E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Iran President's Office via AP
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, center, visits the Natanz Uranium Enrichment Facility in Iran in this April 8, 2008 file photo.
Some 63 percent of Americans would be in favor of taking military action to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, according to a new survey.
The Pew Research Center asked 26,210 people in 21 different countries to give their views on Iran’s alleged plans to get nuclear weapons, finding widespread opposition to the idea in the West and also in some countries in the Mideast.
More than nine in 10 people in the United States, U.K., France and Germany were against Iran getting nuclear weapons. Two percent of Americans said they were in favor.
About 61 percent of Democrats and 79 percent of Republicans backed military force to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, with 31 percent of Democrats and 15 percent of Republicans saying this should be accepted if it happens.
The survey found that 76 percent of Jordanians, 66 percent of Egyptians and 62 percent of Lebanese people were also against the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran.
Obama slams Iran's 'electric curtain' amid 'Israel loves Iran' internet campaign
Iran insists its nuclear program is purely for peaceful purposes, and says it has no intention of making weapons.
“In most countries, there is majority support among opponents of a nuclear-armed Iran for international economic sanctions to try to stop Tehran’s weapons program,” the Pew report laying out the findings, “A Global ‘No’ to a Nuclear-Armed Iran,” reads.
The New Yorker's Laura Secor traveled to Iran in March for the country's parliamentary elections, and she joins Morning Joe to discuss an election that occurred with Iran's nuclear ambitions as the backdrop.
“The Chinese and the Russians are notable dissenters in this regard. The poll also found majorities in Western Europe and the United States disposed to taking military action to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. Again, the Russians and Chinese disagreed,” it added.
Leon Panetta seeks another $70M for Israel rocket shield
At schools, in shops, and on the streets of big cities and small towns, daily life plays out in Iran.
Some 77 percent of Russians were against a nuclear-armed Iran, but of those only 46 percent backed tougher sanctions and just 24 percent approved of military action. In China, 54 percent were opposed, and of those 38 percent backed more sanctions and 30 percent would support the use of force.
Roughly half of Washington’s European allies would support military action to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, the survey found.
Iranians already feeling pain of sanctions
Some 50 percent of people in Pakistan were in favor of Iran acquiring nukes, compared to 11 per cent against, with a large number of people not expressing an opinion.
Iran hangs 'Israel spy' over nuclear scientist killing
Lebanon was split along religious lines, with 73 percent of Shiite Muslims, 31 percent of Christians and just 5 percent of Sunni Muslims in favor. Iran is overwhelmingly a Shiite country.
More world news from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Japan mayor: I wouldn't hire tattooed Gaga, Depp
- Library opened by Mark Twain falls victim to cuts
- China abuzz over reported N.Korea boat hijackings
- Will $95-million cable car be ready for Olympics?
- NBC's Ayman Mohyeldin answers Syria questions
- Royal rumble: Spain's queen snubs UK queen
Follow us on Twitter: @msnbc_world
Leave a Comment:
We need a president that will assure that America will remain free of this threat in the future.
What "threat", the schizophrenia expressed by believers of the modern day military industrial complex mouthpiece? Agreed.
Well, what we do know is that 63% of those polled are illiterate, under-endowed, too old to go to war, defense contractors, couldn't get laid by a woman from the Middle East, and/or are pussy-tough guys.
How about war with North Korea, @!$%#s?
There are no limits to the stupidity and ignorance that these folks (and perhaps Clarence) proudly display on line... on Fox or the History Channel.
Knock. Knock. We're broke folks! We can't afford another war. They're Israel's and the Saudi Arabia's problem. Let them attack Iran. We have too many problems here at home.
Really! I see the results of these polls all the time. Who are these people doing these polls anyways? I have never, and maybe it's just me, been asked to do a poll on anything. I think this is simply media nonsense to get people to join a bandwagon idea on something most people disagree with. I'm calling Bull Crap on this poll. We clearly don't need any involvement in another war.
