Gallup poll confirms majority of Americans favor diplomacy with Iran

Jetdawgg · 06-18-2008, 10:13 PM

[QUOTE]According to a recent Gallup poll, 59% of Americans think it is a good idea for the President of the United States to meet with the President of Iran, and 67% support meeting with the leaders of countries considered enemies of the United States.

For months, the presidential campaigns and members of Congress have focused on the question of whether to negotiate with countries hostile to the United States. This poll indicates a strong majority of Americans prefer a US policy characterized by engagement with other countries rather than one that pursues diplomatic isolation. A recent University of California-Berkeley poll reflecting IranianAmericans' views showed strikingly similar results, with 66% supporting diplomacy with Iran.
Among those polled during Gallup's May 19-21 survey, 71% of Democrats and 58% of Independents favor discussions with Iran. Nearly half of all Republicans support negotiations with Iran as well.

In general, Americans' views on the President meeting leaders of foreign countries considered enemies of the United States are even more affirming of diplomatic engagement. Of those polled, 79% of Democrats and 70% of Independents think it is a good idea, with 48% of Republicans agreeing as well. These new figures add weight to the already significant number of people calling for a new Iran policy centered on diplomacy.

"The Gallup poll confirms what many already knew - the American people and the Iranian-American community support diplomacy as the best approach to resolve conflicts," said Babak Talebi, Director of Community Relations at the National Iranian American Council. "Decision-makers in Washington should heed the will of the American people." [/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1133&Itemid=2[/url]

King Ryan · 06-18-2008, 10:34 PM

they might as well change the poll to say Gallup poll confirms that majority of Americans are sane

24 · 06-18-2008, 10:46 PM

Well thats obvious... Who wouldnt want that alternative over war against any country?? The problem is: can it be done?

King Ryan · 06-18-2008, 10:56 PM

[QUOTE=24;2590735]Who wouldnt want that alternative over war against any country?[/QUOTE]

umm... have you been awake at all in the past 7.5 years?

Jetdawgg · 06-19-2008, 10:45 AM

TanG, I also see less of the 'kill 'em all" clatter that used to dominate this part of the site.

I guess even they are 'softening' a bit:)

24 · 06-19-2008, 03:43 PM

[QUOTE=Tanginius;2590764]umm... have you been awake at all in the past 7.5 years?[/QUOTE]

Nice how you deleted the rest of my post you quoted. Which answers your follow up question.:rolleyes:

asuusa · 06-19-2008, 07:50 PM

[QUOTE=24;2590735] The problem is: can it be done?[/QUOTE]

Oh, it can be done, the question is "Does it do any good?" and "What are we willing to concede to get them to stop being jerks and start being nice little puppies?"

That's what I'd like to hear Obumma and his cronies tell us how they'd do this!

:confused:

acepepe · 06-19-2008, 07:59 PM

In another poll they found that we should try talking to Charles Manson so we can know what he's feeling and try to understand why he's antisocial.

2foolish197 · 06-19-2008, 08:00 PM

[QUOTE=Tanginius;2590698]they might as well change the poll to say Gallup poll confirms that majority of Americans are sane[/QUOTE]so how would you approach iran?

piney · 06-19-2008, 08:04 PM

[QUOTE=asuusa;2592563]Oh, it can be done, the question is "Does it do any good?" and "What are we willing to concede to get them to stop being jerks and start being nice little puppies?"

That's what I'd like to hear Obumma and his cronies tell us how they'd do this!

:confused:[/QUOTE]

that sounds reasonable...

Obama, can you please look into the fututre and tell us exactly what will happen in a meeting with leaders from Iran or any nation which aids terrorists. Can you please tell us exactly what they will request from. You mean you can't look into the future?

Hurmmph....damn you Obumma

jetstream23 · 06-19-2008, 08:05 PM

[QUOTE=2foolish197;2592568]so how would you approach iran?[/QUOTE]

Me, with guns blazing! :yes:

King Ryan · 06-19-2008, 10:06 PM

[QUOTE=2foolish197;2592568]so how would you approach iran?[/QUOTE]

diplomatically... just like I would approach any other country

is there a specific problem you'd like me to solve?

