Poll: Most Americans against striking Syria
WASHINGTON — Americans widely oppose initiating missile strikes against the Syrian government for its alleged use of chemical weapons, according to an Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Nearly six in 10 are opposed to missile strikes, despite the government's determination that Syria used chemical weapons against its own people. Democrats and Republicans alike oppose strikes by double-digit margins, and there is deep opposition among every political and demographic group in the survey. Political independents are among the most clearly opposed, with 66 percent saying they are against military action.
The survey was conducted Wednesday through Sunday, as the Obama administration made its public case for military strikes and presented intelligence claiming “high certainty” that Syria's government is the culprit in attacks.
Americans express more support for action if Britain and France join the cause, a prospect that became far less likely when the British parliament shot down a proposal for military action in Syria. Americans' support for missile strikes in Syria rises to 46 percent if Britain and France participate, including a 14 point jump among independents.
The results from the survey, which used a random national sample of 1,012 adults, have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Dusty Atlantic Ocean thwarts tropical storms
- Clintons hauled in $139M in past 8 years
- Planned Parenthood recordings release halted by judge
- Baltimore slayings climb to level unseen in decades
- Analysts expect French laboratory will be able to provide details from examination of jet part
- Amid 4-year drought, fears rise of trees dying, falling in California
- Fires’ fury unabated in California
- Despite U.S. dollars and bombs, effort failing to squash ISIS
- Suspect in South Carolina church shooting wants to plead guilty to hate crimes, attorney says
- Global lion population falling primarily because of loss of habitat, experts say
- Feds eye use of federal dollars for ads for for-profit colleges