The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
The Betrayal of the American Right
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

President Trump has focused the Republican electorate on immigration and re-calibrated its views on trade. When it comes to war, however, it looks like they still want more. The following graph is constructed using data from YouGov’s latest release. “Not sure” responses, constituting 22% of the total, are excluded:

Though it seems redundant at first blush, responses by both partisan affiliation and 2016 presidential vote are included to show that Trump voters actually express more bellicosity than self-identified Republicans do. Bill Kristol wept and so do I.

This spark didn’t catch, but the next one might. Iranian aggression, in this context, involves retaliation for assassinations against a force we’ve spent most of the last 17 years essentially on the same side as. Iraq is safe for Shiite retaliation today because we toppled the Baathists and reduced Sunnis to the status of enfeebled minority more than a decade ago. When we allowed Sunnis to breath again, ISIS was born. We then spent several subsequent years fighting alongside Solemani’s forces to destroy the caliphate we facilitated the creation of:

If American forces weren’t camped next door, there would be no Iranian aggression to confront.

We need more than just an end to the forever wars. We need to end the conditions that create more of them. Bring the troops home.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: International, Polling, War 
Hide 55 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Got to agree with that. And do it now.

  2. Where’s the betrayal? GOP voters (and Trump voters particularly) want the American military to fight Iran, and Trump is giving them what they want.

    I hope it’s not news to everybody that most Trump voters are not sophisticated heterodox intellectual shitposters who got “redpilled” after “Ron Paul 2012”

    • Replies: @another anon

    Where’s the betrayal? GOP voters (and Trump voters particularly) want the American military to fight Iran, and Trump is giving them what they want.

    I hope it’s not news to everybody that most Trump voters are not sophisticated heterodox intellectual shitposters who got “redpilled” after “Ron Paul 2012”
     

    Exactly. Typical Trump voter is someone like this.

    https://twitter.com/DARDeb1951/status/1213990964748062722

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    I thought you were arguing against these "shitposters" at first, but no, I can't argue with this. Indeed, if Trump's voters were really against these wars it would be a betrayal. He did betray Trump voters like me, but I'm apparently not like the majority that took that poll. (I'm not sure how much I trust those polls, though ...)
    , @Dutch Boy
    Perhaps but then Trump did "promise" to get us out of theses stupid wars. Not doing so could be considered a betrayal.
  3. Iraq the Casbah!!

  4. I remember when GW Bush ran as the non-interventionist candidate (heck, I remember when Bush ran for governor of Texas – a very different creature than what he became later).

    In fact, *I* was a minimal-interventionist and supported 43 for that reason (and others). But like many others in the country, I lost my mind after 9/11. I wanted vengeance for the death and destruction inflicted upon the city of my youth, and enthusiastically supported the military ventures overseas.

    Oh, I wrong I was. I weep for my countrymen who perished in what followed.

    Iraq is safe for Shiite retaliation today because we toppled the Baathists and reduced Sunnis to the status of enfeebled minority more than a decade ago. When we allowed Sunnis to breath again, ISIS was born.

    However, this is a simplistic. We had the Anbar Awakening and was able to coopt the Sunnis into our cause against Al-Qaida. Unfortunately, we then decided to transfer our responsiblity to (i.e. financial remuneration toward and protection of) those Sunnis to the Iraqi National Government, and the former felt abandoned.

    And this happened in Afghanistan prior to the rise of the Talibs too. We Americans have a bad habit of lurching from one conflict to another and using and discarding allies as temporary convenience dictates. It’s like our government is afflicted with ADHD.

    It’s like this in all conflicts, but is particularly the case in the Middle East – he who (survives and) stays wins.

    • Replies: @Mitleser

    Unfortunately, we then decided to transfer our responsiblity to (i.e. financial remuneration toward and protection of) those Sunnis to the Iraqi National Government, and the former felt abandoned.
     
    And who should be be responsible for them if not the Iraqi government?
    They were never going to regain the influence they had in the Saddam Hussein-era when Iraq was run by Sunnis and friends.
    US protection for the Iraqi Kurds nearly broke Iraq as it encouraged their separatism.
    , @Johann Ricke

    And this happened in Afghanistan prior to the rise of the Talibs too. We Americans have a bad habit of lurching from one conflict to another and using and discarding allies as temporary convenience dictates. It’s like our government is afflicted with ADHD.
     
    I think the problem is that Uncle Sam is extremely generous with aid to a point that is politically unsustainable domestically on a long term basis. Some of those allies never think that there's a ticking clock on that aid, and engage in all kinds of shenanigans that seem engineered to continue to be able to continue sucking up aid. Foreign aid can be a bottomless morass, whether civilian or military. Most countries aided by the US, in Asia, Africa, Latin America and elsewhere, have gotten their act together. Then you have the exceptions, like Afghanistan, Cambodia, Cuba, Iraq, Laos, Nicaragua and South Vietnam. Not particularly surprising, given the wide geographical range of US aid programs.
    , @SFG
    I don't want to win in the Middle East. I want to leave.
  5. It is upsetting to me that I am in such a small % of Trump voters who doesn’t favor more aggression against Iran. I voted for Trump in part because I am anti-neocon and neocons seemed to despise him. I was hoping for better relations with Russia, Syria/Assad, Iran and other countries neocons/neolibs hate. I thought there was a segment of Trump voters just like me, now I realize there was no such thing.

    • Agree: Ian Smith
    • Replies: @Realist

    It is upsetting to me that I am in such a small % of Trump voters who doesn’t favor more aggression against Iran.
     
    Yes, the percent is small, but perhaps growing.

    I thought there was a segment of Trump voters just like me, now I realize there was no such thing.
     
    There are Trump voters like you, perhaps more than we know. I am one....I fell for the charade. But I concluded , in mid April, 2017 that Trump was a Deep State minion and have been against him ever since.
    , @Ian Smith
    Let’s face it; 90% of Americans favor war, so long as it’s their party doing it. Clintonistas were fine with him bombing Iraq, bombing Serbia, etc. Liberals hated drone strikes ... until the cool black guy did them.
  6. If American forces weren’t camped next door, there would be no Iranian aggression to confront.

    I’d like for the U.S. not to be fighting foreign wars when there are so many domestic problems to solve, but this is leftist blank-slate nonsense. Muslims aggress plenty without troops next door, in fact they do even more of it. You’re going to tell us that the American MIC is responsible for the Muslim uprisings and assorted sectarian violence in India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and Qatar? Puh-leeze.

    Take Americans out of the equation, and even take Israel out of the equation, and the Sunnis and Shias still want to kill each other and are rather good at it. It was like that before U.S. troops landed and it will be like that after they leave.

    Should America be intervening in the holy wars of desert tribes? No. Is American intervention having a positive impact in the region? No. Is America causing the wars? Also no. “Muzzies dindu nuffin” is the kind of strategic thinking that winds up giving us another 10 million of them inside our borders. Leaving the middle east isn’t going to stop the bombs on the Indian subcontinent, the knives and acid vials in the UK, the grenades in Sweden, or the trucks in all of the other western countries foolish enough to trust them. That’s a leftist lie.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Michael, I thought that A.E. meant that there would be no Iranian aggressions against US (the US) to confront. That's all. Sure, let them fight each other as in the 1980s, when there was no reason I can see why we shouldn't' have let the Iraqis and Iranians beat the crap out of each other. What's it to us?

