[Media-watch] FW: Reuters poll on casualties (3/30)

[david Miller]

Here is a useful poll to quote to media outlets claiming public support for
the war:

>
><http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=focusIraqNews&storyID=2474319>ht
tp://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=focusIraqNews&storyID=2474319
>
>
>With U.S. casualties mounting, the poll also suggests the collective
>stomach for American casualties is limited.
>
>While 59 percent respondents say they would support a war in which 500
>U.S. troops died, support falls to just 47 percent and opposition to the
>war rises to 41 percent if the U.S. death toll rises to 1,000.
>
>Only 34 percent would support the war if as many as 5,000 Americans die,
>with 50 percent opposed if that happens. More than 50,000 American troops
>died in the Vietnam War.
>
>Perhaps surprising to many abroad, a plurality of Americans would not
>support a war in which 5,000 Iraqi civilians were to die. In that event,
>opposition to the war rises to 47 percent, against 40 percent in support.
>
>Even 1,000 Iraqi civilian deaths is too high a price to pay for many
>Americans, with just 50 percent willing to support such a war and 39
>percent opposed under those circumstances.
>
>While Americans would take a dim view of the use of chemical weapons
>against U.S. forces, a narrow majority of 51 percent say the United States
>would not be justified in using battlefield nuclear weapons against Iraqi
>soldiers deploying chemical arms. Some 42 percent would support such a move.
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>Jim Naureckas    <mailto:jkn at nyc.rr.com>jkn at nyc.rr.com
>
>The New York Songlines
><http://www.nysonglines.com>http://www.nysonglines.com