Fox News Poll: 65 percent say use force to stop Iran, 84 percent call possible deal 'bad idea'

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gilliam

Guest
According to a new Fox News poll, voters feel:
  • It would be “a disaster” if Iran obtains the capability to use nuclear weapons.
  • The U.S. has not been aggressive enough in stopping Iran from getting nukes.
  • U.S. military action is the right thing to do to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
  • A deal that just delays Iran’s nuclear time-table is a bad idea.
  • Barack Obama is a weak negotiator with foreign leaders.
  • It was a good idea to invite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to Congress.
foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/04/fox-news-poll-65-percent-say-use-force-to-stop-iran-84-percent-call-possible/
 
Hmmm…What if…

The Republicans controlled the balance of power in the United States? 🤷
 
JamalChristophr said:
Hmmm…What if…
The Republicans controlled the balance of power in the United States? 🤷
Click to expand...
I doubt there would be much difference in our relations with Iran. Regardless of what voters feel, military force is not likely to be very effective in stopping Iran’s nuclear efforts.
 
gilliam said:
According to a new Fox News poll, voters feel:
  • It would be “a disaster” if Iran obtains the capability to use nuclear weapons.
  • The U.S. has not been aggressive enough in stopping Iran from getting nukes.
  • U.S. military action is the right thing to do to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
  • A deal that just delays Iran’s nuclear time-table is a bad idea.
  • Barack Obama is a weak negotiator with foreign leaders.
  • It was a good idea to invite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to Congress.
foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/04/fox-news-poll-65-percent-say-use-force-to-stop-iran-84-percent-call-possible/
Click to expand...
I have an idea! Why don’t we invade Iran to liberate them then impose a government with leaders that we choose. That worked so well in Vietnam and Iraq.
 
In general, it’s like Ben Carson has said, let the military run the wars and not the politicians. The latter hurting efforts obviously in military actions. Keep the Politicans out of it, it never ends up well.
That said, I’d vote that I’m not convinced we need to act against Iraq; their neighbors can determine if more action is needed. It could set up a nuclear arms race as they say in the Middle East.
 
gilliam said:
According to a new Fox News poll, voters feel:
  • It would be “a disaster” if Iran obtains the capability to use nuclear weapons.
  • The U.S. has not been aggressive enough in stopping Iran from getting nukes.
  • U.S. military action is the right thing to do to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
  • A deal that just delays Iran’s nuclear time-table is a bad idea.
  • Barack Obama is a weak negotiator with foreign leaders.
  • It was a good idea to invite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to Congress.
foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/04/fox-news-poll-65-percent-say-use-force-to-stop-iran-84-percent-call-possible/
Click to expand...
The percentages need to be offset with “according to a new Fox News poll”, who are typically right of center to far right and more leaning as war hawks.
 
SyroMalankara said:
The percentages need to be offset with “according to a new Fox News poll”, who are typically right of center to far right and more leaning as war hawks.
Click to expand...
Point of Information:

FoxNews polls are subcontracted to Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) and tend to lean more left than right. They use randomly selected samples of registered voters and they don’t necessarily interview FoxNews viewers.

For those who are interested. The details of this poll are here:
foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2015/03/04/fox-news-polls-isis-iran-obama-vetoes/
 
gilliam said:
Point of Information:

FoxNews polls are subcontracted to Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) and tend to lean more left than right. They use randomly selected samples of registered voters and they don’t necessarily interview FoxNews viewers.

For those who are interested. The details of this poll are here:
foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2015/03/04/fox-news-polls-isis-iran-obama-vetoes/
Click to expand...
Most of those polls are done by calling people up on landlines (or at least they use to). Now I am about as high tech as Fred Flinstone but I can tell you that I gave up my land line 2 years ago. I don’t much like my flip-phone but it is better than that nasty telephone company that wouldn’t allow me to set up automatic payments and would cut off my service if I was a day late with my payments. Plus when I would call the phone company I would always get Kevin and he was a real jerk. So I ditched my phone and I got this crummy cell phone.