    Your last paragraph is absolutely true, but I just didn't see the word "immigration" in there. Whether we trust these people or not, there is NO GOOD REASON to let them in, as Sweden and the UK have. Utter stupidity! With that in mind, Sweden, Iraq, and Iran, see "Importing a civil war, in Sweden".
    , @fool's paradise
    "Sunnis and Shias want to kill each other"--nonsense. Before Neoconned Bush invaded and destroyed Iraq, both sects lived in harmony under Saddam Hussein, like Catholics and Protestants do here. Then after the invasion CIA and Israeli provocateurs began blowing up mosques, blaming one or the other sects and stirring up hatred.

    So there are bombs in India and knives in the UK? So what? It's not our business.

    Before the creation of Israel in 1948 there was no violence or turmoil or anti-Americanism in the Middle East. In fact, even before the inside job of 9/11, (our "new Pearl Harbor" that gave our loyal-to-Israel Neocons the excuse they needed to sic the U.S. on Israel's enemies), Americans were welcomed in the Middle East. I know. I lived in Saudi Arabia in the '70's, traveled safely in Arab countries.
  7. (((Trumpstein))) voters fully deserve their (((Trumpstein))) and other exciting news…

    • Agree: Ghan-buri-Ghan
    • Troll: Cloudbuster
  8. Trump voters actually express more bellicosity than self-identified Republicans do

    I think that there is a difference between expressing bellicosity (support) during an ongoing military conflict and a non-warfare conflict. I have come to understand what a mistake the 2nd Iraq War was, but I have no qualms about supporting military operations until we withdraw. Killing an enemy combatant (Soleimani) in a war zone is not morally wrong.

  9. @Twinkie
    I remember when GW Bush ran as the non-interventionist candidate (heck, I remember when Bush ran for governor of Texas - a very different creature than what he became later).

    In fact, *I* was a minimal-interventionist and supported 43 for that reason (and others). But like many others in the country, I lost my mind after 9/11. I wanted vengeance for the death and destruction inflicted upon the city of my youth, and enthusiastically supported the military ventures overseas.

    Oh, I wrong I was. I weep for my countrymen who perished in what followed.

    Iraq is safe for Shiite retaliation today because we toppled the Baathists and reduced Sunnis to the status of enfeebled minority more than a decade ago. When we allowed Sunnis to breath again, ISIS was born.
     
    However, this is a simplistic. We had the Anbar Awakening and was able to coopt the Sunnis into our cause against Al-Qaida. Unfortunately, we then decided to transfer our responsiblity to (i.e. financial remuneration toward and protection of) those Sunnis to the Iraqi National Government, and the former felt abandoned.

    And this happened in Afghanistan prior to the rise of the Talibs too. We Americans have a bad habit of lurching from one conflict to another and using and discarding allies as temporary convenience dictates. It's like our government is afflicted with ADHD.

    It's like this in all conflicts, but is particularly the case in the Middle East - he who (survives and) stays wins.

    Unfortunately, we then decided to transfer our responsiblity to (i.e. financial remuneration toward and protection of) those Sunnis to the Iraqi National Government, and the former felt abandoned.

    And who should be be responsible for them if not the Iraqi government?
    They were never going to regain the influence they had in the Saddam Hussein-era when Iraq was run by Sunnis and friends.
    US protection for the Iraqi Kurds nearly broke Iraq as it encouraged their separatism.

  10. @Not My Economy
    Where's the betrayal? GOP voters (and Trump voters particularly) want the American military to fight Iran, and Trump is giving them what they want.

    I hope it's not news to everybody that most Trump voters are not sophisticated heterodox intellectual shitposters who got "redpilled" after "Ron Paul 2012"

    Where’s the betrayal? GOP voters (and Trump voters particularly) want the American military to fight Iran, and Trump is giving them what they want.

    I hope it’s not news to everybody that most Trump voters are not sophisticated heterodox intellectual shitposters who got “redpilled” after “Ron Paul 2012”

    Exactly. Typical Trump voter is someone like this.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
    Most Americans are blinded by American exceptionalism. Everything is reduced to jingoistic statements which are over-simplified into black - white them vs us narrative. The overwhelming majority, irrespective of political affiliation, cannot conceive that others do not want to be like the US or that they are perfectly happy with their customs and form of government.
    In your attached video, "Death to America" means the warmongering military industrial complex and the Zionist occupied government of the US, not Americans. It is the US government meddling in the ME killing Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians and others on behalf of Israel, not Joe Blow from Omaha.

    As for the YouGov poll, it was done Jan 11-14, 2020, well after the SHTF. I worked with a pollster to dissect a survey done by another employer, and one criticism he had to the methodology was asking people post event. He likened it to asking a group of people who just finished white water rafting, if the would prefer to try it in a canoe. Most people will stick to what they know. So, what do they know? Well, the Trumpers and Republicans know that the Democrats have vocally opposed Solemani's assassination and the inflamatory statements that followed, which will translate into a big F.U. to the Democrats. They "know" that politicians and gasbags like Pompeo would never lie about something as serious as a potential war. Poll after poll, world wide have demonstrated that no matter how anti-war people are, once the shooting starts, they climb on board.
    The Democrats wouldn't support Trump even if he found a cure for cancer. The assassination just provided more fuel for that fire. Regardless of what the poll may say, the Democrats repeat the lies of Iranian terrorism and Iranian aggression. Their actions do not equate to their poll results.
  11. I take exception to the wording of the question. The two choices are not mutually exclusive. One can want to confront Iranian aggression now precisely to prevent war later.

    “Kill the chicken to scare the monkey.”

  12. Confronting Iranian aggression is the way for the bigger power to maintain peace. When did the heterodox right become actual pacificists? Machiavelli sobs in his grave.

    Just look at how Iran went back in their box? Also, look how wrong Giraldi, Saker and other assorted idiots were on this…

    For results, realism at home and abroad.

    Thankfully the Trump base seem to instinctively grasp the basics.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon

    Confronting Iranian aggression is the way for the bigger power to maintain peace.
     
    Be so kind as to provide actual examples of "Iranian aggression", rather than the well rotted male bovine excrement provided by government liars.
  13. Leaving the ME would just mean various Muslim states would have to duke it out to find a new balance of power that wasn’t as skewed by American meddling. Focus on economic influence rather than military. Ignore the Russians and their pseudo attempts to regain great power status.

  14. Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.

    I wonder if that’s been the case in America’s countless other wars. Are whites really much more aggressive than blacks?

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon

    Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.
     
    I think you mean the Zionist occupied governments of Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.
  15. We had the Anbar Awakening and was able to coopt the Sunnis into our cause against Al-Qaida. Unfortunately, we then decided to transfer our responsiblity to (i.e. financial remuneration toward and protection of) those Sunnis to the Iraqi National Government, and the former felt abandoned.

    Saddam was strong enough to unify Iraq. Arab Shia, Arab Sunni, and Kurds were held together.

    Ending the Awakening effort is a failure of the Iraqi government. PM Mahdi cannot hold the nation together. His regime has exacerbated the differences between the groups.
    ______

    Under Saddam, Iraq had sufficient strength to protect itself from its Persian neighbor.

