Polls Show Americans Say No To Military Action Against Syria

President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry are determined that the US should be the world’s police and use military force against the Syrian government for the use of chemical weapons.  They are doing everything including arm twisting to get members of Congress to support their plans to possibly spark World War III.

But do the American people support his plan to take military action in Syria?

Drudge Report asked their viewers the question:

“Give Obama authority to conduct military operation in Syria? Yes or No”

At the time of this writing, they had 171,501 votes.  656,807 (91.54%) said No, and only 60,694 (8.46%) said Yes.

The Washington Post/ABC poll was not quite as drastic as the Drudge Report poll, but it still demonstrates that Americans are not behind the President.  Their first question asked:

“The United States says it has determined that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons in the civil war there. Given this, do you support or oppose the United States launching missile strikes against the Syrian government?”

Only 36% of the respondents said they supported the US missile strikes against Syria, while 59% said they opposed the measure.  Their second question asked:

“What if other countries such as Great Britain and France participated – in that case do you support or oppose the United States and its allies launching missile strikes against the Syrian government?”

The margin of difference was a little closer than on the previous question, but still not enough to tip in Obama’s favor.  This time, 46% said they would support the missile strikes and 51% opposed the attacks.  I found their third question and results to be quite revealing.  That third question was:

“Do you support or oppose the United States and its allies supplying weapons to the Syrian rebels?”

Only 27% of the respondents said they supported arming the rebels while an overwhelming 70% opposed arming the Syrian rebels.  From all three questions it’s clear that the American people don’t want any involvement in Syria whatsoever.

Pew Research also took a poll to see how Americans felt about Obama’s plans to take military action in Syrian.  When asked if they were in favor or opposed to airstrikes in Syria, 29% said they favored airstrikes, 48% opposed them and 23% were undecided.

Next, Pew asked three questions based on the premise that the US would launch airstrikes against the Syrian government.  Question 1 read:

“Do you think US airstrikes in Syria are likely to create a backlash against the US and its allies in the region?”

Nearly three fourths – 74% – said that a backlash was likely and only 15% said it wasn’t.  Question 2 read:

“Do you think US airstrikes in Syria are likely to lead to a long-term military commitment there?”

A majority, 61%, said it was likely and 26% said they believe it is unlikely.  Question 3 read:

“Do you think US airstrikes in Syria are likely to lead to be effective in discouraging the use of chemical weapons?”

Just over half – 51% – said it was unlikely that it will discourage the future use of chemical weapons and only 33% said it would.  I found this to be quite interesting since I saw Secretary of State John Kerry arguing this very point with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) on the national news.  Kerry was arguing that if we don’t strike that Assad will use chemical weapons again, as if he knew for a fact he would.  Paul said we don’t know that for sure and Kerry said we did.  Rand Paul is against getting involved in Syria and I agree with him as do most of the American people, according to the polls.  We see any involvement in Syria, whether arming the rebels (most of which are al-Qaeda or other Muslim extremists) or launching missile strikes against the government for their supposed use of chemical weapons.

To be honest, the polls mean nothing because Obama and Congress have proven that they do not carry out the wishes of the American people.  When they passed Obamacare, most polls indicated that 60% to 75% of the people were against it, but that didn’t stop them from passing it anyway.  The same was true on the Stimulus packages.

This is why I contend that America is no longer a republic, but a democracy.  In a republic, the elected officials listen to the people and do what they instruct them to do.  In a republic, the federal government is kept small on purpose.  A democracy is what we have today where the elected politicians care less what the people say and do what they want to do for their own personal agendas.  In a democracy, you are free to elect which tyrant you want to rule over you and that’s exactly what we have today and it doesn’t matter whether it’s Democrat or Republican.