NBC poll: Americans skeptical of U.S. intervention in Syria

[brooklynite]

Source: NBC News

Fifty percent of Americans say they oppose the United States taking military action against Syrian President Bashar Assad, and nearly eight-in-10 believe President Barack Obama should receive congressional approval before using any force, according to a new NBC News poll.

Yet the public is more supportive of military action against the Syrian regime when the scope is limited to using cruise missiles launched from U.S. naval ships.

Read the full poll here (.pdf)

The two-day poll was conducted as the Obama administration weighs launching strikes against Syria for the alleged use of chemicals weapons in its violent civil war, as well as amid growing demands by U.S. lawmakers that Congress should have a voice whether or not to authorize force.

Read more: http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/30/20256971-nbc-poll-americans-skeptical-of-us-intervention-in-syria?lite

[another_liberal]

1. However, the problem is . . .

No one knows what will happen after we begin cruise missile attacks. We may not be in a position to stop with just a few attacks. These war things have a way of taking on a life of their own. The Vietnam War was only going to be a few fighter/bomber sorties against some North Vietnamese torpedo boat bases.

[David__77]

2. If one American dies, the poll numbers will change.

And not in the pro-war direction. Just sayin'.

[liberal N proud]

3. My thought...

The Syrian government killed their own people, so now we are going to retaliate by killing more of their people?

[ctsnowman]

6. Yup.

[cstanleytech]

7. If it was a full scale invasion I could completely agree with you that it would be a mistake

however I dont think it will be an Iraq style invasion but rather at most I suspect we are talking about targeted air strikes on key facilities producing said chemical weapons (which makes sense imo) and on their ability to launch them at range which probably means missile sites and air fields again which makes sense.

[AllyCat]

9. Surgical strikes. Because those NEVER kill innocent civilians.

[cstanleytech]

10. You forgot the sarcasm smiley.

That aside I completely acknowledge that yes there is a risk of some innocents being killed if something goes wrong but if it leads to stopping whoever is murdering people with chemical weapons is it not worth it? Or do you believe its none of our business if people are murdered in another country because they arent our own citizens?

[AllyCat]

20. People are murdered in other countries every day. Yet we do nothing for them.

[Alamuti Lotus]

11. logic train crashes into the airport there

Bombing "key facilities producing said chemical weapons" is probably the damn dumbest idea floating around, and it is very reassuring that the 82nd Chairborne is actually in charge of nothing. Bush I's general dicks also thought that would be a great idea when they invaded Iraq the first time; those places are still no-mans lands.

[cstanleytech]

12. Depends on the facilities.

If say they bomb a factory assembling a key but inert component or an air field that stores said key inert components?

[Kurska]

15. No offense, but I never thought I'd agree so much with you.

This whole expedition reeks of military adventurism, we have no reason to become al qaeda's airfroce.

[AllyCat]

21. Sounds lots like mobile WMDs that Sadaam Hussein had hidden so well we never found them

even after we killed him. And we were there for 10 freakin' years with hundreds of thousands dead. Thousands displaced...into Syria. I wonder how many of them will survive and relocate now?

"logic train..." (lol!)

[DCBob]

4. This country is weary of war.

[RKP5637]

5. It gets so tiring, year after year after year, and for the MIC it's more $$$$$ for them. n/t

[durablend]

8. And less for anything else

Since SOMETHING will have to be cut to pay for it (according to House Republicans, and likely O himself).

Better go suit up, seniors! No more free rides for you!

[Jefferson23]

13. Cruise missiles to accomplish what exactly.....so foolish it is stunningly irresponsible. n/t

[L0oniX]

14. Well now we know why they want to cut food stamps ...money for war. n/t

[Kurska]

16. Not in my name n/t

[CanSocDem]

17. Not that it matters of course....

...but I think the entire planet is "skeptical".



.

[blkmusclmachine]

18. As well they should be.

[NorthCarolina]

19. I bet the reality is MUCH higher than 50%. nt