    Globalist Bush broke Iraq. Globalist Barack Hussein funded Iran’s military expansion. Whether it was a goal or an accident, today Iraq cannot defend itself against its aggressive Persian neighbor.

    Would it be moral for the U.S. to abandon the people of Iraq to the fate of becoming an Iranian colony?

    Fortunately, preventing Iranian aggression does not require war or invasion. Khameni’s authoritarian regime will have to make hard choices as revenue plummets:

    — Will Khameni choose overseas aggression or his own people?
    — If the Ayatollah attempts to decide against his people, how will his regime end?

    Stopping Iran from colonizing Iraq and destabilizing the ME region will open the door for the U.S. troop withdrawal that everyone wants.

    PEACE 😇

  16. It’s shameful to me. Most Americans are going to deserve what’s coming then (when the country goes broke).

    I do wonder if those red and blue bars would do an even swap were the Hildabeast in office and Iran were changed to Libya or some other place that “needs regime change” or even left as Iran.

  17. @Not My Economy
    Where's the betrayal? GOP voters (and Trump voters particularly) want the American military to fight Iran, and Trump is giving them what they want.

    I hope it's not news to everybody that most Trump voters are not sophisticated heterodox intellectual shitposters who got "redpilled" after "Ron Paul 2012"

    I thought you were arguing against these “shitposters” at first, but no, I can’t argue with this. Indeed, if Trump’s voters were really against these wars it would be a betrayal. He did betray Trump voters like me, but I’m apparently not like the majority that took that poll. (I’m not sure how much I trust those polls, though …)

  18. @Michael S

    If American forces weren’t camped next door, there would be no Iranian aggression to confront.
     
    I'd like for the U.S. not to be fighting foreign wars when there are so many domestic problems to solve, but this is leftist blank-slate nonsense. Muslims aggress plenty without troops next door, in fact they do even more of it. You're going to tell us that the American MIC is responsible for the Muslim uprisings and assorted sectarian violence in India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and Qatar? Puh-leeze.

    Take Americans out of the equation, and even take Israel out of the equation, and the Sunnis and Shias still want to kill each other and are rather good at it. It was like that before U.S. troops landed and it will be like that after they leave.

    Should America be intervening in the holy wars of desert tribes? No. Is American intervention having a positive impact in the region? No. Is America causing the wars? Also no. "Muzzies dindu nuffin" is the kind of strategic thinking that winds up giving us another 10 million of them inside our borders. Leaving the middle east isn't going to stop the bombs on the Indian subcontinent, the knives and acid vials in the UK, the grenades in Sweden, or the trucks in all of the other western countries foolish enough to trust them. That's a leftist lie.

    Michael, I thought that A.E. meant that there would be no Iranian aggressions against US (the US) to confront. That’s all. Sure, let them fight each other as in the 1980s, when there was no reason I can see why we shouldn’t’ have let the Iraqis and Iranians beat the crap out of each other. What’s it to us?

    Your last paragraph is absolutely true, but I just didn’t see the word “immigration” in there. Whether we trust these people or not, there is NO GOOD REASON to let them in, as Sweden and the UK have. Utter stupidity! With that in mind, Sweden, Iraq, and Iran, see “Importing a civil war, in Sweden”.

  19. jingoism
    noun [ U ] POLITICS disapproving
    UK /ˈdʒɪŋ.ɡəʊ.ɪ.zəm/ US /ˈdʒɪŋ.ɡoʊ.ɪ.zəm/

    the extreme belief that your own country is always best, often shown in enthusiastic support for a war against another country:
    Patriotism can turn into jingoism and intolerance very quickly.

    [Source: Cambridge Dictionary]

    A thought experiment: What if conservatism failed not because the conservative establishment lacks courage and conviction, what if it failed because right-leaning voters (and their candidates) just weren’t very smart? MIGA 2020!

    • Replies: @another anon

    A thought experiment: What if conservatism failed not because the conservative establishment lacks courage and conviction, what if it failed because right-leaning voters (and their candidates) just weren’t very smart? MIGA 2020!

     

    See this article by Anatoly Karlin:

    The Right's Human Capital Problem

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-rights-human-capital-problem/

    TL;DR: when the right is composed of meatheads whose idea of "patriotism" is flag waving, chest thumping and cheering for any war anywhere, anytime, against anyone in the world, it will have problem in attracting smart and educated people.
  20. The very hypocrisy of the question is galling…the US speaking of Iranian aggression.

    I voted for and was a Trump supporter until mid April 2017…when it became obvious to me that Trump was a Deep State minion.

  21. @Jay Fink
    It is upsetting to me that I am in such a small % of Trump voters who doesn't favor more aggression against Iran. I voted for Trump in part because I am anti-neocon and neocons seemed to despise him. I was hoping for better relations with Russia, Syria/Assad, Iran and other countries neocons/neolibs hate. I thought there was a segment of Trump voters just like me, now I realize there was no such thing.

    It is upsetting to me that I am in such a small % of Trump voters who doesn’t favor more aggression against Iran.

    Yes, the percent is small, but perhaps growing.

    I thought there was a segment of Trump voters just like me, now I realize there was no such thing.

    There are Trump voters like you, perhaps more than we know. I am one….I fell for the charade. But I concluded , in mid April, 2017 that Trump was a Deep State minion and have been against him ever since.

  22. President Trump has focused the Republican electorate on immigration and re-calibrated its views on trade. When it comes to war, however, it looks like they still want more. The following graph is constructed using data from YouGov’s latest release. “Not sure” responses, constituting 22% of the total, are excluded:

    Trump is stuck between the Israel First Jew Billionaires(IFJB) — such as Shelly Adelson and Paul Singer — who donate big piles of loot to the GOP and German American women voters in the Great Lakes states who do not want their sons, husbands, fathers, uncles, and their other menfolk to be killed or maimed or brain-damaged or burnt or butchered in anymore Middle East wars for Israel.

    Trump has started playing around with the Death From Above stuff and the retaliations for that will show up soon enough, but Trump doesn’t want war with Iran or any other large scale war in the Middle East or West Asia.

    Trump acceded to the demands of Shelly Adelson to abrogate the Iran Nuke Deal and to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, but Trump doesn’t want a wide scale war with Iran nor does Trump want to drop a nuke on Iran as a demonstration. Adelson gets the embassy move and the Iran deal killed but Adelson ain’t getting a big war against Iran nor is Adelson getting Trump to drop a Nukey Dook in the Iranian desert to show the Iranians what’s what.

    So this fat-assed baby boomer backstabber bastard Trumpy is caught between the beautiful German American ladies in the Great Lakes states and the Israel First Jew Billionaires who want to continue to use the US military as muscle to fight wars in the Middle East and West Asia on behalf of Israel.

    My problem with Trumpy is that he has backstabbed the Hell out of White Core Americans by screaming about flooding the USA with mass legal immigration “in the largest numbers ever” and by Trump refusing to deport the upwards of 30 million illegal alien invaders in the USA.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  23. @Twinkie
    I remember when GW Bush ran as the non-interventionist candidate (heck, I remember when Bush ran for governor of Texas - a very different creature than what he became later).

