Will the American public support a pre-emptive war with Iran?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

As with Iraq, I am getting increasingly nervous (as I'm sure we all are) about the possibility that Bush et. al, despite the post-war mess in Iraq, will nevertheless launch at least a bombing campaign against Iran's nuclear facilities unless it completely renounces and dismantles its nuclear program. My question is what has everybody else observed in terms of public support for such an intervention? Do you believe that the public is as eager and willing as Bush et. al appear to be for us to pre-emptively attack Iran(or anybody else)? I realize, of course, that poll numbers don't mean anything to Bush et. al and if he wants to do something bad enough (like in Iraq), he'll find SOME way to do it but after the mess that he made of Iraq and the public's current negative perception of THAT war/occupation, is the public likely to rally around him like they did in the initial aftermath of the Iraq invasion? I don't know about everybody else but even the news media coverage of the current "crisis" with Iran seems kind of nonchalant to me when compared to the coverage given to Iraq right before we went in there and I don't sense a groundswell of public concern or "appetite" for any more new "wars" right now (as if we could even manage another military conflict with our troops being tied down indefinitely-possibly until after 2008-in Iraq). Thoughts? Opinions?

[babylonsister]

1. No. Never. "Fool me once,..." blah blah blah. No one believes

their motives anymore, at least not thinking people.

[LynnTheDem]

2. The American majority didn't support a pre-emptive attack on Iraq.

And there we are going on 4 years later...Iraqmired.

[Neil Lisst]

16. Iraqmired, indeed!!

in case you didn't see this a few weeks ago, Lynn

[stepnw1f]

3. nope... never again

[napi21]

4. NO! Few supported the one with Iraq, but after all the lies and

disappointments, I predict a mass outcry AGAINST pre-emption against Iran.

[Atman]

5. Will we have a choice?

Sadly, no.

[Extend a Hand]

6. I'm afraid this

group of kooks might actually nuke Iran. They don't have the manpower to do it any other way and a draft would be political suicide.

:scared: :scared:

[CrispyQ]

20. I think boosh is just itchin' to nuke them.

Test out his bunker nukes on real people, not just the Nevada desert.

What I wonder is how long is the rest of the world going to tolerate our bullying?

[MadisonProgressive]

7. Only if I can be in the streets gathering up all the candy and flowers

[Ready4Change]

8. No, but how will you KNOW?

I no longer trust most news programs. Watching most cable news channels you'd think most people are still behind this admininstration. Yet, of the people I know at most 1 in 20 believes in this White House.

Yes I live in a 'librul' area. But only 1 in 20?

If this administration takes us to Iran, I fully expect the news to portray the public as being behind the move, in spite of what the public really says. I've seen too many examples, personally, of the marginalization of opposing viewpoints. Protests where attendance was under reported by factors of 10. Support marches where attendance was OVER reported by factors of 100, or not given any number at all, but just called "massive."

Much of our media is corrupted.

[DrGonzoLives]

9. No

many here think that the majority in this country are idiots, but many of them are sick of this nonsense, and want their kids and husbands and wives to come home, not go to Iran.

Short of Iran lobbing a nuke to downtown Tel Aviv, there would be little support for a war with them, and that mostly coming from the Bushbot crowd who would support it anyway.

[Toots]

10. If they can openly get away with violating Constitutional Law on the basis

that Congress gave them permission to do whatever the hell they feel like in the name of National Security then they will do whatever the hell they feel like.... How many Democrats showed up again for the Censure hearing???????? Prepare yourself for WW III because it is going to happen....

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. Erect bogeyman. Wave flag. Start war. Never fails.

Get grim faced generals in camouflage to surround president, refer to heroic dead, mention "our troops" repeatedly, mention "founding fathers" with look of reverence, assure public that war is the last but necessary option and that war will be brief and victorious, invoke God several times, end with stirring rendition of "God Bless America", wait for talking heads to question acquiescent congress critters.

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H.L. Mencken

[Sinti]

12. Does the misadministration care if they have public support?

I'm not so sure it matters. We, the public, don't have our fingers on the "go to war" button, they do. If they really feel they need public support, I'm sure they can find a creative way to get it.

