Majority in U.S. Would Back Attack to Prevent Iran Nuclear Bomb

[Hissyspit]

Despite This: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4092412&mesg_id=4092412

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aNvqCq5beGAE

Majority in U.S. Would Back Attack to Prevent Iran Nuclear Bomb

By Janine Zacharia

Oct. 6 (Bloomberg) -- A majority of Americans are skeptical that diplomacy with Iran will succeed and say the U.S. should use military action if necessary to prevent the Iranian government from developing a nuclear weapon.

A Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey released today found 61 percent of Americans would support a military strike. Twenty-four percent said it is more important to avoid conflict even if that means Iran will end up building nuclear arms.

The survey by the Washington-based group found 63 percent support direct U.S. negotiations with Iran to push the country to abandon its nuclear program. Still, 64 percent said such efforts won’t succeed. The poll was conducted last week, when Iran held talks with the U.S. and other United Nations powers and agreed to widen discussions on the nuclear dispute.

The U.S. and its European allies are concerned that Iran is making headway on acquiring the capability to build a nuclear weapon. Iran told UN nuclear inspectors last month that it is building an underground nuclear-fuel plant, a facility that the U.S., Britain and France said was a secret site.

[Solly Mack]

1. I just know those 61% are wearing a uniform

Right?

Right?

[indepat]

37. Are 61% saying f**k international law, our own law, the UN, and the Geneva Conventions?

:shrug:

[Solly Mack]

40. The number comes from the article

Which doesn't mean the article is accurate

If you read the article, it claims 61% would support a military strike against Iran...those 61% need to run out and join the military. Course, most people who enjoy calling for military strikes from the safety of their homes are just a bunch of "Cheney's"... always have something better to do than to actually put their lives on the line to back up their words....but they don't mind calling for the deaths of others...just as long as they can feel safe.

[indepat]

44. Let the 61% run out and join the military, and if too old, offer up all their progeny of draft age

;)

[gratuitous]

2. Well, as long as it's free, quick and precise

But a military attack is likely to be none of these, despite the poor wording of the poll question. Nothing about magical unicorns and free cable TV for everyone?

[sinkingfeeling]

3. If only Iran was making a nuclear bomb.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

6. You don't think that is on thier short list of things to do?

If not on thier short term to do list, certainly something to get around doing?

[sinkingfeeling]

21. No, I don't. Neither do the CIA nor the IAEA. In 2007, 16 intelligence agencies put together a

National Intelligence Estimate that concluded Iran had no weapons development program.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

32. 2007...

But not even a moth ago underground/in-ground centrifuge facilities are being discovered.
Color me skeptical of of 2 year old reports, I guess.

[14thColony]

42. They aren't "being discovered"

Iran voluntarily declared the new centrifuge facility to the IAEA in compliance with their requirements under applicable international laws/rules. Until Iran declared it, the IAEA had no idea a new facility was being built at Qom.

Centrifuges are necessary for enriching uranium for ANY purpose - from fule for nuclear power plants to medical radiological applications to use in nuclear weapons. Operating centrifuges no more means they have a nuclear weapons program than operating a steel mill means they must be making tanks.

By the way, NIEs do not work the way you seem to think they do. NIEs are 'in effect' for as long as the current NIE is judged to still be valid and accurate. They are not issued and then forgotten about - agencies continue to monitor the situation closely - if it's important enought to get the attention of an NIE, you can bet lots of people will continue to monitor for new developments. Should new evidence invalidate the current NIE, a new NIE would be published to supercede it. That the US intelligence community has not issued a new NIE says a lot.

[sinkingfeeling]

35. Then check out the story about the IAEA on the front page of DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4092412

There is no proof that they have a weapons program today.

[14thColony]

34. So?

While nuclear latency (aka the Japan Option) seems FAR more plausible as Iran's national security objective here, so what if they produce a bomb? Do you seriously believe they'll lob it straight at Tel Aviv the moment it comes off the assembly line?

[ShortnFiery]

15. Who cares if Iran actually has a bomb? Really?

Don't tell me that Israel is any LESS INSANE than Iran.

It would work FOR BOTH as a deterrent.

[ixion]

4. Humans. Never. Learn.

- nt

[Flaneur]

5. Majority in US Are Know-Nothing Warmongers

[bertman]

23. Precisely, Flaneur. Just start yelling "they want a nuke" and ratchet up the noise machine.

Works every fucking time.

We are truly a sick, brainwashed society.

[gordianot]

33. Correct n/t

[LuvNewcastle]

7. I thought a majority wanted out of Afghanistan.

Now we have a majority wanting to hit Iran? :wtf:

[Cant trust em]

10. We don't want a war where our soldiers die...

but a quick missile strike would be just fine.

Military action is fine as long as we don't get our nose dirty.

[walldude]

19. The Bravery Of Being Out OF Range.

Gotta love people willing to send someone else out to do their dirty work...

[FiveGoodMen]

29. Great song, great summary of our situation.

[FiveGoodMen]

8. We'll never know who else is working on a nuke (until it's too late)

So, we should attack and kill everyone in every country that might make a bomb some day.

