posted on January 21, 2003 04:17:39 AM new
I received this link from a friend of mine in England. I thought you might find it interesting. It appears that if Blair decides to side with the US on a possible war with Iraq, he stands to lose his position as Prime Minister. That's gratitude for you.
Those of you who are opposed to a possible war on Iraq and those who are for it should email their opinions. I think we should let Great Britian know what we think - either way.
posted on January 21, 2003 05:41:53 AM new
Thanks - But sorry - it does not matter how many e-mails they get or even if the people in the US went to armed rebellion. The war is a done deal and they are not going to pack up and come home by popular demand.
The politicians now don't really give a damn what the public wants. If the popular votes is heavy enough to put the current man out of office the one they are given a choice to put in will pursue the same agenda. The deck is stacked. There will never be a choice offered that doesn't serve the party and the money that directs it.
posted on January 21, 2003 06:01:05 AM new
Taken from an article in the BBC today:
Tuesday, 21 January, 2003, 10:00 GMT UK 'fully prepared' as troops deployed
A quarter of the Army is being sent to the Gulf Ministers have insisted the UK military is fully prepared for action against Iraq, as 26,000 British troops prepare to leave for the Gulf.
The huge deployment of troops, mainly from 7 Armoured Brigade and 16 Air Assault Brigade, was announced on Monday and surprised commentators by its size.
posted on January 21, 2003 09:23:57 AM new
"The politicians now don't really give a damn what the public wants."
The President's foreign policy approval rating is in the mid 80 percent range. A Poll from a few days ago said over 60% of US favors military action if Iraq does not comply.
posted on January 21, 2003 10:38:23 AM new
Yes - That's what they have been sold. But is it based on valid facts or lies? And the polls reflect how the questions are presented in very narrow specific statements. The responses depend on certain assumed facts such as there ARE significant weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. An assumption they will never allow to be challenged. The polls themselves are an instrument to manipulate public opinion.
The TV every night on every channel has a big graphic in my face and always use the expression repeatedly "The War on Terrorism."
As long as the people feel the country is on a war footing they'd back Alfred E. Newman as president. If it would become common public knowledge that there is no real basis for thinking we are at risk from Iraqi weapons any more than Indian or Pakistani weapons beyond the vague idea that as long as they exist they could be transfered to someone who will use them will the public support continue?
The news organizations are actively supporting this farce. The biggest problem the government may be facing in keeping the drums of war beating is the acute lack of any more significant attacks.
How long can they keep the hype alive before the people notice there is no continuing series of attacks? Or will some be arranged if the election looks in doubt because people are startiung to think about other things - like not having a job?
I still say if public feelin changes it still won't change government actions. The two are disconnected now except for PR.
[ edited by gravid on Jan 21, 2003 10:49 AM ]
Bush hasn't had an 80% approval rating for quite a while now--not since early 2002. Take a look at this site, which lists results of polls by various groups: Gallop, Foxnews, Harris, CNN, etc. Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on January 21, 2003 01:04:50 PM new
The 80% was a FOREIGN POLICY AVERAGE for last year. Bush has the 8th highest 2nd year rating of ALL presidents with an average of about 72%. Currently, he's in the sixties.
posted on January 21, 2003 01:39:01 PM new
DeSquirrel
Here is a list...about 50, national and international polling organization reports. You can scroll the list every day and find the best looking one. Hahaha!
posted on January 21, 2003 01:39:38 PM new
I would like to see some polls about polling. If, of course, that's what people would *really* like to see. Probably polling about polling would require a poll first to determine if that's what people want. But then...........................
posted on January 21, 2003 01:53:55 PM new
Major General Caughley (spelling may be wrong)
Who Led UK troops to Iraq in 1991,
Is against attack without full UN support.
Sir Andrew Green, former UK ambassador to Syria, said, " Sadam threat to West is fabricated"
Said 'Clean Break' Written 1996 by Israelis in USA has sought attack on Iraq & that "marching to war against Iraq to beat of Israeli Drum Is a Mistake"
Bishop of Oxford- who has backed every war UK involved in his lifetime, does not back current attack, "this war would not be just"
posted on January 21, 2003 01:59:52 PM new
Everyone has an opinion, and are free to share them. But the one who has the decision making power is President Bush. The decision will be his.
posted on January 21, 2003 05:33:17 PM new
Um, saying that Bush has one of the best second year approval ratings for a President isn't saying all that much.
While he scores high on some *personal* characteristics, overall he poll approval has him at 63.5%--not the the above mentioned 80%!
And:
"The disapproval scores on the economy (47%) and foreign affairs (42%) are the highest of Bush's presidency to date, and both approval ratings show rather dramatic declines from where they were shortly after Sept. 11."
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
