Home > military, peace, politics, war > War on Terror

War on Terror

November 2nd, 2009

In a recent Zogby Interactive survey of adults nationwide, respondents were asked to choose a statement that came closest to their view on the War on Terror. About 45% of the respondents strongly or somewhat agreed that our efforts in the War on Terror should focus on addressing anti-American sentiment in the world, compared to 37% of the respondents who strongly or somewhat agreed that our efforts in the War on Terror should focus on using military force. About 18% of the respondents chose “none of the above” or “not sure.”

Significant differences were found between ideological groups. Seventy-seven percent of liberals are in favor of focusing on anti-American sentiment, compared to 18% of conservatives who think so. Moderates are leaning towards liberals on this issue; sixty-one percent of them believe that dealing with anti-American sentiment should be the priority. Around two-thirds (67%) of conservatives believe that the focus should be on using military force, compared to 22% of moderates and 4% of liberals who believe so.

Where do you stand on this issue? If you believe that anti-American sentiment in the world is the primary issue here, what do you think should be done to address it? If you think that our efforts in the War on Terror should focus on using military force, what do you think would be the best course of action for the government?

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Slashdot
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Grace military, peace, politics, war , ,

  1. Kevin
    | #1

    “Addressing anti-American sentiment” sounds good, until you try to determine the source of the sentiment. And even if you can determine the source, there’s no guarantee you can — or should — change that point of view.

    Those who hate America and Americans because we believe in letting women vote and little girls go school will never be persuaded that they shouldn’t hate us. We’re wrong simply because we disagree with their –THEIR — screwed up belief system.

    Those who hate us because of our supposed “arrogance” somehow still manage to accept our billions in aid we can ill afford. If we’re that bad, they should stand on principle and refuse it.

    Thousands of people around the world still leave their families and possessions behind to come to America. If we’re so bad, why do so many of them break our laws to get into such an awful place? They should reject such a country, not clamor to become part of it.

    To change anti-American sentiment means that we will probably have to change what it means to be an American. Those that think we need to change what it fundamentally means to be an American need to take a step back and think about what they’re proposing. Are they really prepared to change our sense of national identity just because third world despots and religious zealots don’t approve of what we stand for? And even if they are prepared to do so, they’re wrong.

    Military force is proper for use against nation-states and groups that attack us or have stated their intent to do so. The daily GI death count in the news shows only a small part of what our service men and women do every day. Most of what they’re doing in Iraq and Afghanistan is nation building. Nation building is not a proper military mission, though it’s the only organ of the American state that has the capability to perform that mission.

  2. billwald
    | #2

    What does it mean to be an American? To participate in hundreds of undeclared wars so that our international owners can get richer?

  3. Susan
    | #3

    @billwald
    Being an American means you are free to post comments such as yours. Being an American means that you have the opportunity to achieve whatever you can with your hardwork, skill and determination. Being an American means FREEDOM from tyranny and the right to live and worship however YOU want.

  4. billwald
    | #4

    All those things are a sham about which our owners care nothing. As long as there is a trillion left to steal, as long as assets keep moving from the working people to Swiss banks our owners will let you own guns, go to church, and all the rest. In other words, as long as the rich get richer and the poor, poorer. You will have all your freedoms as long as there is something left for the owners to steal.

    If 30% of my life’s energy goes pay taxes for things I don’t support then I am a 30% slave.

  5. Jaime
    | #5

    Ah yes. What it is to be a moderate. I believe there are points in time where a military response to terrorism is the correct one. However, I do not believe that we have to change what makes us Americans to be better listeners and observers on the diplomatic level. That is whooey. And arrogance? If you travel much, try this. Fade into your surroundings and listen to the American in the bunch offer “solutions” to EveryThing, great and small. No grievance is too small for us to have an opinion about how others could do something better. Next time your mother in law does that to you, think about how she is only doing it for your own improvement.

    And being free does mean we can post opinions and comments – unless of course net neutrality fails and your opinions are consigned to the bottom of the pipeline. And we are free to buy stuff. Bill, I hear you, but if you are being taxed at the 30% rate, The Man, is letting you have a Whole lot more than I get. Down where I am, there are fewer “freedoms”, in direct proportion to our potential future value as a customer or donor to campaigns.

    As for the theories regarding the appropriateness of nation building, that should be a whole different Zogby question.

  1. No trackbacks yet.