[Spliffdaddy]

Polling conducted earlier this year found that most of the public believes Iran wants to use uranium enrichment for military purposes (82 percent) rather than for the peaceful purposes it claims (8 percent) (January 24-25).

If diplomacy fails, 54 percent of Americans support using air strikes only to stop Iran from getting nukes, up from 51 percent in January, and 42 percent support using air strikes and ground troops, down from 46 percent. The portion supporting the use of "whatever military force is necessary" dropped 9 percentage points, from 59 percent in January to 50 percent today.

A majority (57 percent) thinks it is likely that the United States will be forced to take military action against Iran in the next year, including almost one in five that say "very likely" (19 percent).

full .pdf text >

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/poll_031606.pdf

I think we should have *already* disarmed Iran. Waiting just makes the task more difficult.

[Rumor]

Just out of curiosity, where are these polls taken? Not bashing Fox News, I wonder this about all of the polls I see.

[Spliffdaddy]

Opinion Dynamics conducts the polls via telephone in the evening. Usually, only registered voters are contacted.

Here's how some of their recent polls were done:

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/poll_031606.pdf

[abe]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Polling conducted earlier this year found that most of the public believes Iran wants to use uranium enrichment for military purposes (82 percent) rather than for the peaceful purposes it claims (8 percent) (January 24-25).

If diplomacy fails, 54 percent of Americans support using air strikes only to stop Iran from getting nukes, up from 51 percent in January, and 42 percent support using air strikes and ground troops, down from 46 percent. The portion supporting the use of "whatever military force is necessary" dropped 9 percentage points, from 59 percent in January to 50 percent today.

A majority (57 percent) thinks it is likely that the United States will be forced to take military action against Iran in the next year, including almost one in five that say "very likely" (19 percent).

full .pdf text >

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/poll_031606.pdf

I think we should have *already* disarmed Iran. Waiting just makes the task more difficult.

Iran Agrees to Discuss Iraq With the U.S.

Washington says the agenda will be limited to the war, but some see an effort by Tehran to initiate dialogue on its nuclear program.

By John Daniszewski and Kasra Naji, Special to The Times
March 17, 2006

TEHRAN — In what appears to be a major turnaround in policy, Iran's national security chief announced Thursday that his government intended to name a team of negotiators to hold direct talks with the United States on the subject of calming civil strife in Iraq.

If negotiations take place, they will mark the first direct, open contact between the two governments in about two decades.

ADVERTISEMENT

An aide to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the talks could lead to discussions of other issues, including the dispute over Iran's nuclear ambitions, which the U.N. Security Council took up this week.

In Washington, however, White House spokesman Scott McClellan stressed that any contacts would be limited to the topic of Iraq. He played down the significance of the Iranian announcement and said he was not sure he would even characterize it as the start of "a dialogue."

The Bush administration said last year that it was willing to engage in limited discussions with Iran about how to maintain peace in Iraq, with the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, authorized to speak to the Iranians. But until Thursday, Tehran had rebuffed the overtures.

The Iranian move came on the same day the Bush administration released its national security statement, revised for the first time in three years, which declares that Iran may be the largest security challenge to the United States. It also accuses the Iranian regime of sponsoring terrorism, threatening Israel, disrupting democracy in Iraq and thwarting Iranians' desire for freedom.

The timing of Iran's acceptance, just when it is facing possible action at the United Nations, suggests that the Iranians may be seeking to link any help to the United States in calming Iraq with the nuclear issue.

But the Bush administration said the two should not be linked.

I think the Iranians pay attention to Fox News.

See here, ladies and gents, this is an example of the Bush Administration using DETERRENCE BY DOUBT to influence actions by the other side.

The Iranians were stubbornly refusing to back down on anything.

Now they want to enter into talks with the US over their activities in IRAQ. Why? Because they don't know if or when the US will launch an attack on them.

However, this should not be seen as their saying AT THIS POINT that they are willing to change anything about their nuke program.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Where is that link to the video where Americans think they should invade countries they have never even heard of or even exists?

[I Bent My Wookiee]

double

[Rumor]

Interesting article. It's going to be interesting to see the outcome of this meeting. It could also be seen as a way for Iran to pacify the American government for a little while to perhaps buy more time for them to further thier nuclear agenda. That's a big perhaps though.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by I Bent My Wookiee

Where is that link to the video where Americans think they should invade countries they have never even heard of or even exists?

Right next to the one with the Canadians who said the same thing.

[Spliffdaddy]

This one?

http://proudcanadiankids.ca/canada%20quiz.htm

The Ipsos-Reid poll conducted for the Dominion Institute shows six in 10
Americans (about 63 per cent) could pass a quiz on historical and civic
facts, by scoring five or more correct responses out of 10. Yet only 39 per
cent of Canadians can pass a similar test written for Canada.


