Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
6 In 10 Americans Oppose The War In Iraq  
User currently offlineGreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3087 posts, RR: 20
Posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2539 times:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/20/poll/index.html

Since my last thread on this was deleted for a reference to a certain Member (the reference was totally un-called for and deserved to be deleted) here it is again without the reference.


GS


Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
67 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlyingbronco05 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2526 times:

On a related note, 4 out of 10 americans are stupid.  duck 


Never Trust Your Fuel Gauge
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17829 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2521 times:

OK so what do those 6/10 propose doing? And "not getting into this stupid war in the first place" is not really an option fyi.


E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineThom@s From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 11955 posts, RR: 46
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2518 times:

Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 1):
On a related note, 4 out of 10 americans are stupid.

Only 4?  Wink

Thom@s



"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
User currently offlineJalto27R From United States of America, joined May 2004, 857 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2514 times:

Is this really supposed to be news? It's pretty obvious the war is a very negative subject in the U.S. It almost brought Bush a loss in the elections, and everyone agrees we need to get out of there. But I'd like to know how they suggest we do it.

Mike


User currently offlineCaptOveur From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2513 times:

So what do they propose we do about it? Un-invade?

User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2501 times:

OK so what do those 6/10 propose doing? And "not getting into this stupid war in the first place" is not really an option fyi.

I guess you'll have to wait for the next pointless poll asking people which of the following answers are appropriate:

A. Get out of Iraq.
B. Stay in Iraq.
C. We should never have gone there in the first place.
D. Bush is an idiot.
E. Bush is not an idiot, and Kerry also voted for the war - so don't blame Bush. But we still don't know what to do.
F. I don't know what war you're talking about - the only news I follow is Entertainment Tonight.


User currently offlineAdam From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 465 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2483 times:

Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 1):
On a related note, 4 out of 10 americans are stupid.

ROFL!



Texas: You'll come for the Alamo, You'll stay because you were wrongfully executed. - Conan O'Brian State Quarters
User currently offlineKC135R From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 728 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2475 times:

Quoting CaptOveur (Reply 5):
So what do they propose we do about it? Un-invade?

As you well know we can't uninvade at this point, I realize you weren't seriously suggesting it. Cutting and running at this time would be a certain disaster for Iraq as they would likely be overrun by insurgents just to prove we failed.

However, we can not go on indefinitely losing Americans and getting bombed day after day, some new ideas need to be discussed not just the same old "stay the course" crap - how about something like:
-Set a goal of some sort. Not a timeline - a goal such as rooting out the insurgency (instead of insisting it's in its "last throes") and training XXX,XXX (whatever) amount of Iraqis, then we leave.
-Take more offensive action to wipe out the insurgency. We have the best military in the world, I can't believe over 2 years into this thing and the insurgents are still running around rampant.
-If #2 means more troops, then lets get more troops over there. I happen to know for a fact, despite what he says on TV, Gen Tommy Franks was very upset with the number of troops he got from the beginning. Also, it would seem, the former Army Chief of Staff - Shinsheki - was not "mistaken" when he claimed the occupation of Iraq would take hundreds of thousands in order to secure the country.

It's not a popular war and I personally think some questions need to be asked about how we got there under incorrect (or false) pretenses, why the planning seems so awful, and why it has progressed so poorly for so long. However, we can't leave - our image in the world would be that much worse and Iraq would be in chaos. We have to fix what we broke, like it or not - that's my  twocents !


User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2471 times:

Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 1):
On a related note, 4 out of 10 americans are stupid.

I think it's more like 8/10...


User currently offlineBasas From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2438 times:

Quoting TedTAce (Reply 10):
I think it's more like 8/10...

Really...i didn't realize there were that many Democrats in the country.


User currently offlineFDXMECH From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3251 posts, RR: 34
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2426 times:

Quoting TedTAce (Reply 10):
I think it's more like 8/10...

Then you included yourself, Adam and Superfly? Don't include Thomas as he isn't American.