Winstonbiggs · 06-21-2008, 01:44 PM

We are negiotating with Iran the idea that we aren't is more Democratic BS.

[url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25300269[/url]

[QUOTE]The United States says it is focusing on diplomatic pressure to thwart Tehran's nuclear ambitions but has not ruled out military action as a last resort.

Diplomats said on Friday the six powers had offered Iran preliminary talks on its nuclear program, on condition it limit enrichment to current levels for six weeks in exchange for a freeze on moves towards harsher sanctions.

They said European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana conveyed the proposal during talks in Tehran on June 14 in which he presented a revised batch of incentives for Iran to stop pursuing technology that could yield atomic weapons.

'Freeze-for-freeze'
Asked whether such a "freeze-for-freeze" proposal would be acceptable to Iran, Elham told reporters:

"About suspension, it has been said that suspension of activities and suspension of enrichment is not a logical issue that would be acceptable and in any case the continuation of negotiations will not be based on enrichment suspension."

Iran has repeatedly rejected the sextet's precondition of a full suspension of enrichment-related activity before negotiations to implement the incentives, which include support in developing a civilian nuclear program.

[B]Iran says it will review the offer by the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany but that it will not stop enriching uranium, which can have both civilian and military uses.[/B][/QUOTE]It appears that we are in multi lateral negiotations with Iran on Nukes. Keep up the lies boys the elections is in a few months.

I wonder what most Americans would think if they were asked do you favor the US abandoning multi lateral talks with Iran for unilateral action?

JetsFanatic · 06-21-2008, 05:40 PM

The stupidest thing in world would be for the leader of this country to meet with the nut that runs Iran. All that would do is legitimize a rogue government. Besides do you really think that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can be reasonable?

MnJetFan · 06-21-2008, 05:49 PM

He is only a small nut in a field of nuts. The Mullahs call the shots in Iran!

Warfish · 06-21-2008, 08:59 PM

[QUOTE=24;2590735]Well thats obvious... Who wouldnt want that alternative over war against any country?? The problem is: can it be done?[/QUOTE]

This.

MnJetFan · 06-21-2008, 09:15 PM

We may not have to do it, Israel may do it for us. If the Iranians got really stupid and tried to mine the Persian Straights. The Saudis would also declare war.

PlumberKhan · 06-22-2008, 08:59 AM

[QUOTE=jetstream23;2592572]Me, with guns blazing! :yes:[/QUOTE]

What's stopping you? Freaking cakewalk, right? Open arms...liberators...candy, unicorns, flowers at our feet, rainbows, singing birds.

Cakewalk, cakewalk, cakewalk. So easy.

asuusa · 06-22-2008, 09:47 AM

[QUOTE=JetsFanatic;2595131] Besides do you really think that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can be reasonable?[/QUOTE]

Does it snow in Miami?

The problem we have in negotiations, is that we're willing to concede far more than he does so he's in the driver's seat; Which he loves and loves to thumb his nose at the big ol' White Satan"! So meeting with our prez will glorify him in his eyes, i.e., "See, I'm a player on the world scene, I can even get a meeting with the most powerful man in the world!" And now that he's heard Obamma say he'd meet with him, that, naturally, will make him harder to reason with!

[QUOTE]U.N., "atomic energy chief ElBaradei has been pleading with Iran to accept a new package of incentives before another round of sanctions would be imposed."[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Meanwhile, Iran is reiterating its decision to continue enriching uranium, calling Western pressure to suspend the work "illogical."

The statement by a government spokesman comes as Europe waits for Iran's formal answer to an international package of incentives designed to rein in its nuclear program.

Iran's official IRNA news agency quoted Iranian spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham on Saturday as saying that his country will respond to the package at a convenient time.

