Poll: 60 percent of Americans oppose Iraq war

[NeoConsSuck]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sixty percent of Americans oppose the U.S. war in Iraq, the highest number since polling on the subject began with the commencement of the war in March 2003, according to poll results and trends released Wednesday.

And a majority of poll respondents said they would support the withdrawal of at least some U.S. troops by the end of the year, according to results from the Opinion Research Corporation poll conducted last week on behalf of CNN. The corporation polled 1,047 adult Americans by telephone.

According to trends, the number of poll respondents who said they did not support the Iraq war has steadily risen as the war stretched into a second and then a third year. In the most recent poll, 36 percent said they were in favor of the war -- half of the peak of 72 percent who said they were in favor of the war as it began.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/09/iraq.poll/index.html

[fasttense]

1. Gee, with 60% of America against the war,

you would think all democratic politicians would be anti-war. You would think the Democratic party would be running non-stop ads showing how they are against the war and how the republics got us into it. You would think.......

[AlamoDemoc]

2. with Joe gone they will take stock thought...I assure you

[jobycom]

9. Only about 16% believe troops should be pulled out, so I doubt it

The majority of Democrats in Congress already have the view of the majority in this poll. The war was a mistake, but we can't just leave.

47% still believe we can "win." Not that anyone has ever asked what winning means in this bloody farce. We're Americans, we must win, and to Hell with understanding anything. We are a nation of Ricky Bobbys--If you ain't first, you're last.

[AlamoDemoc]

10. I can't fathom the 16% you are using. What kind of poll was that?

[jobycom]

16. From the damned article. There was stuff below the headline

"Sixty-one percent, however, said they believed at least some U.S. troops should be withdrawn from Iraq by the end of the year. Of those, 26 percent said they would favor the withdrawal of all troops, while 35 percent said not all troops should be withdrawn."

26 percent of 61 percent-- roughly 16%.

[underpants]

19. 60% said DON'T GO ALONE before the war

Oh sorry I was supposed to forget about that.

[rpannier]

3. So...what you're saying is...

60% of all Americans are left-wing, fringe lunatics that hate America?

Because according to matthews, hannity and o'reilly that's what someone who opposes the war is.

[Cobalt Violet]

4. And the other 40% should be sent over there to fight it.

If they really "support it". If it's good enough for others to die in, then it should be good enough for supporters to die in.

[coalition_unwilling]

27. I know you're being saccastic (at least I hope you are), but

the 40% who support the war are just fine with the war so long as they don't have to fight it and it's poor whites, blacks and Latinos doing the actualy fighting and dieing. (Just like back in Vietnam, I'd wager, when the children of the middle- and upper classes got draft deferments, and the poor went off to fight.)

[stray cat]

5. However only a minority believe in an immediate pull out.

People are generally united on the fact that the war was a mistake. However, the majority do not agree on a solution.

[BootinUp]

7. I guess you're one of the few

who read past the thread subject line.

[Felinity]

14. They are asking the wrong question

If they put a dollar value to cost of staying, more Americans would say, "Let's take a hike."

The truth is we cannot afford this war, financially or otherwise. It has depleted our military assets, both human and material. It has prevented us from putting enough money into New Orleans to revive it.

It has ruined our reputation as a Superpower to be reckoned with. It is now obvious to other nations, that we no longer "Walk softly and carry a big stick." We "Trudge like elephants and wave a (magic) flag" (and are more concerned about someone burning it that protecting the troops we have put in harms way, or making sure everyone has access to health care).

I think the public is ill informed as to what price THEY are paying to try to save face rather than admit defeat. They are ignorant to the fact that there is little face left to save.

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

18. "The truth is we cannot afford this war"

Great points, all the way around!

[donkeyotay]

22. Oop! It's a secret! Don't let Merca know the GOP culture war has ended

in the moral and financial bankruptcy of the country. So long as we keep raising the debt ceiling and polling tee vee audiences on who they think we should spank next, no one will notice. It's a secret.

[SpiralHawk]

6. Americans don't like being lied to, Mr. AWOL-WMD Bush

And that goes for you, too, Mr. Dick Five Deferments Cheney.

Stop lying to us.

[theHandpuppet]

8. Oh, never mind them

According to Joe Lieberman, they're just the radical fringe of the true Democratic Party.

[Jackpine Radical]

11. OK--So there's disagreement on how to get us out.

The main point is that only 36% are buying the Bushco/Holy Joe line that the war is a good idea.

Why SHOULD the public have a coherent, consistent idea of how to extract us? They aren't experts in diplomacy. Thanks to the corporate media and the government, they don't even have any accurate information on which to base their opinions, and they've certainly never been exposed to any serious, responsible discussion of the issues.

The American propaganda mill has treated the public like mushrooms--kept them in the dark & fed them bullshit. If you're at all smart, you don't go to mushrooms for informed opinions on astronomy.

[MissWaverly]

12. agree with you and what about the permanent bases

that congress never approved which are being built and all the torture which congress doesn't
approve, this war is the first covert war we have ever had with a president who is paying
for favorable PR

[Jackpine Radical]

21. Exactly. There is so much underhanded manipulation going on

that it's a miracle the public has even seen as far into it as they have.

I dunno--maybe we should view it as a victory for alternative media, including the Internet(s), and as a sign that the corporate echo chamber is rendering itself obsolete by failing to perform its original function.

American society is sorta like an organism that can no longer trust its senses. It will need to either develop new senses or go extinct.

[ERF]

13. Isn't the headline somewhat misleading given the question

Just because 61% are in favour of "And a majority of poll respondents said they would support the withdrawal of at least some U.S. troops by the end of the year" doesn't necessarily make the "opposed to the war". Those are two different things.

I think we are approaching that number, but the question and the headline don't really indicate the same thing. The conclusion being drawn is disingenious or at least presumptuous.

[Czolgosz]

15. Odd that polls say 60% oppose the war while other polls say 50% mistakenly

believe Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. See http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=684.

Either the Harris poll on weapons of mass destruction is inaccurate or a sizable portion of the population opposes the war notwithstanding their erroneous belief that Saddam had WMDs.

Which is it?

[bananas]

23. Possible explanation

They might believe we went there to get rid of Saddam and the WMD's,
mission accomplished, time to go home.

[ERF]

28. The poll didn't actually say that. It said that

60% want some troops to leave by the end of the year. I am sorry, but this article and especially the headline are incredibly misleading.

[Jacobin]

17. The sixty percent 'fringe'

:eyes:
The talking heads will never discuss this one.

[reprobate]

20. The number who support pull out will soon be moot.

Iraq either is or has degenerated into civil war.

And even it's puppet government is now calling for partition into three territories.

In either case we will be forced to leave.

We can't be seen as supporting one side over another and that's just what will happen in the case of civil war.

And you can bet that if Iraq is split into three states it will be full and official civil war. It will mean that the Sunni territory will be the one without oil revenues and that would be the worst offense they could be faced with. They won't take that no matter what else is offered.

So it looks like either way we will have no choice but to 'bug out'. Or lose many more American lives.

As for the permanent basee.....Say bye bye. They will have to be abandoned. Theres no way we could leave any troops there to man them. They would be seen by ALL Iraqis ar foreign occupiers and their livers would be in severe danger from all sides in Iraq.

[saigon68]

24. It will be "THE LAST FLIGHT OUT"

[cezebrgr]

26. Don’t leave now

We need to perfect BZ.

http://www.thewednesdayreport.com/twr/bz.htm

http://www.levity.com/aciddreams/samples/bz.html

[cezebrgr]

25. but please HELP fund THE V.A.

It is only human to want to perfect the art of war. The martial arts have experienced a huge resurgence since the fifties, much like chess. Society has set limits on the level of intensity it will accept as a tolerable war. The trend for war is to it make more expensive and more precise and less affordable. Now greater efforts are made to select targets and eliminate them. The longer a conflict lasts the more efficient both sides get. Both sides usually come out with a unique perspective on tooling each stage of the development and success is generally in the eye of the beholder. The beholder in modern times is the industrial military complex, and a small increase in research and development funding can translate into a relatively large increase in technical spin-off.

Here you are dealing with obvious questions of clear intent. The position of clear intent or obvious intent is not generally a true motive on any playing field. Clear intent is usually a trick move. Something designed to conceal a motion in another part of the arena.

Think to your self what has been the out come of this conflict so far, besides death and destruction? One might say higher fuel prices. If that was the goal was that then the conflict is successful so far. Now who has benefited most from that? Let us just say Iran. They are making more money per gallon.

The next question is what is the hidden long-range benefit and who has the advantage? Ultimately it is the U.S. automakers. The internal combustion was not designed to run on petroleum. It can, but it is designed to run on bio-fuel.

The U.S. has vast amounts of farmland that has not been tilled since Birdseye developed frozen food. Like freezing, canning and drying have been perfected and can safely preservation food for years. These processes have limited the amount of farmland needed to feed the population. The railroads that were built to move the harvest to the population centers have been pulled up and pounded into automobiles.

Once the price of unleaded gas exceeded 2.16 dollars in the U.S. ethanol became cost efficient. Ethanol comes from corn. The U.S. has plenty of capacity to grow corn. Ethanol is a clean, powerful, renewable fuel the growth of which improves the taxable value of land.

There has been a move to get the U.S. out of the United Nations since before the Organization was formed. Closing the US borders was a cause waiting for a catastrophe. Iraq may not be intended to be a winning move as much as it is a cover play connected to a bigger strategy .

The economy of the United States is based on land value. If the demand of ETHANOL increases then the value of corn will increase and the value of land will increase. Increased farming will reduce unemployment. One tenth of a percent reduction in unemployment increases federal revenue by forty billion dollars. The employment in Industrial Military Complex has increased federal revenue by 350 billion the war has cost 300 billion. Improving the medicine that the wounded receive is most important.