Now, I ain’t saying that I disagree with the results of this survey. I like many other Americans want a full scale war with Iran. I also pretty much support any war that John Bolton supports. However, I would be interested to know how they contacted these people for this survey. I don’t get no surveys on my phone no more and I miss tell those guys with the surveys and telling them all my farming and drinking stories. Good times!
 
Respectfully, when action was talked about going into Syria, “crossing a red line”, this was not agreed with by a lot of conservatives.
 
gilliam said:
According to a new Fox News poll, voters feel:
  • It would be “a disaster” if Iran obtains the capability to use nuclear weapons.
  • The U.S. has not been aggressive enough in stopping Iran from getting nukes.
  • U.S. military action is the right thing to do to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
  • A deal that just delays Iran’s nuclear time-table is a bad idea.
  • Barack Obama is a weak negotiator with foreign leaders.
  • It was a good idea to invite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to Congress.
foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/04/fox-news-poll-65-percent-say-use-force-to-stop-iran-84-percent-call-possible/
Click to expand...
Fox news… I guess they are not up on current events. :rolleyes:

We actually need Iran to fight ISIL. Looking further down the road. How do they expect us to prevent Iran from obtaining anything they want? We couldn’t prevent the Soviets, the Chinese, or possibly the North Koreans from obtaining nuclear power. How would we stop iran? War? We don’t have a lot of luck in that neck of the woods. If we do invade Iran after they defeat ISIL. How will we fund this war? :hmmm:

ATB
 
Mickey_Finn said:
Fox news… I guess they are not up on current events. :rolleyes:

We actually need Iran to fight ISIL. Looking further down the road. How do they expect us to prevent Iran from obtaining anything they want? We couldn’t prevent the Soviets, the Chinese, or possibly the North Koreans from obtaining nuclear power. How would we stop iran? War? We don’t have a lot of luck in that neck of the woods. If we do invade Iran after they defeat ISIL. How will we fund this war? :hmmm:

ATB
Click to expand...
So Fox News?? :rolleyes:

Did Fox News do this?
The U.N. Security Council on Friday approved a United States-drafted resolution that condemns the use of toxic chemicals such as chlorine in Syria without assigning blame, while threatening militarily enforced action in the case of further violations.
Click to expand...
All members of the 15-seat council approved the resolution except for Venezuela, which abstained.
Click to expand...
journalreview.com/news/article_4b571806-212b-5788-952f-acb970c0d2ca.html

And “without assigning blame”, one can read on this and see who the US suspects.

And as bad as ISIS is, have people heard of barrel bombs?

news.yahoo.com/least-18-killed-regime-barrel-bomb-aleppo-monitor-114936424.html

This just happened:
Beirut (AFP) - At least 18 civilians were killed in a single regime barrel bomb attack in Syria’s northern city of Aleppo on Thursday, a monitoring group said.
Click to expand...
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the bomb, dropped from a helicopter, struck an eastern sector of the divided city where people were gathering to buy and sell fuel.
Click to expand...
Syria is of course, allied with Iran.

In the long-run, since the US is part of a coalition including countries like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia.

A dose of truth, there is a theory, that people criticize Fox News because it is a way to criticize conservatives, a long with Fox News having 2 times or more viewership than other cable news outlets.

As for who has wanted to act against Syria, er, Fox News?

Headlines have been in the newspapers that it even made the likes of Al Franken into a hawk.
“There are no good options on Syria. But as I’ve said, the use of chemical weapons to kill over a thousand people and injure many more is a horrendous act, and there have to be consequences for that. Whatever action the United States takes, it has to be limited action. This can’t be an open-ended commitment, and it definitely should not lead to American boots on the ground. Congress now has an important role to play, and I look forward to participating in a vigorous debate about the use of force and the best interests of our country.” - ** Al Franken **
Click to expand...
franken.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2544

And as for that first poisonous gas attack was possibly of unknown origins two years ago, it’s back in the news with the alleged chlorine attacks.

I don’t recall Fox News talking about crossing a red line! I also, would not feel comfortable mocking who did talk about the “red line” as well.
 
