78% support war now - gallup poll [Archive]

chris_78660

03-27-2003, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered
Just because the majority agrees with the war does not make it right, it only makes it popular.

Originally posted by Unregistered
Another poll....

http://palestinechronicle.com/artic...030327032651279

so what are you saying? did you just contradict yourself?

Nathan6968

03-27-2003, 01:12 PM

Hey

The polls on that hyperlink are done by the AFP, its a French group, don't you think that throws a little bit of bias in there? It's pretty easy to tweak numbers when you want to, and especially when it proves your point. I'm not saying its completly invalid, but try to get some facts from a more neutral source. And screw the rest of the world because the reason most of them are protesting the war is because we(the US) started it, and they just don't like us. Besides, 48 countries are behind us last time I heard, I'd say thats pretty significant support.

Wanna know why the France, Germany, and Russia protest so bad? Wait till we start kicking over the missile and weapons Saddam is using and they say made in France or Germany or Russia (as we've already seen with the GPS Jammers), and they're fairly new systems, then you'll know why the protest so much.

shade

03-27-2003, 01:12 PM

Im not contradicting myself. Im saying that just because most of the world is against the war doesnt mean anything, and that I am personally happy to see that some are converting to the right side of the issue.

Unregistered

03-27-2003, 01:14 PM

No, I don't think so. Just demonstrating that polls are only opinions, nothing more.

chris_78660

03-27-2003, 01:16 PM

shade,
we are on two different sheets of music.
the guest posted
"Just because the majority agrees with the war does not make it right, it only makes it popular."
and then they posted a poll of thier own. that seems to me a little contradictory...not your posts......sheesh!!!

Unregistered

03-27-2003, 01:41 PM

Polls are only opinions, you can find one to support any position you like.

Just because the majority of Americans support the war does not make it just.

Just because the majority of the world does not support the war doesn't make it un-just.

The justification for the war can only be determined by the actions of the United States and Iraq.

Unregistered

03-27-2003, 01:51 PM

No I think you need to wake up.The polls are being used to fool people like you and it appears to be working as you believe it.This kind of information is called propaganda.If the next poll told you 93% were against the war you would begin to doubt your theories regarding the war;brilliant are,nt they?

DrNaste

03-27-2003, 01:53 PM

People's opinions, and opinion polls in general, can be finicky. If you watch the related video for this latest of Gallup polls, the editor-in-chief will set you straight a little bit.

The polls he speaks of in the video were conducted just before military action took place (March 14, 15). Approval for the war was high, about 65%, he says that the truth behind the polls lies in the fact that when you qualify the question with 'do you still approve of military action if a second US-led UN resolution is debated and voted against?' the approval drops down to at or just above 65%.

He also talks about the 'rally effect' of these polls, and how the approval rating always sees a spike as soon as military action starts, and mentions the 25% jump in approval in 1991. This is the stage we are in now. Approval is high because everyone feels guilty about not 'supporting' the troops. He is also very careful to mention that this is a TEMPORARY effect, and just that: an effect, not an actual reflection of the way people feel.

What I have a problem with is this: what if there are Americans out there that REALLY disapprove of the war, but have family in the military? Do they have to 'suck it up' and approve of the war, to keep their family member's morale high, or do they give in and protest because all they really want is for their family member to come home?

DrNaste

03-27-2003, 01:54 PM

in case anyone was wondering where to see this video:...

http://www.gallup.com/poll/Multimedia/video/segments/vr030317.ram

Unregistered

03-27-2003, 02:06 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered
No I think you need to wake up.The polls are being used to fool people like you and it appears to be working as you believe it.This kind of information is called propaganda.If the next poll told you 93% were against the war you would begin to doubt your theories regarding the war;brilliant are,nt they?

I don't think a poll would change my opinion. My opinion is based on the Bush Administration not presenting a statisfactory justification for the war. In other words, I just don't buy their story.

shade

03-27-2003, 03:03 PM

You can argue all you want about polls, but the Gallup organization is the benchmark for statisticians. If you have ever taken a statistics class or are going to, I gurantee your teacher will mention Gallup Poll. There is no other polling agency in the world with such a record of scientific and independant polling standards. If you read a poll done by Gallup, it is true. You can interpret the numbers how you want, but the numbers are the most accurate ones you can hope to get.

DrNaste

03-27-2003, 03:07 PM

I ma not renouncing the validity of the Gallup organization. You are correct in saying that they are the benchmark of all polls, and other organizations can only hope and strive to have the same authority they command.

However, the Editor-in-Chief himself explains the sort of sweeling of the statistics at this point in the video I had linked to a couple fo posts ago, check it out.

The truth is that I believe this country's people are still very divided about the war. If our media would just remove the veil of censorship for one goddamned second, maybe the people would realize what's going on over there and decide that everyone should be against this war.

"No one hates war more than the warrior."

shade

01-27-2004, 12:33 AM

Looks like someone needs to be banned...

Che

01-27-2004, 01:20 AM

You're right, dear lord he's stating an opinion that is against the leader. And seeing as how patriotism now means agreeing with the leader, he's anti-Americans and he hates the troops and should be arrested, he's a security risk.

Bergs

01-27-2004, 07:12 AM

Hes not talking about Dr Naste, there was a deleted post in there, it was probably your alter ego.

Skinny

01-27-2004, 09:00 AM

whispers*Chuuuuuuck Nooooooris*

j.elohim

01-27-2004, 11:25 AM

WHoa, who dug this up? 3/27/03 March last, that deleted post better have been good.

FireEater

01-27-2004, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by shade
Looks like someone needs to be banned...

He was and please people.......

FE

Marxist

01-27-2004, 04:26 PM

78% of people are imperialist scum.

Anti-Hero

01-27-2004, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by Marxist
78% of people are imperialist scum.

the other 22% must be angels who only want to benefit the world then, right?

Kobe

01-27-2004, 07:21 PM

Say we never went after sadam and he did have wmd and he used them on us how would you anti war people fill then.

Nocturnal

01-28-2004, 01:06 AM

Originally posted by shade
According to the latest gallup poll, independant and scientific, 78% support. That means that anti war people are dropping the fad and waking up to the real world.

Yay.

the war went pretty well overall, and peopel seem to have forgotten about the wmd thing.

the polls would read very different if we hadn't been so sucessfull

lynch03

01-28-2004, 04:36 PM

you've guys obviously never heard of hitler , everyone supported him and he was a great leader :rolleyes:

huge_mischief

01-28-2004, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by lynch03
you've guys obviously never heard of hitler , everyone supported him and he was a great leader I've never seen such a lack of sense in such an anology. Try to at least list some similarity between them and then list the vastly larger amount of differences.
Also, I find your sig funny. Is that one of your victories?

lynch03

01-28-2004, 05:37 PM

Originally posted by huge_mischief
I've never seen such a lack of sense in such an anology. Try to at least list some similarity between them and then list the vastly larger amount of differences.
Also, I find your sig funny. Is that one of your victories?

I never said he was similar to hitler , im saying hitler was a TERRIBLE LEADER who nearly wiped out an entire human race. Yet many people supported him. Just because the majority supports someone doesen't make them right

droogsteve

01-28-2004, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by lynch03
you've guys obviously never heard of hitler , everyone supported him and he was a great leader :rolleyes:

Hitler was never elected to any office. He never recieved more than 37% of the popular vote in any election and he certainly never won one.

Hitler was appointed to power by German president Hindenburg, who had defeated Hitler in two elections. Under Hindenberg an incompetent chancellor named Franz Von Papen was ousted from power by Kurt Von Schleicher, a popular general and friend of Hindenburg.

To get even, Papen approached Hitler and offered to become "co-chancellors," if Hitler would join him in a coalition to overthrow Schleicher. Hitler responded that only he could be the head of government, while Papen's supporters could be given important cabinet positions. He agreed. Meanwhile Schleicher was failing in his attempts to form a coalition government, so Hindenburg, fearing a possible civil war, forced him to resign and accepted the back room deal that made Hitler chancellor. He mistakenly thought that he could control Hitler.

Hindenburg didn't take into account a clause in the German constitution that gave the chancellor dictatorial power in time of emergency. Shortly after Hitler was appointed, a German communist burned down the Reichstag building. Hitler used it as an excuse to set himself up as supreme dictator.

I hope this clears up any misconceptions about Hitler being elected by popular majority.

Delta

01-28-2004, 07:26 PM

you've guys obviously never heard of hitler , everyone supported him and he was a great leader I hope this clears up any misconceptions about Hitler being elected by popular majority So wait.. Im confused here....