    In fact, *I* was a minimal-interventionist and supported 43 for that reason (and others). But like many others in the country, I lost my mind after 9/11. I wanted vengeance for the death and destruction inflicted upon the city of my youth, and enthusiastically supported the military ventures overseas.

    Oh, I wrong I was. I weep for my countrymen who perished in what followed.

    Iraq is safe for Shiite retaliation today because we toppled the Baathists and reduced Sunnis to the status of enfeebled minority more than a decade ago. When we allowed Sunnis to breath again, ISIS was born.
     
    However, this is a simplistic. We had the Anbar Awakening and was able to coopt the Sunnis into our cause against Al-Qaida. Unfortunately, we then decided to transfer our responsiblity to (i.e. financial remuneration toward and protection of) those Sunnis to the Iraqi National Government, and the former felt abandoned.

    And this happened in Afghanistan prior to the rise of the Talibs too. We Americans have a bad habit of lurching from one conflict to another and using and discarding allies as temporary convenience dictates. It's like our government is afflicted with ADHD.

    It's like this in all conflicts, but is particularly the case in the Middle East - he who (survives and) stays wins.

    And this happened in Afghanistan prior to the rise of the Talibs too. We Americans have a bad habit of lurching from one conflict to another and using and discarding allies as temporary convenience dictates. It’s like our government is afflicted with ADHD.

    I think the problem is that Uncle Sam is extremely generous with aid to a point that is politically unsustainable domestically on a long term basis. Some of those allies never think that there’s a ticking clock on that aid, and engage in all kinds of shenanigans that seem engineered to continue to be able to continue sucking up aid. Foreign aid can be a bottomless morass, whether civilian or military. Most countries aided by the US, in Asia, Africa, Latin America and elsewhere, have gotten their act together. Then you have the exceptions, like Afghanistan, Cambodia, Cuba, Iraq, Laos, Nicaragua and South Vietnam. Not particularly surprising, given the wide geographical range of US aid programs.

  24. HELLO, since when did we start believing these POLLS to actually reflect public opinion? For all the jingoistic Trump supporters who really believe everything Trump tells them, there’s a significant number, a sufficient number to cost his re-election, who feel they were duped. Every time Trump sells out America to foreign interests, every time he does what Jared and Ivanka whisper in his ear, he loses support. It is clear we aren’t getting what we voted for, and the POLLS are not interested in finding out what we the right-wing voters actually want. They are only interested in pushing the agenda already laid out.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    HELLO, since when did we start believing these POLLS to actually reflect public opinion? For all the jingoistic Trump supporters who really believe everything Trump tells them, there’s a significant number, a sufficient number to cost his re-election, who feel they were duped.
     
    This could be an intriguing variation on the No True Scotsman fallacy. No True Trump Voter supports US aggression.

    Don't get me wrong. I do know that there are Trump supporters who don't support the forever wars. I just think that, sadly, they're a very small minority. I do understand that it's very painful for that small minority to see America once gain determined to start yet another war. And it's

    Most Trump voters are just your typical Republican voters - greedy, short-sighted, jingoistic, not too bright. The same people who supported George W. Bush.

    And Trump is your typical Republican president - he was always going to give the rich their tax cuts, he was never going to build that wall, he was never going to reduce immigration, he was never going to drain that swamp.

    Don't feel too bad. In Britain Tory voters have just made the same mistake, electing Boris Johnson.
  25. To be fair, this is seems like a question worded to tease out and exaggerate potentially very minor disagreements on what the policy and goals should actually be. I think it’s highly likely that the large disparity is due to different interpretation of the options.

    Republicans see “confront Iranian aggression” as taking a bold and confident stance but may be open to many different specific options.

    Republicans see “avoid war with Iran” as appeasement and letting Iran do whatever it wants.

    Democrats take “confront Iranian aggression” to mean antagonism, retaliation, and a cycle of endless escalation.

    Democrats see “avoid war with Iran” as taking any number of possible negotiation paths to avoid war.

  26. @Jay Fink
    It is upsetting to me that I am in such a small % of Trump voters who doesn't favor more aggression against Iran. I voted for Trump in part because I am anti-neocon and neocons seemed to despise him. I was hoping for better relations with Russia, Syria/Assad, Iran and other countries neocons/neolibs hate. I thought there was a segment of Trump voters just like me, now I realize there was no such thing.

    Let’s face it; 90% of Americans favor war, so long as it’s their party doing it. Clintonistas were fine with him bombing Iraq, bombing Serbia, etc. Liberals hated drone strikes … until the cool black guy did them.

    • Agree: Jay Fink
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    I'm inclined to think that 90% of Americans think war is something that happens on television.
  27. @Michael S

    If American forces weren’t camped next door, there would be no Iranian aggression to confront.
     
    I'd like for the U.S. not to be fighting foreign wars when there are so many domestic problems to solve, but this is leftist blank-slate nonsense. Muslims aggress plenty without troops next door, in fact they do even more of it. You're going to tell us that the American MIC is responsible for the Muslim uprisings and assorted sectarian violence in India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and Qatar? Puh-leeze.

    Take Americans out of the equation, and even take Israel out of the equation, and the Sunnis and Shias still want to kill each other and are rather good at it. It was like that before U.S. troops landed and it will be like that after they leave.

    Should America be intervening in the holy wars of desert tribes? No. Is American intervention having a positive impact in the region? No. Is America causing the wars? Also no. "Muzzies dindu nuffin" is the kind of strategic thinking that winds up giving us another 10 million of them inside our borders. Leaving the middle east isn't going to stop the bombs on the Indian subcontinent, the knives and acid vials in the UK, the grenades in Sweden, or the trucks in all of the other western countries foolish enough to trust them. That's a leftist lie.

    “Sunnis and Shias want to kill each other”–nonsense. Before Neoconned Bush invaded and destroyed Iraq, both sects lived in harmony under Saddam Hussein, like Catholics and Protestants do here. Then after the invasion CIA and Israeli provocateurs began blowing up mosques, blaming one or the other sects and stirring up hatred.

    So there are bombs in India and knives in the UK? So what? It’s not our business.

    Before the creation of Israel in 1948 there was no violence or turmoil or anti-Americanism in the Middle East. In fact, even before the inside job of 9/11, (our “new Pearl Harbor” that gave our loyal-to-Israel Neocons the excuse they needed to sic the U.S. on Israel’s enemies), Americans were welcomed in the Middle East. I know. I lived in Saudi Arabia in the ’70’s, traveled safely in Arab countries.

  28. @GazaPlanet
    HELLO, since when did we start believing these POLLS to actually reflect public opinion? For all the jingoistic Trump supporters who really believe everything Trump tells them, there's a significant number, a sufficient number to cost his re-election, who feel they were duped. Every time Trump sells out America to foreign interests, every time he does what Jared and Ivanka whisper in his ear, he loses support. It is clear we aren't getting what we voted for, and the POLLS are not interested in finding out what we the right-wing voters actually want. They are only interested in pushing the agenda already laid out.

    HELLO, since when did we start believing these POLLS to actually reflect public opinion? For all the jingoistic Trump supporters who really believe everything Trump tells them, there’s a significant number, a sufficient number to cost his re-election, who feel they were duped.

    This could be an intriguing variation on the No True Scotsman fallacy. No True Trump Voter supports US aggression.