Canadians, for example, were asked to name the first Prime Minister of
Canada, while Americans were asked to name the first President of the United
States. While 90 per cent of Americans knew their answer was George
Washington, only 54 per cent of Canadians could name John A. Macdonald as
our founding prime minister.

Americans also tended to remember the lyrics to their national anthem,
better than Canadians: 79 per cent of Americans could recite the first few
bars of the Star Spangled Banner, while only 37 per cent of Canadians knew
the words that come after "O Canada!"

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

This one?

http://proudcanadiankids.ca/canada%20quiz.htm

The Ipsos-Reid poll conducted for the Dominion Institute shows six in 10
Americans (about 63 per cent) could pass a quiz on historical and civic
facts, by scoring five or more correct responses out of 10. Yet only 39 per
cent of Canadians can pass a similar test written for Canada.


Canadians, for example, were asked to name the first Prime Minister of
Canada, while Americans were asked to name the first President of the United
States. While 90 per cent of Americans knew their answer was George
Washington, only 54 per cent of Canadians could name John A. Macdonald as
our founding prime minister.

Americans also tended to remember the lyrics to their national anthem,
better than Canadians: 79 per cent of Americans could recite the first few
bars of the Star Spangled Banner, while only 37 per cent of Canadians knew
the words that come after "O Canada!"

5 out of 10 is considered passing? Ha! The only thing that this proves is that there is an abundance of dumb people in both Canada and the U.S.

Instead of bashing each other's countries, try taking this test to see how you personally do.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Right next to the one with the Canadians who said the same thing.

Canadians are invading other countries?

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

This one?

http://proudcanadiankids.ca/canada%20quiz.htm

No actually, that is not a video nor does it show Americans talking about invading non-exsistant countries.

How could you possibly interpret it THAT wrong

That poll shows that Americans are more petriotic (big surprise) and shows nothing about world views. How does knowing the national anthem or naming a former president relate in any way to this topic?

[abe]

Originally Posted by El Gato

5 out of 10 is considered passing? Ha! The only thing that this proves is that there is an abundance of dumb people in both Canada and the U.S.

Instead of bashing each other's countries, try taking this test to see how you personally do.

It's a fun and educational exercise but it doesn't provide a score!

[abe]

Originally Posted by Rumor

Interesting article. It's going to be interesting to see the outcome of this meeting. It could also be seen as a way for Iran to pacify the American government for a little while to perhaps buy more time for them to further thier nuclear agenda. That's a big perhaps though.

I think your thinking here is 100% sound.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by El Gato

5 out of 10 is considered passing? Ha! The only thing that this proves is that there is an abundance of dumb people in both Canada and the U.S.

Instead of bashing each other's countries, try taking this test to see how you personally do.

heh. I see the word 'Palestine' has an asterisk beside it - denoting that the country is Currently Palestinian territory. Reckon they wanted to future-proof their website, given the high likelihood that Israel might just take 'Palestine' back overnight.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by abe

I think your thinking here is 100% sound.

No. Both Iran and the U.S. State Department have said that the nuclear issue is completely off the table in the talks about Iraq. Both sides want it that way.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by abe

It's a fun and educational exercise but it doesn't provide a score!

It doesn't have to. If anyone had trouble completing the map, I hope that it would give those with xenophobic tendencies on this board reason to consider that the policies they advocate may be just a missed place as their geography skills.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

heh. I see the word 'Palestine' has an asterisk beside it - denoting that the country is Currently Palestinian territory. Reckon they wanted to future-proof their website, given the high likelihood that Israel might just take 'Palestine' back overnight.

Yes, but could you locate the Palestinian territory in one try? Or Israel, for that matter? How about Iran or Iraq?

[abe]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

No. Both Iran and the U.S. State Department have said that the nuclear issue is completely off the table in the talks about Iraq. Both sides want it that way.

How do I say this?

Yes, you are right. And in my first post I allude to this fact you point out.

But Rumor isn't saying that they would talk about the nuclear issue.

Originally Posted by Rumor
Interesting article. It's going to be interesting to see the outcome of this meeting. It could also be seen as a way for Iran to pacify the American government for a little while to perhaps buy more time for them to further thier nuclear agenda. That's a big perhaps though.

What I believe he is saying is that if constructive talks go on between the US and Iran on this issue, (Iran's involvement in the Iraq conflict) and the US is encouraged by what they see happening in these talks then there may be some benefit to the Iranians.

How?

If the US is encouraged by these talks we may be slower to decide on military action on Iran's nuclear sites, thinking we might be able to negotiate a deal on the Nuclear issue.

Also, I have to interject this.

I hope to GOD that we don't go to war with Iran.

But if there is NO OTHER CHOICE, I hope we don't hesitate a single moment to launch an attack due to our governmental or military leaders being 'gun shy' because of the protests and the opposition to the war in Iraq.

If they were to wait a second too long and that delay caused greater death or destruction than necessary, I will lay those deaths at the feet of the liberals.

[abe]

Originally Posted by El Gato

It doesn't have to.

Ok. But I'd LIKE it to.

[abe]

Originally Posted by El Gato

Yes, but could you locate the Palestinian territory in one try? Or Israel, for that matter? How about Iran or Iraq?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

I had problems with the North African states that weren't on the coast and several of the '-stans' which were once part of the Soviet Union but are now independent nations.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by abe

Ok. But I'd LIKE it to.

What would that prove? You know if it takes you 5 minutes or 30 minutes to complete. You know for yourself if you had to cheat to complete the map. At the end, you know for yourself if you need to spend a little more time studying a globe than playing on MacNN.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by abe

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

I had problems with the North African states that weren't on the coast and several of the '-stans' which were once part of the Soviet Union but are now independent nations.

I had some problems with the west African states as well. With some lucky, educated guesses, I was able to place the former Soviet states.

[abe]

Originally Posted by El Gato

What would that prove? You know if it takes you 5 minutes or 30 minutes to complete. You know for yourself if you had to cheat to complete the map. At the end, you know for yourself if you need to spend a little more time studying a globe than playing on MacNN.

There is no need to keep score. Everything in life is relative and there's no such thing as winning or losing. It's an outdated concept.

"I'd like to teach the world to sing, in perfect harmony. I'd like to buy the world some coke so they'd be as high as thee!"

[Spliffdaddy]

I'm not sure that it matters if a person knows where a country is geographically located on the globe.

Unless you plan on sailing there, I suppose.

[abe]

Originally Posted by El Gato

I had some problems with the west African states as well. With some lucky, educated guesses, I was able to place the former Soviet states.

I can't tell you how alluringly pleasant your sig appears to me.

[abe]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'm not sure that it matters if a person knows where a country is geographically located on the globe.

Unless you plan on sailing there, I suppose.

I could think of only one or two more reasons.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by abe

But Rumor isn't saying that they would talk about the nuclear issue.



What I believe he is saying is that if constructive talks go on between the US and Iran on this issue, (Iran's involvement in the Iraq conflict) and the US is encouraged by what they see happening in these talks then there may be some benefit to the Iranians.

How?

If the US is encouraged by these talks we may be slower to decide on military action on Iran's nuclear sites, thinking we might be able to negotiate a deal on the Nuclear issue.

Exactly.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Damn, they renamed Morocco Western Sahara. That screwed me up.

greg

[Spliffdaddy]

Is Palestine a country?

I though it was just a suburb of Israel.

[mania]

Originally Posted by I Bent My Wookiee

Canadians are invading other countries?

This reminds me of a TV show - where someone was pretending to be in the air force and was going to invade canada in order to pick up chicks. it might have been that 70s show or perhaps family ties or it could of been friends (man I am old and senile).

Anyway - back to the topic at hand. I fully support bombing all Iranian nuclear reactors but please please dont try and occupy them okay!

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by abe

I can't tell you how alluringly pleasant your sig appears to me.

LOL, thanks. It's my girlfriend's cat but I've kind of adopted him for my own since he kicks so much ass

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'm not sure that it matters if a person knows where a country is geographically located on the globe.

Quoted for ludicrousness.

As long as our infallible leaders know where the good and bad countries are, then we'll all be alright, huh? No need to think for ourselves, our government has everything under control.

[Spliffdaddy]

well that's what I pay 'em for.

You didn't think I was gonna pay 'em *and* do their job, too - didya?

[El Gato]

Do you have someone chew your food for you as well?

Government's job is to represent the will of the people. Lamentably, the "people" in this case, as you've so aptly demonstrated, are largely uninformed and willing to accept any spoon-fed information the government places in front of their face.

Laziness and ignorance are not characteristics worthy of praise.

[abe]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

well that's what I pay 'em for.

You didn't think I was gonna pay 'em *and* do their job, too - didya?

[abe]

Originally Posted by El Gato

Do you have someone chew your food for you as well?

Government's job is to represent the will of the people. Lamentably, the "people" in this case, as you've so aptly demonstrated, are largely uninformed and willing to accept any spoon-fed information the government places in front of their face.

Laziness and ignorance are not characteristics worthy of praise.

You are mistaking consent for submission.

[abe]

Originally Posted by El Gato

Do you have someone chew your food for you as well?

Government's job is to represent the will of the people. Lamentably, the "people" in this case, as you've so aptly demonstrated, are largely uninformed and willing to accept any spoon-fed information the government places in front of their face.

Laziness and ignorance are not characteristics worthy of praise.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...18#post2919118

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by abe

You are mistaking consent for submission.

When a citizen blindly accepts what their government is doing simply as "the government is doing its job and that's what my taxes pay for," then consent and submission are indistinguishable.

[Spliffdaddy]

Quick! What's the latitude and longitude of Iran?

Well, damn. You're an idiot.

being able to point it out on a map won't do you a bit of good.

[Spliffdaddy]

You can use a computer, but you can't tell me where the northbridge chip is located or which company manufactured it.

How lame is that?

There are plenty of trivia questions that don't relate in any way to real life.

[Fyre4ce]

Originally Posted by El Gato

5 out of 10 is considered passing? Ha! The only thing that this proves is that there is an abundance of dumb people in both Canada and the U.S.

Instead of bashing each other's countries, try taking this test to see how you personally do.

Good test. I had 27 misplace errors before I got them all right. A mediocre, but not terrible, performance. Interested to hear what other people score.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Quick! What's the latitude and longitude of Iran?

Well, damn. You're an idiot.

being able to point it out on a map won't do you a bit of good

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

You can use a computer, but you can't tell me where the northbridge chip is located or which company manufactured it.

How lame is that?

There are plenty of trivia questions that don't relate in any way to real life.

Wow, two in a row. I must have struck a chord with you, Spliffy.

My point stands, unless you'd care to refute it: a willfully ignorant public is the plaything of the government.

Anyway, have the last word if you will, I've said all that I have to say on the issue.

[abe]

Originally Posted by El Gato

When a citizen blindly accepts what their government is doing simply as "the government is doing its job and that's what my taxes pay for," then consent and submission are indistinguishable.

You are ASSUMING quite a bit here. Ask ANY of the conservatives here any questions you'd like about what the government is doing with regards to Iraq and then ask any liberals the same question and I'LL BET you a penny that the conservatives have a better understanding of the history, a better grasp of the current situation and a better idea of what the big picture and long range goals are.

I'd say it is your side, your guys who are out of touch and generally uninformed or misinformed and blind to the truth and/or reality.

[El Gato]

Originally Posted by abe

You are ASSUMING quite a bit here. Ask ANY of the conservatives here any questions you'd like about what the government is doing with regards to Iraq and then ask any liberals the same question and I'LL BET you a penny that the conservatives have a better understanding of the history, a better grasp of the current situation and a better idea of what the big picture and long range goals are.

I'd say it is your side, your guys who are out of touch and generally uninformed or misinformed and blind to the truth and/or reality.

You're assuming that conservatives on this board have a better grasp based on your already well-documented agreement with them.

Besides, it's presumptuous to assume that I subscribe to one political affiliation over another when I've never made it known. I'm only questioning willful ignorance and blind allegiance to any government - my views are not party-specific.

[abe]

Originally Posted by El Gato

You're assuming that conservatives on this board have a better grasp based on your already well-documented agreement with them.

Besides, it's presumptuous to assume that I subscribe to one political affiliation over another when I've never made it known. I'm only questioning willful ignorance and blind allegiance to any government.

Ok, you say you're "only questioning willful ignorance and blind allegiance to any government," well, I propose you get an answer to your questioning.

You will get your eyes opened I think, El Gato!

[ShortcutToMoncton]

I had about 8 errors. The northeastern formerly-Russian-associated countries (which I'm sure caused many people problems), some trouble in western Africa, and a problem figuring out which Gulf Island was which.

I imagine that's pretty good for a North American, but I study history and should probably have done better than I did.

greg

[Fyre4ce]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

I had about 8 errors. The northeastern formerly-Russian-associated countries (which I'm sure caused many people problems), some trouble in western Africa, and a problem figuring out which Gulf Island was which.

I imagine that's pretty good for a North American, but I study history and should probably have done better than I did.

greg

I was able to get almost all the middle-east countries without errors. It was the central african countries that really threw me. Had to resort to blind guessing on a few of them.

[abe]

Originally Posted by Fyre4ce

I was able to get almost all the middle-east countries without errors. It was the central african countries that really threw me. Had to resort to blind guessing on a few of them.

Yeah. Working from the hotspots of the Iraq/Israel region and spreading outward in all directions, I got to a point where I wondered, "How will I know if I'm getting them right or not?"

And then, more than halfway through the test, I got to Chad!

X!!!

Ahhhh! I see.