| Summary/Abstract |
Most U.S. scholarship on the political history of the First Persian Gulf War covers the general debate between the branches of government or among the international community. Several works address the length and quality of the legislature’s deliberation. The few studies examining veteran’s demographics in Congress mostly do so from a macro perspective. None meaningfully scrutinize the personal military service of individual congressmen or how the sheer quantity of veterans in the 102nd Congress influenced the debate. Correcting this oversight, this article shows how politically influential the personal experiences of so many legislators actually were. I argue that the quantity of veterans in the 101st and 102nd U.S. Congresses demonstrably influenced the character and quality of the debate preceding the war in two ways. First, veterans rendered arguments in the context of military experiences and reached conclusions from a veteran’s as much as a legislator’s perspective. Second, their common wartime participation generated a collegial atmosphere of mutual respect and serious deliberation largely free from normal partisan pressure—which stands in stark contrast to contemporary congressional gridlock. In doing so, I show that permeating this discourse and the emotional, yet civil, debate was a powerful source of historical memory.
|