Americans support a military strike on Iran?
By on Jan 27th, 2006 at 3:52 pm
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
neo-cons support it. Notice how NONE of them actually SERVED in the armed forces….
January 27th, 2006 at 3:56 pmBrit Hume = Bushivik
January 27th, 2006 at 3:57 pmfuck that! let Israel deal with that… we’ve got more than we can handle…
January 27th, 2006 at 4:08 pm“Americans support military strike on Iran”
“using someone else’s army” is the end of that sentence
January 27th, 2006 at 4:08 pmNO. But I would support a strike on Iran by Saudi Arabia, or Pakistan, or Israel if they try to arm themselves with nuke capability, whether Russia builds it for them or not.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but why is it up to the US to do all the “spreading of democracy” Bush likes to do? Why not the French and Germans? Or the Saudis or Syrians, who have even more to fear from Islamic rule. I mean, if Sadam Hussain was still in power, he would be the one keeping the Iranians in line, as Reagan used him for in the 1980’s before the two Bushes decided to help out the Saud Family.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:09 pm#1 – You can’t ask a neo-con to practice what they preach. That would be like expecting Pres. Bush to take personal responsibility for his actions!
#5 – Joe, Pres. Bush said he doesn’t support the US military conducting nation building actions. Therefore, we will be nation building for the rest of his term in office. Don’t forget, anything that Pres. Bush says he’ll do is something he will never do. Anything he says he’ll never do, he’ll do quicker. He’s the flip-flopping commander in chief!
January 27th, 2006 at 4:12 pm#6 he actually doesn’t nation build… look at the mess in Iraq, that nation is not built.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:14 pmhere is some good info. Enjoy: HT to Amy G. At Democracy .now
January 27th, 2006 at 4:16 pmhttp://www.tompaine.com/articles/20060112/the_bush_who_cried_wolf.php
Hey Joe Sixpack,
As a conservative how do you feel about the Iranian and Palestinian Democracy?
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t both of those democracies the wrong way for Bush. Do we need more of these democracies around the world?
What about the fact that:
July 18, 2005
Iran, Iraq agree to boost cooperation
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it doesn’t look like your red neck president is doing to well in those there Global relations things.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:17 pm#5, …but why is it up tothe US to do
all the “spreading of democracy”
Bush likes to do?
Because none of the middle eastern actions by bushco have anything to do with democracy. It’s all about protecting business interests, namely OIL INTERESTS. If Iran creates it’s own oil market trading in Euros it would cause a major problem for England and the USA. This is the business prez, he takes his orders from cheney, the main oil man in the world. Why do you think he fought so hard to keep the information from his “energy task force” from the public? Because it was about planning military actions in the middle east to control and guarantee oil production to those US companies in bed with bush/cheney.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:18 pm#7 – Fair enough. I guess that’s the first promise that Pres. Bush has followed through on!
“We will not engage in nation building!” He never said he wouldn’t TRY to nation build.
He’s just as good at nation building as he is on following through on his other promises.
Thanks for the constructive criticism!
January 27th, 2006 at 4:19 pmThat, according to a new Fox News poll,
Pretty much sums it up
January 27th, 2006 at 4:22 pmMurdoch/Kristol/Buschovik Media “Unbalanced Crisis News”
#9 – Spudge, I wouldn’t label Pres. Bush as red-neck. In Texas, the term “red neck” is a compliment as it means adhering to conservative values.
Conservative values are not bad! I mean TRUE conservative values, not the neo-con cabal that’s taken a strangle hold on the current administration and most of the Republican party.
I am not opposed to the conservative values per se, just the misguided attempts at the neo-cons at passing themselves off as ‘conservatives’.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:23 pmAye Never ye Give up me mateys
Bush Support Weak, New Direction Favored, Poll Finds (Update1)
Jan. 27 (Bloomberg) — President George W. Bush will address a nation next week that has soured on the direction of the country and his leadership on issues ranging from health care to the economy to Iraq.
A Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll taken this week as Bush prepares to deliver his annual State of the Union speech shows that the president wins the approval of only 43 percent of the public, a 7-point drop from a year ago. Three out of five say America is seriously off course, and by 62 to 31 percent those surveyed want to move in a different direction than the one Bush has set forth.
The president has lost public support across a broad swath of issues, including most of the ones that especially concern Americans, as well as on matters of personal trust and leadership, according to the survey.
“Presidents who lose their credibility, who lose the ability to persuade people that they’re leading the country in the right direction, have a tremendous political burden to overcome, and that’s where he’s at,” said Robert Dallek, a retired Boston University professor who has written nine books on presidential and diplomatic history. He said the modest goals Bush is likely to set forth in his speech next week reflect the fact that “he’s not any longer at the top of his game. His political capital has been expended.”
January 27th, 2006 at 4:25 pmDemocrat Soldier,
It is a joke. Lighten up, you are acting like me. : )
January 27th, 2006 at 4:26 pmAye seems the mealy maltworms an’ ol jorgy boy av’ blown his wad e’ as’
January 27th, 2006 at 4:29 pmYeah, Democrat Soldier, he did say that about nation building, didn’t he? Of couse he also said Iraq had WMD’s and that former FEMA Director Brownie was doing a heckofa job.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but suppose we launched an attack, based on our intelligence and Bush crying wolf again? If past experience is any lession, we would probably find out that those ariel photo’s we see nitely on Fox News were of school buildings or such.
I mean, wasn’t it just a few months ago our intelligence services were saying the Iranian people were longing for western ways and western culture? Those revalations came just days before the Iranians voted in an overwhelmingly strict, hardline, Islamic government.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:29 pmrite o, ol jorge fell an hit is ‘ead from dat pretzel awrite. bit nasty ‘ead injury.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:32 pmCome on now. First off, conveniently forgetting the preface “if diplomacy fails” is unforgivable. Second, check out the poll questions:
1. Using only airstrikes
2. Using airstrikes and ground personnel
3. Using whatever military means necessary
There is not a non-military option.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:33 pm#Come on now. First off, conveniently forgetting the preface “if diplomacy fails†is unforgivable. Second, check out the poll questions:
1. Using only airstrikes
2. Using airstrikes and ground personnel
3. Using whatever military means necessary
There is not a non-military option.
Comment by Optimist — January 27, 2006 @ 4:33 pm
Bloody well rite you arr’
January 27th, 2006 at 4:39 pmbe bak in a bit telly ‘as me favorite Idol Amerikans. those bloody American are awrite, funny ‘as ell, bloody fools.
And Matt Drudge has headlined it. Jeez, if Hume says it and Drudge prints it – it must be so, right? After all, do these guys ever misrepresent the facts?
January 27th, 2006 at 4:40 pmAnything he says he’ll never do, he’ll do quicker. He’s the flip-flopping commander in chief!
Comment by Democrat Soldier — January 27, 2006 @ 4:12 pm
Gotta disagree with you here. Anything Bush says he’ll never do, he’s already done and is trying to cover it up.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:41 pm107th congress terror finance ‘ignored?’ Hamas in 2002? and today Bush says…
Mr. GURULE. Let me give you an example of the problem. Under
January 27th, 2006 at 4:41 pmSecretary Larson alluded to this as well.
With respect to al-Qaida targets or terrorist financiers and those
related to the Taliban, again, I believe that we have received virtually
full support with respect to blocking.
Where it becomes more difficult, is when we are taking action to
designate an individual who is supporting Hamas, for example.
Senator GRASSLEY. All right.
Mr. GURULE. “There, there are some countries that make a distinction
between the political wing of Hamas and the military wing
of Hamas. Unless the U.S. Government can provide information that traces money directly to the military wing that is supporting
suicide bombings in the Middle East, there is some reluctance, or
in some cases unwillingness, to go ahead and designate those individuals
or entities. It is a very difficult diplomatic and political
problem with respect to those countries.
Of course, the United States does not draw that distinction. If it
is an organization that is funneling money to Hamas, we are less
concerned about whether the money is going to support the political
versus the military wing of Hamas, we are designating that entity,
we are designating that individual. Those entities and individuals
were cut off from doing business with U.S. banks
But WAIT they DO!
RAMALLAH, West Bank — The Bush administration is spending foreign aid money to increase the popularity of the Palestinian Authority on the eve of crucial elections in which the governing party faces a serious challenge from the radical Islamic group Hamas.
The approximately $2 million program is being led by a division of the U.S. Agency for International Development. But no U.S. government logos appear with the projects or events being undertaken as part of the campaign, which bears no evidence of U.S. involvement and does not fall within the definitions of traditional development work.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:45 pmLie-o-cons plain and simple
January 27th, 2006 at 4:46 pmWell,the Iranians already voted so the freedom and democracy thing is out;besides that piece of the world view doesn’t seem to yield the expected results.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:53 pmThe diplomacy thing with Condi doesn’t seem to yield better results than Rumsfeld’s thin green line.
There’s always Bolton at the UN,but he’s more likely to piss off potential allies than get them to go along.
We could just depend on the French and Russians who have been negotiating with Iran for quite a while (without us!) but hell,they’ll just surrender.
So,I guess we better nuke ‘em before they nuke us. Yeah,that’s the ticket;what else would Fox suggest,their audience doesn’t handle subtlety very well.
Its about Iran’s Oil its not about anything Nuclear or demoracy ,its about greed for control of all oil rich nations…bush has already invaded Iran …
January 27th, 2006 at 4:55 pmYeah, Spudge #9, you have a right to pick on my redneck ass. But evidently, you don’t get it: it’s hard work, spreading democracy throughout the Middle East. But looks like its working out: Hezbollah, the Islamic hardliners in Iran, the Islamic rise in Iraq, the Hamas win in the Palestinian elections. They think all this voting and democracy is just working out great!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but maybe junior should concentrate some of his foreign policy in our own back yard, too. In case no one has notived, Boliva and Venezuela have just voted in two socialist/communist presidents in their elections. And the Sandinestas in Nicaragua are becoming popular again.
What you think, Spudge? Must be about time to go down to Crawford and cut brush again where he can figure stuff out on what’s best.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:56 pmI’d be a lot more surprised if a Pox poll didn’t say the most jingoistic thing that popped into some warmongering fool’s head. And, oh yeah, Brit Hume full o’ crap? Who’da thunk it.
January 27th, 2006 at 5:04 pmIf you want to insult Bush, I suggest calling him a Connecticutt Yankee in King Aruthur’s Boots.
January 27th, 2006 at 5:09 pm31- Carpet bagger. Bet he loves that one.
January 27th, 2006 at 5:12 pmDon’t believe it. Show me an American who wants to fight another fruitless war. Show me an American who wants to engage in a war they cannot win! Show me one who thinks borrowing a trillion to fight it is a good idea.
January 27th, 2006 at 5:20 pmAre those the same Americans that refuse to join the military? Perhaps it is the Fighting Keyboardists?
Wait, this was a FOX poll?? Well then, the results are great! At first, I was dismayed to see that many ‘murkans were willing to invade yet another country based on the BS we’re hearing from the war criminal Bushistas. If the chickenhawk brigade can only muster a slim majority in favor of an invasion of Iran, then the actual American electorate must be quite opposed to it.
How many of the Fox-watchin’ rabid pro-war types have actually volunteered to go fight in a war (or will volunteer their kids to do same)?
January 27th, 2006 at 5:28 pmJoe Sixpack,
I think that Bush should go back to the ranch. Maybe this time, the Cedar will win the fight. : )
The White House
January 1, 2006
President Visits Troops at Brooke Army Medical Center
January 27th, 2006 at 5:57 pmWorkin’ hard at not being president
Sorry,
Couldn’t resist.
January 27th, 2006 at 5:58 pmMax-1, you have talent — I love the morphing picture.
January 27th, 2006 at 6:13 pm#28,
Yup I agree. Securing the worlds oil supply is in the agenda with these guys. I think there is something to that “Peak Oil” argument.
January 27th, 2006 at 6:32 pmSome of the people in that poll can be seen in action here
January 27th, 2006 at 6:38 pmHamas = RADICLE ISLAMIC POLITICS
Iran = RADICLE ISLAMIC POLITICS
I see the affiliation, DO YOU ???
Israel can relax and breathe. their fears of the “MUSHROOM CLOUD” are no more now that Hamas is in power. The Plistinians and Iranians will align in in concordance. The neutral ground, you may ask???
AMERICA’s DEMOCRACY in the Middle East.
If anyone needs to be worried at this very moment, it is the Jewish Isrealis. However, the future of the Middle East does rest on the shoulders of the USA. If we remain as the precieved occupiers in THEIR REGION, then all hell will break loose.
Insergency?
We haven’t seen nothing yet.
The US needs to get out while the going is good.
January 27th, 2006 at 7:17 pmSorree aboot me spEleen.
January 27th, 2006 at 7:19 pmGreat shot Max 1, Thank’s for sharing, I don’t care about no spellllin…Blessings
January 27th, 2006 at 7:37 pm39- Holy crap Batman, no wonder Bush is President. Americans are dumber than a sack of hammers.
January 27th, 2006 at 7:49 pmWhat sorta orgy of a thread are we running here? Morphing visuals? What’s next truth in a jar? The miltary is not allowed to go on strike any way, right, how about Iran, have we called them?
January 27th, 2006 at 8:45 pmActually, that morph shows the der Furher is lacking control on the right side of his brain while der Busch is lacking control on the left side of his brain. Notice the sag in each of their lips, both are trying to frown. This means that they are each polar opposites, but that also half of their brains are dead.
January 27th, 2006 at 9:06 pmJanuary 27th, 2006 at 10:23 pm
“ONLY If diplomacy fails” … oops Brit, you forgot to complete the sentence in your poll. The poll is pointless anyway because we all know that this administration doesn’t believe in diplomacy.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:36 pmAnd another thing … our mass media today is nothing but “yellow news” … they’re too chicken to tell the truth. Very little factual information. Most people now turn to the blogs or web to get the real news.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:40 pmJanuary 27th, 2006 at 11:50 pm
Or WILL WHEN HE COMES BACK !
January 27th, 2006 at 11:51 pmI told you all allready,
January 27th, 2006 at 11:57 pm
January 28th, 2006 at 12:24 am
Hey Buschco remember these Lies?
As President Bush noted when talking about Iran last week, not every policy issue needs to be dealt with by force. Secretary Powell also noted last week that we do not seek conflict with Iran. We will continue to pursue nonproliferation and other such control measures as necessary and we must keep all available options on the table…
it must be true if King Jorge and Colon Powowell said it right?
January 28th, 2006 at 12:53 amJanuary 28th, 2006 at 12:57 am
Those ‘conservatives’ again
Iran
Iran’s future is an enigma in the question of stability in the AOR. Since 1997, President Khatami has attempted to change the image of Iran by initiating diplomatic rapprochement with Europe and the Gulf States. Domestically, moderate legislators have the majority in the parliament and have attempted to reform the system by introducing greater transparency and accountability within government. However, conservative hard-liners have closed Iran’s free press, blocked reform legislation, and intimidated and jailed moderate legislators and popular figures, effectively maintaining an atmosphere of social and political repression. Just Like Duhbyas band of bandits, why does he want to Blow up his own Kind of Radical Neo-kook conservatism? oh Yeah they are terrorists.
January 28th, 2006 at 1:35 amWhether or not Americans approve or disapprove of invading Iran is irrelevant. The military is so stretched out as it is that this Bushian fantasy is preposterous. You can also bet that the Russians and Chinese wouldn’t be too happy about it since they just signed a deal for a natural gas pipeline. In case no one’s noticed, Boy George has gone insane.
January 28th, 2006 at 2:34 amI am not opposed to the conservative values per se, just the misguided attempts at the neo-cons at passing themselves off as ‘conservatives’.
Comment by Democrat Soldier #14
Conservatives, neo-conservatives, and conservatism ALL SUCK!
Especially when they (conservatives/neocons) try to stuff it down EVERYONE’s throat…
If individuals choose to be “social conservatives” that is fine as a personal choice. But as far as public policy it STINKS!
Compromise (btwn conservative and liberal) is the ONLY way this country can survive…
Otherwise there will be a revolution, and once that happens the door will be WIDE OPEN for America’s real enemies to step in…
January 28th, 2006 at 9:41 amThat a top-secret military intelligence unit code-named “Able Danger” identified four Sept. 11 hijackers as Al Qaeda operatives? [NY Times, Aug. 9, 2005]
That Able Danger presented a chart with visa photographs of Mohammed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhdar to the Pentagon’s Special Operations Command and recommended the information be given to the FBI?
That this recommendation was rejected?
That a former military intelligence agent said that “We were directed to take those 3M yellow stickers and place them over the faces of Atta and the other terrorists and pretend they didn’t exist”?
That the source for the Times article, conservative Republican Congressman Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania, says he discussed Able Danger with then deputy national security adviser Stephen Hadley right after Sept. 11?
That the White House kept this information from all investigations, including the 9/11 commission?
That several former military intelligence officers say they told the 9/11 staff of Able Danger’s existence?
That the Norristown Times-Herald reported that Weldon “said he was told specifically by commission members Tim Roemer…and John Lehman…that they had never been brief on the Able Danger unit within Special Ops or on the unit’s evidence of a terrorist cell…”
That one former military intelligence officer told the Times-Herald, ” I personally talked with Zelikow [executive director of 9/11 commission Philip Zelikow] about this. For whatever bizarre reasons, he didn’t pass on the information.”
That the 9/11 commission’s report omitted any mention of Able Danger or the fact that Atta had been linked to Al Qaeda?
Stop watching that &*O#&(*^@*%@ TV
January 28th, 2006 at 11:01 amThey are LYING then and they are LYING now.
Able danger was left out of 911 report now can you see why?
January 28th, 2006 at 11:03 amGotta disagree with you here. Anything Bush says he’ll never do, he’s already done and is trying to cover it up.
Comment by Lily — January 27, 2006 @ 4:41 pm
just like the Abortion issue, which bush is using again to divide.
He lied about Wmd, 911, the Commission Report, CLear Skies, Save our History BS, and you think some racists like Bushco whom hate half of America or more, because someone told them they were free, or Liberals, that these people would actually Stop Abortions?
Think about it, Rush Limbaugh wants to stop abortions so more ‘liberal Babies’ can be borne? That Bush attacked a country where many many children died, yet they are Collateral Damage and not a Baby or a Life?
January 28th, 2006 at 11:14 amThat Bush thru his War has killed as many or possibly more than Saddam ever Could or Will? That Bush is killing in Pakistan? Now he wants to send nukes to Iran, that has been a STATUS quo country? That there are no TIES to Al qaeda, that AL qaeda is a Saudi Group, and always has been, that the Saudi Wahhabi groups are the ones trying to Foment the Wars to subvert the M.East Peace Process? That the UK and US and Isreal has supported Hamas and Fatah?
I heard a Middle East expert this morning say that the time for diplomacy and dealing with Iran was in 2002 and 2003, before things got to this point, but we all know what was oging on in 2002 and 2003 don’t we?
January 28th, 2006 at 1:51 pmI don’t understand how anyone would want to attack Iran. They must not have anyone in the military. The USA need to stay out of the Middle East Business. Bush is a Right wing nut. He needs to be Impeached.
January 28th, 2006 at 5:34 pm