Posted on 01/19/2005 10:02:39 PM PST by F14 Pilot
WASHINGTON -- A major new national opinion survey of 1,608 American voters released this week shows that only 42 percent would support the U.S. invasion of Iran to stop its nuclear program.
Nearly half -- 47 percent -- of U.S. voters would oppose such a move and 11 percent are unsure.
The survey was conducted by the Washington-based Opinion Research Corporation for the nonprofit and nonpartisan Results For America, which is a project of the Civil Society Institute.
The survey comes amid media reports that the United States was contemplating military actions against Iran's nuclear sites.
President George Bush told NBC News on Monday he would not rule out military action against Iran if that country was not forthcoming about its suspected nuclear weapons program.
"I hope we can solve it diplomatically, but I will never take any option off the table, if Iran continues to stonewall the international community about the existence of its nuclear weapons program," said Bush.
Iran denies it has been trying to make nuclear weapons and says its nuclear program is geared solely to producing electricity.
The survey shows that less than one in 10 American voters -- 7 percent -- think that the primary focus of American foreign policy and security should be on the "democracy building" that is now the major thrust of U.S. efforts in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East.
Civil Society Institute President Pam Solo said: "The Iraq experience clearly has been a sobering one for Americans. Voters are embracing a 'new realism' in foreign policy and security matters that puts more emphasis on safer U.S. borders, intelligence gathering, diplomatic initiatives, multinational interventions when necessary and greater energy efficiency in order to decrease America's dependence on Middle Eastern oil."
The survey also shows that voters want to de-emphasize current strategies such as nation building, unilateral military invasions and the direct or indirect use of torture. The American public seems ready for an open, honest and democratic debate on the best course of action.
Keeping in mind how the war in Iraq has gone so far, voters were asked if they are now more or less likely to support a greater emphasis by the U.S. on diplomacy and multi-nation military action versus a 'go it alone' approach. A clear majority of 64 percent are now much or somewhat more likely to support diplomacy and multi-nation action. Interestingly, there was no difference on this question between Bush and Kerry voters.
The ORC survey of 1,608 voters was conducted Dec. 2-6, 2004 and found that voters strongly support the following foreign policy initiatives:
-- America's highest foreign and military policy priority should be close to home -- "defense of U.S. borders and homeland security" was selected by a plurality of 43 percent of voters versus considerably smaller groups identifying their top priority as "democracy building" in other nations (7 percent) or "going it alone" on military interventions (6 percent).
-- 64 percent support a greater emphasis on diplomacy and multi-national military action than is currently the case in the U.S.
-- 81 percent agree that it matters whether people around the world respect our country and that the U.S. needs the rest of the world on its side to effectively fight terrorism.
-- 86 percent feel it is important for the U.S. administration to pursue a fuel efficiency target of 40 miles per gallon, in part in order to reduce dependence on Middle Eastern oil.
-- 65 percent favor the U.S. taking a leadership role to settle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. At the same time, voters strongly oppose the following foreign policy actions or initiatives:
-- Strong majorities of American voters believe that a number of current policies leave the U.S. more vulnerable to terrorist attacks, including: acting alone without international support (71 percent); and U.S. involvement in Iraq (71 percent).
-- Two-thirds oppose a long-term occupation of Afghanistan or Iraq;
-- 81 percent think access to Middle Eastern oil plays a role in U.S. foreign policy and about half think the U.S. policy of keeping oil prices down (thus increasing U.S. dependence on it) is not in their best interests.
-- A strong majority oppose the use of torture in other countries (66 percent) or by this country (75 percent) even to crackdown on terrorists.
-- Over half (54 percent) do not support the U.S. extending its "unquestioning" support to Israel if doing so undercuts U.S. interests.
The ORC survey found U.S. voters roughly split on the following issues: the wisdom of the Iraq invasion; invading Iran or North Korea to stop nuclear proliferation; continuing to support undemocratic regimes that are US allies; the likelihood of Iraq becoming a stable democracy; and keeping a military presence in the Arabian peninsula for security reasons despite religious objections of the Saudi population.
The survey results are based on telephone interviews conducted among a sample of 2,090 adults 18 years old or older residing in private households in the continental United States.
Respondents were screened for voting in the 2004 presidential election. These findings are based on the 1,608 respondents who say they voted.
The margin of error at a 95 percent confidence level is plus or minus 3 percentage points for the entire sample. Smaller sub-groups will have larger error margins, the surveyors said.
Not a bad number since it hasn't even been a topic for debate.
42 percent already is a LOT considering there has been no pushing on that matter by the US government.
Someone's gonnna have to take out those plants.
I'd just as soon let the Israeli's use our airspace over Iraq and fly out of Afghanistan and eliminate as many sites as possible...at least slow the mullah's down.
The Ayatollahs support a US invasion because it will only strengthen their support in Iran which currently stands at 15% by polls done by their *own* polling agencies.
ping
OMG, if we have to look to polls to see whether or not we invade a country than we are a sad society.
I wonder what the outcome would be if we changed "Invasion" to "Obliteration"...
Support will be much higher for bomb strikes soley against nuclear installations.
less than 8% my friend!
Any military invasion will worsen the situation in Iran!
Yep!
I'm sure the Mullahs will be tickled pink to see us. There's no way they could be bluffing.
Why don't I ever see that on a survey?
42% is a really good number, IMO. This topic hasn't really been debated in public yet.
You mean we should bomb any where which is against us?!
Carpet bombing innocent people for the fun of it?
Is Hitler your hero?
Da questions are crappy, and terribly biased.
Just in: all of the 300,000 in Saddam Hussein's mass graves approved the invasion; their sole criticism was that it was not sooner.
The bombing of Iranian nuclear sites begins in five minutes.
If Iran builds two bombs tomorrow, will it do Israel on Friday and America on Saturday, or vice versa?
No. I am saying that if it ever comes to a situation where we are considering sending in troops, we should instead just bomb them into oblivion and then let them deal with the smoking rubble that used to be their country. This would require no "occupation", no "nation building", no "insurgency", and only minimal potential losses of our troops.
It has the added advantage that we would only have to do it once. After that, other despotic regimes would think twice before choosing to become our enemies.
I don't think the US needs to invade Iran. Regime change will happen of it's own accord there, sooner or later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.