Neither Fox nor MSM or the rest of that media mind control is all that accurate.

This isn’t accurate…
It would be “a disaster” if Iran obtains the capability to use nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...
  • The U.S. has not been aggressive enough in stopping Iran from getting nukes.
Click to expand...
  • U.S. military action is the right thing to do to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
Click to expand...
The first assumes Iran will use this for military use and not bring world peace as they claim.

Point two is debatable. Thats the monday morning second guessing. Surely we must be learning by all this is the important point.

3 again assumes the military use. Nam and the inspectors pretty much laid out the case. Which the media usually fails to elaborate on. I would think at some point its inevitable the inspectors either will go in or there will be some type of conflict. Course this leads to Israel and holy war etc. I think everyone knows Israel isn’t bluffing just like Iran isn’t bluffing. Maybe they both need hugs or something.
 
Path_Finder said:
So Fox News?? :rolleyes:

Did Fox News do this?

journalreview.com/news/article_4b571806-212b-5788-952f-acb970c0d2ca.html

And “without assigning blame”, one can read on this and see who the US suspects.

And as bad as ISIS is, have people heard of barrel bombs?

news.yahoo.com/least-18-killed-regime-barrel-bomb-aleppo-monitor-114936424.html

This just happened:

Syria is of course, allied with Iran.

In the long-run, since the US is part of a coalition including countries like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia.

A dose of truth, there is a theory, that people criticize Fox News because it is a way to criticize conservatives, a long with Fox News having 2 times or more viewership than other cable news outlets.

As for who has wanted to act against Syria, er, Fox News?

Headlines have been in the newspapers that it even made the likes of Al Franken into a hawk.

franken.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2544

And as for that first poisonous gas attack was possibly of unknown origins two years ago, it’s back in the news with the alleged chlorine attacks.

I don’t recall Fox News talking about crossing a red line! I also, would not feel comfortable mocking who did talk about the “red line” as well.
Click to expand...
Rhetoric is not the equal of reality. The Reality is we can do little to prevent a nation from obtaining anything they want. Except food, and medicine it seems. It’s also reality that post WWII our military interventions have left something to be desired. So, it is not realistic to think we can use force to control a people. Except our own it seems.

Why conservative minded people still go to cable news for their information is a mystery to us all. They must realize that this news is run through filters, and edited for content. Coupling that with a somewhat rigged format makes it seem less than desirable in today’s environment. Ah… I get it.

We know that ISIL is attempting to draw the west back to their region. Could it be they plan a nuclear ambush? We know that many nuclear weapons went missing when the Soviet Union Failed. Or do they just need a powerful enemy to demonize? Lets let the Saudi’s, Turks, and Iranians find out.

ATB
 
GaryTaylor said:
Qassem Suleimani, this is the fellow who is fighting Isis today in Iraq.

bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27883162

newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/30/the-shadow-commander
Click to expand...
This is why the situation is troublesome, US not invited to fight in Tikrit. Do you wonder why there could be a reason for this?? Unfortunately, for that region of the world, it might get shady and this is why we have a problem trying to be a “good guy” with American values. Of course, in the past, the USA has supported probably some unkind rulers. But we are trying to get away with this.

It’s been alleged the regime in Baghdad has likewise used “barrel bombs” that killed indiscriminately.

aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/05/iraq-army-using-barrel-bombs-fallujah-2014511134023608197.html and many other sources for those who care to be informed.

The fighting in Tikrit could be extremely brutal, anyone who bombs total neighborhoods to get at the enemy can do all kinds of things.

And in the long run, because of our allies in the coalition, it might be hard for an Assad to hang on to power.

Some top brass of Al Nusra got hit yesterday and taken out, though some say the Syrian army did it, it looks like other sources are saying we don’t know who was able to kill these top terrorists.

bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31757502

In the long run, it will be troublesome for the US to ally with someone possibly using chlorine and barrel bombs.

In the long run, some sort of government will be formed of Shias and Sunnis in these countries, I don’t think Assad will be staying, perhaps he will be exiled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top