You're only as good as your last departure.
User currently offlineAvianca From Venezuela, joined Jan 2005, 5934 posts, RR: 40
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2404 times:

hard to belive that there are still so many peoples left that it is the correct way what is the us doing in iraq.


Colombia es el Mundo Y el Mundo es Colombia
User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4968 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2399 times:

Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 1):
On a related note, 4 out of 10 americans are stupid

LOL!

Quoting CaptOveur (Reply 5):
So what do they propose we do about it? Un-invade?

Leaving now would create even more disaster than what it is now, and no, I don't have a solution, however, one step could be to begin admiting that it was a mistake to start the war and that it was done under poor intel (or should I say lies?)



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineBasas From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2395 times:

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 14):
Leaving now would create even more disaster than what it is now, and no, I don't have a solution, however, one step could be to begin admiting that it was a mistake to start the war and that it was done under poor intel (or should I say lies?)

So who are the stupid ones? The 4/10 who want to carry out the mission in Iraq? Or the 6/10 who (half of them) originally supported the war in the first place! It's easy to change your opinion after things start to go downhill. The fact remains, these people supported the war, many democrats supported the war, and now that things haven't turned out as planned, they've simply 'changed their minds' and decided to blame the administration.


User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4968 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2392 times:

Quoting Basas (Reply 15):
The fact remains, these people supported the war, many democrats supported the war, and now that things haven't turned out as planned, they've simply 'changed their minds' and decided to blame the administration.

Yes Basas, I agree with you, but i think it's more than simply "changing their minds". It's many people admiting that a mistake was made. However a few don't admit it was a mistake and are still justifying a war that we now know was a complete screw up based on dodgy info. Admitting a mistake shows integrity.
regards



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineBasas From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2389 times:

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 16):
Yes Basas, I agree with you, but i think it's more than simply "changing their minds". It's many people admiting that a mistake was made. However a few don't admit it was a mistake and are still justifying a war that we now know was a complete screw up based on dodgy info. Admitting a mistake shows integrity.

True, but it is still wrong to say the war was a complete waste. Iraq is better without Saddam, and the Middle East will be a safer region with a free, and liberated Iraq. Was Iraq the great threat that we thought it was? Perhaps not, but that doesn't mean this war has been a complete failure. We've won against the terrorists on many levels.


User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4968 posts, RR: 25
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2386 times:

Quoting Basas (Reply 17):
Iraq is better without Saddam, and the Middle East will be a safer region with a free, and liberated Iraq

I used to think that as well, now I'm not so sure. The place is a mess, hundreds killed each month. I don't see that as "safer" for the region.

Quoting Basas (Reply 17):
Was Iraq the great threat that we thought it was? Perhaps not, but that doesn't mean this war has been a complete failure. We've won against the terrorists on many levels.

How has it not been a complete failure? What positive has turned out from it (not from the Iraqi view, but for the US, what has the US achieved with this war regarding the war on terror)? And I think this war is actually creating more terrorists than destroying them.



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineBasas From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2383 times:

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 18):
I used to think that as well, now I'm not so sure. The place is a mess, hundreds killed each month. I don't see that as "safer" for the region.

Really, it will depend if stability can be achieved in the coming months, if not years. If, and when Iraq is a free democracy, without bombings daily, we will know that it is indeed safer than Saddam-Iraq.

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 18):
How has it not been a complete failure? What positive has turned out from it (not from the Iraqi view, but for the US, what has the US achieved with this war regarding the war on terror)? And I think this war is actually creating more terrorists than destroying them.

The positive from the American standpoint is obviously on the fight against terror. Whether or not Iraq was a threat, the point is that threats must, and will be taken seriously and must be dealt with before materializing. Think of the outlast against Bush and the administration if Iraq was indeed involved in terrorist activities, something happened, and the Bush administration didn't do anything about it. Sometimes, you have to take risks. This time, it turned out Iraq was not as big a threat as intelligence suggested. That doesn't mean it wasn't a risk worth taking to protect the homeland, and overall, improve peace throughout the Middle-East.