I know, I know. Some of you will say. But Surefirepython, no one said anything about America fighting the war. They just said 63% backed the idea.
Come one. If not the US then who?
*Spell check is broken and I really don't care!
Then these 63% are more than free to suit up, hop on the next plane to Tehran and go straighten everything out over there. They can go give Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs over there a piece of their mind. I'M NOT sacrificing MY SON'S life, or anyone else's, nor ANY young woman's husband or little tot's DADDY to "liberate" and "rebuild" another fifth century cat litter box.
NOPE - Sorry, but HOMEY DON'T PLAY THAT GAME NO MORE!!!!!!
When will the msm stop all the propaganda and report the truth? We as a nation must follow our hearts and speak out against this insanity. The USA is no longer a republic. Our gov't has created an empire that will fall apart just as Rome and all the other empires before and after it. Sadly America is no longer the land of the free but a nation of war.
63 percent? I don't really believe this figure, sorry.
Send troops in...pull troops out...send troops in...pull troops out...and on and on. Haven't there been enough PTSD affected people, missing limbs, divorces, children losing a parent, homeless vets? When will it ever be enough? Try living 'peace' instead of mandating it on others, even if just for a little while to allow these men and women a much deserved rest from trauma.
It's been three plus years now. Are we going to halts Iran's development or continue to "sit on our a**".
Well, I suppose it was bound to happen. Those people who make billions from these wars will not stop until they have their way. They will use whatever tactics they can to fool the American people, be it false evidence (think Iraq), or hyped-up propoganda, fear tactics, or whatever else they have at their disposal (and they have a lot). Americans are too lazy to really get involved running this country, and they will pay for that laziness with a future that is unlike anythihg this country has ever seen. This is a country that learns nothing from their past mistakes.
Iran has the Russians and the Chinese behind them, and they are not Iraqis -- they will not turn tail and run. Get ready for a blood bath. And, if we're going to do this, we will definitely have to bring back the draft.
Mark my word -- it will be one of the worst mistakes we've ever made.
Gil - Three years since you joined the lobbying team of Northrop Grumman?
Iran with nuclear bombs would be a disaster and the majority of americans can see that. What this poll really shows is that the majority of people who spend all day to posting opinions on MSNBC are clearly in the minority. Disparaging people with whom you disagree solves nothing.
Once again another poll showing a majority of Americans would like to go to war again. Doesn't anyone remember Viet Nam when most Americans wanted to go to war to stop the spread of communism around the world. As soon as the body bags start coming back ( 153,000 ) that's when the support drops and the war ends. So we got our arsses kicked in Viet Nam and there was no spread of Communism relating to that war. OOPS , we were wrong. 153,000 lives wrong. Well lets go into Iraq . They have weapons of mass destruction. The polls said lets go before they get us. OOPS no weapons of mass destruction found. Over 4000 lives lost. We can't forget about Afghanistan. If they don't turn over Bin Laden we will come in. OOPS Bin Laden flees when the war starts. Death Toll??? don't know yet as the final tally isn't in, however what have we won? The polls are out again . Iran must be stopped . Nuclear weapons. A threat to us. They can destroy us or Isreal or both together. Lets go get them. OOOOPS!!!!!! ...................
Unlike Iraq there is a real threat from Iran. When they went in to Iraq I thought it should have been Iran. Now I see that Saddam had to be gone before Iran could even possibly happen. If it does make it as quick and effective as possible.
Sebastian - You don't know how right you are. MSNBC is loaded up with what I call the less than 30%er's.
I actually feel sorry for the people of Iran. Their leaders are insane.
I think it is only a matter of time before military strikes take place to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. All we need to do is to lend the Israelis some aerial refueling tankers and maybe a few of the big bunker buster bombs and they will take care of the rest. It is pretty evident that there would be little if any backlash from any other Middle Eastern countries if Israel were to do this. Many might make token statements against the attacks simply for political reasons but none would take any kind of action against Israel in response. They all secretly want Israel to do it so they can stop worrying about Iran.