    Don’t get me wrong. I do know that there are Trump supporters who don’t support the forever wars. I just think that, sadly, they’re a very small minority. I do understand that it’s very painful for that small minority to see America once gain determined to start yet another war. And it’s

    Most Trump voters are just your typical Republican voters – greedy, short-sighted, jingoistic, not too bright. The same people who supported George W. Bush.

    And Trump is your typical Republican president – he was always going to give the rich their tax cuts, he was never going to build that wall, he was never going to reduce immigration, he was never going to drain that swamp.

    Don’t feel too bad. In Britain Tory voters have just made the same mistake, electing Boris Johnson.

    • Disagree: iffen
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I got my tax cut, significant enough, and I'm no Warren Buffet. Do you do your own taxes, D?
    , @Feryl
    Most stock right wing media in the US (both TV and radio) is full of anti-Iran posturing right now. It's the same old same old crap we've had since the 1980's.. The Right pushes war for "peace" (thereby precluding peace and stability from ever being achieved. The modern Right can't win battles on media obscenity, on preserving the family, on preserving cultural and ethnic continuity (people in the 1970's could openly be skeptical of racial integration, up to and including inter-racial relationships).

    The post-1980 Right is obsessed with notions of idolizing free market capitalism (even though big government liberals ran society more responsibly in the 1930's-1970's, giving us a healthier balance sheet and more innovation), and nominal attempts to "make the world safe for democracy" (a total betrayal of intelligent and realistic skepticism of utopian schemes be they directed by the military or not).

    Charles Murray basically now admits that the neo-liberal revolution of the 1980's and 90's has been a total rout for cultural conservatives and true political/economic conservatives (not the decadent Chicago School supply side traitors, let alone the "neo-conservatives" who are a total repudiation of any sense of tradition or restraint). People are expected to abandon all manner of tradition and restraint as record high corporate profits are run up, ethnic and cultural tradition is destroyed, and a sense of alarming intellectual stagnation creeps in. Every major market in America can turn on the radio in the morning and hear frat-boy level humor and boasting about idiocy and degeneracy involving gambling, sex, drinking, and drugs. The neo-liberal West, from the standpoint of what cultural gate keepers permit and encourage, is a sick nihilistic joke, but the joke is on us when we arrive, more or less simultaneously, at the modern collapse of civic and economic well being, which the neo-liberal "conservatives" set into motion forty years ago. The Leftists of the 1920's-1970's did some damage, yet in some ways the individualistic excess of the neo-lib era has been even more atrocious. After all, Westerners didn't regularly kill themselves via inter-racial relationships or literal suicide before the 80's.
  29. I would be interested to see the same statement presented in a pole from 2011-12 but referring to Syria.

    My theory is the results of the poll are the typical “backing my horse” phenomenon. Republican support of furthering hostilities with Iran is insane, but I wonder how it compares with Democratic support of intervening in Syria when Barry the Fairy was president.

  30. ” I do know that there are Trump supporters who don’t support the forever wars. I just think that, sadly, they’re a very small minority.”

    probably the second or first most important reason to support the executive — nearly all of the supporters for the candidate were to less aggressive careless foreign policy.

    • Replies: @A123

    the second or first most important reason to support the executive — nearly all of the supporters for the candidate were to less aggressive careless foreign policy.
     
    And Trump has delivered on this promise.

    NeoConDemocrat Hillary would have boots on the ground in Iran and Libya by now.... The next NeoConDemocrat candidate (Sanders, Biden, or Warren) will share Hillary's invasion first, more invasion second, even more invasion third, foreign policy.

    If the DNC wanted to win, Tulsi was their only option.

    PEACE 😇
  31. @another anon

    Where’s the betrayal? GOP voters (and Trump voters particularly) want the American military to fight Iran, and Trump is giving them what they want.

    I hope it’s not news to everybody that most Trump voters are not sophisticated heterodox intellectual shitposters who got “redpilled” after “Ron Paul 2012”
     

    Exactly. Typical Trump voter is someone like this.

    https://twitter.com/DARDeb1951/status/1213990964748062722

    Most Americans are blinded by American exceptionalism. Everything is reduced to jingoistic statements which are over-simplified into black – white them vs us narrative. The overwhelming majority, irrespective of political affiliation, cannot conceive that others do not want to be like the US or that they are perfectly happy with their customs and form of government.
    In your attached video, “Death to America” means the warmongering military industrial complex and the Zionist occupied government of the US, not Americans. It is the US government meddling in the ME killing Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians and others on behalf of Israel, not Joe Blow from Omaha.

    As for the YouGov poll, it was done Jan 11-14, 2020, well after the SHTF. I worked with a pollster to dissect a survey done by another employer, and one criticism he had to the methodology was asking people post event. He likened it to asking a group of people who just finished white water rafting, if the would prefer to try it in a canoe. Most people will stick to what they know. So, what do they know? Well, the Trumpers and Republicans know that the Democrats have vocally opposed Solemani’s assassination and the inflamatory statements that followed, which will translate into a big F.U. to the Democrats. They “know” that politicians and gasbags like Pompeo would never lie about something as serious as a potential war. Poll after poll, world wide have demonstrated that no matter how anti-war people are, once the shooting starts, they climb on board.
    The Democrats wouldn’t support Trump even if he found a cure for cancer. The assassination just provided more fuel for that fire. Regardless of what the poll may say, the Democrats repeat the lies of Iranian terrorism and Iranian aggression. Their actions do not equate to their poll results.

    • Replies: @getaclue
    Actually "most Americans" could care less-- they are trying to make ends meet and come home from work watch tv, pop a beer, go to bed and repeat-- NeoCons etc. are behind these wars the average American is not, Trump was actually voted in by "Americans" to end this bs but the "Russia Collusion" hoax put a bullet in that as did the Deep Stater "war forever" Neocons and their buddies....--"Americans" are just too busy just surviving -- there is no real "Anti-War" Movement to "join" by the way if you haven't noticed, even if "Americans"wanted to do so....

    -- when I hear someone going on about "Americans" I just find the comment foolish and non-reality based because the reality is that the Occupied Government functions completely divorced from "Americans" basically, as does the Globalist Media trying to shape perceptions (the vast Majority of Americans are not for "gay marriage" or transgenderism etc. the Globalist Media is and pimps it endlessly as if all were on board which is a total lie, homo marriage could not pass by a vote even in California even though homosexuality is endlessly pimped in the Mainslime Media and "Entertainment"....-- the reality is that what is happening is much more in line with what AIPAC wants than what any "Americans" want....

  32. @UK
    Confronting Iranian aggression is the way for the bigger power to maintain peace. When did the heterodox right become actual pacificists? Machiavelli sobs in his grave.

    Just look at how Iran went back in their box? Also, look how wrong Giraldi, Saker and other assorted idiots were on this...

    For results, realism at home and abroad.

    Thankfully the Trump base seem to instinctively grasp the basics.

    Confronting Iranian aggression is the way for the bigger power to maintain peace.

    Be so kind as to provide actual examples of “Iranian aggression”, rather than the well rotted male bovine excrement provided by government liars.

    • Replies: @UK
    The Iranians have been active in Iraq, parts of Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon and probably other places including Yemen, whatever they say. That was the point of their Al Quds force. They are an imperialist power like the US, but with a small man complex. It was time they got reminded of their real place in the world.

