Bush Not Convincing Anyone on Iran

President Bush and his administration have expended a great deal of effort in recent days and weeks trying to sell the case for war with Iran, whether explicitly or implicitly. But by and large their case is falling on deaf ears among the American public, as evidenced by new numbers from The Pew Research Center.

In recent weeks, the Bush administration also has highlighted the increasing threat posed by Iran, both because of its nuclear program and its reported support for anti-U.S. insurgents in Iraq. But public perceptions of the Iranian threat have not increased over the past year. Currently, a quarter of Americans volunteer Iran as the country representing the "greatest danger" to the U.S., the highest percentage naming any single country. In February 2006, a comparable number (27%) cited Iran as the greatest threat to the U.S. And the public is split evenly over whether it is more important for the U.S. to take a firm stand against Iranian actions or to try to avoid a military conflict with Iran (43% each).

[...]

About a third of Americans (34%) say they have read or heard a lot about reports that Iran may be providing weapons to insurgent groups in Iraq. Public awareness of this issue is somewhat lower than it was regarding Iran's nuclear program last September (41%).

Overall, Americans are evenly divided over whether it is more important to "take a firm stand" against Iran or to avoid a military conflict with Iran. The political and ideological differences over how to approach Iran resemble the divisions over Iraq. Nearly two-thirds of conservative Republicans (65%) and a smaller majority of moderate and liberal Republicans (55%) believe it is more important to take a firm stand against Iran; among Democrats, majorities of liberals (60%), and conservatives and moderates (51%), say it is more important to avoid a military conflict with Iran.

In addition, 40% of conservative Republicans cite Iran as the country that represents the greatest danger to the United States; no more than three-in-ten in any other partisan group identifies Iran as the country presenting the greatest danger. However, somewhat fewer conservative Republicans name Iran as the biggest threat to the U.S. than did so a year ago (48%). [embpasis added]

Even the President's most loyal base -- conservative Republicans -- aren't buying the notion that Iran represents an existential threat to the United States, or even that it is the greatest threat to our nation's security. And when looking at the broader public as a whole, even fewer are accepting the Bush administration's saber rattling as it relates to Iran.

If the numbers do not speak clearly enough, let's put it another way: Americans do not want war with Iran.



Display:


Re: Bush Not Convincing Anyone on Iran (none / 0)

What was it that W said...fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, won't get fooled again?

FYI, yesterday John Edwards issued a comprehensive proposal to enact his plan for Iraq.

The statement released by the campaign noted, "In addition, Edwards believes the U.S. should step up our diplomatic efforts by engaging in direct talks with all the nations in the region, including Iran and Syria and work to bring about a political solution to the sectarian violence inside Iraq, including through a peace conference."

For those of you who are convinced that Edwards just can't wait to drop bombs on Iran, I want to emphasize that he is calling for more diplomacy in the region, including direct talks with Iran.


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 08:39:03 PM EST

Re: Bush Not Convincing Anyone on Iran (none / 0)

Eventhough Iran is our enemy, their allies are in charge of the government in Iraq, the Shia Clerics. So, how can the US go to war with Iraq's allies. Al Sadr's gov't is in charge of Iraq.


by olawakandi on Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 08:40:50 PM EST

Re: Bush Not Convincing Anyone on Iran (none / 0)

And not only the Republicans and the electorate, it appears that Defense and State don't want a war with Iran either.  The Iran warmongering has devolved to just more confetti supporting the justification for the 'surge' and an attempt to shift blame for the mishandling of Iraq to 'outside influences.'

The appearance of Ahmadinejad, essentially a creation of neoconservative rhetoric, has given the Bush administration a useful demon but I wonder if he would have appeared in the absence of US posturing on the 'axis of evil' theme.

The real issue, methinks, underlying the existential threat presented by Iran's nuclear program is really about Isreal and the nature of US commitments there.  Perhaps we should have another look at a sustainable and lasting relationship with Isreal that preserves the best interests of both our countries.


by Shaun Appleby on Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 08:55:20 PM EST

Re: Bush Not Convincing Anyone on Iran (none / 0)

Smirk is an asshat.  The Iranian people are a lot like us.  We both have asshats for President.  The people want to be more like us.  How do we expect them to get rid of their government, if we aren't out in the streets with torches and pitchforks?


John McCain: Bush right to veto kids health insurance expansion
by Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle on Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 08:59:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Blanket Democratic Response (3.00 / 1)

I'd like to see every Democrat in office respond to any and all questions directed to them about the Bush administraton's sabre rattling on Iran in the following way:

"President Bush and his Republican administration are simply no longer credible."

Every. Single. Question.

For example, I watched Blitzer interrogate Max Cleland the other day, asking him several times to the effect of "But, President Bush claims that Iran is providing weapons and training...." etc.

Response: "President Bush and his Republican administration are simply no longer credible."

Too simple? Go ahead and embellish:

"President Bush and his Republican administration are simply no longer credible. Remember WMD, mushroom clouds, Sadaam tied to 9-11, being greated as liberators, final throws, dead or alive... by the way, where is Osama bin Laden anyway?"

Stomp this one into the ground. Bury the GOP with this:

"President Bush and his Republican administration are simply no longer credible."


Witty comment goes here...
by michael in chicago on Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 09:01:42 PM EST

Re: Bush Not Convincing Anyone on Iran (none / 0)

Not yet.  But what will the neocons try next?


by catherineD on Fri Feb 16, 2007 at 01:48:39 AM EST

Re: Bush Not Convincing Anyone on Iran (none / 0)

the folks at pew clearly haven't been talking to the right people.

the question is: do barney and laura want war with iran?


i'm glad you asked
by truth hurts on Fri Feb 16, 2007 at 05:22:39 AM EST

Re: Surgin'-in-Chief (none / 0)

The Iraq casualty reports track the deaths of American soldiers from different points in the war.  The last division is since the Iraqi elections in December, 2005.  Since that election, American military deaths have averaged 2.42 per day.  However, since our elections when W started his (initially covert) surge, the figure is 4.22 per day.

Bush listens to know one.  The blame needs to be squarely and appropriately place on thge Republican administration and the Republican Party.  BTW, bringing the troops home is not a political disaster.  Eisenhower promised to do this as part of his 1952 campaign ("I will go to Korea" and hardly suffered in 1956.  True, Nixon rigged the 1972 election but starting to bring the troops home was a political winner, anyway.


by David Kowalski on Fri Feb 16, 2007 at 09:23:24 AM EST

Re: Bush Not Convincing Anyone on Iran (3.00 / 1)

Bush claims that Iran's interference in Iraq is one of the cause for the instability and thus a threat to our interests. But should we attack Iran, I think the situation in Iraq would worsen and help the Sunni Insurgents, our public enemy number one there.  IMO most Iranians are in Iraq with the tacit or express approval of the Iraqi Government, where many of the politicians were in exile under Saddam.  The main source of American casualties are from Sunni Insurgents.  The Shias are too busy celebrating their ascendancy to power and killing the Sunnis to make us the focus of their wrath.  They don't like us, but we were a useful means to an end, so we are tolerated.  Now let's attack Iran, a Shia nation, and you will definitely get the Iraqi Shias into the attack American troops column.  At that point, an American surge of 20,000 will do nothing to stem a civil war and more importantly will cause a two pronged attack on American troops, increasing American casualties and further deteriorating the Iraq disaster.


by Kingstongirl on Fri Feb 16, 2007 at 12:47:50 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.