[Betsy Ross]

13. Why do I think we won't be asked?

I have this horrible feeling that * will order an attack, just a few bombs on "strategic sites" before mentioning his plans to anyone outside the cabal. "Oops, I didn't know that was illegal. It is the President's job to protect Amurkins. Nobody could have imagined..."

[banana republican]

14. Think MIHOP.

all they have to do is Make It Happen Again. MIHA

[Lost4words]

15. All Bush wanted as a child was a few hundred plastic army men

and Poppy said," If you are good I'll give you your very own Army with real troops you can do what ever you want with.

I dont trust dimson with a loaded tooth brush! I am surprised he hasnt put out an eye with one, but then he probally has Laura brush them for little sissy sack!

[Double T]

17. The bushco WH has already lost the support of the majority.......

of Americans for the Iraq 'war', but would they dare start a pre-emptive 'war' with Iran?? You better believe they would because these psychos think that they can convince everybody that their position is truly correct and when it comes to 'war' they know what they are doing. 'war' is bushco's ONLY marketing tool.

[acmavm]

18. Unfortunately not supporting a war and being able to prevent

them from starting one are two radically different things. They're so arrogant that the figure once they get the old ball rolling, the bombs dropping, a bunch of Iranians dying, all the usual idiots will get on board. And I mean our dem rep idiots in the House and Senate as well.

[90-percent]

22. They don't care about "public opinion"

It's a quaint outdated concept to them.

They will manufacture an event via black ops and CIA that looks like Iran committing some kind of terrorist attack against Americans, probably troops in Iraq, and then retaliate with nukes dropped on Iran.

They have to make it convincing enough to revive the abused "patriotic instinct" of American Citizens and it has to be so big we'll all go along with a revival of the draft.

they are crazy and evil enough to do it, no question. Plus they think we are all stupid enough to buy it.

Condi will say; "Nobody could have foreseen Iran using their stealth missiles against American Troops in Iraq" line, and we'll all be enjoying a national sense of deja vu.

And anyone accused of bringing up the concept of deja vu will be labeled a supporter of the Terrorists.

And when all polls show Dem's polling above 80% before the elections, Republicans will end up increasing their majority in every 2006 Electoral Race. Questioning the integrity of the voting process in time of dual war will be labeled as excessively unpatriotic and treasonous. And now there will be camps to keep all those labeled as "unpatriotic" by the GWB Administration.

-85% Jimmy

[TahitiNut]

19. It makes little difference. The "public" has lost most of its voice.

The "American public" has been neutered and enfeebled, lacking any commitment to unified actions whatsoever. "Let George Do It" should be our national motto instead of "In God We Trust" since we lack the courage to have a national strike and view 'protesters' with effete disdain. Whatever sense of "what's good for my neighbor is good for me" has been lost. The 'ownership class' knows this and exploits it. They don't need 'support' since there is no danger of The People rising up in opposition. None. At best, we just want someone else to do it. If they fail, we can treat them as fools - and wallow in self-righteousness.

Yep. I'm feeling cynical today. :shrug:

[Broadslidin]

21. Simply, Anticipating the Next Attack Against the 'Fatherland'......

Then implement a mass propaganda of Fear, Anger, and Blood Revenge.

The history of our primate specie demonstrates,
social manipulation is quite simple.

Only "War and/or Plague" will temporarily cleanse the group
of particularly combative members.

:yoiks:

[mmonk]

23. absolutely

[BlooInBloo]

24. Wow. People here thinking the American public got smarter are suckers...

Nobody EVER went broke betting on the stupidity of the American public.

[FloridaPat]

25. Depends on if there's another 9-11 or not. The next 9-11 will

be blamed on Iran.

[Iniquitous Bunny]

26. It seems as though that's what their trying to set up.

God, I hope the populace has wised up a little, but sadly, another fake, poser "Terra" attack would keep far too many of the apathetic, fear-mongering doofuses of this county in lock step with whatever crap this administration and their PNAC, neo-con cronies want. :(

[bigtree]

nope

it will immediately bankrupt us and increase the likelihood of unconventional attacks. I think folks are full on war.

[NNN0LHI]

27. Only if the Iranians were stupid enough to let us disarm them first

Which they are not.

Don

[Rocknrule]

28. No, but it'll happen anyway