It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Poll: Iraq War Hasn't Made Americans Safer

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 11:51 AM
link   
A new Washington Post poll shows that more than half of America believes that the War on Iraq has not made them any safer. 3/4 of Americans state that the number of casualties in Iraqi is unacceptable and 6/10 Americans believe that the war was not worth fighting for. According to the poll, the War on Iraq ranks second in importance with the economy in first.
 



www.washingtonpost.com
For the first time since the war in Iraq began, more than half of the American public believes the fight there has not made the United States safer, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

While the focus in Washington has shifted from the Iraq conflict to Social Security and other domestic matters, the survey found that Americans continue to rank Iraq second only to the economy in importance -- and that many are losing patience with the enterprise.

Nearly three-quarters of Americans say the number of casualties in Iraq is unacceptable, while two-thirds say the U.S. military there is bogged down and nearly six in 10 say the war was not worth fighting -- in all three cases matching or exceeding the highest levels of pessimism yet recorded. More than four in 10 believe the U.S. presence in Iraq is becoming analogous to the experience in Vietnam.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


52% percent of the people polled state that the War on Iraq has not contributed to long term safety of the nation. This marks the first time the majority of America disagreed with the central notion Bush has offered to support the war.

More than half of the Americans polled disapprove with President George Bush’s 'job handling abilities'.




posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Ive always been kinda critical of these polls. It seems they have become a fast and easy way for news stations to get a story out. They call up a couple of people and then generalize for the whole population.

I went to the full article and found this:

"A total of 1,002 randomly selected adults were interviewed by telephone June 2 to 5 for this Post-ABC News poll. The margin of sampling error for the overall results is plus or minus three percentage points."

So 1000 people are suppose to represent Americans as a whole....ya right!!!

Plus the article states: "52% percent of the people polled state that the War on Iraq has not contributed to long term safety of the nation. This marks the first time the majority of America disagreed with the central notion Bush has offered to support the war. "

and then states there is a 3 percent margin of error. Well that 3 percent could easily bump the stats into a minority..no??? I dont think they should be stating that the MAJORITY of americans see this as true.



posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 09:13 PM
link   
And at 5PM on election day Kerry was leading in all the exit polls! They are garbage and not worth the paper they are printed on.



posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 04:52 AM
link   
Sounds like you are just looking for ways to dis the message via the way it was rendered. Any fool (except conservatives, funnymentalists and repugnicans) can see the whole damn thing was a sham and was a sham right from the very beginning. Sooner or later Bush and company will pay for their crimes and I hope it is hard jail time.



posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 05:43 AM
link   
Poll is pointless.

Iraq was never a threat to the US anyway.



posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 08:44 AM
link   
I think the most telling piece of evidence that this war has been a sham engineered to put dollars in the pockets of admin cronies is this:

Iraq was a former ally, never threatend us and seemingly had disarmed by the time we invaded.

North Korea HAS NUKES, has threatened to use them against us, AND we are still technically at war with them, and yet, no military action, no NOTHING except perhaps appeasment.

Is this because there is no profit motive to invade them? I think so.



posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by opensecret1150
...

Is this because there is no profit motive to invade them? I think so.


When two tigers fight, most often one is killed and the other is badly hurt (an old Oriental saying)...



posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 09:05 AM
link   
I think it would be refreshing to see, rather than a useless opinion poll, an official vote by the people. Do we pack up and go home or stay in and keep fighting? I feel that since it is the men and women of America whose @ss is on the line, it is they who should decide the fate of this war and not some rich politician behind a desk. But what do I know, I'm just a drone.....



posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by grover
Sounds like you are just looking for ways to dis the message via the way it was rendered. Any fool (except conservatives, funnymentalists and repugnicans) can see the whole damn thing was a sham and was a sham right from the very beginning.
.

Are you implying that i am a conservative??...because i am actually the opposite. And as for the whole "looking for ways to dis the message" thing...this couldnt be farther from the truth. I know it was a bad idea to go in there. I know it was based on half truths so i dont need you to be telling me that. All i was trying to get at is that this article is completely ludicrous when i comes to showing us that. Its what stats were used to base the content on i am bashing not the actual content of the facts.


Sooner or later Bush and company will pay for their crimes and I hope it is hard jail time.


What was that called again??.....

Oh ya...wishful thinking.



posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Ahh now calm down, take a sedative even. LOL If I offended you I am indeed sorry. You just see so much of the "If you don't like the message attack the messenger" attitude from the right (and there are alot on here) that I thought that was what you were doing. Polls do serve a purpose besides giving pollsters a gainful employment and cross sections do work the problem doesn't lay with the method, it lies with those doing it, enivitably they bring their own bias to the task which is why they are so often scewed. As for wishful thinking, we'll see, Nixon won a landslide and had to flee office...I would love to see all of bushes birds come home and not only roost on him but # all over him as well. Anyone hear the good news, Texas is sinking? LOL There is hope. LOL



posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Interesting question. Have the Bush admin policies made America safer? Well lets argue the sides:

Yes they have. Evidence: no terrorist attacks since 9/11. Many arrests of terrorists. A murderess terrorist sponsoring dicator who used chemical weapons on his own people and thumbed his nose at the UN is out of power and an elected democratic gov. in his place. Terrorists on the run in both Afganistan and Iraq now lowering themselves to killing their own countryman in cowardly terrorist acts.

No the policies haven't: ummm I can't think of any evidence...no attacks have happened since...


I can show you evidence how they are working. Show me evidence that we aren't safer. If the coward Clinton would have done something after the terrorists attacks in his "love-fest" administration (note a 9/11ish attack was tried under his watch) the real 9/11 probably never would have happened. But of course the Clinton admin was more worried about killing American women and children in Waco and Ruby Ridge than protecting the country. If the world hates Bush so much and Clinton was so great why did more terrorist attacks happen under Clinton? Thankfully we have W to clean up the mess left by the democrats.

[edit on 9-6-2005 by Apoc]



posted on Jun, 10 2005 @ 02:30 PM
link   
JesusFrickingChristMotherMaryofBaalMolach I swear would you right wing pinheads get over Clinton already...you idiots are just jealous he was getting some and you aren't. Actually if the truth be known if Jesus God himself had beaten Bush Sr. in 1992, you fools would have gone after him too...It isn't even about Clinton is it? It was all about losing power after 12 years...you guys are such a bunch of sore losers and whats worse, sore winners. Get a life.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join