J. Camp-1109014
No! We need a president that will not back-down and do some defensive action according to the poll as represented.
My opinion. And, I appreciate your view.
How come I never get "surveyed" on these types of questions?
These "surveys" must be reserved for terrified 70-year-old McCarthyites who sit at home waiting for their landlines to ring while watching Lawrence Welk and reading the National Review.
I don't remember anyone asking me or anyone that I know if we'd would want our country to take military action. We've already got 2 wars that haven't been paid for except in American blood. This has shades of Viet Nam all over it, make war and those are the new jobs--start up the military industry and those are the other new jobs.
This is the elitist way and the sheep will follow, anything rather than deal with repairing roads, bridges, etc. that are in dire need of repair and would create jobs of true worth.
Israel are the ones who want it destroyed, let them do it.
Go America! F*** Yeah!
Hmmm... interesting. As far as we know at this time Iran is not even capable of enrichment necessary to manufacture rods to power their existing nuclear power plant. They had to get them from Russia. Those rods require (if I remember correctly) about 20% purity. A nuclear weapon requires about 99% purity.
Now then. On the face of things it appears they're still a long way from being able to produce a weapon.
But I would like to establish for certain that being the actual case. If we find that it isn't I have no objection to a quick and precise strike to further limit them if a weapon is actually found to be their goal.
But absolutely NO BOOTS ON THE GROUND! Get in, get out and leave them to pick up the pieces. NO MORE of this "nation building" crap.
You mean like President Obama already has? Note that Iran backed down under his strategy of sanctions and diplomacy. I find the various countries takes on this question extremely enlightening. Russia and China- we don't like it, but it's their business if they can carry it off. Pakistan and Lebanon- Please, please, let it happen. US and Eurozone- No way, no how, 'cause we say so!. Middle East- No, but let the bullies take care of it......
We have spent 1.3 trillion to find WMD's and to eliminate the world of terrorist, yet we can't afford to feed the poor or the cost universal health care. We will never accomplish the latter is we continue with the former. Let's just change the name of the Defense Department and call it Haliburton Inc.
Lets keep in mind the poll said U.S. military "action." Not a full blown war. I most certainly support a Libya type action. A few well placed airstrikes to eliminate nuclear capability. Lets face it, we're gonna spend money either way.
Scenario 1: Iran gets nuclear weapons, we choose not to act. Price of gas goes up. We end up paying them hush money like we do with North Korea every time they make a threat.
Scenario 2: Iran gets a nuke, we act, because of the actions the price of gas will still go up anyway. But at least we won't be paying them off for the next god knows how many years. Though we'll still end up spending a few billion at least.
Either way, we lose money. I'll only support airstrikes against Iran. NO U.S. troops on the ground. Let Israel handle the ground war.
Forget about 'Nam. Remember Iraq? And Afghanistan? Going to war with Iran may well be the last major mistake America ever makes, because whatever comes after that will be irrelevant--the economy will be past the point of no return. Not to mention thousands of lives wasted on yet another pointless war.
Those surveyed must all be fans of Fox Noise or something.
No war necessary. Pursue all possible diplomatic measures to cut Iran off from the world, unless they stop the nuclear program. If they develop a weapon anyway, so what? Many nations of the world have nukes--more than one or two, which is about all Iran will do unless Russia or China get involved, which is somewhat doubtful at this point. We have reason to ratchet up the political pressure, anyway, since Iran is arming other despotic governments, according to latest reports.
I say, put them under enormous political pressure. If that doesn't work, and they develop a weapon or two, let them have them. Give Iran the message if they use them offensively and unprovoked, we will turn Iran into a sea of glass and be done with it, similarly to how the Russians dealt with the tribal uprisings during the Soviet years and achieved relative quiet. I am sure the Chinese and the Russians would back that idea, since they would also be threatened (remember, Iran boasted it could hit Beijing with a missile...) That should resolve the nuclear issue. That is my opinion.
If you repeat a lie many times the mob of imbeciles would believe it. The Iranian threat has been going on for years, especially the wrong translation about "Israel should be wiped out of the map", when the media knows it was "Zionism would fade from the pages of History". If someone can mention the last war started by Iran, that would be interesting.
Since the Hispanic-American war our media publishes inflammatory articles exaggerating events, that if done by us are considered just and necessary, but when done by our enemies are all evil and require a response.
Anyway, if stupid Americans want to support another war in the Middle East, let it be, more debt, more deaths and a faster swirl down to the toilet.
Romilio,s there are thousands of Israelis and others who speak Farsi as there first language and are quite able to translate correctly.Just like there were a huge amount of English speaking people in different countries whose native tongue was German to translate Hitlers words. No mistake.The ayatollahs are nazi type terrorists .and have commited terrorists acts on 6 continent.including Latin America where I live.Their attacks in Argentina were a type of declaration of war..You need to investigate the truth of the Iranian regime.They are every bit as pyscho and dangerous as most believe believe.. Verdad,mi amigo.
bart martin-3773750
You are so correct regarding Israeli's speaking Farsi. I've been there too. Israel has a nationalistic attitude when terrorists try to breech the Nation.
While I was in Israel, I witnessed a melting pot of Arabs, Muslim's, Iranians, Israeli's etc.
Yeah, so some Israelis speak farci. That doesn't make the translation correct. Israel is and has been in the business of promoting falsehoods in order to justify their war mongering to aquire more land for the Israeli empire.
" It lies upon the people's shoulders to prepare for
the war, but it lies upon the Israeli army to carry out the fight with the
ultimate object of erecting the Israeli Empire."
By: Moshe Dayan (Israel Defense and Foreign Minister)
Source: 12 February 1952. Radio "Israel."
In any event, Iran's nuclear enrichment is closely monitored by the IAEA. Neither America, nor Israel has a valid excuse to attack Iran. Of course we didn't really have a valid excuse to attack Iraq, which is why Bush, Cheney and the neocons, who planned and sold the war based on lies, should be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Israel will not attack Iran, because they don't want to take the chance that Iran might actually have the ability to fight back and the IDF hasn't got the guts. They were soundly whipped by Hezbollah, despite having superior armor and air support. On the ground, the IDF is 3rd rate, at best. Their best work consists of attacking women and children in the Palestinian territories and using their American supplied air power.
By ASSOCIATED PRESS | 3/18/12 5:57 PM EDT
JERUSALEM - Despite saber-rattling from Jerusalem, Israeli officials now
agree with the U.S. assessment that Tehran has not yet decided on the actual
construction of a nuclear bomb, according to senior Israeli government and
defense figures.
Even so, there is great concern in Israel about leaving Iran “on the cusp”
of a bomb - explaining why Israel continues to hint at a military attack on
Iran’s nuclear installations before it moves enough of them underground to
protect them from Israel’s bombs. Iran reported in February that it possesses
up to 100 kilograms of uranium enriched to 20 percent, which would be enough
for four bombs if further processed. Uranium must be enriched to 90 percent to
be military grade.
Israeli intelligence officials, like other intelligence agencies worldwide,
estimate that once a decision to build a bomb is reached, it would take months
to upgrade the enrichment and months more to build a crude bomb - in all, a
year to 18 months.
Then, to fit a bomb to a Shahab-3 missile capable of striking Israel would
take Iran two years, Israeli defense officials say.
Israeli officials who favor a strike do not want Iran even to reach the
point where work on a bomb could begin.
They took this poll in Brooklyn NY, and if you weren't wearing a beanie, you were excluded.
I'll admit to being in the minority this time. Our military needs a break. Let the Arab nations deal with Iran.
I hardly believe you are the minority. I call BS on this... what kind of people did they poll?!
Edit: So according to the PEW page, they polled people by dialing random numbers. I think most normal people don't care for that and say "no leave me alone" - right? So I wonder what kind of people were willing to take a poll from a random phone call, they should do a poll on that. Unemployed? Check. No education? Check. No common sense? Check.
No one has ever asked me this question on a poll. Has anyone on this thread been asked by Pew for their opinion on attacking Iran? I don't believe their 63% figures. We should not get involved in any way. Let the Arabs handle it.
SuptyMoney~ Awesome man! Your point is right on. I think theses polls should have qualifying questions?
1) Got a job? Nope so you count.
2) Graduate High School? Nope so you don't count either.
Most people that have anything more important to do with their time don't have to spend all that time on those stupid calls.
*Then again this is coming from a guy that is wasting even more time typing this responce.
How come I never get "surveyed" on these types of questions?
These "surveys" must be reserved for terrified 70-year-old McCarthyites who sit at home waiting for their landlines to ring while watching Lawrence Welk and reading the National Review.
Good news!! and not surprising. ! 32 years of the pyscho and perverted ayatollahs holding the world hostage will be coming to an end.The military force lined up against Iran is overwhelming.Just Germany with their subs in the Persian Gulf and Israel could finish them off. But the U.S Saudia Arabia and most of Europe will join in to give the finishing touches.The attacks will be masive ,just like they were to finish off Hitler...And most of the world will cheer.If Iran tries anything funny,they will be responsible for the masive destruction of their country just like Adolph was for his. Ayatollahs and Adolph .2 fiends in the same peapod..
Our War Department (formerly Defense Department) is run by Haliburton. This decision will not be made by a president from either party.
I wonder who those 63% were? I think they were the same people who say they love our military but would NEVER allow THEIR children to sign up to defend our freedoms. It's always okay if the cost is for someone else.
Nobody asked me and it is a bad idea.....
Follow up headline: "Majority of Americans unwilling to join the military and help stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons." So what the "majority of Americans" think about any military action is irrelevant if they are not willing to put themselves or their loved ones in harms way to accomplish it.
hey Cappy I agree with up but if Obama needed to he or who ever comes next will re-enstate the Draft. Which in some respect isn't the worse thing that could happen. Not the War but making everyone give a little for how much they will get from this Country. I really don't think we will put boots on the ground. Shock and Awe the sites and major citys. Let the world call us animals but I bet all these little dirt bag countries will stop their yelling WE BAD.
well said Cappy!
Actually we have a more pressing problem in the middle east that of Pakistan having the BOMB and the fact that they are taking us to the cleaners with fees of $5000/tank truck being charged to ship fuel and supplies to our troops in Afghanistan. After all a Capitalist society with the BOMB is a very dangerous combination especially to the originator of both don't you think?
Add to that the Islamic element to the equation and we have the seeds of destruction staring us in the face. So I do not believe we have any choice but to nuke the nukes in Iran and Pakistan. The question is not IF it is WHEN.
Actually we have a more pressing problem in the middle east that of Pakistan having the BOMB and the fact that they are taking us to the cleaners with fees of $5000/tank truck being charged to ship fuel and supplies to our troops in Afghanistan. After all a Capitalist society with the BOMB is a very dangerous combination especially to the originator of both don't you think?
Add to that the Islamic element to the equation and we have the seeds of destruction staring us in the face. So I do not believe we have any choice but to nuke the nukes in Iran and Pakistan. The question is not IF it is WHEN.
Poor, Poor, America. We have no choice. We are being forced to Nuke two entire countries. How dare they do that to us.
I personally think military action should be the very last resort. War is most detrimental to those doing the fighting and civilians caught in the crossfire. Those who order it done are watching it on a screen somewhere, well fed and comfortable.
I think we, the American people, duly elect "those who order it done". Who is the f**king dumbass now?
I hate to tell you this spendthrift, but there are a hell of a lot of other issues besides war that people base their votes on. If you didn't know that then you are the f**king dumb ass. Not to mention troll.