User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4968 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2381 times:

Quoting Basas (Reply 19):
Really, it will depend if stability can be achieved in the coming months, if not years. If, and when Iraq is a free democracy, without bombings daily, we will know that it is indeed safer than Saddam-Iraq.

True, but things don't look too good. The thing I have a problem is with Iraq being a free democracy, in the sense that obviously it is a positive thing, yet it is hard for it to work because it was imposed. Democarcies were mostly created, for a lack of a better word, naturally, without foreign forces forcing it on them. Argentina, Chile, Spain, Russia, UK, France ... etc. I guess, as you have correctly said, we'll have to wait and see.

Quoting Basas (Reply 19):
Whether or not Iraq was a threat, the point is that threats must, and will be taken seriously and must be dealt with before materializing.

There are far bigger threats that we, the average people know of (N.Korea, Saudi Arabia, for example), yet they went for Saddam. Why this threat and not the other? Besides, with what we know now, and they knew then, Iraq was not a threat, so why go after Saddam? Do you honestly believe it was to fight terrorists?

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 18):
And I think this war is actually creating more terrorists than destroying them.

Now this is a problem!



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineBasas From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2379 times:

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 20):
True, but things don't look too good. The thing I have a problem is with Iraq being a free democracy, in the sense that obviously it is a positive thing, yet it is hard for it to work because it was imposed. Democarcies were mostly created, for a lack of a better word, naturally, without foreign forces forcing it on them. Argentina, Chile, Spain, Russia, UK, France ... etc. I guess, as you have correctly said, we'll have to wait and see.

I see your point- but i think the strong showing of Iraqis at the election in January shows that Iraqis do, indeed, support democracy in their country.

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 20):
There are far bigger threats that we, the average people know of (N.Korea, Saudi Arabia, for example), yet they went for Saddam. Why this threat and not the other? Besides, with what we know now, and they knew then, Iraq was not a threat, so why go after Saddam? Do you honestly believe it was to fight terrorists?

All these nations you list are indeed threats. Iraq was also a threat, and it refused to co-operate with anyone- suggesting even further the possible threat. Perhaps the threat was overexagerated, but I still believe Saddam was a dangerous man to have in power- a danger for Iraqis, and the rest of the world alike. We DO need to keep tracking North Korea, Iran, etc. but take action only if absolutely needed (even taking lessons learned from Iraq and applying them to situations involving these other nations).

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 20):
And I think this war is actually creating more terrorists than destroying them.

Now this is a problem!

Well- can this actually be proven? Many strong insurgents have been captured or killed in Iraq, and 75% of Al-Qaeda (sp?) elsewhere. I think it is making a mark into terrorism. Just IMO, of course.  Smile


User currently offlineS12PPL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2376 times:

Nothing from Nikv69 on this subject? duck 

User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4968 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2371 times:

Quoting Basas (Reply 21):
Well- can this actually be proven?

Obviously there are no figures, but Anti-Americanism has been growing world wide. Ok, fair to say that there are not future terrorists to be found at an anti-Bush rallie in London, but what about in Iraq itself? Or Saudi Arabia? Or Iran? It was so easy to recruit terrorists before so imagine now, having US troops in their back yard. I hope I'm wrong  Sad

Quoting Basas (Reply 21):
but I still believe Saddam was a dangerous man to have in power- a danger for Iraqis, and the rest of the world alike

A potential threat maybe, but not a real threat in the last few years. Well, actually, let me specify: For Iraqis he was definitly a threat, as Pinochet was in Chile, Stalin in the USSR or Castro in Cuba, but from the US intrests, I honestly don't see how Saddam was a direct threat. He wasn't the closest of friends, but he was not stupid. So, regardless that he did not have the military capability to be a threat to the US, even if he would have had an atomic bomb, he would not have used it because he knew that retaliation would have been his end. Just my opinion here, can't back it up!  Smile

ps: I'm glad we have been able to keep this a constructive, civilized debate  Silly



