Gallup: Americans Favor President Meeting w/ US Enemies

[The Lorax]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107617/American...US-Enemies.aspx

[nebula]

This is according to a Gallup Panel survey of a representative national sample of 1,013 Americans

I understand the wwight Gallup has with surveying . . . but only 1, 013 people to represent the whole of the US population's opinion?

[WillingToDie]

I'm not surprised. People are tired of war and fighting.

[EricH]

Yes, and a majority of Brits favored Neville Chaimberlain meeting with Hitler. The ideal that because a majority believe something it must be correct is logically fallacious. The question is much more complicated that actually meeting. One must ask what agreeing to meet will communicate etc.

[The Lorax]

One must ask what agreeing to meet will communicate etc.

It communicates a willingness to solve the problem.

[Guest yod]

There is a reason why we elect leaders. To lead. Deciding foreign policy by opinion poll is the Clinton way...but that got us 911, the USS Cole, and a hastry retreat from Somalia among other political/military blunders.

How many of these people polled have access to the same intel that our leaders have? Answer: ZERO

We can't have our defense policy run by a 300 million-headed monster. We have representatives in government who make decisions based on things that should not be made public knowledge for our enemies. Our only choice is to elect people we can trust. obviously, you don't trust Bush or his methods but the alternatives we were given in the last 2 elections were pathetic and he was chosen by the laws governing the nation.

No matter who gets elected next, appeasement is the coward's way out and will ultimately cause more lives to be lost in the long run. I have hope that most Americans know this and Obama will be rejected for offering this ludicrous option as a solution.

in other words, I don't think Americans want to surrender even if they don't support the current actions in Iraq...and this war is going to continue until Iran is no longer a threat to the oil supply of western nations...no matter what ANY of the candidates would say before the election.

[Guest yod]

One must ask what agreeing to meet will communicate etc.

It communicates a willingness to solve the problem.

so does relentlessly fighting our enemies until they are defeated no matter how long it takes...

[The Lorax]

No matter who gets elected next, appeasement is the coward's way out and will ultimately cause more lives to be lost in the long run.

You are the second person to bring up appeasement in this thread.

Can you tell me what appeasement is?

[nebula]

It communicates a willingness to solve the problem.

With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

How does sitting at the table with a man who says: "Today, the time for the fall of the satanic power of the United States has come and the countdown to the annihilation of the emperor of power and wealth has started," going to solve anything?

[Burning_Ember]

3 Posts 'till referencing Hitler in this thread. I think thats a new record.

But really as an example, "The Surge" in Iraq wasn't successful because of brute force. It was successful because of diplomacy, and getting the factions to agree to stop shooting each other. If people agree to stop shooting each other, it is far more effective than shooting at one/both sides until they stop shooting each other/you.