According to a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center, 58% of Americans “approve of the U.S. conducting missile strikes from drones to target extremists in such countries as Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. About a third (35%) disapprove of U.S. drone attacks.”
The poll was conducted between May 12th and May 18th among 2,002 adults, showing that the opinion has changed only modestly since February of 2013 when 56% approved of drone attacks, and 26% disapproved. Below are a series of graphs that show the results of the poll in detail:
The U.S. public’s concern for the safety of innocent civilians hasn’t improved much either, with 48% saying they are concerned U.S. drone strikes endanger civilians, and 32% saying they are “somewhat concerned.”
Earlier this year, two hostages, including one American, were killed by a U.S. drone strike targeting an al Qaeda compound along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
According to the survey, the public’s opinion that the U.S. has “mostly failed” its mission in Afghanistan has also changed little since last year. A majority (56%) still believe the U.S. has mostly failed in achieving its goals, while 36% say the U.S. has been mostly successful.
The public is less concerned of a retaliation due to the drone strikes, with 31% believing there could be repercussions, 29% believing they are being conducted legally, and only 24% acknowledging the damage that is being done to America’s reputation.
Meanwhile, President Obama’s plan to delay the withdrawal of some 10,000 U.S. forces from Afghanistan, which he announced in March, draws bipartisan support.
58% approve of Obama’s decision to keep troops in Afghanistan, while 39% disapprove. When broken into parties; Democrats approve of Obama’s decision (60%), independents (59%), and Republicans (58%).
The views across demographic groups are striking. While the majority of men approve of drone attacks, women roughly break even, with 50% approving, and 42% disapproving.
Young adults are among the least likely to approve of the attacks; this statistic is particularly interesting, especially considering the older generations are more likely to remember the irrationality of the communist scare, also known as the “red scare.” Instead, older age group majorities express support for the attacks. Some might say the U.S. government has simply replaced the word “communist” with “terrorist”, in an effort to keep the people frightened and docile.
As for racial and ethnic groups, whites (66%) are much more likely to approve of drone attacks than blacks (46%) and Hispanics (39%).
Partisan differences in overall views of U.S. drone strikes extend to concerns over whether they endanger the lives of innocent civilians.
55% of Democrats say they are very concerned about whether U.S. drone strikes endanger the lives of civilians, compared to 32% of Republicans. Independents’ views are similar to Democrats at 51%.
On other possible concerns, such as damage to America’s reputation, retaliation from extremists, and whether the attacks are being conducted legally, partisan differences are more modest, as relatively few from either party say they are very concerned about these potential issues.
As well as expressing lower support for U.S. drone strikes in general, women are more concerned about possible issues regarding the attacks, such as endangering the lives of civilians, and retaliation.
When it comes to concerns about whether the U.S. drone strikes are being conducted legally and whether they damage America’s reputation around the world, women are about 10 points more likely than men to say they are very concerned about each of these issues.
Additional findings are provided in the Pew Research Center’s report.
In response to the poll findings, Justin King of The Fifth Column News presented an interesting argument:
Imagine the rage if a poll conducted in the Middle East suggested that 58% of Arabs supported the World Trade Center attacks. There would be calls for blood and to rain fire down on every square inch of the Middle East. More hyperbole from hawkish American officials would lead to yet another invasion.
Unfortunately, King has a point. It’s easy to condone mass violence when it isn’t being committed on home soil. There are many around the world (as well as the U.S.) who are calling Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld war criminals, and in fact, according to a May 2012 report by Press TV, they were convicted in a Malaysian court with the Nuremberg Charter.
Using American rationale, does this mean 58% of U.S. citizens would agree that the U.S. should be hit by drone strikes? Should we be invaded for the next 15 years—our streets turned to warzones, our schools, churches and hospitals destroyed, and millions of Americans killed? Wouldn’t that be “American” justice?
The drone program targets those that finance the military operations of insurgents, those that manufacture the products necessary for insurgents to fight, and the command and control facilities of the insurgent groups. These are all legitimate military targets. By that same token, striking the financial nerve center of the United States and the building that houses the Department of Defense would be legitimate military targets. The next obvious objection is that the drone program doesn’t kill thousands of civilians. Yes, it does.
According to The Guardian, there were 41 men marked for death by the U.S. drone program in Pakistan. 1,147 people, including children, were killed in the pursuit of those 41 men, and some of the targets are still alive.
The fear Americans feel at the news of another school shooting in their hometown is the same fear people who live under drones feel every day of their lives. Mothers are afraid to send their children to school, and children cannot play in their neighborhoods. If a man walks through a playground and he looks as though he could be a terrorist, everyone in that playground will die.
… At least 22% of Americans are fully-aware of the kids being blown out of their shoes in an ineffective drone war. Unfortunately, they are either too callous or too stupid to realize the implications of it. Drones create more terrorists.
Imagine a drone strike had occurred in America, and images of a toddler’s bloody shoe, with a tiny foot still nestled inside it, was circulated by propagandists—it’s safe to say many angry American’s would rise up in retaliation of the offending nation’s military forces, and this same assumption applies to those in the Middle East. Terrorist organizations sound much more appealing when they are fighting those who decimated your children.
Children killed by U.S. drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan. (Photo courtesy of Asian Tribune.)
Most of the people who are killed in U.S. drone strikes are simply living their lives. In places like Somalia, Yemen, or rural Pakistan, people spend their days wondering how to get fresh water and food. They don’t care about geopolitical situations, and yet they’re dying over them.
Americans will often retort that ‘It’s just war.’ Civilian casualties are part of the process. Civilian casualties happen in war, but they are supposed to be accidental. They shouldn’t be figured into a formula.
Get Your Anonymous T-Shirt / Sweatshirt / Hoodie / Tanktop, Smartphone or Tablet Cover or Mug In Our Spreadshirt Shop! Click Here
This Article (Poll: 58% of Americans Support U.S. Drone Attacks) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com.
