jenk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 02:23 PM
Original message |
Interesting CNN poll, What do you think? |
|
http://www.cnn.com/Do the latest terror acts in Baghdad increase your resolve to help rebuild Iraq? Yes 39% 5411 votes No 61% 8642 votes Total: 14053 votes
|
acmavm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 02:30 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I think it means that people are becoming more sceptical (?) everyday |
|
about throwing $87 billion to the Bush Administration for Iraq.
|
papau
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 02:31 PM
Response to Original message |
2. "Today's Saddam "Shock and Awe" proof that Saddam is losing" -Bush |
|
Edited on Mon Oct-27-03 02:31 PM by papau
No kidding - Bush actually said today that the disasters in Iraq are evidence that those against us are desparate because we are winning.
Should we have 30 days of quiet in Iraq it will be evidence that we are losing?
Sorry, I forgot that our Media whores will endorse any spin put out by the Whitehouse without raising any questions. So quiet is good, and not quiet is good, and Bush's and the media's shit does not stink.
|
reachout
(236 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 02:32 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Strange phrasing of the question |
|
Of course that's not unusual of CNN.
I voted no because for this administration "rebuilding of Iraq" is code for "occupy and rape Iraq of its natural resources while installing a friendly, tractable government." The attacks don't alter my opposition to this.
Now, if we remove the newsspeak, of course I think we should do all we can to help rebuild a nation we helped destroy. Of course we should be doing it through the UN. The terrorism doesn't alter my opinion of that either.
Peace
|
fob
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. Ah but they've already won. The question is about "terror" attacks |
|
not attacks by "terrorists". They are getting you to buy into defense of Iraq against an occupation = terrorism.
The terrorism doesn't alter my opinion of that either
Is it terrorism or defense of homeland?
fob
|
reachout
(236 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
The attacks against uniformed forces of the occupation are "resistance" and recognized as such by international law. I think it can be argued that attacks against domestic collaborators fall within the same realm. That being said, the bombing of civilian targets and international aid agencies I would classify as acts of "terrorism." That is, the deliberate targeting of non-combatants in pursuit of a particular political outcome.
Peace
|
Zero Gravitas
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 02:33 PM
Response to Original message |
4. the attacks can't increase something |
|
most people don't have.
The money to "rebuild" Iraq ought to come out of the pockets of Bush* campaign donors and not those of the American taxpayer.
|
fob
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 02:37 PM
Response to Original message |
5. That's one fucked question! |
|
If I say Yes, then the troops will remain and be attacked again, thereby necessitating another poll as to the "strength" of my resolve.
If I say No, then I don't want to take responsibility for the damage done and to hell with the consequences of our actions?
I think this is probush* regardless of how one answers.
fob
|
QuidditchFan
(299 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. Agreed...the question is horrible. |
|
In statement form, this question would be: The latest attacks in Baghdad increase resolve to rebuild Iraq.
What is the relation between the latest attacks and rebuilding Iraq?
Granted that the country wasn't doing so well originally, but did we not completely ruin it with our attacks? Since we f*cked it up, we are morally obligated to rebuild it.
A better question would be: Do the latest attacks in Baghdad increase your resolve to internationalize the effort and transfer control to the UN?
|
LeahMira
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-27-03 03:25 PM
Response to Original message |
|
... considering that an awful lot of Americans resent giving money to people that they feel don't "deserve help." If the Iraqis continue to attack our troops, clearly they don't deserve any assistance and certainly not from hardworking Americans who worked for that money and should get to keep it.
Yep. Sound to me like whether the $87 billion is opposed because we would rather spend it on our own homeland needs or because we don't want to give our money to "ingrates" this is one issue that we can agree on. Bush may be in real trouble over this one.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 03rd 2024, 09:41 AM
Response to Original message |