    Iran is a significant player in one multipolar region. They are not crazily suicidal but they are also aggressive and often ruthless. Why else do you think even Assad, whom they saved, has been feeding Israel information on how to bomb them out of Syria. Nevermind the Russians turning a blind eye?
  33. @dfordoom
    Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.

    I wonder if that's been the case in America's countless other wars. Are whites really much more aggressive than blacks?

    Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.

    I think you mean the Zionist occupied governments of Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.

    • Replies: @dfordoom


    Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.
     
    I think you mean the Zionist occupied governments of Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.
     
    No, I mean that whites seem to be particularly keen for war. That's what the survey is saying.

    In fact the survey indicates that whites are even keener on war than the government is.

    In fact it's possible that the enthusiasm for war among ordinary people sometimes drags the government along with it. Trump seems to favour avoiding war but his supporters definitely want war.
  34. @EliteCommInc.
    " I do know that there are Trump supporters who don’t support the forever wars. I just think that, sadly, they’re a very small minority."


    probably the second or first most important reason to support the executive --- nearly all of the supporters for the candidate were to less aggressive careless foreign policy.

    the second or first most important reason to support the executive — nearly all of the supporters for the candidate were to less aggressive careless foreign policy.

    And Trump has delivered on this promise.

    NeoConDemocrat Hillary would have boots on the ground in Iran and Libya by now…. The next NeoConDemocrat candidate (Sanders, Biden, or Warren) will share Hillary’s invasion first, more invasion second, even more invasion third, foreign policy.

    If the DNC wanted to win, Tulsi was their only option.

    PEACE 😇

  35. My thought is that most of what you cite as support for war with Iran among Trump followers is more of a gut level support the troops reaction. After all it is mostly our personal kids and grandkids out there at the front. They are fine Americans and fought well. It is not their fault that they were used by Deep State traitors to destroy what they swore to defend. As President Trump winds down the M.E. wars and brings the troops home none will appreciate him more than we Repubs, except of course the troops themselves who have become ever more redpilled as to how and by whom they have been used. The nominally antiwar Left will of course be furious that those young Red State Americans they wanted dead over there so that there would be less opposition to the coup over here will be at home ans alive.

    • Agree: iffen
  36. “Not sure” responses, constituting 22% of the total, are excluded:

    I will assume that this 22% is not paying attention. The other 88% and especially the Trump and Hillary voters are seriously fucked up. The Trump voters because Candidate Trump said he was opposed to endless wars and the Hillary voters because Hillary made it clear that She would continue them.

    It could be that my fellow Deplorables are just more perceptive than myself and knew from the start that Trump was lying about his opposition to endless war. But how to explain Hillary voters not knowing that Hillary is a war pig?

    Following AE’s blog since it came to UR I have been increasingly concerned that I might be a Republican. Now I fear I might be a Hillary voter.

    Poor me. I will have to fall back on my default position. Don’t believe the polls.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    By the way. Any person who cannot see that Iran is playing defense has a negative IQ.
  37. @WorkingClass

    “Not sure” responses, constituting 22% of the total, are excluded:
     
    I will assume that this 22% is not paying attention. The other 88% and especially the Trump and Hillary voters are seriously fucked up. The Trump voters because Candidate Trump said he was opposed to endless wars and the Hillary voters because Hillary made it clear that She would continue them.

    It could be that my fellow Deplorables are just more perceptive than myself and knew from the start that Trump was lying about his opposition to endless war. But how to explain Hillary voters not knowing that Hillary is a war pig?

    Following AE's blog since it came to UR I have been increasingly concerned that I might be a Republican. Now I fear I might be a Hillary voter.

    Poor me. I will have to fall back on my default position. Don't believe the polls.

    By the way. Any person who cannot see that Iran is playing defense has a negative IQ.

  38. @Ian Smith
    Let’s face it; 90% of Americans favor war, so long as it’s their party doing it. Clintonistas were fine with him bombing Iraq, bombing Serbia, etc. Liberals hated drone strikes ... until the cool black guy did them.

    I’m inclined to think that 90% of Americans think war is something that happens on television.

    • Agree: Ian Smith
  39. @Curmudgeon
    Most Americans are blinded by American exceptionalism. Everything is reduced to jingoistic statements which are over-simplified into black - white them vs us narrative. The overwhelming majority, irrespective of political affiliation, cannot conceive that others do not want to be like the US or that they are perfectly happy with their customs and form of government.
    In your attached video, "Death to America" means the warmongering military industrial complex and the Zionist occupied government of the US, not Americans. It is the US government meddling in the ME killing Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians and others on behalf of Israel, not Joe Blow from Omaha.

    As for the YouGov poll, it was done Jan 11-14, 2020, well after the SHTF. I worked with a pollster to dissect a survey done by another employer, and one criticism he had to the methodology was asking people post event. He likened it to asking a group of people who just finished white water rafting, if the would prefer to try it in a canoe. Most people will stick to what they know. So, what do they know? Well, the Trumpers and Republicans know that the Democrats have vocally opposed Solemani's assassination and the inflamatory statements that followed, which will translate into a big F.U. to the Democrats. They "know" that politicians and gasbags like Pompeo would never lie about something as serious as a potential war. Poll after poll, world wide have demonstrated that no matter how anti-war people are, once the shooting starts, they climb on board.
    The Democrats wouldn't support Trump even if he found a cure for cancer. The assassination just provided more fuel for that fire. Regardless of what the poll may say, the Democrats repeat the lies of Iranian terrorism and Iranian aggression. Their actions do not equate to their poll results.

    Actually “most Americans” could care less– they are trying to make ends meet and come home from work watch tv, pop a beer, go to bed and repeat– NeoCons etc. are behind these wars the average American is not, Trump was actually voted in by “Americans” to end this bs but the “Russia Collusion” hoax put a bullet in that as did the Deep Stater “war forever” Neocons and their buddies….–“Americans” are just too busy just surviving — there is no real “Anti-War” Movement to “join” by the way if you haven’t noticed, even if “Americans”wanted to do so….

    — when I hear someone going on about “Americans” I just find the comment foolish and non-reality based because the reality is that the Occupied Government functions completely divorced from “Americans” basically, as does the Globalist Media trying to shape perceptions (the vast Majority of Americans are not for “gay marriage” or transgenderism etc. the Globalist Media is and pimps it endlessly as if all were on board which is a total lie, homo marriage could not pass by a vote even in California even though homosexuality is endlessly pimped in the Mainslime Media and “Entertainment”….– the reality is that what is happening is much more in line with what AIPAC wants than what any “Americans” want….

    • Agree: MikeatMikedotMike
    • Replies: @WHAT
    Yet when neochohens finally start the shooting war, it is you who will march on their orders. So don`t try to dodge the responsibility, golem.
  40. @Tulip
    jingoism
    noun [ U ] POLITICS disapproving
    UK /ˈdʒɪŋ.ɡəʊ.ɪ.zəm/ US /ˈdʒɪŋ.ɡoʊ.ɪ.zəm/

    the extreme belief that your own country is always best, often shown in enthusiastic support for a war against another country:
    Patriotism can turn into jingoism and intolerance very quickly.

