Muslims less in favor of attacks on civilians than average American

[Bill Haywood]

While polls are very rough, generic estimates of what people would actually do in real situations, these ones are interesting nonetheless.
Polls

[Coco]

Page 17 of the Iranian-American public opinion poll is very interesting.

While 24% of Americans believe that attacking civilians is at least "sometimes" justified, only 13% believe that attacking Israeli civilians is at least "sometimes" justified. Americans seem to be more ok with civilians being attacked if they are not citizens of America or their allies.

While 11% of Iranians feel that attacks on civillians are at least "sometimes justified" and 16% at least "rarely justified", 53% believe attacking Israeli citizens is "sometimes justified." Seems flawed. How can you be against attacking civilians and for attacking civilians? Flip-Floppers.

[boracay]

[ QUOTE ]
While polls are very rough, generic estimates of what people would actually do in real situations, these ones are interesting nonetheless.
Polls

[/ QUOTE ]

thx for great link. just some interesting quotes from the The Islamic enemy within page:

Newsweek poll: Nearly half (48 percent) of the public rejects the scientific theory of evolution;
one-third (34 percent) of college graduates say they accept the Biblical account of creation as fact.

American Jews, like American Muslims, oppose Bush's "war on terrorism" policies in large numbers. A full 65% believe that the U.S. "should have stayed out of Iraq," while 62% disapprove of the way the U.S. is handling the war on terror. And a majority would oppose any American military action against Iran.

The U.S. already has at least 14,000 people held in detention around the world without charges of any kind -- the vast, vast majority of them Muslim, many of whom have been tortured.

Furthermore, the Pew Poll from today itself revealed that 42% of American Christians consider themselves "Christians first," not "Americans first." A very substantial portion of Christians, then, place allegiance to their religion above that of allegiance to the United States.

about the last quote - do you think this is good or bad or it doesn't matter?

[NeBlis]

What I find amusing is that people are naive enough to believe war is some sort of surgical instrument where you only kill enemy soldiers.

Thanks to this Chuck Norris / Rambo view of war. Bolstered by images of smart bombs on CNN blowing the wang off of a gnat @ 200 miles. We live in a world where people rush to war thinking our boys wont get hurt and we will only be killing evil enemy combatants.

The reality is that war = kill them all till they stop or are all dead. There are no ifs ands or buts. You cannot win a half-assed war. If more people understood this we would have less war and win the incredible few if any that we enter.

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
The reality is that war = kill them all till they stop or are all dead. There are no ifs ands or buts. You cannot win a half-assed war. If more people understood this we would have less war and win the incredible few if any that we enter.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, are you advocating knowledge so we don't fight wars or so we go Roman every time we fight (i.e. NBC).
I was pretty sure you meant the former until you said "You cannot win a half-assed war."

Cody

[NeBlis]

[ QUOTE ]
Wait, are you advocating knowledge so we don't fight wars or so we go Roman every time we fight (i.e. NBC).
I was pretty sure you meant the former until you said "You cannot win a half-assed war."

Cody


[/ QUOTE ]


both .. but mostly the former. Some wars may be inevitable, those should be full out. This policy will cause 3 things.

1. the sheeple won't rush to war at the drop of a hat.

2. 3rd world dillholes etc wont mess with us so much.

3. in the event of a war it will be expedient and fair.

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wait, are you advocating knowledge so we don't fight wars or so we go Roman every time we fight (i.e. NBC).
I was pretty sure you meant the former until you said "You cannot win a half-assed war."

Cody


[/ QUOTE ]


both .. but mostly the former. Some wars may be inevitable, those should be full out. This policy will cause 3 things.

1. the sheeple won't rush to war at the drop of a hat.

2. 3rd world dillholes etc wont mess with us so much.

3. in the event of a war it will be expedient and fair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotcha.

Cody

[Woolygimp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wait, are you advocating knowledge so we don't fight wars or so we go Roman every time we fight (i.e. NBC).
I was pretty sure you meant the former until you said "You cannot win a half-assed war."

Cody


[/ QUOTE ]


both .. but mostly the former. Some wars may be inevitable, those should be full out. This policy will cause 3 things.

1. the sheeple won't rush to war at the drop of a hat.

2. 3rd world dillholes etc wont mess with us so much.

3. in the event of a war it will be expedient and fair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotcha.

Cody

[/ QUOTE ]

War is never fair.

Iraq really isn't even a war to begin with, and if we really wanted to win we'd do exactly what the Romans would do in our position and that'd be to slaughter 75% of the population.

Of course our morals, values, and integrity are more important than quick victory as they should be.

[latefordinner]

Of course, one needs to also be aware of what the Americans actually in Iraq right now think:

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/52292/