The point is, dumbass, we the American people elect fools for office, all from a list of fools and we have the gaul to believe that these fools will do something that will make us happy. Sure, we don't elect them perhaps because we are voting on the war issue. But we elected them for whatever reason and they are the ones, like it or not, who order it done, with no say so from us. No matter what the issue was that you voted for these dumbasses to be elected. You are the real dumbass because you still believe that the American political system can help you with your entitlements. You are just plain dumb and you are spitting in the wind.
No. Our military deserve the respect of only being used as a last resort in defense of our nation. A war with Iran is neither a last resort, nor is it in defense of our nation.
If we would have left Iraq alone, they would have taken care of Iran as they had for decades. We brought about Iran's power by eliminating Iraq and thus destablizing the region in Iran's favor. Committing our brave soldiers to another ill-conceived war brought about by the failed results of our previous ill-conceived war is insane.
Obama's propaganda arm, MSNBC, simply floating a trial balloon at their master's behest. If Obama's dismal polling numbers stay where they're at, expect an attack on Iran and if that doesn't look like its working around the first week of November, expect a declaration of martial law due to a manufactured crisis.
Radicals don't willingly give up power and Obama is infinitely more radical than any other US politician in the history of this country.
Fishlore, speaking of radicals, have you looked in the mirror lately. Get a clue.
Fishlore....I see you're off you medications again. Go see Nurse Ratched, she'll take care of you
verno...MSNBC and the vast majority of media in this country cheerleads for Obama. Independent pollsters have proved that 70% of journalists in the US are democrat.
The same neo-con clowns who said Saddam had WMD's and we had to go to war with Iraq
are now saying "we" (i.e., your kids, not the neo-con's kids) need to go to war with Iran
over a bomb the Iranians don't have. How did the invasion of Iraq work out ?
In the 1980's the Soviets really did have 30,000+ nuclear weapons pointed at us along
with an air force, an army and a navy all as large as ours and the Soviets didn't
attack us, yet we are supposed quiver in fear of one bomb the Iranians "might" build ?
The Soviets don't and didn't worship a branch of Islam as radical and ridiculous as does Iran. They didn't believe in martyrdom or the idea that God wrote the Q'uran. They could be rational. Iran cannot.
Thanks r1ghtwing for a little historical perspective. Fishlore is apparently too busy believing a conspiracy behind every tree to think about this rationally. I love to see the far right swinging in the wind as to which way to go, President Obama is too weak on defense and only "We" can protect America, or it's a plot and President Obama is going to invent a "Crisis" to win the election. Gotta love it!!
“I think the Iranian leadership is composed of very rational people" - chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Force, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/world/middleeast/israeli-army-chief-says-he-believes-iran-wont-build-bomb.html
Iran is just as rational as most nations. You just have to look at it from their perspective. That and ignore the rhetoric. Iran wants to build nuclear weapons for a couple reasons. Domestic prestige, because Israel has nukes, and because no nation who has nuclear weapons has ever been invaded. Those are perfectly valid and rational reasons to build them. Have you ever thought that maybe all this talk about the US invading Iran would actually incentive them to build nukes in order to stop an invasion? Just because a country doesn't do what we would like them to do does not make them an irrational actor.
Yeah, sure. Their leader Abba Dabba Du, doesn't believe that the Holocaust ever happened, as do many of their other politicos. Now, that is rational as hell, isn't it?
If my chihuahua keeps snapping at my black lab long enough, she might just chomp on his ugly little head and end his noise before he scratches her real bad.
Note to the little dogs: Don't tick off the big dogs.
Wow, and what analogy should we use for world hunger?
I cannot believe this poll. Must be politicians and rich people because we know none of them have children in the military. If they had a draft they would not be in such a hurry to fight.
And just what is the percentage of all Americans who are willing to go fight in said war against Iran? When the only thing you have in your toolbox is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Don't generals on the ground think war with Iran is a bad idea? I believe that's whats been said.
