Skip to main content /US
CNN.com /US
CNN TV
EDITIONS






Many Americans unconvinced about Iraq attack

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- While slightly more than half of U.S. residents feel they understand why the Bush administration is considering military action against Iraq, many Americans still need convincing that an attack is necessary, according to a CNN-Gallup Poll released Friday.

Fears of biological and chemical weapons or of terrorist acts were most often cited by those polled as the reasons the United States should attack Iraq

 CNN NewsPass Video 
  •  Bush makes Iraq case to Congress 
  •  Iraqi minister scolds U.S. at U.N. 
 MORE STORIES
  •  General: U.S. ready to attack Iraq
  •  Iraq: No new U.N. resolutions
  •  Bush outlines first-strike doctrine
 EXTRA INFORMATION
  •  Profile: Hans Blix
  •  Gallery: Reactions to Bush's speech on Iraq
  •  Timeline: White House states case for Saddam violations
  •  Interactive: Chemical weapons
  •  Timeline: U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq
  •  Map: Area controlled by Kurds
  •  Interactive Map: World stances on Iraq
 RESOURCES
  •  On the Scene: Rula Amin: Iraqi people relieved
  •  Text of Iraq letter to U.N.
  •  U.N. resolutions on Iraq
  •  U.N. Security Council
  •  Transcript: Bush address to U.N. General Assembly
  •  In-Depth: The Unfinished War

The poll of 1,007 adults showed that 56 percent believe they have a clear idea of why an attack against Iraq is being considered. Forty-four percent of those surveyed August 5-8 said they don't clearly understand.

Of the 590 people who said they understood the U.S. considerations, almost one-third said the United States is considering attacking Iraq because of its weapons of mass destruction, while another 30 percent said it is because of the possibility it could back terrorist attacks.

Sixteen percent said the reason is simply to remove Saddam Hussein from power, 13 percent gave the broad reason that Iraq is a threat to the United States, and 6 percent cited Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspections.

Iraq ousted the inspectors in late 1998, and they haven't returned. The inspectors were there to ensure that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction or the ability to launch them, as mandated under a U.N. resolution passed after Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990.

The United Nations also imposed sanctions on Iraq that won't be lifted until inspectors certify the nation has none of the weapons.

The Bush administration contends that Iraq possesses chemical and biological weapons -- some of which it has used against its own people -- and is in the process of developing nuclear weapons.

The United States turned down a recent offer from Iraq for members of Congress to examine sites where they believe weapons of mass destruction are being produced, and the United Nations turned down Iraq's offer of talks on the possible return of the inspectors.

Friday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters the sanctions have been in place so long, they are no longer working.

"Not just in the case of Iraq, but I believe historically, once they're applied, they're effective for a reasonable period of time, and then they tend to be eroded," he said.

He said that happens for a lot of reasons. "People decide they don't agree with them anymore, and they start trading. People figure clever ways to get around them with dual-use technologies. People do it illegally across borders, and these are porous borders.

"And it is very clear that the political and economic sanctions have, with respect to Saddam Hussein, not worked."

Rumsfeld and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice are expected to meet with President Bush next week at his Crawford, Texas, ranch to discuss how best to deal with Hussein and the threats they believe he poses.

Congress also has held hearings on the issue.

The administration has said repeatedly that its goal is to remove Hussein from power, a policy that was approved by Congress in 1998, called the Iraqi Liberation Act.

"It is the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime," Rumsfeld said. He said he didn't know what prompted the legislative action.

"I assume it had to do with him trying to impose his will on his neighbors. I also assume that it's because he's [Iraq] been elevated to the status of a terrorist state."

Rumsfeld was asked about a warning Thursday from House Majority Leader Dick Armey, who said the United States should not initiate an attack on Iraq without provocation.

"Dick Armey's a fine congressman and a good friend," the secretary said. "And I think it's important for people to say what they think on these things. And that's the wonderful thing about our country. We have a public debate and dialogue and discussion on important issues."

Comparing the possibilities in Iraq with Afghanistan, Rumsfeld said, "Afghanistan is a model of what can happen when people are liberated."

"Wouldn't it be a wonderful thing if Iraq were similar to Afghanistan?

"If a bad regime was thrown out, people were liberated, food could come in, borders could be opened, repression could stop, prisons could be opened. I mean it would be fabulous."



 
 
 
 







RELATED SITES:

 Search   

Back to the top