    [Source: Cambridge Dictionary]

    A thought experiment: What if conservatism failed not because the conservative establishment lacks courage and conviction, what if it failed because right-leaning voters (and their candidates) just weren't very smart? MIGA 2020!

    A thought experiment: What if conservatism failed not because the conservative establishment lacks courage and conviction, what if it failed because right-leaning voters (and their candidates) just weren’t very smart? MIGA 2020!

    See this article by Anatoly Karlin:

    The Right’s Human Capital Problem

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-rights-human-capital-problem/

    TL;DR: when the right is composed of meatheads whose idea of “patriotism” is flag waving, chest thumping and cheering for any war anywhere, anytime, against anyone in the world, it will have problem in attracting smart and educated people.

  41. OT: Today I just received the dismaying news that the Microsoft Corp. intends to go “carbon negative” by 2030.

    https://news.microsoft.com/climate/

    This is ridiculous. I do not understand how a $1.27 trillion company goes about making itself a net carbon sink, but this is the sort of unhinged thinking that happens once you flood the world with NIRP money and deregulation, and so destroy market discipline that companies forget what they’re in business to do and go about tilting at nonexistent windmills.

    We are not ruled by politicians sitting in state houses and parliaments. We are ruled by an insane clown posse of demented CEOs using monopoly money to play games with the fate of millions. However this stops, whatever collateral damage it does, it needs to happen soon.

    In other words, Lord, please send Nemesis. We’ve got the Hubris already.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    AGREED, I.D. MS can go revenue-negative too, for all I care. I'd had enough of them about that time that paper-clip guy started appearing on the screen.

    I have one word for your future, Benjamin.
    .
    .
    Linux
  42. @dfordoom

    HELLO, since when did we start believing these POLLS to actually reflect public opinion? For all the jingoistic Trump supporters who really believe everything Trump tells them, there’s a significant number, a sufficient number to cost his re-election, who feel they were duped.
     
    This could be an intriguing variation on the No True Scotsman fallacy. No True Trump Voter supports US aggression.

    Don't get me wrong. I do know that there are Trump supporters who don't support the forever wars. I just think that, sadly, they're a very small minority. I do understand that it's very painful for that small minority to see America once gain determined to start yet another war. And it's

    Most Trump voters are just your typical Republican voters - greedy, short-sighted, jingoistic, not too bright. The same people who supported George W. Bush.

    And Trump is your typical Republican president - he was always going to give the rich their tax cuts, he was never going to build that wall, he was never going to reduce immigration, he was never going to drain that swamp.

    Don't feel too bad. In Britain Tory voters have just made the same mistake, electing Boris Johnson.

    I got my tax cut, significant enough, and I’m no Warren Buffet. Do you do your own taxes, D?

  43. @Intelligent Dasein
    OT: Today I just received the dismaying news that the Microsoft Corp. intends to go "carbon negative" by 2030.

    https://news.microsoft.com/climate/

    This is ridiculous. I do not understand how a $1.27 trillion company goes about making itself a net carbon sink, but this is the sort of unhinged thinking that happens once you flood the world with NIRP money and deregulation, and so destroy market discipline that companies forget what they're in business to do and go about tilting at nonexistent windmills.

    We are not ruled by politicians sitting in state houses and parliaments. We are ruled by an insane clown posse of demented CEOs using monopoly money to play games with the fate of millions. However this stops, whatever collateral damage it does, it needs to happen soon.

    In other words, Lord, please send Nemesis. We've got the Hubris already.

    AGREED, I.D. MS can go revenue-negative too, for all I care. I’d had enough of them about that time that paper-clip guy started appearing on the screen.

    I have one word for your future, Benjamin.
    .
    .
    Linux

  44. It is more important to “confront Iranian aggression” than to “avoid war with Iran” (YouGov; N=1,165)

    There is real reason to doubt the validity of the results of this kind of poll right now. That is to say, to doubt doubt whether Invade The World is really as near-and-dear to right-wing hearts as some casually believe, and as some polling seems to show.

    As I wrote in a comment to Anatoly Karlin’s post on a similar topic a few days ago:

    Like almost all political polls in the US today, it [a poll showing high support for attacking Iran] is nothing but a proxy for pro- or anti-Trump. The value of the data is limited for anything else, like measuring views on Invade-Invite.

    In the pre-Trump, early 2010s, the situation was more muddled, and although there was always a ~15% constituency to attack Iran, it was not the strongly polarized situation reflected in very recent polling.

    A series of CBS polls between 2006 and 2011 found a consistent 25-30% saying Iran was “not a threat” or unsure if it was a threat, vs. 15% calling for “military action now;” the majority were push-polled into “Yeah, I guess a threat, but let’s work it out diplomatically.”

    Remarkably, NO appreciable partisan difference on whether to confront Iran as of 2003:

    See also “The Los Angeles Times Poll. April 2-3, 2003,” for how surprisingly little partisan divide there was on Iran back then. (fwiw, the first episode of Donald Trump’s tv-show “The Apprentice” was filmed in Sept. 2003; first aired Jan. 2004, nine months after this poll.)

    The April 2003 LA Times poll is available at http://pollingreport.com/iran.htm:

    “There is evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. Do you think the U.S. should or should not take military action against Iran if they continue to develop these weapons?”

    Republicans
    – Should: 59%
    – Should Not: 30%
    – Don’t Know: 11%

    Independents
    – Should: 45%
    – Should Not: 44%
    – Don’t Know: 11%

    Democrats
    – Should: 52%
    – Should Not: 38%
    – Don’t Know: 10%

    The margin of error was +/-4. The upper-end of the D margin-of-error and the lower-end of the R margin-of-error overlap. IOW, in statistics-speak we cannot exclude the hypothesis that there was no partisan difference at all at that time.

    • Agree: MikeatMikedotMike
  45. We need more than just an end to the forever wars. We need to end the conditions that create more of them.

    Opposition to forever wars is anti-Semitic.

    • Disagree: iffen
    • LOL: Hail
  46. @Curmudgeon

    Confronting Iranian aggression is the way for the bigger power to maintain peace.
     
    Be so kind as to provide actual examples of "Iranian aggression", rather than the well rotted male bovine excrement provided by government liars.

    The Iranians have been active in Iraq, parts of Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon and probably other places including Yemen, whatever they say. That was the point of their Al Quds force. They are an imperialist power like the US, but with a small man complex. It was time they got reminded of their real place in the world.

    Iran is a significant player in one multipolar region. They are not crazily suicidal but they are also aggressive and often ruthless. Why else do you think even Assad, whom they saved, has been feeding Israel information on how to bomb them out of Syria. Nevermind the Russians turning a blind eye?

  47. @Twinkie
    I remember when GW Bush ran as the non-interventionist candidate (heck, I remember when Bush ran for governor of Texas - a very different creature than what he became later).

    In fact, *I* was a minimal-interventionist and supported 43 for that reason (and others). But like many others in the country, I lost my mind after 9/11. I wanted vengeance for the death and destruction inflicted upon the city of my youth, and enthusiastically supported the military ventures overseas.

    Oh, I wrong I was. I weep for my countrymen who perished in what followed.