This is ABSOLUTELY a TRIAL BALLOON. Where are all the anti-war, anti-interventionist liberals? Liberals truly love to be subjugated by their political masters--even though they often don't realize it.
LOKI of ASGARD: You might as well come for us now.
This poll is utterly ridiculous. has to be a republican who id gunning for a war with Iran...
How funny Kenny. Your a perfect example of a liberal....faced with facts you still live in a phantasy world of denial.
You want to go to war? Then GO! You want to kill innocent Iranian children? You are insane! CHICKEN HAWKS!
After the debacle of Afghanistan and Iraq and the public being disillusioned about both, and lied to at every opportunity, to think of invading Iran is reactionary and without thought. So, you think Iraq was difficult after the Saddam's fall? People should google Iran, you'll find the country is about 3 times the size of Iraq and has about triple the population. Since forces in Iraq were wanting, not to mention ill equipped as in vehicles as heavily armored as a Buick or Ford, where will this military force come from? Now that 63% think armed conflict is the way to go does that mean all the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq will just be moves? Who's is going to sign up? Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld used all the B.S. in the bag to get people to sign up. Imagine, the politicians started a war and no Americans signed up for it. Of the 63% who are in favor of military action how many of their family's are go to for this adventure? Do you know anyone who has served in either of Bush's wars? I don't, I don't know anyone who knows anyone who served in either country. Politicians want to start the war, their families are the first ones to go along with the families of all the companies who will supply the next farcical adventure. As a 20 year old I was part of the Vietnam experiment. Oh, will Boehner and his bunch call for lower taxes since they will want to spend another $1 trillion dollars for another war. Will Boehner use Visa, MasterCard, or American Express and at 18% interest. Let's put all 536 Congress people on the front line. McCain always spouts off saying what is needed. He was never part of a ground force war, he was never in charge of a ground force in a war, he was never in the planning stage of a ground war. He's clueless. You need proof? He picked Palin, who had about 3 years experience beyond mayor of a town of about 10,000. I'd want the principal of a grammar school to have more than 3 years experience before becoming principal. McCain's judgment, he could have asked Paris Hilton to be V.P.
McCain is a war veteran--not that I'm really standing up for him...one of my sons served honorably in Afghanistan, on the Pakistan border getting shelled every freaking day, bud, and he's still in the Army. I happen to know a number of OIF/OEF veterans with whom I stand up, along with Vietnam vets and my Korean service comrades in their battles with VA.
As far as we are all concerned, all these wars have been for nothing but money and political power, with the case in point in my opinion being the view on Iraq and Afghanistan right now. What have we really accomplished--just like Vietnam and Korea. We don't always need an enemy, and war has never fixed anything in the entire history of mankind, because as soon as one ends, there comes an excuse for another one. We do not need war with Iran to deal with their nuclear aspirations.
The United State Air Force! Missiles and drones and bombs, oh my! No ground troops required, just a lot of the super massive bunker busting bombs that Israel was looking to acquire recently. After the first few sortees, the cruise/tomahawk missiles are sent in. Troops are only after the obliteration and surrender.
63% agree to military action against Iran? That means only 37% have any brains. Why should we go and fight Israel's war?? Israel is doing it's Damned best to Drag US into a war with Iran. It's not enough that we give Israel Billions every year for Absolutely Nothing, now they want us to fight a war for them. B.S. And who took this poll?? We always have these mysterious polls going on. Just because somebody puts some poll numbers out there, we are supposed to be like Robots and believe them??
There should be a law that any member of congress that votes to go to war, or bomb another country must immediately volunteer themselves, their sons and daughters for the army, and be compelled to be the first "boots on the ground" in the country they voted to go to war against.
I think we would then be free of war forever. Scared to death of the Iranian navy, army and air force. Even if they have all of one nuke? What a joke.
Hag: Really? Peaceful countries are never dragged into war? Read a history book.