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineZOTAN From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 613 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

Quoting Basas (Reply 21):
I still believe Saddam was a dangerous man to have in power- a danger for Iraqis, and the rest of the world alike

Saddam was a danger to Iraqis, but not to the rest of the world. He may have been an evil dictator, but he wasnt dumb. He ruled with absolute power; he wasnt going to let anyone compromise that including terrorists. The most dangerous thing he had when we invaded was a SCUD missile that could barely reach outside the countries borders.

Quoting Basas (Reply 21):
Many strong insurgents have been captured or killed in Iraq, and 75% of Al-Qaeda (sp?) elsewhere

Many, many more have been recruited. Im willing to bet that Al-Qaeda is much stronger today than it was before 9/11. They may not be as concentrated, but they probably have many more people in countries around the world.


User currently offlineNonRevKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2364 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 2):
OK so what do those 6/10 propose doing? And "not getting into this stupid war in the first place" is not really an option fyi.

Well, this one of that 60% proposes to hold investigations and punish those responsible. I'd keep an open mind to impeachment hearings for Bush too.

B


25 Mdsh00 : I think that running away would not be a good idea at this point. But I would like Bush and Co. to be more honest to the American people. Daily suicid
26 Post contains images Thom@s : And damn proud of it! Thom@s
27 Aloges : Impeaching Bush would be a good thing to begin with. How about High Treason?
28 FDXMECH : Yes, I'm sure you are. Though, is the rest of Britain proud to claim you as well? What about Germany and Japan? No, he was a danger to the mideast in
29 MD11Engineer : Both Germany and Japan had done experiments with democracy in the 1920 (in the case of Japan actually during the late 19th century as well), so democr
30 Post contains images Thom@s : Norway is part of Britain now? I must have missed that column in the newspapers... Thom@s
31 Post contains images FlyAUA : Well nice to see that more of the public are coming to their senses. But unfortunately this does not change anything. Bush will continue to do what pl
32 Mir : They they want it, I'm sure. But I'm not sure that they can handle it at the present time. And as Jan said, several countries that tried democracy to
33 EZEIZA : At what point did I say "all countries"? Besides, I stand by my post: Most countries. And Saudi's dont? And by the way, how is this a threat to the U
34 MaverickM11 : With zero success whatsoever...
35 Jaysit : What do you propose doing other than being nonchalant about it?
36 EZEIZA : Well, no one has been killed over it, something you can't say regarding Iraq, can you? How do you measure success?
37 MaverickM11 : I'm not in that 6/10. The goal is to disarm a nuclear North Korea, so success would mean we've moved towards that goal when in fact we've done precis
38 Jaysit : And that's why I asked you what you propose to do about the current state of the war in Iraq. Keep up the status quo? Send in more troops? Plan on st
39 MaverickM11 : Yes. And if we succeed in creating a democratic Muslim world (Indonesia aside) it will be one of the greatest contributions to humanity in world hist
40 Jaysit : Well, at least you're upfront about it. I wish the President was. Because quite likely there is no other alternative at this point. The long haul in
41 Basas : Really...because i don't think it would matter what leader was in power- the US would still be in Iraq. (I guess some forgot the massive support for
42 MaverickM11 : That's never stopped the opposition before, why start now?
43 Basas : Huh? All i'm saying is that people are finding an easy excuse to blame Bush when really, the US would have been in Iraq with any president.
44 Jaysit : B*llshit. We didn't find ourselves in Iraq under Bush I (although he had the chance to go in for regime change), nor did we find ourselves in Iraq un