    Iraq is safe for Shiite retaliation today because we toppled the Baathists and reduced Sunnis to the status of enfeebled minority more than a decade ago. When we allowed Sunnis to breath again, ISIS was born.
     
    However, this is a simplistic. We had the Anbar Awakening and was able to coopt the Sunnis into our cause against Al-Qaida. Unfortunately, we then decided to transfer our responsiblity to (i.e. financial remuneration toward and protection of) those Sunnis to the Iraqi National Government, and the former felt abandoned.

    And this happened in Afghanistan prior to the rise of the Talibs too. We Americans have a bad habit of lurching from one conflict to another and using and discarding allies as temporary convenience dictates. It's like our government is afflicted with ADHD.

    It's like this in all conflicts, but is particularly the case in the Middle East - he who (survives and) stays wins.

    I don’t want to win in the Middle East. I want to leave.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    Agree. But we have to leave without looking like we are running away. That’s why we have to be extraordinarily careful about entering conflicts in the first place.* As the saying goes “Wars begin when you will, but do not end when you please.” I think it’s attributed to Machiavelli.

    *Thats why prudent powers use proxies, not their own blood, for fighting. Money is easier to replenish than men.
  48. “And Trump has delivered on this promise.”

    Laughing. He really did not make promise. However, he did make it clear that Iran was probably going to be an issue.

    My record of support for the current executive is well documented. As yet there are no other candidates that that even come close. I sincerely believe he could be transformative executive, not transitional.

    But I have yet to see that occurring.

  49. @Curmudgeon

    Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.
     
    I think you mean the Zionist occupied governments of Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.

    Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.

    I think you mean the Zionist occupied governments of Whites seem to be particularly keen for war.

    No, I mean that whites seem to be particularly keen for war. That’s what the survey is saying.

    In fact the survey indicates that whites are even keener on war than the government is.

    In fact it’s possible that the enthusiasm for war among ordinary people sometimes drags the government along with it. Trump seems to favour avoiding war but his supporters definitely want war.

  50. @getaclue
    Actually "most Americans" could care less-- they are trying to make ends meet and come home from work watch tv, pop a beer, go to bed and repeat-- NeoCons etc. are behind these wars the average American is not, Trump was actually voted in by "Americans" to end this bs but the "Russia Collusion" hoax put a bullet in that as did the Deep Stater "war forever" Neocons and their buddies....--"Americans" are just too busy just surviving -- there is no real "Anti-War" Movement to "join" by the way if you haven't noticed, even if "Americans"wanted to do so....

    -- when I hear someone going on about "Americans" I just find the comment foolish and non-reality based because the reality is that the Occupied Government functions completely divorced from "Americans" basically, as does the Globalist Media trying to shape perceptions (the vast Majority of Americans are not for "gay marriage" or transgenderism etc. the Globalist Media is and pimps it endlessly as if all were on board which is a total lie, homo marriage could not pass by a vote even in California even though homosexuality is endlessly pimped in the Mainslime Media and "Entertainment"....-- the reality is that what is happening is much more in line with what AIPAC wants than what any "Americans" want....

    Yet when neochohens finally start the shooting war, it is you who will march on their orders. So don`t try to dodge the responsibility, golem.

  51. “If American forces weren’t camped next door, there would be no Iranian aggression to confront.”

    This applies to quite a bit of global tension the US finds itself a part of. North Korea is a fine example. We currently have 27,000 troops along the DMZ and scratch our heads as to why the Prince of Pyongyang is constantly rattling his little saber. What if Mexico decided to let China station 30k regulars along the Rio Grande? DC might start shooting missiles off into the Pacific as well.

    US foreign policy creates most of this conflict with its perpetual meddling. I want our military out of the ME, Europe, Africa and S. Korea.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  52. @dfordoom

    HELLO, since when did we start believing these POLLS to actually reflect public opinion? For all the jingoistic Trump supporters who really believe everything Trump tells them, there’s a significant number, a sufficient number to cost his re-election, who feel they were duped.
     
    This could be an intriguing variation on the No True Scotsman fallacy. No True Trump Voter supports US aggression.

    Don't get me wrong. I do know that there are Trump supporters who don't support the forever wars. I just think that, sadly, they're a very small minority. I do understand that it's very painful for that small minority to see America once gain determined to start yet another war. And it's

    Most Trump voters are just your typical Republican voters - greedy, short-sighted, jingoistic, not too bright. The same people who supported George W. Bush.

    And Trump is your typical Republican president - he was always going to give the rich their tax cuts, he was never going to build that wall, he was never going to reduce immigration, he was never going to drain that swamp.

    Don't feel too bad. In Britain Tory voters have just made the same mistake, electing Boris Johnson.

    Most stock right wing media in the US (both TV and radio) is full of anti-Iran posturing right now. It’s the same old same old crap we’ve had since the 1980’s.. The Right pushes war for “peace” (thereby precluding peace and stability from ever being achieved. The modern Right can’t win battles on media obscenity, on preserving the family, on preserving cultural and ethnic continuity (people in the 1970’s could openly be skeptical of racial integration, up to and including inter-racial relationships).

    The post-1980 Right is obsessed with notions of idolizing free market capitalism (even though big government liberals ran society more responsibly in the 1930’s-1970’s, giving us a healthier balance sheet and more innovation), and nominal attempts to “make the world safe for democracy” (a total betrayal of intelligent and realistic skepticism of utopian schemes be they directed by the military or not).

    Charles Murray basically now admits that the neo-liberal revolution of the 1980’s and 90’s has been a total rout for cultural conservatives and true political/economic conservatives (not the decadent Chicago School supply side traitors, let alone the “neo-conservatives” who are a total repudiation of any sense of tradition or restraint). People are expected to abandon all manner of tradition and restraint as record high corporate profits are run up, ethnic and cultural tradition is destroyed, and a sense of alarming intellectual stagnation creeps in. Every major market in America can turn on the radio in the morning and hear frat-boy level humor and boasting about idiocy and degeneracy involving gambling, sex, drinking, and drugs. The neo-liberal West, from the standpoint of what cultural gate keepers permit and encourage, is a sick nihilistic joke, but the joke is on us when we arrive, more or less simultaneously, at the modern collapse of civic and economic well being, which the neo-liberal “conservatives” set into motion forty years ago. The Leftists of the 1920’s-1970’s did some damage, yet in some ways the individualistic excess of the neo-lib era has been even more atrocious. After all, Westerners didn’t regularly kill themselves via inter-racial relationships or literal suicide before the 80’s.

    • Agree: Hail
  53. @Not My Economy
    Where's the betrayal? GOP voters (and Trump voters particularly) want the American military to fight Iran, and Trump is giving them what they want.

    I hope it's not news to everybody that most Trump voters are not sophisticated heterodox intellectual shitposters who got "redpilled" after "Ron Paul 2012"

    Perhaps but then Trump did “promise” to get us out of theses stupid wars. Not doing so could be considered a betrayal.

  54. @SFG
    I don't want to win in the Middle East. I want to leave.

    Agree. But we have to leave without looking like we are running away. That’s why we have to be extraordinarily careful about entering conflicts in the first place.* As the saying goes “Wars begin when you will, but do not end when you please.” I think it’s attributed to Machiavelli.

    *Thats why prudent powers use proxies, not their own blood, for fighting. Money is easier to replenish than men.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS