Posted on 10/15/2002 6:15:02 PM PDT by Pokey78
There has been a spectacular surge in support among British voters for military action against Iraq in the immediate aftermath of the terror attack in Bali, according to the latest Guardian/ICM poll.
The survey, which was carried out on Monday, shows that support for a military attack on Iraq has risen 10 points in the last week from 32% to 42% of voters.
The ICM poll also shows that more voters agree with Tony Blair that it is necessary to fight on two fronts against both al-Qaida and Iraq. Only one in three voters agree that the United States and Britain "took their eye off the ball" by concentrating on Iraq.
Mr Blair yesterday told the Commons in an emergency statement that the Bali attack was "an act of pure wickedness" which he said would be met "with defiance and determination".
He told MPs that he entirely rejected the contention that terrorism should be fought alone and that dealing with Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was a distraction.
"Some say that we should fight terrorism alone and that the issues to do with weapons of mass destruction are a distraction. I reject that entirely," he said. "Both, though different in means, are the same in nature. Both are the new threats facing the post-cold war world. Both are threats from people of states who do not care about human life, who have no compunction about killing the innocent. Both represent the extreme replacing the rational, the fanatic driving out moderation."
The Guardian/ICM poll shows that 41% of voters agree with the prime minister that it is not a choice between fighting either Iraq or al-Qaida. Fewer - 35% - disagreed and said they believed the United States had "taken its eye off the ball".
The level of support for a military attack on Iraq is now at its highest level since the Guardian started a weekly tracker poll on the question in August. Opposition to a war against Iraq reached a peak in the last week of August when it touched 50% and has now fallen to its lowest level at 37%.
Support for a war against Iraq is strongest amongst men - 51% approve as opposed to only 34% of women - and among 25- 34-year-olds who approve by 52% to 25%. Opposition to war is strongest among women - 41% of whom disapprove compared with 33% of men.
The poll results also show that the belief that a new UN mandate is needed before British troops are committed remains overwhelming with 85% of voters saying this must be a precondition.
A similar proportion - 81% - also says there needs to be a Commons vote before there is British participation in an attack on Iraq. Mistrust of Saddam Hussein also remains at a very high level in Britain. Three-quarters say they do not believe he would honour his commitment to allow UN weapons inspectors into Iraq without any conditions. Only 13% are prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt.
ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,008 adults aged 18 and over by telephone on Monday 14 October. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.
It's telling that, despite the best probable efforts of the Guardian to push-poll their way out of reporting the truth, they still had to admit to a ten percent increase in support for taking out Iraq. The real poll numbers were probably quite a bit higher...
I am pleasantly thrilled with Prime Minister Blair's (maybe the third time I've called him by his title and that since 9/11) actions and unequivocal support of the US and President Bush since 9/11/01...but there IS a teeny part of me that keeps saying "He hated Thatcher...he is acting SOOOO Thatcherlike now...is it too good to be true?"
Great minds think alike, I guess - see my post #22.
There are some people on the left who rise to the occasion when events merit. Blair seems to be one of those.
It's hard for me to see what the point of Al Qaeda is, other than evil devotion to radical Islamic hegemony. In other words, what's their endgame?
They've opened war on so many fronts, they seem unfocused, only striking wherever they see the defenseless.
I picture vomit in the newsroom.
To be fair...LOADS of the Aussie Mainstream population are far more conservative and have been in favor of Iraq since the beginning. Indeed, the Australian government's initial reluctace to join in the war in Afghanistan right after 9/11 ("People might DIE!!") was met with an EXTREMELY negative reaction by the Aussie public.
Thanks, Aussie public. Fire your elected officials and replace them with officials who represent YOUR morality, needs and opinions PLEASE!! (I'm sure you're working on it)
Seems the Britts are starting to realize these terror attacks can happen to them also
Yeah but...Mr. Blair ( I HAVE to speak of him respectfully, since he gained such a -guarded- measure of respect since 9/11/01) is one of the original Clinton/LIEberman-ista Third Way people I have been after for several years...
It's just...at best, it's just weird...at worst...well, I want to give him the benefit of the doubt and therefore will.
I have no problem with seeing the endgame, at least as it was initially envisioned.
Al Qaeda attacks the U.S. and provokes it into further futile but enraging attacks on Muslim countries, a la Sudan and Afghanistan under Clinton.
Muslims become more enraged and emboldened. As more attacks on the U.S. occur, a revolt occurs in Saudi Arabia, and Osama is made the Caliph.
Under a true and just Caliph, the rest of the Muslim world is united, with the sword if necessary.
The problem with this end game is that it has way too many false assumptions built into it, not the least of which is "Allah is on our side". If you truely believe that Allah will sweep you into power, you have a delusion which will justify anything you wish to do.
In a small, detached way, I can sympathise with Osama. He acted with only a cartoon knowledge of the United States, handed to him by Clinton. He looked at how we reated to Lebanon, the African embassies, Somalia, and the Cole. He assumed that we would always act that way. He did not realize that those attacks were viewed as mildly irritatting annoyances of a housefly on a bull elephant. 9-11 was the equivelant of the housefly biting the bull elephant on the tip if his most tender element. It coulb be ignored no longer.
I picture a knot of sobbing drunks in the nearest pub.
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.