Poll Shows That Most Americans Agree With Bush's Stance on Iraq

[The Finman]

<APPLET CODE="chat_ticker.class" CODEBASE="http://newsticker.shortnews.com/com/newsticker/" WIDTH="700" HEIGHT="20">
<PARAM NAME="MSGTEXT" VALUE="http://newsticker.shortnews.de/com/export/default.txt">
<PARAM NAME="BGCOLOR" VALUE="000000">
<PARAM NAME="FGCOLOR" VALUE="ffcc33">
<PARAM NAME="LINKCOLOR" VALUE="00ff00">
<PARAM NAME="HIDECOLOR" VALUE="000066">
<PARAM NAME="MOUSEOVERHOLD" VALUE="1">
<PARAM NAME="SPEED" VALUE="20">
<PARAM NAME="U_ID" VALUE="4318">
</APPLET>

<h2><font color=red>
Poll Sees Americans Taking Bush Line on Iraq
</font></h2>
Most Americans accept arguments by President Bush for a potential war against Iraq: that it may soon have a nuclear weapon and the surest way to avert the threat is to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, according to a poll released on Thursday.

The findings came as the House of Representatives voted to grant Bush the power to launch a military attack on Iraq if needed.

The poll by the Pew Research Center for People and the Press, an independent opinion research group, found that debate over Iraq was having little impact on next month's elections, which will determine control of Congress.

According to the poll, 86 percent of those surveyed believed Saddam had nuclear weapons or was close to acquiring them, and 66 percent believed he was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States.

Bush cites the attacks as demonstrating the need to act against Saddam, and has linked his campaign against Iraq to the "war on terrorism" he launched last fall, but he has not established a direct link between Sept. 11 and Iraq.

"Clearly, the president's major arguments in favor of taking military action against Iraq are resonating with the public," the Pew center said in its report on the poll.

The survey of 1,513 people was taken Oct. 2-6, before Bush made a prime-time speech on the Iraqi threat.

Mirroring other surveys, the Pew poll found that 62 percent of Americans favored military action against Iraq.

Full Story <font color="red"><u>Here</u></font>

[Dutch]

It will take at most three weeks to rid the world of Saddam. liberals spout how they are all for helping the indigent, the downtrodden, and the misfortunate, yet they have no problem defending Saddam’s right to butcher the least of the Iraqis, while chastising President Bush for talking a step that would, at the very least, improve the lives of most in the Middle East.

liberal/democRATs say that they are all for the working man. Well what they neglect to mention is that they are all for the working man so long as he is working for them.

[Q]

I think going to war with Iraq is a pretty major decision and has to be made with a lot of thoughtfulness. Consequently, I think some opposition is good. However, it is hard to understand how thinking people can be against Bush's position on Iraq. It should be clear that Hussein is a dangerous man. Moreover, a link between Hussein and September 11th is really unnecessary. I think the War on Terrorism is about what we learned from September 11th. We've seen what fanatics will do with airplanes, and heaven forbid we ever see what they will do with worse weapons. The War on Terrorism isn't about punishing everybody with a link to September 11th, but about protecting our country from similar attacks in the future. I am glad to see that the majority voting to authorize force against Iraq was fairly large. I think this shows that at least some of the Democrats are thinking clearly on the issue.

-Buckley.

[Buckley]

The above message was in fact written by me, Buckley, and not Mrs. Buckley, AKA Q. I'm pretty sure Q would agree with what I wrote anyway. [img]smile.gif[/img]

-Buckley.