Americans support war in Iraq 2-to-1, poll finds

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,677
136
Obviously, the Bush/Rove propaganda machine plays the sentiment of the public the way Eric Clapton plays the guitar.

After 9/11, folks wanted to believe in their leadership, and wanted revenge for those attacks. So while Dean is saying he wants the vote of working class southern white males because of real issues and ideas, Dubya plays to their base instincts by "kicking some r@ghead butt"- any r@ghead, any where, they're all the same, right? And Dubya has apparently succeeded in transferring this righteous sense of rage from Al Quaeda and the Saudi fundamentalism that spawned them onto the Baathists, and Iraq. Their implementation of scaremongering and deception has few peers in modern history, and their post hoc inventiveness legend... It doesn't have to make sense, it just has to sell...

Not that it really matters that much to the average guy, Dubya is often his champion and idol- a guy who bumbles and fails repeatedly, kinda like Homer Simpson becoming President... But he appeals to their machismo, their cojones, their pride even while digging their socioeconomic graves right before their eyes...

As a nation, we're not very good at being occupiers and oppressors, something the current situation in Iraq will demand for years to come. We're impatient and have a short collective attention span, demanding immediate results. If the situation in Iraq and/or Afghanistan deteriorates much before the election, the public will be singing a different tune...

 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
dodgy intel
you mean the same intel that Clinton had?
linky
Isn't this the same "aspirin factory" YABAs use to attack Clinton-era intelligence? Is it your contention that al Qaeda and Iraq conspired together to produce aspirin? The bastards, no wonder we had to attack.

The United Corps of America, making the world safer for Bayer.

Heartsurgeon?
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
linky

i can predict the liberals responses already:

people are sheep!
people are stupid!
idiots believe everything the Cheney/Rumsfeld/Bush White House tells them.
morons!, conspiracy to hide the truth! we are the terrorists! Dean will win!!
Well, you proved that one true, for yourself at least. 1722 posts and you still can't link properly. Duhhhhhhhhh...
Nice trolling by the way.
 

Miramonti

Lifer
Aug 26, 2000
28,651
98
91
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Originally posted by: jjsole
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Originally posted by: jjsole
l

Polls have been all over the board the past few months however its doubtful 2/3 of americans are that stupid.
So is it safe to assume, using your logic, that 1/3 of Americans are?
Please humble me with your logic and witt and explain how you extract this assumption.
Well, I started with the proposition that "2/3 of Americans are not that stupid," which you asserted above (realizing you said "doubtful"). Given that you did not mention the other 1/3 of the population, I assumed them to be the residual, or, in this case, those people who are stupid and cannot be classified with the other 2/3 of those who are not stupid. Then, using the logic of those opposed to war (and view all others as stupid), I assumed that the 1/3 (again, using the residual from your statistic) who opposed the war are, in layman's terms, stupid. This, sir, is how I arrived at the 1/3 of Americans are stupid assumption. :)
Ah, you added a few independent assumptions that weren't substantiated in the original premise...

By saying 2/3 are not that stupid, can mean that 2/3-x are that stupid. Iow, it doesn't suggest that all 2/3 are smart, but that it could mean many of those are in fact stupid [truth], just not 2/3.

So yes I would agree that [atleast] 1/3 are stupid, but there is no logical case from the above that concludes these people are the suggested 1/3 that were not opposed to the war in this poll.

But I give you credit for erroneously trying to tie the two, however I could now only conclude you are one of the stupid people. :p;)


 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: jjsole

But I give you credit for erroneously trying to tie the two, however I could now only conclude you are one of the stupid people. :p;)
But I didn't oppose the war, so perhaps this is a sampling error.

 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
70,124
5,291
126
I think people are trying to do the best they can with what they know. Consciousness can't be forced.
 
Feb 3, 2001
5,156
0
0
Karl Marx's dogma, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,"
And here, Ladies and Gentlemen, lies the philosophical root of the evil ideas permeating and destroying the foundations of Liberty in America and on earth.

Enjoy!

Jason
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
69,535
4,956
126
Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
Karl Marx's dogma, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,"
And here, Ladies and Gentlemen, lies the philosophical root of the evil ideas permeating and destroying the foundations of Liberty in America and on earth.

Enjoy!

Jason
Yup, Jesus was a real sh1t disturber as well.
 
Feb 3, 2001
5,156
0
0
I realize that it came from the Bible first, nevertheless the idea itself is a BAD idea. Much more just is "From each according to his ability, to each according to his production."

Or better yet, each man owns his own life and the product of his own labor, and no other man nor group of men can have any right whatsoever to any part of it.

Jason
 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
Americans believe 2-to-1 that going to war in Iraq was the right decision, rejecting Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean's assertion that military action was wrong and should not have been taken, according to a national survey.
Leading paragraphs from newspapers founded by men who think they're the second coming of Christ are funny. :)
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
70,124
5,291
126
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Where do you want to go?
hmmm...i'd have to think about that for a while. you've asked a very insightful question.
Well yes and no, perhaps. It's a question anybody might ask of any inner perception, but a real answer might indeed take some self study. I wish I could give you the story of the wooden horse to help you with this.

 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex


Or better yet, each man owns his own life and the product of his own labor, and no other man nor group of men can have any right whatsoever to any part of it.

Jason
I love you, Jason.

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,216
126
Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex
I realize that it came from the Bible first, nevertheless the idea itself is a BAD idea. Much more just is "From each according to his ability, to each according to his production."

Or better yet, each man owns his own life and the product of his own labor, and no other man nor group of men can have any right whatsoever to any part of it.

Jason
And that is a real difference between us. This can be paraphrased by

"Madame, the peasants have no bread"

"No bread? Well let them eat cake!"


Humanity is cruel. There are generous people to be sure, however it is in their nature to me miserly. It is not a higher calling to withold charity. The argument I have seen is "Well I ought to be the one who determines to how much and to whom I give" Well, to be sure, that is right. However consider the real world.


New Hampshire. Lowest taxes in the nation. Also it is far from the bottom of the list in per capita income, yet it IS at the bottom in charitable contributions. THey have the greatest reluctance to raise taxes and the least desire to help others financially.

On the other hand, this philosophy has advantages. I did not support this war. If there were no governments, then there would be no armies, and no wars. Of course there would be no civilization either. Perhaps you have an idea after all.
 
Feb 3, 2001
5,156
0
0
Well, where it comes to charity I might not have a good viewpoint. I, personally, give to a lot of charities, usually those that help young people because I think the money is best spent on them. I like giving to charity because it gives me a good feeling, personally, and also some hope that those who are benefitted will see the beauty of helping others and, when they are able to afford to do so, will follow the example.

I would never imagine stealing from someone else in order to give to any cause, no matter how noble. I believe that would taint the morality of the act. I LOATHE Robin Hood, and I think he and his methods were proper for an age where the only way to get wealth was to be born into it, but we in the U.S. do NOT live in that kind of world. Over 80% of the rich in America, as an example, are *first generation* wealthy. The biggest thing that holds people back is an idea in their head that says they *can't* do better than they have. I do not share that idea.

If I were to share in the idea that you are what you are born to, I would have to be dirt poor and a drug addict. I cam from a family where my parents abused drugs, where we moved constantly because my father couldn't keep a job due to his piss-poor attitude. When I was 8 years old we spent almost a year living in the family van because my father spent, spent, spent everything he made on getting high.

But you know what? I've never even once tried an illegal drug of any kind. I've gotten drunk maybe 3 or 4 times in my life and I didn't like it. I left home at 17 and got myself a cruddy minimum wage job (if I recall it was at around $5 an hour doing utter grunt labor for Kmart) and put myself through a couple of years of training at a technical college where I learned networking, and eventually I've managed to climb up to make around $30 an hour. I'm not part of a union and I never will be. I haven't gotten a lot of breaks, though I have had close friends who have helped me through some rough times, and I appreciate that more than I can ever say. I've made mistakes, of course, as we all have, and even had a child with a nutty woman who ended up kidnapping him 5 years ago.

But I don't give up, and though I do sometimes despair I don't stop believing that I CAN do better and that I can make every year better than the last. I believe that with all my heart and soul, and sometimes I can't believe that I'm really from the family I am, but the truth of that situation is inescapable. So when I see whiny piss-ant people like Bowfinger, whose answer for making people economically better off is to steal from some and give to others, I get a little pissed. Partially because people like him bring out the worst and most unethical behavior in people and partially because they intentionally work to discourage people and implant the idea in their heads that they can't make through honest means.

To anyone who's ever tempted by such evil words, I would say to you that you CAN make it, you are NOT stuck where you were born, you are NOT doomed to any fate but what YOU choose. The key is to realize that the power of CHOICE is in your hands and your minds, and you must learn to make the best choices you can.

You CAN make it. I know from experience.

Jason
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY