Half Of US Would Attack Iran?
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Iran, Polls, The War On Terrorism, The World, WarThat’s the latest from a poll conducted by USA Today and Gallup.
While 46% of those surveyed say military action should be taken either now or if diplomacy fails, 45% rule it out in any case. Republicans are twice as likely as Democrats to endorse taking military steps.“If you had more follow-on questions — on what if the military action was unilateral, (for instance) — then support would tend to diminish,” says Steven Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland. “But it does indicate that approximately half of Americans are concerned enough that they would at least seriously consider it, and that’s worth noting.”
So why are people willing to attack another country?
Tough talk from President Bush and Vice President Cheney about Iran’s nuclear program seems to have generated concern about a potential threat and alarm about the prospect for premature U.S. military action.
Yep, when you beat the war drums, people respond. But if you do notice, 45% would NEVER go to war with them. That’s a big number and one that will most likely not change.
What do you think?
This entry was posted on Thursday, November 8th, 2007 and is filed under Iran, Polls, The War On Terrorism, The World, War. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
November 8th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Iran is building nuclear weapons, threatening Israel’s destruction, and supporting global terrorist organizations with impunity. Which people were you talking about Justin, the Iranians or Americans?
Who is beating the drums? Tell me why you do not consider what Iran is doing to be “warmongerring.” Tell me why Americans or Israelis are not being reactionary, in a legitimate sense, to Iranian aggression.
Is it because Iranians are ethnically exotic to you, and therefore always victims of whites and Jews, or is it because they are too poor and uneducated to really mean what they say and be held accountable for their actions?
November 8th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
Yeah, this is one of the more condescending heavy-handed posts. Dubes like Jimmy (and myself) are goats being lead around by those masters of persuasion in the Bush Adminsitration.
November 8th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
What a loaded question! I guess I would fall within the 46% who would say, “Yes, depending on circumstances.” Of course that answer would apply if the same question were to name, for example, China, given a similar set of circumstances. Short form opinion: The results you state do not reflect the way the question was asked.
So let me ask the question in a more real-life manner. Would you support attacking Iran any time within the next 14 months? My answer would be, “NO!, definitely not!” My reasoning is simple. The people telling us the reasons (the administration) are proven liars who cannot be trusted.
In other words, the poll is too ambiguous to be taken seriously.
November 8th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Just like Iraq was building WMD? When your source is the same group, you do realize how lame that is, don’t you?
Not unlike the US threatening Iran’s destruction, and before it Iraq?
While I agree with this, it is worth noting the US has and does support some not so nice groups as well.
I am not saying that Iran is undeserving of some serious scrutiny; what I am saying a little critical thinking can go along way–and a little looking in the mirror can lend perspective.
It is simply scary that 46 percent of American’s are willing to even consider giving this bunch another chance to screw up.
If something needs to be done about Iran, I can only hope it won’t be this group.
November 8th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
Your moral equivicating between America and Iran is simply Orwellian. In fact, George Orwell wrote about this phenomenon amongst the British left who were arguing against confrontation with Hitler. In 1941, George Orwell wrote about the “propaganda tricks” that the left used to justify their reluctance to confront fascism on account that the British government was “indistinguishable” from the Reichstag:
“1. The Fascising processes occurring in Britain as a result of war are systematically exaggerated.
2. The actual record of Fascism, especially in its pre-war history, is ignored or pooh-poohed as “propaganda”. Discussion of what the world would be like if the Axis dominated it is evaded.
3. Those who want to struggle against Fascism are accused of being wholehearted defenders of capitalist “democracy” . . .
4. It is tacitly pretended that the war is only between Britain and Germany. Mention of Russia and China, and their fate if Fascism is permitted to win, is avoided . . .
. . . Hitler’s positive achievement appeals to the emptiness of these people . . . One knows in advance more or less what they will say. They will start by refusing to admit that British capitalism is evolving into something different, or that the defeat of Hitler can mean any more than a victory for the British and American millionaires. And from that they will proceed to argue that, after all, British democracy is “just the same as” or “just as bad as” totalitarianism. There is not much freedom of speech in England; therefore there is no more than exists in Germany. “
-George Orwell, 1941
November 9th, 2007 at 7:15 am
…and your endless tirade from the right is just tiresome.
