinction, The University of Western Ontario (Department of Sociology), 181 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: The purpose of this thesis is to discover the extent to which governments possess the capacity to influence public opinion. It argues that the United States government initiated and directed a social control campaign during both the 1991 and 2003 wars with Iraq in order to mobilize public opinion in support of their foreign policy objectives. To this end, the United States government, in conjunction with powerful interest groups, is seen to possess the capacity to influence the content of the mass media in order to disseminate and promote justifications for war that contain emotion-provoking elements. During both wars, the justifications presented to the American public produced a negative emotional response to Saddam Hussein and in the process created a foreign threat that appeared to be immediate. It is concluded that these social control campaigns restricted the American public's access to reliable information, thereby obstructing their ability to participate in their nation's political process.

Steve A. Yetiv has developed an interdisciplinary, integrated approach to studying foreign policy decisions, which he applies here to understand better how and why the United States went to war in the Persian Gulf in 1991 and 2003. Yetiv’s innovative method employs the rational actor, cognitive, domestic politics, groupthink, and bureaucratic politics models to explain the foreign policy behavior of governments. Drawing on the widest set of primary sources to date—including a trove of recently declassified documents—and on interviews with key actors, he applies these models to illuminate the decision-making process in the two Gulf Wars and to develop theoretical notions about foreign policy. What Yetiv discovers, in addition to empirical evidence about the Persian Gulf and Iraq wars, is that no one approach provides the best explanation, but when all five are used, a fuller and more complete understanding emerges. Thoroughly updated with a new preface and a chapter on the 2003 Iraq War, Explaining Foreign Policy, already widely used in courses, will continue to be of interest to students and scholars of foreign policy, international relations, and related fields.

Shifts in public opinion have had an impact on U.S. foreign policy

The book focuses on policy-making at the highest levels of the United States government. Chapter contributors examine political, military, and foreign policy processes from micro and macro perspectives in documenting how President Bush personally dominated U.S. national security policy and was the driving force behind the United Nations-backed coalition of nations against Saddam Hussein. The authors place the president's actions into political and historical perspective and examine the consequences of the Gulf War in both military and diplomatic terms. Among the subjects discussed by experts are the president's political and constitutional roles in war-making; the foreign policy implications and military issues in the war; the domestic implications; and the postwar environment and planning for peace.

In these original essays, widely respected experts analyze the personal psychologies and public belief systems of the individuals and nations involved in the Gulf War - from George Bush and Saddam Hussein to the peoples of the United States, Israel, and Arab countries. Approaching the events of 1990-1991 from the perspectives of psychology, history, mass communications, and political science, these scholars examine the dynamic relationship of events, behavior, and perceptions.Part I deals with the psychological and political origins of the war; part II focuses on George Bush, Saddam Hussein, and the nature of their leadership and judgement; part III discusses the battle for public perceptions and beliefs waged by both sides; part IV analyzes the results of that battle as revealed by the understanding of the U.S., Israeli, and Arab publics; and part V deals with the war's consequences. A postscript by Stanley Renshon covers military actions in the Gulf in late 1992 and early 1993.

How were the American people prepared for the war on Iraq? How have political agents and media gatekeepers sought to develop public support for the first preventive war of the modern age? Bring 'Em On highlights the complex links between media and politics, analyzing how communication practices are modified in times of crisis to protect political interests or implement political goals. International contributors in mass communication, political science, and sociology address how U.S. institutional media practices, government policy, and culture can influence public mobilization for war.