45 MaverickM11 : I'm just pointing out that the opposition camp has had many major supporters of the war until it went sour--a fact often forgotten by opponents of th
46 Post contains images Basas : Because Iraq wasn't a threat under Clinton? Or perhaps he was...but maybe the US wasn't as aggressive in going after threats. That's why 9/11 happene
47 Jaysit : I guess it took them longer to realize that this war was a losing endeavor and a farce to begin with.
48 FDXMECH : No. I stand by my claim that that flag is indeed the British flag. My goof. Actually I didn't look at the flag but thought he was from the UK from a
49 FlyingTexan : Halliburton was just awarded a $1.25 Billion contract the other day. Using his own mantra, all options are on the table! GWB does what pleases corpor
50 Flybyguy : Here's a stat for everyone of the 6 out of 10 Americans that oppose the war, 9 out of 10 don't know what they want for themselves and receive most of
51 EZEIZA : On what basis can you give such an assesment? I'm not saying "no", but the agressiveness shown by the Bush administration was not shown by the Clinto
52 Basas : Remember that Bush made his decision immediately following 9/11- something that had never happened before to the US before. It changed the way the go
53 EZEIZA : Hi again Basas, After 9-11, Al Quaeda was the target, and at the time in Afghanistan. Out of no where, Bush said that Saddam had something to do with
54 Post contains images Basas : Hi True, Al Qaida was the target- but 9/11 was more than just Al Qaida and Afghanistan; It was a message to the US government to 'wake up' and deal w
55 Post contains images EZEIZA : As other few "non friendly" countries. Again, why Saddam? Against Iraqis? Look, I hated Saddam probably more than Bush, but the war, even if the purp
56 Basas : Well I don't think Bush will be starting another war anytime soon- he has neither the support or the resources necessary for it to happen. Neverthele
57 EZEIZA : But it was false information! With that info, plus the fear of another 9/11 happening obviously most people would support the war. People now think i
58 Basas : Actually, quite frankly, the job is complete. Saddam is out of power, and we have determined there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (which
59 Post contains images Thom@s : I'm half Brit, so I'll let you off the hook. Thom@s
60 MidnightMike : Need to study your history a little better, we were in Iraq, over 10 years prior to when GWB became President.
61 Post contains images Mir : But I thought that we went into Iraq in order to spread democracy and freedom... -Mir
62 ME AVN FAN : - maybe, but in government !�
63 Post contains images FDXMECH : Friends forever
64 Thom@s : Something like that... hehe Thom@s
65 Jaysit : Need to study your history a little better, we were in Iraq, over 10 years prior to when GWB became President. Go back and read my post. The US fought
66 MaverickM11 : He was following UN orders, that's why he didn't "follow through". Nonetheless a few "errant" missiles were lobbed Saddams way when we exited the fir
67 Jaysit : Iraq = 9/11 has been debunked by everyone including the neo-cons in the administration. But you keep believing whatever you want to.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Saddam Hussein Bribed Chirac To Oppose The War posted Wed Jan 28 2004 23:14:52 by MD-90
The War On Iraq - *MONEY*. posted Tue Mar 25 2003 10:01:23 by Mx5_boy
US Report About The War In Iraq posted Mon Sep 25 2006 10:03:18 by Sebolino
A Marine's Report On The War In Iraq posted Thu Nov 17 2005 04:47:22 by PROSA
The U.s. Have Lost The War In Iraq Irreversably posted Sun Sep 26 2004 15:38:36 by Zak
My Biggest Problem With The War In Iraq posted Mon Sep 6 2004 20:53:33 by Tbar220
10 U.S. Soldiers Die Today In Iraq Fighting posted Mon Apr 5 2004 01:32:12 by 727LOVER
The War In Iraq And What You Dont See On Foxnews posted Fri Feb 27 2004 20:49:58 by Zak
Series Of Bomb Blasts In Riyadh; 10 Americans Dead posted Tue May 13 2003 12:10:36 by Eg777er
Aircraft Lights In The Sky Over Iraq posted Thu Mar 20 2003 03:44:31 by NWA742