POLL: Most Republicans Still Believe That Iraq Had WMD

Discussion in 'Politics' started by AK Forty Seven, Sep 25, 2012.

  1. http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/06/21/504201/poll-republicans-iraq-wmd/

    POLL: Most Republicans Still Believe That Iraq Had WMD

    A new poll conducted by Dartmouth government professor Benjamin Valentino found that 63 percent of Republican respondents still believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the United States invaded in 2003, even though this assertion has been thoroughly debunked. In comparison, only 27 percent of independents and less than 15 percent of Democrats believed in the misinformation. Additionally, 64 percent of Republican respondents believe that President Obama was born in another country. As the Huffington Post’s Dan Froomkin notes, “this latest poll result seems to indicate a refusal — unique to the modern Republican Party — to acknowledge facts.”
  2. Not one to keep digging up stuff, but come on, this is too much.
  3. "Without a shred of verifiable and falsifiable evidence to the contrary, 50% of the republicans don't believe that President Obama was born in the US less than 50 years ago.
    And yet, those same people are certain that 2000 years ago someone called jesus was born in of a virgin in the Middle East, did miracles, died on the cross and resurrected to heaven without a shred of verifiable and falsifiable evidence to support this."
  4. Lucrum


  5. It's part of the conservative mentality to preserve the past, whether it is healthy or not. Their beloved leader Bush invaded Iraq on the WMD pretext, and even if they know it was a hollow pretext, they feel they must publicly acknowledged it as a fact to maintain solidairty and brotherhood with their fellow tribesmen. And most of all, to not cede victory to the Non Republicans.

    What's a real surprise about that poll is that 37% of Republicans are not infected with this tribal form of groupthink.

    Hard left Liberals are just as susceptible to tribal groupthink.

    Sincerely, Brother Bong, your friend and occasional libtard.
  6. I was convinced by speeches made by President Clinton, Senator Clinton, Senator Kerry, Senator Kennedy.
    They all were convinced Iraq had WMD
  7. Lucrum


    Don't forget Al Gore.
  8. So you are saying that Bush and his neocon cadre were svengalied by the prior group of Democraps?

    The difference is that Clinton didn't press to invade Iraq, waste 100,000 American lives and 2 trillion dollars. He pressed to maintain a no fly zone.

    A shock to the American consciousness arrived on 1/11/2001 and our President and Congress failed to provide intelligent leadership and the public failed to hold the leadership accountable. We deserve the kneedeep shithole we put ourselves in.
  9. stoic


    On 16 March 1988, the Kurdish town of Halabja was attacked with a mix of mustard gas and nerve agents, killing 5,000 civilians, and maiming, disfiguring, or seriously debilitating 10,000 more. The attack occurred in conjunction with the 1988 al-Anfal campaign designed to reassert central control of the mostly Kurdish population of areas of northern Iraq and defeat the Kurdish peshmerga rebel forces. It is estimated that 1.1 to 2.1 million deaths resulted from the al-Anfal campaign. Saddam ordered the attack to terrorize the Kurdish population in northern Iraq. The bloody eight-year war ended in a stalemate.

    During the Iraq- Iran war, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranian forces fighting on the southern front.

    A weapon of mass destruction (WMD) is a weapon that can kill and bring significant harm to a large number of humans (and other life forms) and/or cause great damage to man-made structures (e.g. buildings), natural structures (e.g. mountains), or the biosphere in general. The scope and application of the term has evolved and been disputed, often signifying more politically than technically. Coined in reference to aerial bombing with chemical explosives, it has come to distinguish large-scale weaponry of other technologies, such as chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear. This differentiates the term from more technical ones such as chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons (CBRN).
  10. BSAM


    Exsqueeze me, brother Bong, but where did you get that number?
    #10     Sep 25, 2012