Publius Pundit

« Previous · Home · Next »

U.S. Majority Supports Striking Iran

Filed under: Iran ~ Russia

Pajamas Media links to a Zogby Poll which agrees with our prior poll here on Publius Pundit approving a military strike on Iran. Zogby states:

A majority of likely voters -- 52% -- would support a U.S. military strike to prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon, and 53% believe it is likely that the U.S. will be involved in a military strike against Iran before the next presidential election, a new Zogby America telephone poll shows. The survey results come at a time of increasing U.S. scrutiny of Iran. According to reports from the Associated Press, earlier this month Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accused Iran of "lying" about the aim of its nuclear program and Vice President Dick Cheney has raised the prospect of "serious consequences" if the U.S. were to discover Iran was attempting to devolop a nuclear weapon. Last week, the Bush administration also announced new sanctions against Iran. Democrats (63%) are most likely to believe a U.S. military strike against Iran could take place in the relatively near future, but independents (51%) and Republicans (44%) are less likely to agree. Republicans, however, are much more likely to be supportive of a strike (71%), than Democrats (41%) or independents (44%). Younger likely voters are more likely than those who are older to say a strike is likely to happen before the election and women (58%) are more likely than men (48%) to say the same -- but there is little difference in support for a U.S. strike against Iran among these groups.

This is a remarkable demonstration of solidarity given the quagmire that Iraq has become, and flies in the face of the nattering nabobs of negativity who claim Americans don't support standing up against those who threaten them.

It's unfortunate, though, that lost in the shuffle is the need to deal with Russia, the nation that is enabling Iran's outrageous actions by supplying the rogue state with nuclear technology, a missile system to defend it (even while, outrageously, inveighing against the U.S. system proposed for Eastern Europe) and blocking economic sanctions in the U.N. Security Council.

Vladimir Putin's Russia is as much our enemy, and as much the enemy of democracy, as Iran.

Social Bookmarking:
Del.icio.us this del.icio.us | digg this digg | Add to Technorati technorati | StumbleUpon Toolbar stumble upon | Furl this furl | Reddit this reddit

Comments


JoseyWales says:

Headline needs to be fixed.

EDS: THANKS, OUTLAW!


Bear (Russian) says:

Go ahead! The majority supported going to Iraq too. Where are we now?

More revenue from oil for Russia though. Iraq pre-war hassle and the war itself helped a lot with that. I think Russians have to errect a monument to the President George Bush, made by Tseretelly


JoeCitizen says:

Who did Zogby poll? Not the people I talk to on the street. If true, that's says a lot about american people.. deaf, dumb and blind!


JOeCitizen says:

Who did Zogby poll? Not the people I talk to on the street. If true, that's says a lot about american people.. deaf, dumb and blind!


JoeCitizen says:

Who did Zogby poll? Not the people I talk to on the street. If true, that's says a lot about american people.. deaf, dumb and blind!


Tel says:

The question seems a little loaded to me. It presumes that Iran actually is currently building a nuclear weapon, and that a strike would stop Iran from getting it. If those two conditions are met, of course people would be for it. But have those two conditions been met in the real world? Support for a strike under those circumstances, and support for a strike proposed by Bush/Cheney, might not be exactly the same thing. I'd be interested to see a poll about how close people think Iran is to actually getting a nuclear weapon.


Bruce Moomaw says:

I'm extremely skeptical of Zogby -- who, to put it mildly, is not the most reliable pollster in the world. (You can usually predict who will win any race in an individual state by picking the guy that Zogby shows LOSING it.) Taking a look at other polls on the same subject in the compendium at "Polling Report.com" (the best Web compendium of polls in general that I know of):

CNN poll, Oct. 13: 68-29 opposition to the US "taking military action in Iran."

Fox News poll, Sept. 25: 54-29 that Bush should NOT "take military action against Iran before his term ends."

CBS/NY Times poll, Sept. 6: 83-9 against "taking military action now", in favor of trying diplomacy for the time being.

As for my own opinion: we may end up eventually having to do it -- but if I had to name an administration capable of bungling such an operation by passing up remaining possible diplomatic opportunities, cheerfully ignoring the serious side effects of a military attack, and trying to "overthrow the regime" by bombing Iran in general rather than focusing on the nuclear facilities, this is the one.


Jim C. says:

Ya, I have to believe that the question implies that Iran has nukes or that they are "imminent"--according to those with actaul access to the most relevant info, i.e., our leaders and our top intelligence officers, and that we can successfully stop the completion of same with a miltary strike--according to our leaders and our top intelligence wihtout turening it inot a total quagmire, AND, most importantly, that all of this will actually benefit U.S. interests and safety in the LONG-TERM--according to our leaders and our top intelligence.

(Sound familiar?)


RobertSeattle says:

For too many Americans it would be like in Jerry Maguire... "You had me at 'strike'"


Jim C. says:

Yes, I have to believe that the question implies that Iran has nukes or that they are "imminent"--according to those with actual access to the most relevant info, i.e., our leaders and our top intelligence officers, and that we can successfully stop the completion of same with a miltary strike--according to our leaders and our top intelligence wihtout turning it into a total quagmire, AND, most importantly, that all of this will actually benefit U.S. interests and safety in the LONG-TERM and not creating a recruiting bonanza for terrorists--according to our leaders and our top intelligence.

(Sound familiar?)


Steve says:

After the US finishes the massive air strikes, it's safe to say that any iranian campaigning for democracy will either have his throat slit or promptly flee the country. Good times ahead


Jim C. says:

From:
http://framed.typepad.com/framed/2007/10/speechless.html

I would love to see the results of a survey asking these basic questions:

1. Please locate Iran on an unlabeled map of the world.

2. Most Iranians are adherents of what sect of what religion?

3. How many of the 9/11 terrorists were Iranian?

4. What language is spoken in Iran?

5. What is the capital of Iran?

I would bet that fewer than 15% of the American people could answer any of those questions correctly. And that is why Bush & Co. have been able to bamboozle the people yet again.


EW says:

Amen, Jim W!

I betcha George Bush can't answer most of those questions either...


EW says:

Make that Jim C. My mistake.


EW says:

Make that "Jim C." My mistake.


EW says:

Make that "Jim C." My mistake.


John says:

Jim C. speaks the truth.

Thanks to decades of leftist asshattery dumbing down the public schools, the citizenry is no longer informed enough to be trusted to make sound choices.

Here is a fact which must be faced: not every human is equal in intelligence. We need to retun to separating kids by intelligence nd teach them at the level they're capable of learning.

And to hell with anybody's HURT FRIGGING FEELINGS - child OR adult. "Sorry, Mr & Mrs Living-Vicariously-Through-Your-Spawn, but your kid is decidedly average, and that's that. Don't ask the education system to stroke your pathetic little egos by acting as if reality isn't real."

Commies to the Left of me
Fascists to the right, here I am:
Stuck in the middle by my g-ddamned self


john o. says:

At most, this poll may be some evidence that administration deceit about Iran (which the poll question effectively incorporates)is manipulating public opinion.


Polar Bear says:

I'll support war against Iran - when George
Bush personally leads the invasion, and Jenna, Barbara, and all of Jeb and Neil's disreputable loinfruits take forward positions with rifles in hand. Also, Bush will need to subsidize gasoline when it hits $10/gallon.

It's obvious to me that Bush is still on cocaine, and that the American public is out of its mind.

PB







Post a comment


(will not be published)



Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)




TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/455