Public Still Backs Military Move on Iraq

After weeks of debate in foreign-policy circles, a solid majority of Americans continue to support military action to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq, The Times Poll has found.

But most of those who support a strike against Iraq also want the United States to win support from allied nations before launching military action, the poll shows.

That poses a potential problem for the Bush administration, which has met resistance from such allies as Britain, France and Germany to its calls for forceful action to overthrow Hussein.

Still, the poll suggests that President Bush starts with a broad base of support from the American public as he makes the case for toppling Hussein.

The poll found that 59% of Americans believe the U.S. should take military action to remove Hussein from power; 29% were opposed; and 12% were unsure.

An even larger majority, 64%, said they would support a ground attack on Iraq if Bush decided to launch one, with 28% still opposed.

However, 61% of those who support military action said they believe the United States should attack Iraq only if the international community supports the move.

“I think we ought to get rid of Saddam Hussein, but it would be a terrible mistake to do it unilaterally,” said Dewey Paugh, 65, a retired U.S. Postal Service manager in Columbus, Ga., who was one of the respondents to the poll. “I think it would just about ruin us in getting any help in the war on terrorism from the Arab nations.”

The poll also found that support for war with Iraq might drop significantly if U.S. forces suffered significant casualties. When asked whether they would support a ground attack on Iraq if casualties were high, 45% said yes; 41% said no.

The poll’s findings suggest that public support for military action against Hussein has diminished somewhat over the last six months. After Bush denounced Iraq as a major threat to U.S. security in his State of the Union address in January, The Times Poll and other surveys found that more than 70% of the public backed military action.

But even at 59%, the level of support for military action--before the president has decided to send troops into battle--is unprecedented, public-opinion experts say. Ever since the first opinion surveys were taken in the years before World War II, polls usually find most of the public opposed to military action before it begins.

“This is more conceptual support for military operations than we ever saw in the 1990s, when the Clinton administration was considering intervention in the Balkans,” noted Andrew Kohut of Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. “One of the real legacies of the Sept. 11 attack is that people are willing to accept the idea of preemptive military action.”

Kohut said the poll’s finding that most Americans want global support for any military action fits a more traditional pattern. “The public doesn’t like the idea of going it alone,” he said.

“Bush has a lot to work with here in terms of potential public support ... but it’s not a done deal. He’s going to have a hard time holding it if he doesn’t have allied support, if he doesn’t get support from Congress, if he doesn’t touch all the bases.”

The Times Poll also found that 60% of the public believes Bush is considering an attack against Iraq because he genuinely believes Hussein is a threat to U.S. security, against 27% who say the president is acting for political motives.

And a large majority, 79%, said they believe Hussein supports the Al Qaeda terrorist group that launched the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The Bush administration has charged that Hussein is linked to Al Qaeda, although little specific evidence of a connection has surfaced.

The poll found that 77% of the public believes that U.S. military action against Iraq is likely in the next year--and 66% believe that if a war occurs, it will increase the likelihood of terrorism against Americans. Among those who support military action against Iraq, 61% believe it will increase the risk of terrorism but are apparently willing to run the added risk.

One of those is Kammi Vaux, 25, a financial counselor in Ogden, Utah. “I support going after Saddam Hussein,” she said. “I think we should have handled it years ago.” Asked whether she believed the U.S. should wait for support from other countries first, she said: “I’d like to, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And if it doesn’t happen, I still think we should go ahead.”

The Times Poll also asked Americans how the events of Sept. 11 had affected their lives--and most respondents said, in effect, “not much.”

Asked whether their lives had changed, 47% said no; 36% said they had changed a little; and only 16% said they had changed a lot.

Asked whether life had returned to normal, 68% said yes; 14% said their lives hadn’t changed in the first place; 13% said their lives have begun returning to normal; and 5% said they were still having difficulty getting back to normal.

A large majority, 64%, said they expect more terrorist attacks in the United States within the next six months.

Eighty-three percent said they are confident that the military can protect the country from terrorist attacks, and 68% said they are confident that the proposed Department of Homeland Security can protect the country.

But respondents are divided over whether the Bush administration has responded clearly to the challenge of terrorism. Only 38% said Bush has “formulated a clear policy,” while 55% said they thought the administration was “reacting to events as they happen.”

Not surprisingly, the public’s response to that question divided along partisan lines: 61% of people who identified themselves as Republicans said Bush had responded with a clear policy, while only 22% of Democrats agreed.

The public is also divided over whether the threat of terrorism justifies restrictions on traditional civil liberties. Overall, 49% said they believe some civil liberties should be surrendered, while 38% think the government may go too far in restricting liberties.

*

The Times Poll, directed by Susan Pinkus, interviewed 1,372 adults nationwide Aug. 22-25. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX(

9/11 A Year Later

Has your life returned to normal since the events of 9/11?

Returned to normal 68%

It didn t affect me 14%

Having difficulty getting back to normal 5%

Starting to get back to normal 13%

How much, if any, have the events since 9/11 shaken your own personal sense of safety and security?

Don’t know 1%

Great deal 12

Good amount 25

Not too much 44

Not at all 18

Do you use commercial airlines to travel for business or pleasure more often, less often or with about the same frequency as before 9/11? (IF LESS OFTEN) Do you travel less often because of unease over terrorist attacks, or because of the hassle of higher security and longer lines in airports, or for economic reasons, or is there some other reason?

More often 3%

About the same 72

Less often (total) 19

Because of:

Unease over terrorism 8

Hassle of higher security 4

Economic reasons 4

Other reasons 2

Dont fly at all (Volunteered) 4

Don’t know 2

Do you think it is necessary to give up some civil liberties in order to make the country safe from terrorism, or do you think some of the government s proposals will go too far in restricting the publics civil liberties?

Necessary to give up some liberties 49%

Government will go too far 38

Don’t know 13

War on Terrorism A bill was passed by the House to create a Department of Homeland Security. The new Cabinet department would combine federal agencies such as the Coast Guard, the Secret Service, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Customs Service and the Transportation Security Administration. A similar measure has yet to clear the Senate.

Are you in favor of or opposed to combining these agencies into one department?

Favor 59%

Oppose 27

Don’t know 14

How much confidence do you have that a newly created Department of Homeland Security would be able to protect the country from terrorist attacks?

A lot 13%

Some 55

Not too much 21

None at all 9

Don’t know 2

If President Bush decides to order U.S. troops into a ground attack against Iraqi forces, would you support or oppose that decision? (THOSE WHO SAID THEY WOULD SUPPORT THE DECISION WERE THEN ASKED) Would you continue to support it even if it resulted in substantial U.S. casualties?

Support it

even if casualties 45%

but not if casualties 13

but if casualties, not sure 6

Oppose it 28

Don’t know 8

Agree or disagree: The United States should take military action against Iraq only if it has the support of the international community.

Agree (total) 65%

Agree strongly 43

Agree somewhat 22

Disagree (total) 27

Disagree somewhat 10

Disagree strongly 17

Don’t know 8

Note: Numbers may not total 100% where more than one response was accepted or some answer categories are not shown.

How the Poll Was Conducted

The Times Poll contacted 1,372 adults nationwide by telephone Aug. 22-25. Telephone numbers were chosen from a list of all exchanges in the nation. Random-digit dialing techniques were used so that listed and unlisted numbers could be contacted. The entire sample was weighted slightly to conform with census figures for sex, race, age, education and region. The margin of sampling error for the entire sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points. For certain subgroups the error margin may be somewhat higher. Poll results can also be affected by other factors such as question wording and the order in which questions are presented.

The Times Poll results are also available at www.latimes.com/timespoll