These are the kind of numbers you get when less that 1% of us are active duty military.
Did they provide a projected budget when they asked people to weigh in on the topic? Was anyone asked if they would pay higher taxes to cover the cost of the war?
Or maybe they should have asked, "If your child/spouse/whatever were required to fight this war, would you back military action?" Bet they would have a different answer. Because that's what it boils down to: people sitting safely in their offices while others bleed and die.
This is all amusing. MSNBC will naturally poll the most liberal group they can find, and the results show that even the Democrats think we should prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, and should go after them if they do.
Never mind Israel Tehran7, if Iran gets nukes, it will effect a lot more than Israel, who has the means and the intent to take them out if need be. Countries reluctant to pull the trigger because of political correctness are more likely the targets. Like...say...the US.
What's your solution? I assume you think it is a great idea that Iran has nukes, and that if they plotz Isreal (or anyone else) with them we should just ignore it. So...what do you suggest?
Those who say yes are thinking a. they won't have to go. It's easy to send others to die b. This will be a snap. Think Iraq and Afghanistan and Viet Nam.
These are people who never served, or attempted to serve. Like Hannity, Limbaugh and Cheney. Personal cowards.
And like Obama. and Clinton. And Harry Reid. Chicken@!$%#s of the 1st order.
OK, 63% are wrong. everybody wants to be safe I'll give you that but engaging in another preemptive war is stupid. first of all you won't get those nukes. secondly, we do not win these types of wars and high amounts of money go into them and many people die. finally, Iran has not attacked anybody. who profits from this act of war? military industrial complex, military contractors, certain legislators who have arms companies in their districts, and Israel.
There was nothing preemptive about the Iraq war. They invaded kuwait, we beat them back, agreed to cease fire pending certain conditions, they violated the conditions, the war resumed.
that war was justified on wmds that did not exist. are you trying to justify the iraq war? why stop there what about vietnam?
No it was justified on the fact that saddam agreed to inspections in exchange for a cease fire. When he kicked the inspectors out he violated the agreement so the fire ceased to cease.
Saddam did not "kick out the weapons inspectors". This is a lie that was pushed by the radical right wing neo-cons in an attempt to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq by the Bush administration.
See :
"U.S advises weapons inspectors to leave Iraq"
Posted 3/17/2003 5:40 AM Updated 3/17/2003 1:16 PM
"VIENNA, Austria (AP) — In the clearest sign yet that war with Iraq is imminent, the United States has advised U.N. weapons inspectors to begin pulling out of Baghdad, the U.N. nuclear agency chief said Monday."
"Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said the recommendation was given late Sunday night both to his Vienna-based agency hunting for atomic weaponry and to the New York-based teams looking for biological and chemical weapons."
"Late last night ... I was advised by the U.S. government to pull out our inspectors from Baghdad," ElBaradei told the IAEA's board of governors.
"He (ElBaradei) said U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the Security Council were informed and that the council would take up the issue later Monday."
That was the evacuation before the invasion. he was defying the sanctions and threw out inspectors or limited access many times.
jblo,
They never threw out the inspectors, the Bush regime pulled them out and lied about it.
I'm somewhat on the fence about this one. The reality is that trying to stop Iran makes us hypocrites because we are allowing North Korea to get the bomb and we are ignoring the fact that Pakistan is becoming radically unstable while still possessing it.
Perhaps more importantly, though, ultimately this is all just a stall. As technology progresses it will become easier and easier for anybody who wants them to acquire WMDs simply because the basic components become so ubiquitous that they are impossible to control (consider, for example, that a hundred years ago something like the OK City bombing would have been impossible, whereas today literally anybody can walk into a hardware store and buy the necessary materials). That time is coming rapidly. The current focus on keeping WMDs away from the "bad guys" is short-sighted. The ultimately question is how we are going to stay safe in a world where everybody has WMDs.
MC in TX- its called MAD ( mutual assurd distruction) and it works. That was the policy use during the cold war.