Posted on 02/03/2003 3:48:23 PM PST by RCW2001
The Associated Press
Monday, February 3, 2003
©2003 Associated Press
URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/02/03/national1811EST0783.DTL
(02-03) 15:11 PST (AP) --
Asked whom they trust more on Iraq policy, more people said they were more likely to trust Secretary of State Colin Powell, 63 percent, than the 24 percent who said they were more likely to trust President Bush, a new poll says.
Almost six in 10, 56 percent, said they have a great deal of trust in Powell, while four in 10, 39 percent, said they have a great deal of trust in the president, according to the CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll released Monday.
Powell has been an advocate within the administration of working closely with the United Nations to resolve the Iraq situation. In recent days, as deep divisions have split Europe, Powell has taken a more hawkish stance about the need to disarm Iraq soon.
The secretary of state continues to have the highest favorable rating among members of the Bush administration, 86 percent, compared with 68 percent for Bush.
Public opinion of Bush's policies has improved since he gave his State of the Union address a week ago. More than half, 56 percent, now say that Bush's policies are moving the country in the right direction. That's up from 49 percent who felt that way just before the speech.
Support for military action against Iraq was up to 58 percent, compared with 52 percent before the speech. Four in 10 said the United States should invade with ground troops only if the United Nations holds a new vote that authorizes the use of troops.
The poll of 1,003 adults was taken Friday through Sunday and has an error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
©2003 Associated Press
Powell and his politics represent the same, failed policies that are responsible for Saddam STILL BEING in Iraq to begin with.
and for those who claim "Well, the UN gave us no authority to actually remove Saddam, so we did right by leaving him.."
I say:
1) All bets were off when he started launching missles at the Jews, who were bystanders in the conflict.
2) He made a deal to end the war, then broke it. Thus, by any logical standard, the war should have resumed at THAT POINT. (Thanks again Bill..)
Powell's report could swing war support
By Richard Benedetto, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Colin Powell's presentation of weapons evidence against Iraq to the United Nations on Wednesday is not only critical for gaining international support for going to war, but also crucial for winning greater American public backing, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll shows.
Overall, 58% of those surveyed favor invading Iraq with United States ground troops to oust Saddam Hussein. That's up from 52% a week ago, before President Bush's State of the Union speech, which he used to try to bolster his case.
But half of the 58% in support, and half of the 38% in opposition, say they still could change their minds depending on further developments. A full 87% say they are looking to the Powell presentation to convince them.
Yet, most think war is inevitable. More than three of four — 78% — say they expect the United States to be at war against Iraq a month from now.
Powell is expected to display photographs of mobile biological weapons installations and refer to transcripts of intercepted conversations among Iraqi officials. At the White House on Monday, spokesman Ari Fleischer refused to give details of the evidence Powell will present.
The poll shows that Americans are less eager to go to war at this time than they were in January 1991, shortly before Bush's father sent U.S. troops to oust Iraqi soldiers from Kuwait.
Today, half favor giving weapons inspectors more time to complete their work before attacking. Twelve years ago, 36% favored giving economic sanctions against Iraq more time to work.
At this time, most are already certain Saddam is obstructing weapons inspectors. There is less certainty, however, over whether Saddam has weapons of mass destruction or ties to al-Qaeda.
But public support for war could jump to 76% or higher if Powell can present evidence that Iraq is obstructing U.N weapons inspectors, has chemical, nuclear or biological weapons or has links to Osama bin Laden's terrorist organization.
Even if Powell showed that Iraq has facilities to create weapons of mass destruction, but does not have weapons at this time, 60% said that would be enough to justify military action.
The poll further shows that Bush is sending a credible spokesman to make the U.S. case. Powell goes before the international body more highly trusted on Iraq policy than Bush, 88% to 67%, and brings with him an 86% favorable rating from the American people.
Bush's favorable rating is 68%. And 61% approve of the overall job he is doing, compared with 60% before his speech last week.
However, there is still an element of skepticism among the public. About half say it is likely the Bush administration would present some evidence it knows is not accurate. And 58% say the administration is likely to conceal evidence that does not support its case.
With a number of Democrats in Congress complaining that the administration is rushing to war and not keeping them properly informed, the poll finds 51% saying that criticism is unfair. Also, 51% say Democrats have been too slow to propose military action to deal with the threat of terrorism.
The Jan. 31-Feb. 2 poll of 1,003 adults has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points, and +/- 4 percentage points on some questions.
Support for the war is down? Nah, that went up too. We need something else. Something that says people are losing confidence in him. But they're not. His confidence ratings are up as well. Here's an idea: how about we compare him to... Colin Powell. Powell picks up 14% right off the top, they'll split the rest. I'll get right on it. |
1) Some real or imagined action by the Jews that made Saddam feel as if they were participants in the conflict?
2) A kind of blackmail intended to get us off his back? ("Hey man, either you back off or I'll shoot missles at your friends")
3) An attempt to exploit political and racial issues in the region (the ever present Jew/Musim friction) thus drawing others into the conflict who would otherwise have no reason to intervene?
?
Who do you trust more on Iraqi policy, the intelligent and diplomatic Colin Powell, or that steenkin' cowboy loserboy, George W Bush?
ROFL! There's NOTHING I would like better.. But I can't afford belly button lint right now!
I'm so broke bums THROW ME money..
I'm so broke I can't even pay homage..
I'm so broke germany is offering me aid..
It's something I have always wondered about.
Now, that's just mean.. (with the exception of the lint, that is!)
This is the reason. If Saddam drew Israel into heavy retaliation then it busts up the coalition to oust Saddam from Kuwait. Makes the Muslim nations leave this coalition. Because Muslims will not fight on the same side as Jews. We just about bribed Egypt to join this collation. We forgave 7 billion in loans to them.
Thank You!
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.
Damn. His poll ratings went back up after the speech. Now what?