The package would give Tehran economic incentives, and the chance to develop alternate light-water reactors, in return for dropping the uranium enrichment.
[/QUOTE]

CBS News

villain_the_foe · 06-22-2008, 09:24 PM

[QUOTE=Jetdawgg;2590657][url]http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1133&Itemid=2[/url][/QUOTE]

Of course meeting with countries who have a different view than we do would be beneficial. We could attempt to come to a common ground. Nukes never bring common ground to a situation.

The president of Iran himself came to NYC and spoke at Colombia University about a year ago. Im not sure how many people knew about that. My point is, that though he may have different views than this government which, showing the polls, many citizens of the country also have different views than the government, the president of Iran came to this country in peace, not to speak to the President, but to speak to the people of this country at an educational institution. Our own president doesnt even do that. Though there were things that he may have agreed with that we may not agree with, he didnt bring gunz and rockets with him to Colombia U. He bought himself, his voice, a pen and a pad. How could you not respect that?

There's no reason to push this man and his country into a corner. An attack wouldnt be for the sake of maintaining our liberties.

Example: look how we just invaded Iraq with all there "weapons of mass destruction". I knew that sh!t was fake just because of how we stormed into the country.

Remember the cold war? remember when Russia had nukes in Cuba. Why didnt we just storm Russia? I'll tell you why, we didnt storm into Russia because Russia REALLY had Weapons on mass destruction as our current president would put it. What did this govenrment do? They got on the damn phone and talked about it. We sent ships out in the ocean, but we just didnt barge into Cuba beacuse we SEEN what they had, we knew it.

Yet, Iraq is basically the same threat and we just go in like some wild Cowboys huh? Its not hard to point out the bull****.

06-18-2008, 10:13 PM	#1
Jetdawgg All Pro Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 6,693	Gallup poll confirms majority of Americans favor diplomacy with Iran [QUOTE]According to a recent Gallup poll, 59% of Americans think it is a good idea for the President of the United States to meet with the President of Iran, and 67% support meeting with the leaders of countries considered enemies of the United States. For months, the presidential campaigns and members of Congress have focused on the question of whether to negotiate with countries hostile to the United States. This poll indicates a strong majority of Americans prefer a US policy characterized by engagement with other countries rather than one that pursues diplomatic isolation. A recent University of California-Berkeley poll reflecting IranianAmericans' views showed strikingly similar results, with 66% supporting diplomacy with Iran. Among those polled during Gallup's May 19-21 survey, 71% of Democrats and 58% of Independents favor discussions with Iran. Nearly half of all Republicans support negotiations with Iran as well. In general, Americans' views on the President meeting leaders of foreign countries considered enemies of the United States are even more affirming of diplomatic engagement. Of those polled, 79% of Democrats and 70% of Independents think it is a good idea, with 48% of Republicans agreeing as well. These new figures add weight to the already significant number of people calling for a new Iran policy centered on diplomacy. "The Gallup poll confirms what many already knew - the American people and the Iranian-American community support diplomacy as the best approach to resolve conflicts," said Babak Talebi, Director of Community Relations at the National Iranian American Council. "Decision-makers in Washington should heed the will of the American people." [/QUOTE] [url]http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1133&Itemid=2[/url]

06-18-2008, 10:34 PM	#2
King Ryan take a guess Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Montville, NJ Posts: 5,473	they might as well change the poll to say Gallup poll confirms that majority of Americans are sane

06-18-2008, 10:46 PM	#3
24 All Pro Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 8,884	Well thats obvious... Who wouldnt want that alternative over war against any country?? The problem is: can it be done?

06-18-2008, 10:56 PM	#4
King Ryan take a guess Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Montville, NJ Posts: 5,473	[QUOTE=24;2590735]Who wouldnt want that alternative over war against any country?[/QUOTE] umm... have you been awake at all in the past 7.5 years?

06-19-2008, 10:45 AM	#5
Jetdawgg All Pro Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 6,693	TanG, I also see less of the 'kill 'em all" clatter that used to dominate this part of the site. I guess even they are 'softening' a bit:)

06-19-2008, 03:43 PM	#6
24 All Pro Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 8,884	[QUOTE=Tanginius;2590764]umm... have you been awake at all in the past 7.5 years?[/QUOTE] Nice how you deleted the rest of my post you quoted. Which answers your follow up question.:rolleyes:

06-19-2008, 07:50 PM	#7
asuusa All Pro Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 1,171	[QUOTE=24;2590735] The problem is: can it be done?[/QUOTE] Oh, it can be done, the question is "Does it do any good?" and "What are we willing to concede to get them to stop being jerks and start being nice little puppies?" That's what I'd like to hear Obumma and his cronies tell us how they'd do this! :confused:

06-19-2008, 07:59 PM	#8
acepepe All League Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,428	In another poll they found that we should try talking to Charles Manson so we can know what he's feeling and try to understand why he's antisocial.

06-19-2008, 08:00 PM	#9
2foolish197 i suspect hanky-panky All League Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: astoria Posts: 4,528	[QUOTE=Tanginius;2590698]they might as well change the poll to say Gallup poll confirms that majority of Americans are sane[/QUOTE]so how would you approach iran?

06-19-2008, 08:04 PM	#10
piney hip deep in dirty diapers All League Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 3,618	[QUOTE=asuusa;2592563]Oh, it can be done, the question is "Does it do any good?" and "What are we willing to concede to get them to stop being jerks and start being nice little puppies?" That's what I'd like to hear Obumma and his cronies tell us how they'd do this! :confused:[/QUOTE] that sounds reasonable... Obama, can you please look into the fututre and tell us exactly what will happen in a meeting with leaders from Iran or any nation which aids terrorists. Can you please tell us exactly what they will request from. You mean you can't look into the future? Hurmmph....damn you Obumma

06-19-2008, 08:05 PM	#11
jetstream23 recovering from turf toe Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Phoenix, AZ (New Jets Stadium Section 246) Posts: 31,610	[QUOTE=2foolish197;2592568]so how would you approach iran?[/QUOTE] Me, with guns blazing! :yes:

06-19-2008, 10:06 PM	#12
King Ryan take a guess Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Montville, NJ Posts: 5,473	[QUOTE=2foolish197;2592568]so how would you approach iran?[/QUOTE] diplomatically... just like I would approach any other country is there a specific problem you'd like me to solve?

06-21-2008, 01:44 PM	#13
Winstonbiggs Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 12,939	We are negiotating with Iran the idea that we aren't is more Democratic BS. [url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25300269[/url] [QUOTE]The United States says it is focusing on diplomatic pressure to thwart Tehran's nuclear ambitions but has not ruled out military action as a last resort. Diplomats said on Friday the six powers had offered Iran preliminary talks on its nuclear program, on condition it limit enrichment to current levels for six weeks in exchange for a freeze on moves towards harsher sanctions. They said European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana conveyed the proposal during talks in Tehran on June 14 in which he presented a revised batch of incentives for Iran to stop pursuing technology that could yield atomic weapons. 'Freeze-for-freeze' Asked whether such a "freeze-for-freeze" proposal would be acceptable to Iran, Elham told reporters: "About suspension, it has been said that suspension of activities and suspension of enrichment is not a logical issue that would be acceptable and in any case the continuation of negotiations will not be based on enrichment suspension." Iran has repeatedly rejected the sextet's precondition of a full suspension of enrichment-related activity before negotiations to implement the incentives, which include support in developing a civilian nuclear program. [B]Iran says it will review the offer by the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany but that it will not stop enriching uranium, which can have both civilian and military uses.[/B][/QUOTE]It appears that we are in multi lateral negiotations with Iran on Nukes. Keep up the lies boys the elections is in a few months. I wonder what most Americans would think if they were asked do you favor the US abandoning multi lateral talks with Iran for unilateral action?