And while we're at it, we need to kill everyone in THIS country who might leave at some point because they might take the secrets with them.

And those who stay but communicate with the rest of the world are a threat as well! We should kill all of them. Or at least bomb their local surroundings into the stone age so they can't produce anything.

In fact, if we're really serious about safety, we should kill off the entire human race including Americans.

Only then will the world be safe.

(If you need the tag, get back on your meds!)

[14thColony]

28. Hmmmm...

I think you're onto something here. I like your out-of-the-box thinking.

[pscot]

9. A majority in the U.S. are bat-shit crazy

and stupid to boot.

[HappyCynic]

24. Ill-informed

I don't think that's true. I believe it's more a combination of an uninformed public and poor reporting. In this case, the question matters. There's the tendency to conflate "nuclear weapons program" with "nuclear program". The press has used these two interchangeably when they are vastly different - related but different. It would be like someone calling for the Center for Disease Control to be shut down because they're studying viruses and have labs that *could* be used for bio weapons research.
So, if you spend time confusing a nuclear program for energy with a nuclear weapons program, then point to facilities that can produce nuclear material (regardless of whether or not they're suitable for weapons), it makes the results of any survey on the issue suspect at best.
(Note: Iran may be producing nukes or it may not be. Either way, a survey of many uninformed people doesn't produce any useful results.)

[pscot]

25. If thee and me and most other DUers

are capable of drawing such distinctions, what are we supposed to think about the mass of people who can't seem to figure it out? You generously suggest they are ill-informed. But they choose to be uninformed on this as on so many other key issues. Personally, I delieve there are a lot of dumb-asses out there, who know what they know, and don't want to learn otherwise. Stupid is as stupid does.

[HappyCynic]

36. Priorities

I won't argue with you that there are a lot of people who are willfully ignorant or worse. We're better informed on this issue because we've decided that this is an important issue and have taken it upon ourselves to learn more about the situation. Other people will have different priorities and will not have learned much about the situation so all they know is what's put out there by the mainstream media. Then, when they get asked the question, all they have to draw on is their limited knowledge of the issue.
My problem is more with the survey. Without an informed public, the results aren't useful. Using the results to draw a conclusion saying a *majority* of Americans are crazy and stupid is, in my opinion, equally flawed.
Maybe I'm just hoping that it is a case of misinformation or lack of information because the alternative is far more disturbing.

[Individualist]

26. Ill-informed? No. They're willfully ignorant.

[ShortnFiery]

11. Hello? Such an act would be against International Law. The mere thought is fucking INSANE!

:grr: :nuke:

[invictus]

14. +1

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ShortnFiery]

20. Don't believe the M$M "polls" either. Average Americans are much more insightful

than we give them credit for. However, they are also afraid of not being "patriotic." ESPECIALLY after the horrific events of 9/11.

The multinational powers that be who wish to invade and occupy nations in order to rape their natural resources is DEPENDING on the American People to remain both AFRAID and/or DOCILE.

We need a good old fashion Anti-War and Civil Rights MARCH! :thumbsup:

[Nikki Stone1]

13. I no longer trust Pew or surveys in general

I also think a war with Iran is still on the books.

[AllentownJake]

16. A majority of Americans are dumb asses

[Echo In Light]

17. "In a one-party system there is always a landslide." — Philip K. Dick

[Hannah Bell]

18. i don't believe it. i want to see the sampling & the question.

[polly7]

22. Well this will piss a lot of people off, but who attacked the U.S.

for all it's nuclear bombs? Heck, Israel's are barely even mentioned and I don't doubt for one second they'd use them against anyone they chose in the ME. Iran hasn't got a bomb, the IAEA has stated so time after time, they've allowed inspections and cameras for years and called for an NPA and nuclear weapon free ME, which Israel will not sign.

But then, Iran is swimming in oil ......

Sorry to whomever I p'd off. Nothing personal.

[redqueen]

27. My first thought: "Here we go again."

Again with the manipulation of public opinion... I really hope this doesn't go the same way... but when I read the subject line, it felt like 2002 all over again.

[gordianot]

30. Just what kind of attack do the 61% envision? What would they attack?

Better yet how would they attack it? Hardened nuclear processing facilities built into a mountain will not be easy or close to impossible with conventional weapons. Let that little old Genie out of the bottle and see what happens.

[spanone]

31. the majority should have voted for mccain if that's how they feel...too late

[autorank]

38. I simply don't believe this.

It's too ridiculous. A majority of Republicans and Democrats opposed invading Iraq until inspectors
were sure that there were weapons and Hussein refused to dump them. Now after the disaster of
Iraq and Afghanistan, this poll. No way. It's a ringer.

[invictus]

45. +1

[Rex]

39. Like I would believe anything from bloomberg,

They want war to make some more money. Help the stock market etc.. :eyes:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

41. Erect bogeyman, wave flag, give money to the Pentagon, send in the bombers, works every time.

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” H.L. Mencken

[newspeak]

43. well, well, well, now doesn't that just fall into the PNAC plans

If they're so worried about nukes-why aren't they worried about Pakistan?

[iceman66]

46. If the media did its job,

and accurately explained the expected ramifications of such an attack, almost nobody would support it.