Your pulling out the “appeasement” card is predictable. When you don’t want to discuss things, out comes another bit of nonsense from the neocon (old) bag of tricks.
You slipped from lockstep to irrelevancy. Once again, rather than discuss the issues, you choose to just attack the people you disagree with. Honestly, I don’t think you even believe half the things that spew from your keyboard.
You read want you want to read and respond to points no one makes because you are incapable of addressing the issue at the heart of this debate.
Bush and his ilk have (or should have) no credibility; your the boy who cried wolf one too many times. It is amazing to me that 46 percent of people polled say that the US should take action based on the ravings of incompetents, who at best have proven to be lacking real analytical abilities and at worst are liars.
But, with people like you fanning the flames of war–yes, you are warmongering, as you repeat or overstate unfounded claims — we need more people to say “Stop, hold on. What do we really know?”
How ironic that you equate Germany and Iran with the tag of fascism, when fascism is exactly what the neocons have been pursuing for the last 7 years. To wrap the flag of freedom around fascism is horrifying.
Iran is a threat, but one that requires a measured response.
This group has had its chances and botched them one after another. It is the most incompetent administration in my lifetime and to even think that anyone can still support it just boggles my mind. To actively support it as you do is reaching the point of ridiculousness
November 9th, 2007 at 9:12 am
So therefore Iran is not building nuclear weapons? And Iran is not sending terrorists into Iraq?
You believe Iran is a threat that needs to be handled with military action, if necessary, but you would rather see that threat metastasize, and your own position on the issue to be negated, than to make common cause with your president. That’s just crazy. A lot of conservatives detested Bill Clinton but praised him for circumventing the sclerotic and corrupt UN in order to stop the genocide in the Balkans once and for all.
This is not about “one too many times,” Its about one time - when Bush claimed Saddam was in possession of WMD stockpiles, which turned out not to be the case. In addition, you simply hate him because he is a religious, free market capitalist which you have been conditioned to despise. If he lacks credibility, he lacks it from us, which we can then give to him again if we make the same observations this time around.
Instead, you will set logic aside and believe Mahmoud Ahmadinajad, the jew-hating apocalyptic lunatic and hostage taker, when he says he is doing nothing wrong. In fact, all he does is neither confirm nor deny his regime’s involvement with terrorism in Iraq, or his quest for nuclear weapons. That seems to be good enough for you. But, Bush? Forget about it. If Bush claimed the world was round, you would turn around and say it was flat.
Wow. I guess George Orwell was a fascist too. At least you are admitting directly that there is no moral distinction between American troops and terrorists, or between democratic self government and sharia law, or surgical strikes on terrorist enclaves with laser-guided bombs, and launching ball-bearing filled warheads into civilian neighborhoods from rooftops of suburban homes. Because that is who is doing the fighting, what they are fighting for, and how they are fighting.
I’m confused. The Nazis were not fascism? or they were fascism but its exactly what the “neocons have been persuing” as well? This moral equivalence is astonishing, and you smear me by claiming I am the one building straw men? You have just proven everything I have claimed about you to be true — Orwellian.
November 9th, 2007 at 10:36 am
Addendum:
-Senator Joseph Leiberman, 11/09/07
November 10th, 2007 at 10:42 am
Do you think 46% of our fellow citizens can find Iran on a map?
November 10th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Please bomb and attack today no time to waist, get it going so the Dems and Reps can continue with their agreed upon agendas on the world stage. Why wait why try to negotiate or use every possible means to avoid war until war is the only recourse ATTACK NOW!
Do it, that’s what both parties want that’s the America they both envision. Don’t fight or argue gang it’s all Smoke and Mirrors you guys are on the same page. It’s a Dog and Pony show, to make you think each party is different- there is no difference!
On the home front there are slight differences, but in the world at large there is no difference. Do you think we might want to lock down our southern border before we attack, or just let the volunteer Minute Men (private citizens doing what the Government refuses to) take care of that because as a Government we cannot get it done? Doors wide open for terrorists to enter at will unchecked, while we go start another war?
If we are in front of our house or down the street fighting thugs do we leave our doors unlocked, do we at least tell our family do not let anybody in you do not know?
Then the few real Patriots left in this Country can start with Campaign Refinance
Form TOMMORROW.
Remember ultimately everybody’s on a strange corporate stipend every single politician. All of their motivations should be checked, double checked, verified, scrutinized, pondered very seriously and questioned in depth before trusting what trickles down to the public eye and ear through endless filters.
If the Dems stood for what they claim to believe (which they do not) they would have accomplished something since the 2006 election. Traitor Pelosi and all the other Traitor Dems refuse to do anything they say they believe in. Amazing!
It is my strong opion they should Impeach Cheney, should have been done long ago.
Not to worry the Dems are on your side!
Forgive my strongly different opinion and congratulations on at least advancing what you believe to be the right course of action.
I respect people who at least stand for something, even if I strongly disagree with them! The Dems stand for nothing and have promised the American public they will do nothing until 2009. They tell us if they win the White House then they might do something. Not, they will not, they want the war in Iraq voted for it (whined about it and changed nothing) and have no problem attacking Iran before their illusions of taking the office by providing their voters with no results for 2 YEARS?
We are all going with the Government program there is no difference.
To close I wonder?
1- Bill Clinton-1993 did not take out Osama (had intel he wanted to kill lots of Americans- this clown has been on the US Radar for a very long time)
2- Bill Clinton did not take him out after the Cole Incident (had intel long before and now lic. to kill w Public applaud)
3- GW Bush (had intel- lic. to kill w public applaud, did not take him out)
4- GW Bush (is disputed/argued to have had specific intel - and missed 9-11)
5- GW Bush- 2007 (had intel ect- Osama still at large)
This is not looking strange anymore- more like Government BS!
This appears to point (appears) that it seems (seems) something at the very least (very least) is strangely twisted at the very least (the very least).
2 different political parties cannot kill or capture for 10+ years a well known extremely Dangerous American Threat and he is still running lose?
I am not blaming Bush or Clinton the point I am trying to make is something is defiantly wrong with this picture.
This makes no sense what so ever and makes me for one very concerned:
“We the people”?
or is it
“We the Government”?
Is anyone on this thread that confident in his or her leaders truthfulness or integrity?
We all must watch and question them together as we continue our growth as a nation.
Polarity can work very well as a perfect shield. I am no radical in my estimation and consider my self a Patriot.
“United we stand divided we fall” has many levels of message and meaning for us to ponder.
We are the American people first, we are not Dems and Reps first, are there things that “WE” find suspect or that ‘WE” agree on.
Please turn down the possible flames I am hoping for some interesting dialoge on why as a country we have not gotten Osama going all the back to eary B. Clinton and late GW Bush time slots both being different parties and both having tons of reason to kill or capture. Years and years passing by and no one getting it done. I bet 50. the next adm. Rep or Dem will leave him at large.
As a people I think we all know the excuses do not add up, so what do you think is going on with this Osama thing. Not the over all terrorist stuff specifically the non capture or killing of him specifically.
Any opinions as to the need or desire for Campaign Refinance Reform. Would we all Dems, Reps and Other do better with canidates not funded by corporations?
Is there any agreement on that one? I really do not know?
November 10th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Please bomb and attack today no time to waist, get it going so the Dems and Reps can continue with their agreed upon agendas on the world stage. Why wait why try to negotiate or use every possible means to avoid war until war is the only recourse ATTACK NOW!
Do it, that’s what both parties want that’s the America they both envision. Don’t fight or argue gang it’s all Smoke and Mirrors you guys are on the same page. It’s a Dog and Pony show, to make you think each party is different- there is no difference!
On the home front there are slight differences, but in the world at large there is no difference. Do you think we might want to lock down our southern border before we attack, or just let the volunteer Minute Men (private citizens doing what the Government refuses to) take care of that because as a Government we cannot get it done? Doors wide open for terrorists to enter at will unchecked, while we go start another war. My God what an incredible plan, stellar!
Remember ultimately everybody’s on a strange corporate stipend every single politician. All of their motivations should be checked, double checked, verified, scrutinized, pondered very seriously and questioned in depth before trusting what trickles down to the public eye and ear through endless filters.
If the Dems stood for what they claim to believe (which they do not) they would have accomplished something since the 2006 election. Traitor Pelosi and all the other Traitor Dems refuse to do anything they say they believe in. Amazing!
It is my strong opion they should Impeach Cheney, should have been done long ago.
Not to worry the Dems are on your side!
Forgive my strongly different opinion and congratulations on at least advancing what you believe to be the right course of action.
I respect people who at least stand for something, even if I strongly disagree with them! The Dems stand for nothing and have promised the American public they will do nothing until 2009. They tell us if they win the White House then they might do something. Not, they will not, they want the war in Iraq voted for it (whined about it and changed nothing) and have no problem attacking Iran before their illusions of taking the office by providing their voters with no results for 2 YEARS?
We are all going with the Government program there is no difference.
To close I wonder?
1- Bill Clinton-1993 did not take out Osama (had intel he wanted to kill lots of Americans- this clown has been on the US Radar for a very long time)
2- Bill Clinton did not take him out after the Cole Incident (had intel long before and now lic. to kill w Public applaud)
3- GW Bush (had intel- lic. to kill w public applaud, did not take him out)
4- GW Bush (had intel supposedly - and missed 9-11)
5- GW Bush- 2007 (had intel ect- Osama still at large)
this is not looking srange anymore- more like Government BS
This appears to point (appears) that it seems (seems) something at the very least (very least) is strangely twisted at the very least (the very least).
2 different political parties cannot kill or capture for 10+ years a well known extremely Dangerous American Threat and he is still running lose
I am not blaming Bush or Clinton the point I am trying to make is something is defiantly
wrong with this picture.
I doubt seriously the next adm. will catch or kill him either regardless of the party in the White House.
By the time we have that perspective of that much time we may have all been hooded winked to a lethal situation we cannot change.
This non capture or kill makes no sense what so ever and makes me for one very concerned:
“We the people”?
or is it
“We the Government”?
Is anyone on this thread that confident in his or her leaders truthfulness or integrity?
We all must watch and question them together as we continue our growth as a nation.
Polarity can work very well as a perfect shield. I am no radical in my estimation and consider my self a Patriot.
“United we stand divided we fall” has many levels of message and meaning for us to ponder.
We are the American people first, we are not Dems and Reps first, are there things that “WE” find suspect or that ‘WE” agree on.
Please turn down the possible flames I am hoping for some interesting feed back on why as a country we have not gotten Osama going all the back to eary B. Clinton and late GW Bush time slots.
As a people I think we all know the excuses do not add up, so what do you think is going on with this Osama thing. Not the general terrorist stuff specifically the non capture or killing of Osama.
Any thoughts on Campagin Refinance, having politicans that are not supported by any Corporate funding period, agree, disagree- I mention because I feel this is the broken foundation. If we could remove that card from the deck we may rest a little easier that their motivations come strickly from their convictions.
November 10th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
sorry for double post
November 10th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
Took me several days to get back to this, but once again you are missing the point. When a person lies or is mistaken over and over again about one thing, why should we believe him again?
If you repeat something enough, it does not make it true.
The truth is that Iran’s weapon program is debatable. The International Atomic Energy Agency has not found any evidence of a program to produce fissile material. None. Even those who think they are pursuing it differ in their estimates of Iran’s nuclear capability, and they all agree that it is premature to conclude that Iran has weapons-grade material.
That is our one real rationale for taking military action and this group has proven inept in assessing the intelligence, inept in taking action, and inept in planning for the aftermath.
About the only thing you got right in your entire post is that you are confused.