• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CNN Poll: Americans favor diplomacy against Iran

Chaddelamancha

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
4,177
Reaction score
1,458
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
A majority of Americans don't want the U.S. to take military action to force Iran to shut down its nuclear program, according to a new national survey.

A CNN/ORC International poll released Wednesday indicates that only 17% of the public wants the U.S. to use force, with 60% saying diplomatic or economic action against Iran is the right response, and 22% saying no action should be taken at this time.

CNN Poll: Americans favor diplomacy against Iran – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Glad to see that I fall within the majority. I hope the administration is listening and does what it can diplomatically.

Where do you fall? The majority or the minority?
 
I don't think it matters. Israel will handle it.
 
Let them. They have more investment in it than we do.
 

Americans didn't want the Iraq war too, so there was 911 attack. What will happen if the ruler of this country wants Iran war? Be careful of another 911 alike false flag attack on US cities to justify the war.

USS Enterprise - Possible False Flag!

Stop The False Flag Attack On The U.S.S. Enterprise - YouTube

The USS Enterprise is on her last legs and scheduled to be decommissioned next year. Decommissioning a nuclear air craft carrier is a very expensive process. The 8 nuclear reactors must all be disposed of as nuclear waste material.

The navy would save a great deal of money if the USS Enterprise was sunk in the Persian Gulf.

Why send an ancient war ship into harms way?

False flags can be preventing by alerting the public to the possibility, so the story would not be believable.

911 did the same way. The insulator of the WTC was asbestos. It was forbidden by the later rule of construction. WTC thus became a hot potato in real estate market. The cost to tear down WTC would be high - equal to build a new one. Then we saw 911, they let insurance company to pay for the money.
 
It may seem contradictory, but for diplomacy to be efficient and successful, it might be necessary the Iranians believe the US would go to war.
 
I don't think it matters. Israel will handle it.

That' how Israel handles it.

Why are there Hungarian MIG-29 in Israel?

English| We already dealt with this question once. The thing was brought up on the hook of why Israeli airplanes drill above Romania. We dissected the issue, that presumably they practice the high hill conditions similar to Iran, and with the Hungarian aircraft they are training under desert conditions, since Iran has this aerial flight at his disposal.

Carrying of MIG aircraft to Israel gained a more dangerous meaning according to the recent happenings. It appears much more logical that the Hungarian aircraft will be sacrificed. Iran is not that fool that he would leap into a war in such a way voluntarily that he attacks the American ships threatening him. The Israeli pilots will do this with the Hungarian aircraft.

They are transformed into Iranian aircraft supplied with colours and ensigns like that, as if they would be Iranian aircraft. A spectacular, well recorded attack against the american ships when Iranian ensign are visible on the planes would be enough for the public opinion to require immediate counterattack by NATO. One or two of them would be shot, and the TV reporters would be allowed to pass at a close range then they can see Iranian ensign on the planes - this would be the final, perfect propaganda of war against Iran.

Ejected and caught pilots would admit they were truly Iranian pilots and everyone would know about it. By this the war would be inescapable, and legally solid. Iran would expound the truth, but nobody would be interested on the West because they already are only waiting for some kind of minor excuse.

This may be easily the new Pearl Harbor case, and this is why those planes were carried just next to Iran.

Why are there Hungarian MIG-29 in Israel? | www.jöv
 
That' how Israel handles it.

Israel was operating Mig-29s as far back as 2009. They are using them to train against should any action against Iran or Syria be necessary. This is nothing to get excited about.
Israel Air Force test pilots are flying MIG 29 jets and conducting dogfights against the IAF's F-16 fighters, Israel TV Channel 2 revealed last Wednesday. The MIG 29, developed by the soviets in the 1970s, is one of the best fighter jets used by eastern and Arab countries, as well as by Syria and Iran. It was developed to counter American-made jets such the F-16 or F/A-18.
IAF Pilots are Practicing MIG-29/F-16 Dogfights
 
It may seem contradictory, but for diplomacy to be efficient and successful, it might be necessary the Iranians believe the US would go to war.

It only "seems" contradictory if you have no idea how countries (that is to say, people) actually relate to each other. If you do, then it makes perfect sense.
 
Americans didn't want the Iraq war too, so there was 911 attack. What will happen if the ruler of this country wants Iran war? Be careful of another 911 alike false flag attack on US cities to justify the war.



911 did the same way. The insulator of the WTC was asbestos. It was forbidden by the later rule of construction. WTC thus became a hot potato in real estate market. The cost to tear down WTC would be high - equal to build a new one. Then we saw 911, they let insurance company to pay for the money.

There are plenty of threads in the Conspiracies section where you can peddle this.
 
It may seem contradictory, but for diplomacy to be efficient and successful, it might be necessary the Iranians believe the US would go to war.

Curious, I thought it was US eagerness for war that made diplomacy less successful.
 
CNN Poll: Americans favor diplomacy against Iran – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Glad to see that I fall within the majority. I hope the administration is listening and does what it can diplomatically.

Where do you fall? The majority or the minority?

Where do you fall ... leadership, or whichever way the wind is blowing that morning ?

I hope for a diplomatic solution as well. But I sure as **** don't want a spineless leader who insures that our opposition thinks we lack the will to do what must be done regardless. Obama radiates such.

He is a FAIL.
 
Curious, I thought it was US eagerness for war that made diplomacy less successful.

Tell us all how you connect such uninformed notions. Inquiring minds are .... baffled ;)
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060254939 said:
So the Obama administration has yet to attempt diplomacy with Iran? Or maybe has just had no success?

I wouldn't call sanctions diplomacy.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk
 
Darn right.

We need to give Iran some of the same shock and awe that we gave Iraq.

Why? They haven't done any provoking. There is no need for warmongering

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk
 
Darn right.

We need to give Iran some of the same shock and awe that we gave Iraq.

Apparently you don't get my point. I don't support a war with Iran, which is and will be a stupid move. I was pointing out how people act like how war and diplomacy is different from each other. It isn't
 
Where do you fall ... leadership, or whichever way the wind is blowing that morning ?

I hope for a diplomatic solution as well. But I sure as **** don't want a spineless leader who insures that our opposition thinks we lack the will to do what must be done regardless. Obama radiates such.

He is a FAIL.

Yeah, just ask the pirates in Somalia, Osama bin Laden and Muammar Gaddafi! Oh, nevermind. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060254939 said:
So the Obama administration has yet to attempt diplomacy with Iran? Or maybe has just had no success?


I wouldn't call sanctions diplomacy.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk


Wasn't that an Obama presidential campaign promise to improve diplomatic relations with Iran?

“My administration is now committed to diplomacy that addresses the full range of issues before us and to pursuing constructive ties among the United States, Iran, and the international community,” the president said. “We seek engagement that is honest and grounded in mutual respect” and “a future with renewed exchanges among our people and greater opportunities for partnership and commerce; a future where the old divisions are overcome.”

Better relations between the United States and Iran are the key to stability in the Middle East.

Obama Offers Iran "A Promise of a New Day" | LA Progressive

So I'll ask again. Is that a no on an attempt at diplomacy on the part of the Obama administration? (Another failed campaign promise)

Or does that mean that his attempt at diplomacy has not worked?

Which is it?
 
Apparently I missed my voting slip in the mail when the american people decided on the last several wars.

apparently you didn't notice we're not living in 2001 anymore. we're living in 2012.

this poll is a direct contradiction to an assertion you made, and instead of evolving your beliefs to match the data, you're just going to ignore the data. what intellectual maturity.
 
Back
Top Bottom