Are you saying that Hitler WASNT supported by "everyone"?

And here I thought WWII was one big gag we did for his Birthday............:rolleyes:

brainkandy87

01-29-2004, 01:55 AM

Originally posted by Delta
And here I thought WWII was one big gag we did for his Birthday............:rolleyes:

No, no...

His birthday present was looting the Eagle's Nest. :p

Che

01-29-2004, 02:10 AM

I've never seen such a lack of sense in such an anology. Try to at least list some similarity between them and then list the vastly larger amount of differences.

Both draw upon people's emotions and use propaganda to invade sovereign nations and murder innocent people. Both use constant references to the almighty as a means of justifying their actions. Both encouraged people to spy on one another and make it unpatriotic to say ANYTHING that disagrees with the administration and the gap between their styles of punishment is slowly closing.

The only difference is, Hitler's reasoning made a half bit of sense and he was honest about it. He flatly told the people that Jews needed to be gotten rid of because they caused problems like causing Germany to lose World War 1.

However, Bush has still failed to explain why he hates Arabs so much. Perhaps he, like all Christians, views them as heathen?

brainkandy87

01-29-2004, 02:20 AM

Originally posted by Che
He flatly told the people that Jews needed to be gotten rid of because they caused problems like causing Germany to lose World War 1.

Hitler had many others besides Jews murdered just because they were "inferior" or were considered undesirable. He used propaganda to convice Germany that by using these techniques, they (Germany) would become a superior race and grow back to a superpower in Europe. But he had to murder millions to do so. :rolleyes:

That included Jews, Jehovah's Witnesses, Gypsies, mentaly challenged and disabled persons, blacks, Polish citizens, homosexuals, interracial couples, anyone that refused to salute the Nazi regime.

Che

01-29-2004, 03:13 AM

The emphasis was on Jews, but yes I'm aware of those as well.

Bergs

01-29-2004, 12:52 PM

You also forgot communists and arabs brain.

brainkandy87

01-29-2004, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by Bergs
You also forgot communists and arabs brain.

Yeah, I figured I had forgot some...I also forgot prostitutes, vagrants, and alcoholics.

Merkulrdanu

01-29-2004, 02:30 PM

what half bit of sense did hitler make?

torture, death, slave labor versus imprisonment with a few cases of execution, very big gap
83% of statistics are made up on the spot
and marxism doesn't work, they tried

and hitler was bad to the old folks, and non aryans (blonde hair, blue eyes) in general, but his grandmother was a jew

Nocturnal

01-29-2004, 03:40 PM

Hitler may not have been elected but he enjoyed nearly unamimous support from germans until late in the war.

Originally posted by Che
Both draw upon people's emotions and use propaganda to invade sovereign nations and murder innocent people. Both use constant references to the almighty as a means of justifying their actions. Both encouraged people to spy on one another and make it unpatriotic to say ANYTHING that disagrees with the administration and the gap between their styles of punishment is slowly closing.

The only difference is, Hitler's reasoning made a half bit of sense and he was honest about it. He flatly told the people that Jews needed to be gotten rid of because they caused problems like causing Germany to lose World War 1.

Hitler's irational hatred of Jews (some believe this stemmed from his youth when a Jewish art teacher told him he had no talent) cost him the war. If he had used the abilities of Jewish scientists and not wasted so many resources killing them his technology would have outpaced the allies so quickly his defeat would not have been possible.

Che

01-29-2004, 06:47 PM

Well realisticly there was no way he could have won. Militarily, prior to the invasion of Russia, he had sweeping victory after victory. But even if he had continued crushing the allies as he had, he would never have been able to control the land he gained because he was so evil and hated.

Kind of like Bush in Iraq. You can defeat the military all you want, but when people see through your intentions and see what you really want, they will hate you, and they will fight to the bitter end. If you can't control territory you conquer, you've lost.

BooRadley

01-26-2007, 09:55 AM

According to the latest gallup poll, independant and scientific, 78% support. That means that anti war people are dropping the fad and waking up to the real world.

Yay.

http://pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

The real world is waiting for you.

droogsteve

01-26-2007, 10:00 AM

http://pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

The real world is waiting for you.

Please check the date of the last post. This thread (and poll) is three years old and the person you're responding to doesn't even post here anymore.

Please refrain from reviving dead threads.

Thread closed.