06-21-2008, 05:40 PM	#14
JetsFanatic When you listen to the fans, you sit with the fans! Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 5,938	The stupidest thing in world would be for the leader of this country to meet with the nut that runs Iran. All that would do is legitimize a rogue government. Besides do you really think that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can be reasonable?

06-21-2008, 05:49 PM	#15
MnJetFan All League Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 4,302	He is only a small nut in a field of nuts. The Mullahs call the shots in Iran!

06-21-2008, 08:59 PM	#16
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	[QUOTE=24;2590735]Well thats obvious... Who wouldnt want that alternative over war against any country?? The problem is: can it be done?[/QUOTE] This.

06-21-2008, 09:15 PM	#17
MnJetFan All League Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 4,302	We may not have to do it, Israel may do it for us. If the Iranians got really stupid and tried to mine the Persian Straights. The Saudis would also declare war.

06-22-2008, 08:59 AM	#18
PlumberKhan BRACE YOURSELVES FOR 12... Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Van down by the river Posts: 21,028	[QUOTE=jetstream23;2592572]Me, with guns blazing! :yes:[/QUOTE] What's stopping you? Freaking cakewalk, right? Open arms...liberators...candy, unicorns, flowers at our feet, rainbows, singing birds. Cakewalk, cakewalk, cakewalk. So easy.

06-22-2008, 09:47 AM	#19
asuusa All Pro Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 1,171	[QUOTE=JetsFanatic;2595131] Besides do you really think that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can be reasonable?[/QUOTE] Does it snow in Miami? The problem we have in negotiations, is that we're willing to concede far more than he does so he's in the driver's seat; Which he loves and loves to thumb his nose at the big ol' White Satan"! So meeting with our prez will glorify him in his eyes, i.e., "See, I'm a player on the world scene, I can even get a meeting with the most powerful man in the world!" And now that he's heard Obamma say he'd meet with him, that, naturally, will make him harder to reason with! [QUOTE]U.N., "atomic energy chief ElBaradei has been pleading with Iran to accept a new package of incentives before another round of sanctions would be imposed."[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Meanwhile, Iran is reiterating its decision to continue enriching uranium, calling Western pressure to suspend the work "illogical." The statement by a government spokesman comes as Europe waits for Iran's formal answer to an international package of incentives designed to rein in its nuclear program. Iran's official IRNA news agency quoted Iranian spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham on Saturday as saying that his country will respond to the package at a convenient time. The package would give Tehran economic incentives, and the chance to develop alternate light-water reactors, in return for dropping the uranium enrichment. [/QUOTE] CBS News

06-22-2008, 09:24 PM	#20
villain_the_foe Veteran Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 192	[QUOTE=Jetdawgg;2590657][url]http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1133&Itemid=2[/url][/QUOTE] Of course meeting with countries who have a different view than we do would be beneficial. We could attempt to come to a common ground. Nukes never bring common ground to a situation. The president of Iran himself came to NYC and spoke at Colombia University about a year ago. Im not sure how many people knew about that. My point is, that though he may have different views than this government which, showing the polls, many citizens of the country also have different views than the government, the president of Iran came to this country in peace, not to speak to the President, but to speak to the people of this country at an educational institution. Our own president doesnt even do that. Though there were things that he may have agreed with that we may not agree with, he didnt bring gunz and rockets with him to Colombia U. He bought himself, his voice, a pen and a pad. How could you not respect that? There's no reason to push this man and his country into a corner. An attack wouldnt be for the sake of maintaining our liberties. Example: look how we just invaded Iraq with all there "weapons of mass destruction". I knew that sh!t was fake just because of how we stormed into the country. Remember the cold war? remember when Russia had nukes in Cuba. Why didnt we just storm Russia? I'll tell you why, we didnt storm into Russia because Russia REALLY had Weapons on mass destruction as our current president would put it. What did this govenrment do? They got on the damn phone and talked about it. We sent ships out in the ocean, but we just didnt barge into Cuba beacuse we SEEN what they had, we knew it. Yet, Iraq is basically the same threat and we just go in like some wild Cowboys huh? Its not hard to point out the bull****.