1
   

Polls: More Think Iraq War Increased Terror Threat

 
 
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 11:17 am
Sep 9, 2003
More Think Iraq War Increased Terror Threat, View of Administration's Handling of Terror Slips
By Will Lester - Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - More people now think the war in Iraq has increased the risk of terrorism in the United States than think it has reduced that risk, a major shift on this issue since mid-April, say new polls released almost two years after the Sept. 11 attacks.

In April, almost six in 10 thought the war in Iraq had reduced the risk of terrorism in this country, twice the number who thought it made the risk higher. But in the ABC News poll, about half, 48 percent said the war increased the risk, while 40 percent said it reduced the risk.

A survey by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland also found that by a 2-to-1 margin, more Americans say the U.S. military presence in the Mideast increases the likelihood of terrorist attacks. Three-fourths of those polled said the current foreign policy creates a climate that makes it easier for terrorist to recruit new members and raise money.

Overall, the public's perception of the Bush administration's handling of terrorism is still positive, though it has slipped in the last year.

Just over half, 55 percent, in the ABC poll said the Bush administration is doing a good job dealing with the war on terrorism, while 44 percent said it has not done such a good job. That's down from 73 percent who said a year ago that the Bush administration had done a good job.

President Bush personally scores higher on that measure, with two-thirds saying they approve of the way he has handled the campaign against terror, down from 79 percent in April but still very strong. The president's overall job approval in this poll was 56 percent, about where it's been since midsummer.

The number who say the war was worth fighting has slipped to just over half, 54 percent, down from 70 percent in late April. And people were about evenly split on his handling of the situation in Iraq, down from 56 percent approval in August.

Fears of another terror attack remain high two years after the terror strike, according to several polls taken two years after the attacks.

Almost three-fourths said they think another terrorist attack in this country is likely within the next 12 months, according to a CNN-Time poll. More than half in that poll said their lives have changed since the Sept. 11 attacks and have not yet returned to normal.

The ABC poll of 1,004 adults, the CNN-Time poll of 1,003 adults and the PIPA poll of 1,207 adults have a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. All three polls were taken in early September.
--------------------------------
This story can be found at: http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGARLN34EKD.html
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 943 • Replies: 15
No top replies

 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 12:20 pm
That 40 percent who feel the war in Iraq reduced the risk of terrorism must not read the newpaper or watch t.v. news. They also have a arcane ability to ignore the increased loss of our military personnel and billions being spent in Iraq. What's their secret?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 04:33 pm
Here's the graph to go with one of these results ...

http://www.pollingreport.com/images/iraq.GIF
0 Replies
 
unknown man
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 04:39 pm
I'm suprised it's not greatly steeper. At a Dean booth I was fortunate to help run, it was quite amazing how many people wandered from the Republican booth (it was two booths down) to our booth. And this in our very conservative farming town of Dixon!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 04:42 pm
unknownman, WELCOME to A2K. It seems Howard Dean is the front runner for many including many republicans. I think he has a good shot at defeating Bush in November 2004. When I first thought Dean had a good chance when his name was still unknown many months ago, things are looking positive every time I hear about his campaign.
0 Replies
 
unknown man
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 04:47 pm
He's actually taking some ground at my school, whcih is nice, because I'm tired of being the only liberal for miles. Unfortunatley theres not enough of us though. So not really enough of a real holding, including the fact none of us can vote.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 04:50 pm
unknown, That's okay; you're getting involved in politics is good for our country. Too many are too lazy or dumb to vote, and we're lucky to get 50 percent out on election day to cast their votes. I think more younger people are getting involved in politics at an earlier age. It's my opinion that more college students are going to vote at the next national election.
0 Replies
 
unknown man
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 04:57 pm
I figure the more students we have campaigning for Dean, the more parents are being pestered to vote. Also a large part of the population are imigrants, who usually do not participate in these great political races. I'm trying to contact some of my hispanic compadres and getting them to talk to there parents, and get them to vote for Dean. With enough luck, my work will get at least one person to vote for the doctor.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 05:04 pm
That's the spirit. And thanks from a Dean Supporter.
0 Replies
 
unknown man
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 05:06 pm
On the subject of the War increasing the Terror threat, I don't know what to say. We've definattly been seeing a lot more threat level alerts then normal, which get really annoying, but I guess you could say its neccisary. The war has definnatly been fruitless in terms of stamping out terriosim, as they will just continue moving, and Bush wouldn't dare attempt to hunt them down everywhere (or would he?)
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 05:11 pm
Republicans really for Dean? Maybe not
The Republication leadership considers Dean to be the easiest candidate for Bush to beat.

I'd be very leery about Republicans showing interest in supporting Dean. In states that allow cross over voting, Republicans may support Dean in the primaries to make him the Democrat's candidate, but then vote against Dean in the national election.

Republicans have even been know to change their registration to Democrat in order to support Dean in the primaries. Then they reregister as Republicans to vote against him in the presidential election.

As far as I know, there is no law to prevent this duplicity.

---BumbleBeeBoogie
0 Replies
 
unknown man
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 05:19 pm
Lately I have spoken to several Republicans supporting Dean, and they all said the main reason is because the Republican candidates are jack squat. This does worry me though, for we do not know if they truelly support him or if they are just using him as a last resort.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 05:24 pm
The war on terror and the war in Iraq are two very different matters. Yes, I applaud Bush for taking action against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. However, I question the action in Iraq. Despite the administrations claim Saddam and Al Qaeda were not allied. Will the action in Iraq result in increased terrorist activity, yes I believe so? Why did Bush [US] attack Iraq? Certainly not the reasons they have been trying to sell.
0 Replies
 
unknown man
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 05:31 pm
au1929 wrote:
Why did Bush [US] attack Iraq? Certainly not the reasons they have been trying to sell.


Well of course thats not the reason they attacked, the world revolves around a few things, and one of them just happens to be oil. No offense, but your preaching to the quire here.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 05:45 pm
unknown man
Quote:

Well of course that's not the reason they attacked, the world revolves around a few things, and one of them just happens to be oil. No offense, but your preaching to the quire here.


I think you need to stick around and understand the lay of the land before you decide what need not be said.
0 Replies
 
unknown man
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Sep, 2003 05:48 pm
I learn.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Polls: More Think Iraq War Increased Terror Threat
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 01:14:44